This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to take up the case of an unarmed Arkansas mother who was threatened with a Taser by a police officer who already had ordered her two young sons onto the ground and handcuffed them.
The actions by the officer, he claimed, were because he was looking for three adult males and a woman who had fled from police earlier.
The fight now is whether that officer was justified in attacking the boys, attacking the mother, and threatening her.
The Institute for Justice is working on the case involving Casondra "Cassi" Pollreis.
She brought a case against the officer for unlawfully threatening her with a Taser, but lower court judges have claimed being unarmed, and being out of her house, and asking questions of the officer, could be perceived as a threat.
"The petition raises important questions concerning the Fourth Amendment’s protections against excessive force and the separate roles judges and juries play in deciding cases," the IJ reported.
Cassi’s case began on a cold winter’s night in 2018. Her two young boys were walking home from their grandparents’ house when a police car stopped in front of them and an officer emerged with his gun drawn. Within moments, the officer started shouting “get on the ground” and proceeded to handcuff the boys and hold them at gunpoint.
Cassi noticed the commotion, and—as any mother would—attempted to defuse the situation. With her boys lying face down on the ground and the officer’s gun drawn on their backs, Cassi calmly attempted to reason with the officer. “They are my boys ... Are you serious? They are 12 and 14 years old,” she said.
He replied: “And I’m looking for two kids about this age right now.” But he wasn’t; he was looking for three grown men and a woman who’d fled from police earlier in the evening. The boys and Cassi were completely innocent, but that didn’t stop him. “Get back!” he shouted as he drew his Taser on her. “I want you to get back in your house,” he demanded. Cassi complied, not wanting to make the situation worse.
Eventually, the officer’s sergeant arrived, assessed the scene, and quickly realized a mistake had been made. Minutes later he let the boys go.
The IJ said that Pollreis decided that the officer should be held to account for "threatening her with a Taser as she attempted to protect her children and defuse a tense situation."
At the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, two judges used an inconclusive dashcam video that showed only a little of what happened to decide against her.
The IJ said such issues should be presented at trial, and decided by jurors who can watch videos, hear testimony, and decide which side to believe.
"Juries are supposed to decide the facts, and judges are supposed to decide the law,” said Keith Neely, an attorney at the Institute for Justice, which represents Cassi. “The video in this case would be incredibly important evidence at a trial, but a jury will never get to see it because the appeals court denied Cassie her right to a trial of her peers."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
One of the problems America's next president is going to have to deal with is the massive influx of illegal aliens, all arrived because of Joe Biden's decision to make the nation's southern border literally wide open.
The result was predictable: Tens of thousands of illegals now live in cities where taxpayers are struggling to provide them benefits. Even leftist cities that claimed to be "sanctuaries" are telling the illegals not to come, or to go away. The cost for Americans is in the billions – and rising fast.
While Joe Biden likely would continue his welcome mat for all, including potential terrorists, if elected, the GOP's leading candidate, President Donald Trump, has promised to close down the border on "day one" of his administration.
But one of the second tier of candidates in the GOP race has pointed out that the solution is already available, should responsible federal officials decide they want to start working to protect the nation.
It is candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, whose support remains in single digits, who pointed out "the president and Congress do not have to pass any additional laws to have the nation's 11 million to 22 million illegal aliens deported."
According to a report at Breitbart, he explained the government's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's 287(g) program is ready to use to let local law enforcement help detain and then remove illegals.
"There are things that the government can do right now that nobody is talking about among the professional politicians in this race," he said.
He continued "We absolutely have that ability to deport anybody who is in this country illegally."
However, he said, "It shocks me that nobody in the Republican Party is talking about it…"
His comments came during Wednesday's GOP primary debate on NewsNation.
Actually, the government under Biden's direction has "worked to gut ICE's program, the report explained.
"Through so-called 'sanctuary country' orders that drastically limit the scope of which illegal aliens can be detained and deported by ICE agents, the administration has been able to hugely cut deportations," Breitbart reported.
