This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Special Counsel Jack Smith, assigned by the Biden administration to prosecute President Donald Trump on a variety of election interference claims, already has seen one of his cases thrown out because the judge determined he wasn't properly appointed.
He's trying to get an appeals court to overlook his problematic hiring in that dispute.
But now, in his other case against Trump, where he's demanded the need for speed throughout, trying to get a trial and conviction before the election, he's suddenly flipflopped.
Now he wants to slow things down.
This case against Trump claims he engaged in a "criminal scheme" when he pointed out discrepancies and possible problems in the 2020 electoral vote count.
Smith alleges Trump's pursuit of what he considered electoral checks actually were "fake electors." And Smith claims Trump demanded "sham election crime investigations" and more.
In fact, that election now is considered tainted because of the $400 million plus Mark Zuckerberg handed to local election officials mostly to recruit Democrat voters – a scheme that multiple states now have outlawed. Further, the FBI interfered in the election by falsely claiming that accurate reporting about Biden family scandals documented in a computer Hunter Biden abandoned were Russian disinformation. A subsequent survey showed that move alone probably cost Trump the election.
Smith has insisted throughout the case, aided by Judge Tanya Chutkan, that things be hurried. He's opposed any sort of appellate review rights, and shoved the case so quickly that a reasonable record wasn't even developed on key points.
But now he wants a delay. "The government continues to assess the new precedent set forth last month in the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States. Although those consultations are well underway, the government has not finalized its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the decision," he said.
That Supreme Court decision, in fact, said presidents have absolute immunity for some actions in office, and no immunity for others.
The problem is that the lower courts never reviewed that dispute before the Supreme Court got the case, so it returned the fight to lower courts to determine that.
Chutkan immediately jumped into action and set an aggressive hearing schedule, a campaign that Trump's lawyers have opposed all along. And now Smith is dragging his feet.
A report from constitutional expert Jonathan Turley explains the faceoff.
He explained, "For over a year, Special Counsel Jack Smith has made one element the overriding priority in his prosecution of former president Donald Trump: speed. Smith repeatedly moved to curtail Trump's appellate rights and demand expedited appeals to try to secure a conviction before the election. In that effort, he found an equally motivated judge in U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who virtually turned her court into a rocket docket to try Trump. Now, in a neck-breaking change of direction, Smith is trying to slow down Chutkan who appears again ready to pull out the stops in this case."
He said only hours after Chutkan got the case back she was scheduling hearings – now to Smith's dismay.
He wants a three-week delay to consider what's next.
Turley pointedly noted that, "It is not clear if the press and pundits will now charge Smith with 'slow walking' the case," as they earlier accused Trump of doing.
"The question is whether Smith is considering a drastic move in light of the calendar and the ruling. There is, of course, always the possibility that he either throws in the towel or opts for a post-election trial. That would certainly go against the grain of Smith, who has always pushed both the law and the calendar to the breaking point. However, as some of us have been arguing for months, he may no longer view a trial as a plausible objective," Turley said.
"There is also the possibility that Smith will do something that some of us have discussed over the last year: pare down his case. Smith has always been undone by his appetite. As shown in his 8-0 reversal in his conviction of former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, Smith has rarely shown moderation as a prosecutor."
He pointed out that Smith's standard is to "load up" a case with charges, and the result is that the cases then get bogged down in various issues because of that.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal judge has ordered a pro se lawsuit filed by an injured J6 prisoner to be served on Attorney General Merrick Garland and others, a move the plaintiff suggests is the first time such a case has reached the stage of being an active case on the federal court docket.
A report at the Gateway Pundit said U.S. District Court Judge Rachel P. Kovner, "presiding over J6 hostage Ryan Samsel's pro se case for emergency medical treatment," told the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants with the complaint Samsel filed in federal court.
Samsel sued Garland, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Metropolitan Detention Center, and the Washington Treatment Correctional Facility in separate cases.
Samsel now is being held in New York, and filed Writ of Habeas Corpus and Writ of Mandamus petitions on his own behalf.
Samsel also has filed his own motions demanding the federal court issue an order to prevent U.S. Marshals from interfering with his medical care.
He's seeking an order for a doctor's exam and then treatment.
Kovner has yet to rule on Samsel's request for a restraining order, but said the defendants must be served with the legal action.
His physical condition involves blood clots that threaten him.
