This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden, whose extreme "green" agenda has included his ban on the export of liquid natural gas, already has triggered a U.S. House plan to reverse his orders.

The proposal approved by the members of Congress would strip the power to approve such exports from the Department of Energy and leave the independent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as the sole authority.

Biden's controversial plan was part of his agenda to look at the "environmental and economic impacts" of the business, in which the U.S. is the largest LNG exporter in the world.

LNG is the cleanest of all the fossil fuel products that now power the United States, and, in fact, much of the world.

However, as of this week, there's a new wrinkle in Biden's green agenda: a lawsuit has been filed by Liberty Justice Center and Pelican Institute for Public Policy over his anti-LNG campaign.

"Nothing in the Natural Gas Act grants any federal officer, even the president, the authority to halt the approval process, and yet the Biden administration has tried just that," said Loren Seehase, counsel at the Liberty Justice Center. "The administration will continue to disregard the Constitution and federal law until a court upholds the rule of law—and our lawsuit aims to make sure the court will."

The organizations reported that since 1938, a federal law titled the Natural Gas Act has regulated the approval of LNG exportation. This legislation presumes that LNG export applications are almost always in the public interest, and therefore requires the secretary of the Department of Energy to approve the applications unless the department makes specific findings showing that an individual application is not in the public’s interest.

"Nothing in the Natural Gas Act authorizes the Department of Energy to halt all LNG export applications. For that reason, as recently as July of 2023, the Department of Energy denied a petition calling for a halt to the approval of all new LNG export licenses. In its rejection, the department stated that it had 'no factual or legal basis' for 'halt[ing] approval of pending applications to export LNG,'" they reported.

Then Biden, in January, simply declared a ban, "effective immediately and indefinitely."

The lawsuit charges that the ban violates federal law as well as the Constitution's separation of powers and exceeds Biden's authority.

It also hurts the nation's economy, it charges.

Previously, 16 states joined to file a lawsuit through their attorneys general over the same issues.

"This export ban is unconstitutional and indefensible. In addition to the harm it will do to the economy and to tens of thousands of working Americans across the country, it also disregards federal law, flouts the standard rule-making procedure, and threatens our constitutional structure," said James Baehr, counsel at the Pelican Institute for Public Policy.

"Tens of thousands of hardworking oil and gas workers across the country depend on the LNG export industry to put food on the table for their families," said plaintiff Matt Coday, president of the Oil & Gas Workers Association. "This ban will have devastating consequences on their lives and livelihoods unless the court steps in to put an end to the administration’s overreach."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

In a move that was described as needed to make sure they could get access to mental health services,  the government in Peru has designated transgenders and intersex individuals as "mentally ill."

report in the Telegraph documented the official categorization, from the Peruvian government, means those individuals now are assured "full coverage of medical attention for mental health" from the nation's health services.

But, the report said, promoters of the LGBT lifestyle choices have erupted with "a fierce backlash."

The alternative behaviors have not been popular in the nation, and recently lawmakers banned references to gender equality in school books, the report said.

The report said Health Minister César Vásquez hasn't taken a position on the dispute yet, as he is tied up with a controversy involving President Dina Boluarte and her alleged acquisition of expensive jewelry.

And just days ago, her brother, Nicanor Boluarte, was placed under arrest for selling off government jobs.

The designation, according to Lima Scientific University of the South researcher Percy Mayta-Tristán, may have been based on good intentions. But he said it didn't include an awareness of the issues at hand.

"You can’t ignore the context that this is happening in a super-conservative society, where the LGBT community has no rights and where labelling them as mentally ill opens the door to conversion therapy," he said.

A report at the New York Post explained the designation is supposed to change the Essentials Health Insurance Plan to reflect transgenders and others "have a mental disorder."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A 30-year-old pro-life activist who tried to rescue the unborn from America's massive abortion industry has been sentenced to nearly five years in prison for her work.

The sentence, 57 months in prison and three years of supervision, came after Joe Biden's Department of Justice insisted she committed a crime by blockading access to an abortion business.

Officials with the Thomas More Society immediately confirmed they are preparing to proceed with an appeal on behalf of Lauren Handy, a filing that will "seek to overturn her conviction and challenge the constitutionality of the FACE Act."