Members of Congress recently assembled a report accusing Biden of failing to deport 99% of the illegal aliens who have arrived under his watch.
Instead of working to deport illegal aliens, Democrats actually have been reaching to assure they remain.
The Daily Caller News Foundation recently reported how the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue is processing donations for a bail fund seeking to help free illegal immigrants from detention, according to the fund’s donation page.
The website claims that illegals are detained solely because they cannot post a $5,000 bond, and it injected a racial component into the agenda.
"We are not stopping until EVERY Black Immigrant in ICE detention is FREE. We will not let any Black immigrant’s freedom to hinge on their wealth because we believe Black Lives Matter no matter where they were born," the site explains.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A website, study.com, which offers support for students and teachers, discusses American values as including liberty, unity, diversity, individualism, equality, and self-government.
It explains, "Various cultures have different values, but American values can be very accommodating for all. American values refer to the constitutionally-determined code of conduct. The American values definition implies that America is a place where certain ethical and legal standards have to be met. Governed by the rule of law, there are laws that American citizens and non-American residents alike have to adhere to. American values emphasize individuals being responsible for their identities and destiny through their thoughts, choices, and capabilities."
However, Alejandro Mayorkas, Joe Biden's pick to be the secretary of Homeland Security, apparently believes that wide-open borders and unlimited illegal immigration are American values.
And a lack of any law enforcement regarding the nation's immigration and asylum laws.
And unlimited presidential power to do, well, whatever he wants to protect illegal aliens.
The stunning opinions come from Mayorkas himself.
Alejandro Mayorkas says building a border wall, increasing the number of Border Patrol agents, limiting asylum, and narrowing Biden’s power to parole illegal immigrants is “violence to our fundamental values” pic.twitter.com/7gexP7D70n
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) December 6, 2023
RNC Research posted the Mayorkas video, explaining he "says building a border wall, increasing the number of Border Patrol agents, limiting asylum, and narrowing Biden's power to parole illegal immigrants is 'violence to our fundamental values.'"
The GOP already has proposed legislation to do that. Mayorkas resisted, stating, "I would say two things. One we've presented, uhm, uhm, proposals that address the situation that provide real practical solutions and also do not do violence to our fundamental values.
"We are a country of refuge. We do have asylum laws. We do have refugee laws. We, uhm, we abide by our international obligations and are longstanding," he said.
Study.com said, "American values were developed over numerous years, taking into consideration various cultural beliefs and their historical significance. The purpose of American values is to facilitate the assimilation of myriads of individuals from various parts of the world with different cultures and beliefs into a comprehensive American identity."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Republicans in the U.S. Senate have shot down Chuck Schumer's latest attack on the Second Amendment, blocking his attempt to adopt an "assault weapons" ban and universal background checks.
The Hill reported that Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., objected to demands by Schumer, D-N.Y., the Senate majority leader, to use unanimous consent to adopt the changes.
Schumer had insisted that what he called the "scourge" of gun violence is a national crisis, and "The American people are sick and tired of enduring one mass shooting after another. They’re sick and tired of vigil and moments of silence for family, friends, classmates, coworkers."
The plan, originally brought up by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would have outlawed semiautomatic rifles with pistol grips, forward grips and folding or telescoping stocks, all of which are common on weapons for hunting or for self-defense.
It also would have outlawed several other features on weapons.
The Hill reported Barrasso explained to supporting Democrats that their plan would violate the Second Amendment and "deprive law-abiding gun owners of an important liberty," the report said.
"Americans have a constitutional right to own a firearm. Every day, people across Wyoming responsibly use their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms,” he said. “Democrats are demanding that the American people give up their liberty."
He also noted that, as often happens, Democrats are trying to ban weapons "because of the way they look."
It was Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who later wanted unanimous consent for a law regarding universal background checks.
He claimed America doesn't have more mental illness or angrier people, or spend less on law enforcement, as justification for his request.