A legal expert told the Gateway Pundit, "Ryan Samsel has been beaten up, he is brain injured. And his prior attorney doesn't really want to be named because she faced retaliation with election fraud litigation. She did not even put her name on any of Samsel's filings, she just worked behind the scenes investigating, and she got sanctioned — and it was not her lawsuit, and her name was not on it. The judges are just so vindictive."
One of the allegations is that Samsel is being abused because he declines to make statements against President Donald Trump.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been involved in some of the biggest health scandals in years.
It's been involved in recommending the controversial HPV shots, as well as promoting LGBT ideology. And then it was caught up in the maelstrom of the COVID shots, which actually injured tens of thousands of Americans.
And now its reputation has taken another major hit, with a judge's determination it was breaking the law by deleting information that should have been kept for government records.
Politico reported the ruling from U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras found that the agency probably has been violating the law for years by deleting employees' emails after they quit their jobs.
The decision came in a lawsuit brought by America First Legal Foundation, which pursued a Freedom of Information Act request for records about an LGBT-promoting publication by the CDC.
"After months of wrangling, the CDC identified three employees who worked on the document but indicated that two of them had departed the agency and their emails had likely been destroyed," the report noted.
The judge ordered the agency to halt such erasures immediately.
The ruling, by the judge appointed by Barack Obama, said, "The court concludes that CDC's policy and practice of disposing of former employees' emails ninety days after the end of their employment is likely unlawful."
He said the agency's practice of destroying emails was not approved by the National Archives.
Government records normally must be kept for periods ranging from three to seven years.
"The available evidence suggests that CDC did indeed commit to manage and dispose of its employees' emails pursuant to the [Capstone] schedule," Contreras wrote. "Because CDC disposed of former employees' email records pursuant to a schedule that was not approved by the Archivist, it is likely that … records removed or deleted under the CDC's unapproved policy were removed or deleted unlawfully."
"The Biden-Harris Administration was actively destroying the records of federal employees at the CDC in blatant violation of the law — and we are pleased that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has ordered a stop to their illegal conduct," said America First Legal's executive director Gene Hamilton.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Virtually no one outside of the Democrat Party's agenda-driven core considers Kamala Harris the ultimate success.
Her "border czar" assignment from Joe Biden saw a complete collapse of the nation's southern boundary and millions of illegal aliens arrive.
What is associated with her is her penchant for word salads, such as her insistence that the significance of the passage of time is significant, and her shrewish cackle that has been ridiculed a hundred ways online, many of them not polite.
The Daily Caller News Foundation noted that "Several Georgia voters told Newsmax they couldn't recount a single Harris accomplishment over the course of her entire career."
"Washington Post politics reporter Amber Phillips noted there are only two achievements that 'could be reasonably called her accomplishments' alone," the report added.
Those would be her promotion of abortion and her vote that plunged the United States significantly deeper in debt with the approval of misnamed "Inflation Reduction Act," which actually spent trillions but didn't address inflation at all.
But now an adviser to Biden is insisting that Harris actually is one of the "greatest things" in Biden's legacy.
In a report at the Daily Mail, ex-Biden adviser Anita Dunn commented on the removal of Biden from the 2024 ticket and insertion of Kamala Harris into the top slot.
"You know, it was rough. And no reflection on the vice president because I think one of the greatest things about Joe Biden's legacy will be that he made sure that there was a pipeline in which Kamala Harris was going to be the natural person everyone turned to if something happened to him," she said.
"He ran because he believed he was the best person to beat Donald Trump. And because he also believed he was the best person to lead the country. Now, if he's not a candidate, he made it very clear that the second-best person was his vice president. And that is where we are now."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
If there's any significance to the old saying about knowing people by the company they keep, Americans should be concerned about Tim Walz, a leftist Minnesota governor and Kamala Harris pick to be VP on the Democrats' White House ticket this year.
It's because he repeatedly entertained a radical Muslim cleric who celebrated the horrific terror assault on Israel last Oct. 7 when some 1,200 innocent Israeli civilians were butchered, often in horrific fashion.
The Washington Examiner reports that cleric at one point linked to a website for a "pro-Hitler film called 'The Greatest Story Never Told.'"
The report explained Walz at least five times as governor entertained Asad Zaman, of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota.
He was among a group of Muslims in May 2023 that met with Walz's office about mosque security.