That stands for Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances and is used by Biden's DOJ almost exclusively against pro-lifers, even though the law is supposed to protect both pro-life protesters and those who are employed in the abortion industry.

The legal team's report said Handy was convicted Aug. 29, 2023, by a Washington, D.C., federal jury on charges of violating the FACE Act and "Conspiracy Against Rights." The charges were brought by the Biden Department of Justice against Handy and several other pro-life advocates and carried a potential sentence of up to 11 years.

Martin Cannon, Thomas More Society counsel, said, "There was only one thing around which Ms. Handy and her co-defendants were unified, and that was nonviolence. They conspired to be peaceful. Yet, today, the court granted the Biden Department of Justice its wish by sentencing Ms. Handy to 57 months—nearly 5 years in prison. For her efforts to peacefully protect the lives of innocent preborn human beings, Ms. Handy deserves thanks, not a gut-wrenching prison sentence."

Steve Crampton, also a lawyer for the society, added, "As I’ve gotten to know Ms. Handy, I’ve seen up close her unwavering passion for pro-life advocacy and resolute dedication to nonviolence. The caricature of Ms. Handy that the Biden Department of Justice fabricated flies in the face of reality. Ms. Handy should have been shown the same mercy that she has herself shown to countless many downtrodden throughout her young life."

The fight that has developed over Biden's near-exclusive use of the FACE Act against pro-lifers has, in fact, prompted discussion about its constitutionality.

"The debate has reached members of both houses of the United States Congress, where legislation has been introduced to repeal the FACE Act," the legal team explained.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden is on record, on social media, stating that President Donald Trump "must" be impeached, at the time, because he withheld "congressionally appropriated aid" from Ukraine in exchange for a political favor.

Biden's statement, from 2019, in fact, is, "President Trump withheld Congressionally appropriated aid to Ukraine unless they granted him a political favor. It's the definition of quid pro quo. This is no joke—Trump continues to put his own personal, political interests ahead of the national interest. He must be impeached."

Which is causing a problem now in that Biden has withheld congressional approved aid to Israel, to put himself in a better light.

"This is awkward," one commenter said.

A commentary at Twitchy explained, "Biden once pledged full support for Israel but that support ended when [Benjamin] Netanyahu going full speed after Hamas angered some voters which could cost Biden a swing state in November. The White House is now kicking Israel under the bus by withholding aid that's in a package Congress passed and Biden signed."

The report continued, " During yesterday's interview with CNN's Erin Burnett, President Biden admitted that the White House is holding back aid for Israel because Benjamin Netanyahu won't help out his election campaign and avoid going into Rafah to placate the pro-Hamas wing of the Democrat Party."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new plan being proposed in Congress outlines a plan of community service punishment for those rioters who are taking over campus properties and buildings in support of Hamas terrorists.

It would call for six months of such service, often considered a generally light punishment.

But the service would take place in the terrorist hotbed of Gaza.

Fox News explains the bill from Reps. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., Randy Weber, R-Texas, and Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., comes in response to the anti-Israel riots across America.

Hundreds have been arrested and in multiple locations the riots have turned violent.

They are in support of Hamas, which dispatched its soldiers from Gaza into Israel last Oct. 7 and butchered some 1,200 civilians, which prompted Israel to send its military on a mission to destroy that terror threat.

Ogles' plan does not mention Israel or the anti-Israel groups, but instead targets unlawful activity on college campuses after Oct. 7, 2023.

Fox explained, "Those convicted would be forced to serve a minimum six-month community service sentence in Gaza, where Israel is currently waging a brutal campaign to eradicate Hamas and rescue the remaining Israelis that terrorists took hostage in October."

Ogles explained to the broadcast organization, "Students have abandoned their classes to harass other students and disrupt campus-wide activities, including university commencement ceremonies nationwide. Enough is enough. That’s why I introduced legislation to send any person convicted of unlawful activity on the campus of an American university since October 7th, 2023, to Gaza to complete a minimum of six months of community service."

The report noted Democrats, the majority in the Senate, likely would ignore punishment aimed at anti-Israel protesters.

Weber said, "If you support a terrorist organization, and you participate in unlawful activity on campuses, you should get a taste of your own medicine. I am going to bet that these pro-Hamas supporters wouldn’t last a day, but let’s give them the opportunity."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Increasingly, astute China analysts warn that the communist regime is watching America diminish its resources around the world, and predict it's only a matter of time before Beijing seriously capitalizes on this rapid trend in world-changing ways.