"We have more guns and we are much more permissive in this country about allowing felons, dangerous people, to get their hands on guns," he said.
The New York Daily News had explained Schumer was trying to "resurrect" a ban that expired in the law almost 20 years ago.
The report noted how unlikely its success actually was.
"Schumer’s push to pass the bill might charitably be described as a Hail Mary: Democrats hold a 51-to-49 advantage in the Senate, and far more modest gun safety efforts have run aground in the chamber and in the Republican-ruled House."
Even after the Sandy Hook school tragedy in 2012, the report said, the "Senate skewered a bid for a new assault weapons ban, with 40 votes in favor and 60 against."
Schumer, however, has continued pushing for such a ban, probably at least partly because it's been a goal of Joe Biden's administration.
His scheme would have banned the production and sale of 205 variations of weapons.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An investigation has been launched in Congress into the apparent collusion of Democrats on ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's partisan committee looking at the events of Jan. 6, 2021, with a prosecutor in Atlanta to build a legal case against President Donald Trump.
The investigation, announced by Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., include calls for Fulton County prosecutor Fani Willis and Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Democrat who headed Pelosi's partisan committee, to turn over documents.
The Washington Times reported Jordan told Willis, in a letter, "Recently, the committee became aware of cooperation between your office and the partisan January 6 Select Committee. We are in possession of a letter, dated December 17, 2021, and enclosed herein, from you to Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, chairman of the partisan January 6 Select Committee, requesting access to congressional 'records that may be relevant to our criminal investigation.'
"Specifically, you asked Rep. Thompson for access to ‘record [sic] includ[ing] but … not limited to recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel.'"
Jordan points out that Willis volunteered to travel to Washington, with staff members, to meet investigators and get records.
Jordan questioned, "Although it is not clear what records, if any, you obtained from your coordination with the partisan January 6 Select Committee, this new information raises additional questions relevant to the committee’s oversight of your politically motivated prosecution of a former president of the United States and several former senior federal officials."
Jordan how heads the House Judiciary Committee and Republicans there previously had begun asking questions about the now-defunct January 6 "Select Committee," partisan because only Democrat Pelosi was allowed to name its participants after she rejected GOP nominees.
The inquiry concerns whether the committee members gave documents to Willis. Since then, it's been revealed that the Democrats there apparently failed to preserve recordings of witness statements, a move that appears to violate congressional rules.
The report noted another letter was sent by Republicans to Thompson accusing him of giving Willis congressional records.
"According to public reporting, the Select Committee shared records with Ms. Willis. The Select Committee provided ‘Fulton County prosecutors … key evidence about what former President Trump and his top advisers knew’ with respect to Georgia’s 2020 election results," Loudermilk charged.
"However, there are no records of any additional communication between the Select Committee and Ms. Willis and her office. Therefore, we have no records showing what the Select Committee actually provided her office," he said.
Loudermilk's concern was elevated because, the report said, "Thompson wrote in a previous letter to him that he did not preserve any video recordings of depositions or transcribed interviews."
Because of that, Thompson stands accused of denying "the American public the right to review the footage and make their own conclusions about witnesses’ truthfulness. Clearly, Ms. Willis agrees that video recordings of witness interviews and depositions are important records."
Thompson claims he did nothing wrong.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Today's tech-heavy vehicles often rely on alarm lights to warn drivers of possible trouble. Low tire? Dash lights up. Engine oil issue? Dash lights up. Temperature gone wacky? Dash lights up. Seat belts, door ajar, hatch open, the same.
And now, according to the FBI, if America as a nation had warning lights regarding terrorism, its whole dash would be a glow of red and orange.
It's because he described the current "threat matrix" to Congress as really high.
According to a report from Fox News, FBI Director Christopher Wray told a hearing, "What I would say that is unique about the environment that we're in right now in my career is that while there may have been times over the years where individual threats could have been higher here or there than where they may be right now, I've never seen a time where all the threats or so many of the threats are all elevated, all at exactly the same time."