The Examiner also found that, "Zaman also spoke at a May 2020 event to call for peaceful protests with the governor during the riots in Minnesota sparked after George Floyd's death. In April 2019, the cleric delivered an invocation before Walz's state address — just months after Zaman called for an end to a government shutdown at a press conference with Walz in January 2019."
The report noted Walz's close association with Zaman, and all of his ideologies including the promotion of a pro-Hitler film, "could serve as problematic baggage for the Minnesota governor as he campaigns with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee."
Zaman said last Oct. 7 even as Israeli hostages still were being hauled off by Hamas terrorists to Gaza that he "stands in solidarity with Palestinians against Israeli attacks."
And as 1,200 Israelis were being murdered by forces that now have been revealed to include at least nine employees of the United Nations, he shared an image of a Palestinian flag on social media.
In fact, the report explains, Zaman has used his social media influence to promote the press releases from the terrorists of Hamas.
It was in 2015 he gave a link to a website for the pro-Hitler propaganda.
A spokesperson for the Anti-Defamation League told the Examiner, "Imam Zaman has a troubling history of playing into classic anti-Jewish themes and justifying violence against Israel. … He also has justified violence against Israel, including from terror groups. Given his hurtful remarks post-Oct. 7, and absent any recognition of the pain he has caused the Jewish community, we urge all public officials and leaders to avoid meeting with him in the future. Those who have met with Imam Zaman should clarify that they don't agree with his toxic views about Jews and the Jewish state."
The Examiner said, "In recent years, Zaman has also appeared to equate Hamas committing terrorism to Israel defending itself. State records reviewed by the Washington Examiner show Walz's administration has awarded over $100,000 in funding to MAS Minnesota."
Forebodingly, terrorism researcher Sam Westrop told the Examiner that such a history shows that "anti-Israel extremists may be given a platform in a potential Harris-Walz administration."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
GOP presidential nominee President Donald Trump is seeking the White House in the November election and has made clear his intention is to win the race.
But his opponent now apparently is Kamala Harris, instead of incumbent Joe Biden, who had promised for years that he would seek another term. And he had been doing that actively until he wasn't.
His poor performance in a debate with Trump, along with his multiple public displays of cognitive decline, preceded his abrupt announcement that he was dropping out.
But how it happened makes the Democrats look bad, Trump said.
According to a report by the Daily Signal, he said, "I'm no Biden fan, but I'll tell you what, from a constitutional standpoint, from any standpoint, they took the presidency away."
He charged that powerful Democrats literally decided to throw Biden out, and he was pushed out of the race.
"People were saying he lost the debate. I don't know that that is true necessarily. But whether he could win or he couldn't win, he had the right to run. And they took it away. They said they were going to use the 25th Amendment. They were going to hit him hard. Either we can do it the nice way or do it the hard way. And he said alright. What they've done is pretty incredible."
Actually, Biden already had accumulated commitments from enough delegates to the party convention coming up in a few days that he would have won the nomination.
The report explained, "Biden has said he left the race voluntarily to pass the torch to Harris. However, a recent story by Pulitzer-winning journalist Seymour Hersh said that leading Democrats threatened to forcefully remove Biden through the 25th Amendment if he did not drop out."
Further, Trump said no matter the winner, he expects a peaceful transfer of power following the November election.
The report noted that was an apparent reference to the Capitol riot in 2021, when protesters entered the Capitol to protest the certification of Joe Biden's election and some got out of hand, vandalizing and more.
"Of course there will be a peaceful transfer, and there was last time, and there will be a peaceful transfer. I just hope we're gonna have honest elections. That's all," he said.
Biden, however, was not in agreement on that issue.
In an interview to be released this coming weekend, with CBS' Robert Costa, he was asked, "Are you confident that there will be a peaceful transfer of power in January 2025?"
Biden said, "If Trump wins, no, I'm not confident at all."
Then he changed his mind, and added, "I mean if Trump loses, I'm not confident at all. He means what he says. We don't take him seriously. He means it, all the stuff about, 'If we lose, there'll be a bloodbath, it'll have to be a stolen election.'
"Look what they're trying to do now in the local election districts where people count the votes, or putting people in place in states that they're going to count the votes, right?"
Biden's response actually didn't make much sense either time, as under the first scenario he would be accusing Democrats of failing to let there be a peaceful transfer. Under the second scenario, if Trump loses and Democrats win, would there then be a violent transfer from the Biden-Harris camp to the Harris-Walz camp?