One of these "Paul Reveres" is Chris Coulombe, who in 2016 ended more than 15 years of military service, having been both an enlisted service member and officer in multiple branches of America's Armed Forces – Army, Navy, and Marine Corps.

Wanting to continue serving his country, and endorsed by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., Coulombe is the Republican candidate for a House seat in California's 2nd Congressional District.

In a recent X post, Coulombe shared a video in which he said, "China is attempting to create economic warfare on the United States." Noting that China is currently "biding its time, watching America's two most valuable resources – its military and the dollar – diminish," Coulombe's video tweet concluded dramatically: "When will the CCP directly challenge America's superpower status? Soon. Very soon."

WND spoke to Coulombe about his post.

China is making "a brilliant move" against the U.S., Coulombe told WND, though "it seems like most people sitting at home haven't noticed."

According to the GOP candidate, the mainstream media fails to report the increasingly evident truth that "China is effectively using regional [military] conflicts as a way to take advantage of draining the U. S. economy."

Most recently, he noted, these conflicts include Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine, Hamas' attack on Israel, and the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.

Each involvement draws scarce American resources – especially Ukraine. And "the economic drain will impact the value of the dollar," Coulombe noted, adding: "It's quite clear that Russia, Iran, and China are working together to ensure that the U.S. continues to spend large sums of money."

As far as the communist Chinese regime, Coulombe told WND: "It's a beautiful economic warfare play": While the U.S. continues to support multiple conflicts around the globe, "we're continuing to drive up the debt that drives the value of the dollar down." And as the value of the dollar declines on the global market, the Republican candidate warns that "China will position itself with a parallel currency, one that could be the coup de grace for the United States."

"When enough countries around the world no longer want to use the U.S. dollar as a global reserve currency," he explained, "there will be a whole lot of dollars sitting on the market without demand." Should this scenario unfold, he expects the Chinese regime to "create a parallel economy in the world – arguably, to destroy the U.S. dollar."

"They'll become the global superpower without even firing a shot," he said. "With a Chinese-controlled currency, they remove the sphere of economic influence long maintained by the United States."
"We have watched the Congress formally position the U.S. as the financier of ever-growing regional conflicts ... conflicts we cannot easily extract ourselves from," he argued. "If a third conflict erupts after more funding is committed to Ukraine, Israel, and the Red Sea, the U.S. will be financially obligated to help, placing us right where China wants us before they move on Taiwan."

Should this happen, he warned, "America will be in a four-front war."

Solutions that keep America first

According to Coulombe, Congress needs to help rein in the amounts of financial resources spent on foreign engagements, seek innovative ways to bolster the American economy and protect the financial security of U.S. citizens.

"Americans and the world are looking for leadership and vision and they are not getting it today," he told WND, adding, "We cannot spend our way out of problems." With that, he pointed to the nation's staggering and growing $34 trillion debt.

As a member of Congress, one of Coulombe's many initiatives would include protecting the financial security of military veterans.

"This would include exempting all active duty and honorably discharged veterans from federal income tax for life on the first $182,000 of income," he explained.

Coulombe argued, "We do not need more government programs to fix failed government programs, [as] our veterans have served this country honorably for 248 years and without question, have earned the right to economic dignity in this republic."

"This [initiative]," Coulombe told WND, "will allow veterans to afford to be American and encourage them to engage in the economy, exactly where America needs them right now."

Another initiative of Coulombe's would be to suspend the federal income tax for all citizens for five years on the first $182,000 of income. "This will allow Americans to afford to be American and restimulate our overly burdened citizens," he explained. "Increased take-home pay will allow citizens to earn a living wage without increasing the burdens to overregulated small businesses" and result in "increased consumer spending, which will generate more jobs and decrease the number of Americans relying on government programs, ensuring those programs can help those who need it most."

"We need to unshackle the American economy," Coulombe concluded, "and that starts with unshackling Americans."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The substance of special counsel Robert Hur's investigation into Joe Biden's decision to take and keep classified government documents to which he was not entitled long has been known.

Biden likely violated the law, but Hur recommended against charges because of Biden's "diminished" capabilities.

But Congress has wanted more details, specifically the audio recordings of Hur's interview with Biden in which Biden forgot key dates and events.

And Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, has refused, prompting Congress to set out a path to hold him in contempt.

The Washington Examiner reports it is the House Judiciary Committee aiming for a contempt of Congress citation for Garland.

A review of the plan now is scheduled for May 16, the report said.

The Examiner said, "The committee’s decision to move forward with contempt marks a dramatic escalation in its months-long fight to obtain recordings of Biden’s interview, which former special counsel Robert Hur conducted last October."

Hur's investigation concluded that Biden mishandled classified documents from his time as senator and vice president. Biden even gave some of that classified information to a ghostwriter.

But Hur found Biden realistically could present to the jury a reasonable doubt because he could be seen as a "sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."

In contrast, the Biden administration has leveled a long list of felonies against President Trump for keeping papers from his own time in the Oval Office, despite reports that the government itself sent those documents to Trump's home, and the prosecutor's admission that investigators altered the evidence in the case.

The report said the audio recordings of Biden could shed more light on Biden's mental fitness, or incapacities, as the case may be.

The report explained when a contempt case is approved by the House, a criminal referral is made to federal prosecutors in Washington.

However, the report noted the politicization of the prosecutors' office in Washington makes it unlikely Garland would face repercussions.

WND reported only days ago when DOJ officials scolded Congress for asking for information.

"We urge the committees to avoid conflict rather than seek it," charged assistant attorney general Carlos Uriarte in a recent letter to members of Congress.

The DOJ claimed that releasing the audio of the interviews could make it harder in the future for prosecutors to get cooperation from witnesses.

Uriarte claimed the DOJ already had given Congress "the information you saw you need."

"To go further by producing the audio files would compound the likelihood that future prosecutors will be unable to secure this level of cooperation. They might have a harder time obtaining consent to an interview at all. It is clearly not in the public interest to render such cooperation with prosecutors and investigators less likely in the future," he claimed.

The House Oversight and Judiciary committees are among those involved in the investigation of Biden's behaviors as potential support for an impeachment.

Hur confirmed he found Biden "willfully" retained classified material but stopped short of filing charges.

The report also confirmed what is known about Biden: He "became muddled about the dates he was vice president and could not even remember the year in which his son Beau died," the report said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new report from the Epoch Times warns that the more COVID shots an individual has taken, the higher the risk of getting COVID.

The experimental shots, of course, are not really like traditional "vaccines" that cause a body to develop a resistance to a health threat. Instead, they trigger the body to "make a protein fragment" found in the virus, purportedly to provide a "protective immune response."

The report said the results, from the work of Dr. Naabin Shrestha and others, found, "The risk of contracting COVID-19 was 1.5 times higher for those who received two doses, 1.95 times higher for those who received three doses, and 2.5 times higher for those who received three or more doses."

The comparison was against "people who received zero or one dose of a vaccine," the report said, of the results of Cleveland Clinic.

"The exact reason for this finding is not clear. It is possible that this may be related to the fact that vaccine-induced immunity is weaker and less durable than natural immunity. So, although somewhat protective in the short term, vaccination may increase risk of future infection," the researchers said in the paper.

The Times explained, "Dr. Robert Malone, a vaccine researcher who was not involved in the paper, told The Epoch Times that the paper served as 'another acknowledgment that the products are not effective or are at very low effectiveness and are contributing to negative effectiveness [down the line].'"

Other studies already have documented that the shots, often mandated by government or corporate officials for Americans during the pandemic, also carry potential side effects including fatal heart inflammation.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which promoted as mandatory the shots during the worldwide pandemic that killed millions, still wants virtually everyone 6 months and older to keep taking shot after shot after shot.

The report also cited Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at Yale, who said, "Multiple vaccine doses may have the effect of antibody-dependent enhancement or 'original antigenic sin,' which increase the infection response disproportionally to antibodies generated from the first vaccine dose, rather than from the current vaccine or the current infection, making the antibody response less effective."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

At the height of COVID, a lot of government officials regularly imposed demands on Americans that could – and sometimes have been – argued in court as unconstitutional.

One of the leaders of that movement was Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, and her agenda triggered many negative responses.

One was an alleged scheme to kidnap her, and part of the controversy was the many, many government agents sent to infiltrate, cooperate with, and if the evidence can be believed, encourage, that scheme.