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked, "So, blinking red lights analogy about 9/11 — all the lights were blinking red before 9/11, apparently. Obviously, all of us missed it. Would you say there are multiple blinking red lights out there?"
Wray said the threat right now is at levels unprecedented before the Oct. 7 terror attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians, in an attack in which some 1,400 were slaughtered, sometimes with babies beheaded and other times with whole families burned alive.
Wray said, actually, he sees "blinking red lights everywhere."
A "veritable rogue's gallery of foreign terrorists" has demanded attacks against the U.S. since the Hamas atrocities, Wray confirmed.
"The threat level has gone to a whole 'nother level since Oct. 7," he said.
He had suggested in October there were threats.
The report noted there have been 74 attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria since Oct. 17, most considered to have been launched by militia groups triggered by the U.S. support for Israel.
And the report noted domestically, the FBI and Las Vegas police this week foiled an alleged "lone wolf" terror plot by a teenager who pledged support to ISIS.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Amid the ongoing war between the Islamic terrorists of Hamas and the Middle East's primary democracy, Israel, Hamas, and its supporters often have referenced the human cost to civilians in Gaza as Israel works to wipe out the terrorists.
It's not surprising there are civilian casualties there, given that Hamas terrorists frequently locate their military bases at or near – even underneath – hospitals, schools, and historic sites, seeking to use them as shields.
The Joe Biden White House verbally has continued its commitment to Israel's right to defend itself and fight terrorism.
But the actual words have taken on a new meaning, as they reprise the messaging that has been coming from Hamas itself.
On social media, Kamala Harris claimed she and Biden were clear: "Israel has a right to defend itself, and we will remain steadfast in that conviction."
However, she charged that Israel must respect "international humanitarian law," because, of course, "too many Palestinians have been killed."
She ordered that Israel "must do more to protect innocent civilians."
During her short message, she didn't address the 1,400 innocent civilians in Israel who were butchered by Hamas, from babies being beheaded to entire families being burned alive. Women were raped and worse.
He said the White House doesn’t support Israel's operations against Hamas in the southern part of Gaza "unless or until they have factored in all those additional civilians" there.
"We have made two points here: One, we’ve told the Israelis, very consistently, we don’t support southern operations unless or until they have factored in all those additional civilians — actually, all civilians, but noting that there are now hundreds of thousands more civilians. Number two, … we have also urged them to think about how to do this in a way that keeps those civilians safe.
"Now, I don’t want to get into whether there [are] safe zones called for or what that could look like, but we certainly want to see them pursue these operations in a way that properly accounts for that civilian population, and [that], to the maximum degree that it can, inoculate[s] them from these combat operations, so that they’re not in harm’s way, that they’re not caught in the crossfire between Israel and Hamas."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Kilolo Kijakazi is the Social Security Administration commissioner chosen by Joe Biden and is well-known as an activist for the "National Advisory Council on Eliminating the Black-White Wealth Gap" and being on the "Equitable Recovery Advisory Group."
But under her watch, the administration has "overpaid beneficiaries tens of billions of dollars, including a 65% spike in overpayments in one year," according to a report from government watchdog Judicial Watch.
The report explained the "noted racial equity activist" was part of "a whopping $23 billion in overpayments" during 2023.
That's up from$11.1 billion in overpayments that SSA erroneously made in 2022.
"At a congressional hearing earlier this year, SSA Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi told federal lawmakers that her agency is trying to recover the money by sending out millions of 'overpayment notices' to those who erroneously got extra cash. Kijakazi said 1,028,389 people got the notices in 2022 and 986,912 in fiscal 2023, which ended in September," the report said.
But Kijakazi, a renowned racial equity proponent with a storied career of researching—and tackling—structural racism and the racial wealth gap in both government and high-profile nonprofits, continues to face problematic operations despite adding 4,000 works to the administration.
"We made progress toward eliminating our hearings backlog," she said in a report.
She also boasts of reducing wait times for claims and improving organizational efficiency.