WND reported earlier that Biden supporter U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., promised there would be "civil war" conditions if Trump wins, as he would try to have the GOP nominee declared ineligible to hold office.
He gave the impression he was planning an "insurrection."
That would be his plans to have Congress deny Trump the presidency should he win in November.
He explained his agenda:
What can be put into the Constitution can slip away from you very quickly and the greatest example going on right now before our eye is Section 3 of the 14th amendment which they're just disappearing with the magic wand as if it doesn't exist even though it could not be clearer what it's stating.
And so they want to kick it to Congress.
So it's going to be up to us on January 6, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqualified and then we need bodyguards for everybody and civil war conditions, all because denying justice is not all of them, but these justices who have not many cases to look at each year, not that much work to do, a huge staff, great protection, simply do not want to do their job.
His argument stems from his own interpretation of that section, which states "no person can hold certain offices under the United States or any state if they have previously taken an oath to support the Constitution but have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against it, or provided aid or comfort to its enemies."
He has claimed repeatedly that Trump, because others rioted on Jan. 6, 2021, is ineligible for office.
Of course, Trump never has been charged with insurrection, much less convicted. Congress tried twice to impeach and remove him, including once after he already was out of office. And Congress failed both times.
Nonetheless, Raskin has adopted his own interpretation of that provision and insists on its application, to his satisfaction. Raskin is not the only member of Congress who apparently believes that it is within their power to determine a president guilty of a constitutional violation, as Pelosi's partisan January 6 committee largely spent all of its time and millions of tax dollars trying to assemble a storyline that portrayed Trump as guilty of something on that day when a protest turned into a riot.
Online commenters showed that Raskin's arguments were not being considered seriously.
"Raskin has a few missing screws!" said one. Another added, "I also know Raskin is a complete moron that nobody takes seriously as he talks out of his *** more than he talks out of his mouth."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
If voters choose Kamala Harris and Tim Walz to be in the administration for the next four years, there will be an "all-out war" on voters' First Amendment speech rights, warns an editorial from a major publication.
It is the Washington Examiner that says based on their records, "a Harris-Walz administration would declare all-out war on the First Amendment under the guise of fighting 'misinformation.'"
Further, the leftists would "browbeat social media platforms with the threat of antitrust enforcement to censor any information that was inconvenient" for their political party.
Even more, they would "weaponize the Department of Justice to go after not just pro-life demonstrators but any organization, such as the Knights of Columbus, that believes abortion is murder." That's a subject already under review by Congress.
Their threat? Well, the editorial explains, that would be to "use and abuse the full power of the IRS to harass conservative organizations and bully conservative people."
The agenda points actually would be an expansion on similar campaigns that were dictated against Christians and conservatives during the Barack Obama administration, and under Joe Biden.
But it probably would get much worse.
The publication cited Walz's comment revealing his lack of knowledge of the Constitution.
He said, "There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech and especially around our democracy."
The editorial said that "would be news" to the Supreme Court, which held in 2017 that "speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground" is still protected by the First Amendment.
"Walz's impulse to censor speech he does not like is most definitely shared by his running mate, Vice President Kamala Harris, who pushed for Twitter and Facebook to censor then-President Donald Trump even before the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. In Iowa, on Oct. 19, 2019, Harris told Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, 'This is not a matter of free speech. … This is a matter of holding corporate America and these Big Tech companies responsible and accountable for what they are facilitating,'" the Examiner reported.
"Harris's anti-free speech position was so extreme that even Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) pushed back, saying she wanted to kick Trump only out of the White House, not off social media. But politburo secretariat officer Kamala did not back down. 'I'm calling on everyone to join me,' she said."
Her censorship schemes date back years, as she used government power in 2019 while attorney general in California to confiscate from conservative nonprofits sensitive IRS documents listing donors.
"In a complete 'coincidence,' Harris's office then posted the private data online, an incident that she claimed was purely accidental. The Supreme Court ruled against Harris, holding that her efforts to intimidate conservative voices by abusing IRS power violated the First Amendment," the warning explained.
Then as senator, she attacked judicial nominees for their religious beliefs, revealed by their membership in the Knights of Columbus.
"The implication of her line of questioning clearly was that merely being a member of a charitable organization that has conservative views disqualified one from public service," it said.