Eventually, many of the defendants named were acquitted. But two were convicted and now their arguments have been heard by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Ken Silva, at HeadlineUSA, monitored events and explained the judges weren't gentle to prosecutors.

The defendants are Barry Croft and Adam Cox, who were convicted at a later trial after the first resulted in a hung jury. Others tried with them were acquitted.

The report noted, "Croft’s attorney, Timothy Sweeney, argued that his client should get a retrial because he wasn’t allowed to introduce numerous text messages that showed improper conduct by the FBI."

HeadlineUSA explained those confirmed how "FBI informants were pressuring Fox and Croft to formulate a plan against Whitmer."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Nils Kessler claimed the FBI influences were irrelevant – because the defendants "already" wanted to commit terrorism.

"All the [FBI] statements identified by defense go to inducement. If the jury found they were predisposed [to kidnapping Whitmer], none of that matters," he instructed the court. "This court has held that entrapment can only happen if the government plants an idea in an innocent person’s head."

One justice, however, openly doubted that claim.

"They’re saying the jury didn’t see all the pressure, all the government informants pounding on them. Surely that’s relevant?" the judge said.

When Kessler claimed there weren't identified statements where FBI informers "actually put that kind of pressure," the court again doubted, with justices identifying several such statements.

For example, the report said, "FBI informant Steve Robeson said in August 2020: 'If we don’t talk about actually doing what the f--- we need to be doing, I’m done with meetings."

The court noted that appeared to be specific, "I’m reading this as ‘we need to make a plan,'" one justice said.

Hearing the case were Joan Larsen, Chad Readler, and Stephanie Davis and they did not make an immediate ruling.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Prominent members of America's elite who hate President Donald Trump and high-profile personalities in the media, who also apparently hate him, have been meeting regularly to discuss strategies to use against him, according to a new report.

It is a report at Politico that explained, "Some of the country’s most prominent legal commentators are holding off-the-record sessions to hash out the latest twists and turns in Donald Trump’s legal saga."

The report noted the meetings are off the record and include those from "different media outlets."

"About a dozen or more people join any given call, though no one takes attendance. Some group members wouldn’t describe themselves with any partisan or ideological lean, but most are united by their dislike of Trump," Politico explained.

Calling the meetings is Norman Eisen, who was senior in the administration of Barack Obama and has worked for CNN. He's a well-known Trump critic and was part of the legal team that conducted the first of two failed impeachment campaigns against Trump.

Regulars on the brainstorming sessions are Bill Kristol, a commentator who repeatedly has lashed out at Trump, liberal law professor Laurence Tribe, Richard Nixon's White House counsel John Dean and George Conway, who famously and repeatedly lashed out at Trump during his tenure in office and founded the anti-Trump Lincoln Project, the report said.

Also Andrew Weissmann, who worked on Robert Mueller's investigation into the Democrat-created disinformation claims of Trump collusion with Russia.

Shamed MSNBC talker Jeffrey Toobin also appears.

"Sometimes there is a special guest, like the Jan. 6 committee staffers (who recalled briefing the group). One Friday last May, after E. Jean Carroll defeated Trump in the first of her two defamation cases to go to trial, her lawyer Roberta Kaplan joined as a guest to talk for roughly half an hour about her strategy for beating Trump in court. Another time, J. Michael Luttig, a conservative legal scholar and former judge who helped lead the public campaign to disqualify Trump under the 14th Amendment, showed up to make his case," the report said.

The report commented, "There is also something very 2024 about this group: It’s the perfect emblem of today’s Trump-media-legal-industrial complex."

The report writer noted, "A prominent legal commentator with a TV contract was surprised to learn about the existence of the calls when I approached them for the story. That person, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, volunteered some reservations about the idea of hosting a standing, off-the-record call with people working across different television, print and digital outlets."

That comment was, "It runs the risk of creating the impression that there is an agreement or cooperation or conspiracy across mainstream media entities."

The report explained those from the "Anti-Trump Cinematic Universe" who appear include Obama-era U.S. attorneys Harry Litman, Barbara McQuade and Joyce White Vance, Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin, MSNBC podcaster Mary McCord and CNN commentator Karen Agnifilo.

At JoeHoft.com was the comment, 'It's official – a group of corrupt disgusting Democrat haters are working with the media to attack President Trump."

© 2024 - Patriot News Alerts