And she claims to be striving to reduce "reduce improper payments and combat waste, fraud and abuse through our quality reviews, cost-effective program integrity work, and payment accuracy efforts."
She claimed there are "no material weaknesses in our internal controls."
The bureaucracy's been known for overpayments for years, sticking American taxpayers will the hefty bill each year.
"Most of the money is never recovered. In the last few years, the agency has doled out between $6 billion and $7 billion in new overpayments annually, the new report reveals. It shows that most of the 2022 overpayments, around $6.5 billion, occurred within the Old-Age Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) programs which provide monthly benefits to qualified retired and disabled workers and their dependents and to survivors of insured workers."
The report warned, however, that, "buried deep in the exhaustive 216-page report the agency discloses the billions it has overpaid in the last few years despite establishing a special Improper Payment Prevention Team in 2019 tasked with developing strategies to determine the underlying cause of payment errors and developing corrective action plans."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A new report reveals that testimony from Deutsche Bank officials in New York Attorney General Letitia James' claims that Donald Trump's companies engaged in fraud has "blown up" the case.
James campaigned for her statewide office on the slogan of getting Trump, even though there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of his companies. She's now in court, claiming fraud and demanding $250 million in damages and the execution of his New York enterprises, even though there's no evidence of unpaid loans, irate partners, unmade payments, or anything of that kind.
Trump has charged repeatedly that it's no more than a political witch hunt in which James, apparently with the aid of Judge Arthur Engoron, is trying to inflict as much damage on him as possible, without cause.
A report in The Gateway Pundit explains now how testimony from a Deutsche Bank official undermined James' claims.
The report first explained the executive "gave testimony that could bolster Donald Trump’s defense in his civil fraud trial, telling a New York judge that prospective clients can get loans even after reporting a net worth far higher than the lender’s own calculations."
"David Williams, who worked on at least one of three loans Deutsche Bank made to Trump in the years before he was elected president, testified Tuesday that it's 'atypical, but not entirely unusual' for the bank to cut a client’s stated asset value by 50% and approve a loan anyway, as it did with Trump."
Williams worked on at least one of the loans Deutsche Bank made to Trump before he was president, and said the stated assets are merely an opinion and a difference of opinion in asset values does not disqualify a borrower.
The Pundit explained, "Radical Marxist New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking $250 million in 'damages' when there is no victim in this fraud case and she is also seeking to ban Trump and his sons from operating any businesses in New York. She accused Trump of inflating his assets and defrauding lenders and insurance companies."
The banker said such lending "is typical in high net-worth, high-profile clients like Donald Trump," the report explained.
Engoron repeatedly has acted in opposition to Trump's defense, and recently threatened that fining Trump for "illegal profits" could be a remedy.
The Pundit explained that was in a case "with zero victims."
William A. Jacobson, a clinical professor of law and founder of the Legal Insurrection website, has suggested James is a victim of "Trump Derangement Syndrome."
The evidence? Her $250 million civil lawsuit against President Donald Trump and his family over his business dealings.
Writing at the Daily Caller News Foundation, Jacobson explained that although the state office James holds has great power, hundreds of employees and authority both in criminal and civil venues, "political neutrality is not what Attorney General Letitia James has delivered."
In fact, her campaign for the office was based on her promise "to get Donald Trump on something, anything," he explained. As a result, she's "conducted herself in office to exact political revenge on the former president, his businesses, and his family."
In fact, it was during 2018 while she was campaigning that James demanded: "He should be charged with obstructing justice. I believe that the president of these United States can be indicted for criminal offenses and we would join with law enforcement and other attorneys general across the nation in removing this president from office."
Jacobson pointed out James also was on social media boasting of an endorsement from Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who said James would, if elected, "investigate Trump."
When she was elected, Jacobson reported, James bragged, "I will be shining a bright light into every dark corner of his real estate dealings…."
In office, she's promoted multiple "investigations" of Trump, "even threatening a church as which Eric Trump was appearing," Jacobson wrote.