What will be targeted, the publication warned, by a Harris-Walz regime, would be "any information that Democrats don't like."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
America's abortion industry giant, Planned Parenthood, has taken hundreds of millions of dollars over the years from taxpayers for its campaign to destroy the unborn. Of late, it's added to its revenue stream by soliciting those who believe they are transgender and providing "treatment."
Now that agenda may be backfiring, as a 20-year-old woman has accused, in a lawsuit, the megacorporation of pushing her into a gender transition when she was 18, leaving her with lifelong damages.
A report in the Daily Mail noted Cristina Hineman has filed a lawsuit against the organization that is America's largest single provider of abortion and contraception.
The case accuses of Planned Parenthood of giving her testosterone following an evaluation that included a 30-minute consultation with a nurse practitioner.
She charges that her permanent side effects now include hair on the back of her hands and face and constant discomfort.
The report explains Hineman also charges her sexual responses have been changed and a double mastectomy left her chest scarred and "alternately numb and raw."
The report says Hineman went to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Hudson, New York, in November 2021 when she turned 18, seeking testosterone after her parents were skeptical about her claim to "gender dysphoria."
"The teenager was reportedly instructed to fill out a consent form for 'masculinizing hormone therapy.' According to medical records, a nurse practitioner noted that Hineman had 'consulted with a mental health provider.' The nurse and Hineman then discussed 'expected changes,' such as growing a beard and body hair and a deepening voice. The two also reportedly discussed that 'changes to fertility may be permanent or reversible,'" the report said.
But only a year into treatments, she discovered her gender was not the root of her issues, and regretted the process. In an interview with Free Press, she said, "I was brainwashed… A lot of people say that adults should be able to do whatever they want."
The report noted that her issues included self-harm, depression, anxiety and autism.
She now considers herself a detransitioner, someone who has acknowledged their sex at birth.
"If you have mental illness that's clouding your view, or you're so misinformed about what gender dysphoria even means, then you cannot consent to such invasive treatments," she explained.
Her action seeks unspecified damages from Planned Parenthood.
Other detransitioners already have announced their lawsuits against others in the transgender business, including individual doctors and Kaiser Permanente.
The Free Press report explained Planned Parenthood now is the nation's leading provider of gender transition hormones.
Her legal fight charges Planned Parenthood with negligence and failure to obtain informed consent. Planned Parenthood is fighting the case.
The Free Press report added, "Her suit comes as the U.S. is increasingly alone in championing hormonal and surgical interventions to swiftly transition gender-distressed young people. A growing list of European countries, including Sweden, Finland, and the UK, are restricting these sometimes irreversible treatments for young people and favoring an approach that encourages therapy to address all the causes of a patient's distress."
And some two dozen Republican-led states have adopted limits on what kind of treatments can be inflicted on minors.
"Treatment without a competent evaluation shouldn't be foisted on you whether you're 15 or 30," said Kevin Keller, a lawyer consulting on detransitioner cases.
"Vulnerability is the issue. If there's no comprehensive screening in place before a medical intervention that's going to have permanent effects," that's a breach of duty, he explains.
The report noted there already is a second lawsuit over the issue against Planned Parenthood, charging the infliction of "great pain and anguish."
Hineman described, "There was no conversation about the actual process of what the hormones are going to do in your body; it's just you take the shot and start becoming more male."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the so-called humanitarian organization which only represents the Palestinians, finally officially admitted this week what has been known for several months already – namely its operatives took part in the Hamas-inspired Oct. 7 slaughter of Israelis in southern Israel and its communities.
Well, sort of.
"For nine people, the evidence was sufficient to conclude they may have been involved in the seventh of October attacks," Deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said. They have apparently had their employment terminated. Nineteen people in all were investigated through the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). It delivered a confidential report – which will not be made public – to United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres.
In nine other cases, the OIOS claimed the evidence of involvement was insufficient, and in one case, it said there was no evidence.
Israel's outgoing Ambassador to the United Nations, Gilad Erdan, who recently received the "Defender of Israel" award from Christians United for Israel (CUFI), lambasted both the timing of the report and its findings.
He labeled it a "disgrace" and "too little too late." "The investigation ignored the thousands of agency employees involved in Hamas terrorism and the extent of their involvement. Israel has provided the U.N. with precise details of over a hundred UNRWA employees who are members of the terrorist organization Hamas," Erdan said in a statement.