Then came the announcement of a civil lawsuit against the Trumps.
However, Jacobson pointed out that no one is alleged to have lost money because of any Trump action, and the focus of the dispute, the valuation of properties, was conceded by even the New York Times to be "often subjective."
In fact, Engoron radically claimed that Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence is worth some $18 million, triggering a massive eye roll from the real estate community, where real experts suggested it was worth 50 times that – or more.
The fact is that all of the loans that generated the dispute have been paid off.
"Tish James campaigned on and conducted her office for the purpose of investigating a political opponent and those around him trying to find a crime. That is Soviet-level prosecutorial abuse where individuals are targeted not to prosecute a crime, but to sift through their lives in the hope of finding a crime," Jacobson said. "And lacking a prosecutable crime, trying to bring them down and purge them from the economic world through a civil lawsuit."
Trump Derangement Syndrome is a term coined for a malady suffered by those who hate something simply because President Trump is involved.
Other legal experts have warned James destroyed her own neutrality and credibility by threatening Trump before she was elected.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Republicans in the U.S. House say investigators have tracked $40,000 that ended up in Joe Biden's personal bank account back to a Chinese company that apparently was making payments to try to buy influence in America.
The investigators traced the funds through a labyrinth of bank accounts and discovered the money had been provided to the Biden family banking complex by the now-defunct Chinese energy company CEFC, which was linked to the Chinese Communist Party.
A report in the Washington Times outlines the path of the $40,000, which actually was a check from Joe Biden's brother and sister-in-law and marked "loan repayment" even though that hasn't yet been documented.
The relationship between the family and CEFC began with brother James and son Hunter developing links while Joe Biden was vice president to Barack Obama.
"To avoid the appearance of corruption, they waited for a $3 million payout deemed a 'thank you' until six weeks after Mr. Biden left office, according to former business associate Tony Bobulinki," the Times explained.
The payment was for work "to advance CEFC's interests," it explained.
It was the same company with which James and Hunter and others also reached a $10 million agreement.
It was in 2017, with Joe Biden out of office, that Hunter Biden used social media to threaten CEFC through an associate, Raymond Zhao.
He told Zhao, "I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled.
He said unless payment was made more or less immediately, "I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction."
Zhao then promised cooperation.
Joe Biden then got $40,000 through that labyrinth, the report said.
CEFC wired $5 million through its Northern International Capital into Hudson West III, which Hunter Biden ran with a Chinese national linked to CEFC, the report said.
The wire arrived a week after Hunter Biden's threat, and that same day Hunter Biden sent $400,000 from Hudson West II to his law firm, Owasco PC. Days later he send $150,000 from Owasco to an account held by James and Sara Biden, which they called Lion Hall Group.
Sara Biden then pulled $50,000 out of that account, putting it in her personal bank account with James Biden, and then writing a $40,000 check to Joe Biden.
The report explained House investigators believe the money was "part of a payoff" from the Chinese company.
The check was marked "loan repayment" but Rep. James Comer said the evidence from various banks for Biden account details "show a direct benefit to Joe Biden through a series of complicated financial transactions."
Joe Biden claims he didn't participate in his family's business dealings, but House investigators say the evidence suggests otherwise.
Members of Congress have told Joe Biden to prove that the $40,000, and an earlier $200,000 payment so marked, actually were loan "repayments."
House investigators have said James Biden’s bank records show no record of such a large loan from Joe Biden.
The Times reported, "According to witnesses’ testimony and other evidence uncovered by investigators in the House and Senate, Vice President Biden was indirectly and directly involved in some of the deals. James Biden and Hunter Biden leveraged the 'Biden brand,' a reference to Mr. Biden, to secure lucrative deals. Mr. Biden phoned in or dropped by some of Hunter Biden’s business meetings."
The House has reported the Biden family took in millions of dollars from China, Ukraine, Russia, Romania and other countries, apparently for nothing more than access to Joe Biden.