To rub salt into an already festering wound Guterres recently awarded UNRWA-Gaza the U.N. Secretary-General's Award for 2023. Erdan also called for Philippe Lazzarini, UNRWA commissioner-general, to resign and for the entire organization to be shut down. Lazzarini was recently embarrassed at an event in Lausanne, Switzerland, where he was the honored guest of the socialist mayor's Swiss National Day ceremony. As he attempted to speak, a woman – Ayelet Samerano – whose son, Jonathan, was killed and his body kidnapped to Gaza – stood up and declared, "UNRWA kidnapped my son!" Following up with, "Where is he Mr. Lazzarini?" Jonathan Samerano's lifeless body was infamously seen on a security camera being dumped into a white pickup truck by two Gazans wearing, clearly visibly wearing UNRWA jackets.
Lazzarini released a statement on behalf of UNRWA saying, "UNRWA is committed to continue upholding the fundamental principles of the United Nations, including the humanitarian principle of neutrality, and to ensure all its staff abide by the Agency's policy on outside and political activity."
Hillel Neuer, executive director of United Nations Watch, has been one of the key figures holding the leadership of UNRWA accountable. It was he who invited Ayelet Samerano to Lausanne to embarrass Lazarini, and his organization has been instrumental in pushing back against UNRWA's obfuscations, aided and abetted by the corporate media.
He was highly critical of the Colonna report, named for Catherine Colonna, the former French Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was selected to head the review group. In an article posted on UN Watch's website, he said its composition was clear evidence the fix was in. Moreover, he added the real point of the report was, according to a former UNRWA spokesman, Chris Gunness, who retired from his post in 2019 but who recently returned as a surrogate for UNRWA and who has been an organizational mouthpiece on Al-Jazeera, "to provide cover for donors."
Speaking at a U.N. press conference on February 22, Colonna said:
"The aim of this important and delicate mission, entrusted to us by the Secretary General, is to enable donors, the largest among them, but in fact everyone, to regain confidence, when they have lost it or when they have doubts, in the way UNRWA operates."
Also in February, Israel Defense Minister Yoav Gallant claimed at least 12 UNRWA workers directly took part in the atrocities, and a further 30 assisted or facilitated those heinous crimes. He also charged as many as 12% of the organization were affiliated in some way with the various Gaza terrorist organizations.
In April, and as a result of the accusations regarding UNRWA, several countries including the United States, which according to Congress will withhold funds until 2025, ceased sending aid to the organization until the U.N. undertook a deeper investigation. However, many of those countries have resumed funding, including the United Kingdom, whose government has altered from the largely pro-Israel Conservative Party, to the much more critical Labour Party, under Sir Keir Starmer. Canada and Australia – two countries with an active and vocal Palestinian Diaspora community – also quickly resumed their funding.
Israeli academic Einat Wilf, who has written extensively on the so-called "Right of Return" has been particularly scathing of UNRWA's role in keeping Gazans and non-Israeli Arabs living in Judea and Samaria, hypnotized by a fantasy for more than 75 years. A political centrist, she is of the opinion – as are most Israelis – the time has come to completely disband the organization as it is not fit for purpose.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Trump supporter went online to confirm he'd been offered $1,500 to post one comment supporting Harris and her VP pick: 'Basically what they were asking for … $1,500 for anti-Trump content on TikTok'
American voters are being told by some of those online influencers that they are all for Kamala Harris for president. But those comments likely should be considered politically paid ads, as payments are being made for those comments.
Essentially.
This is evident after one TikTok influencer went online to confirm he'd been offered $1,500 to post one comment supporting Harris, and her VP pick, the radically left and possible "Stolen Valor" offender Tim Walz, whose booking image following a drunken driving arrest now is flooding the Web.
Influencer Michael Doherty explained, "Basically what they were asking for … $1,500 for anti-Trump content on TikTok."
There was a list of requirements along with the instructions to "gloat about Harris and her allies."
He explained, "They're basically creating division and paying for division online," he said.
Joe Biden, with Harris as his VP boasted of being a "uniter" when he campaigned four years ago. Since then, they have promoted division in America on issues of transgenderism, abortion, spending, taxes, the border, the economy and more.
Doherty said he tracked the offer for cash-for-Kamala praise to a SuperPac with hundreds of millions of dollars to spend.
Online reports have documented an explosion in payment offers to influencers online with the requirement that they praise Harris and Walz.