This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
On Friday, Kamala Harris made her first statements about her own policy plans and ideology since a month ago when the Democrat party elites tossed the mentally declining Joe Biden under the bus and hand-picked Harris as his replacement in this year's presidential race.
It took, literally, no time at all before her ideas were condemned as "socialist" or "communist," by not just GOP presidential nominee President Donald Trump but economic experts, too.
Trump's campaign cited the analysis of a commentator from the leftist CNN, Catherine Rampell, who pointed out Harris's plans already have been tried in other locations.
"We've seen this kind of thing tried in lots of other countries before, Venezuela, Argentina, the Soviet Union. It leads to shortages. It leads to black markets, plenty of uncertainty."
Harris, as reported earlier, is opposed to "price gouging," by those involved in distributing and selling America's food supply. And she wants "price controls," a routine technic used by repressive governments to make their economies look better.
Rampell explained, "Well, first of all, nobody can explain what price gouging means. It's like that old line about pornography: I know it when I see it, in the sense that, what does it mean to have an excessive price or an excessive profit margin? That seems to be shorthand for a price or a profit margin that bugs me. That seems too high.
"So, you know, it's very hard to pin down what this would actually mean. If you look at the legislation that, as I mentioned, is already in the Senate, led by Senator Warren and Senator Bob Casey and a slew of others. The particular way that this is written, which is likely to be the template for any proposal that Harris would eventually embrace, is especially bad in that it just bans 'excessive prices, grossly excessive prices, grossly excessive profit margins,' and says that the Federal Trade Commission can use any metric it deems appropriate to decide what that would mean."
She noted that, basically, means "some bureaucrat in D.C." will be deciding grocery prices, not supply and demand.
She continued, "Which seems totally unworkable, first of all, for the FTC to be deciding how much Kroger charges for eggs in Michigan. But it also would be very bad for markets. … And beyond that, the specific way this bill is written might actually increase prices because of some of the other language in it, things like requiring companies, public companies, to disclose in their quarterly reports, the quarterly earnings reports, how they're setting prices, which is a great way to help them collude, which normally we don't want them to do."
A report as Fox Business explained Harris also has a "list of actions" to address affordable housing, including providing $25,000 down payments for first-time homebuyers.
The report said, "Alexander Gorlin, an architect who co-authored the book 'Housing the Nation: Social Equity, Architecture, and the Future of Affordable Housing' told FOX Business he likes the idea, but he and co-author Victoria Newhouse both said they would need to see more about the plan, noting that $25,000 might be great assistance in some areas of the country, but would not go very far in places with higher home prices, like San Francisco."
And Tony Fiorillo, owner of Asset Management Strategies, Inc., told FOX Business that Harris's ideas are "a perfect formula to create inflation."
"Providing this benefit from the government would increase demand for houses at a time when there is already a shortage of homes available for sale," he explained.
Elon Musk, in the Fox report, said yes, on social media, when the question was asked, "[W]on't that just increase the price of all homes by $25,000 while also increasing the deficit."
Wealth adviser Cody Moore of Alpharetta, Georgia, said, "In my opinion, it is just an attempt to garner more votes for the upcoming election by utilizing handouts."
Biden, while he was campaigning, multiple times promised to "cancel" the debt of student loan borrowers, in an obvious attempt to purchase goodwill.
The Supreme Court at one point said he couldn't do what he wanted, and the facts are that Biden wasn't "cancelling" any debt, he was just forcing taxpayers to pay it instead of those who borrowed and spent the money.
Another report at Fox explained that her policies "may be even worse than Biden's failed 'Bidenomics.'"
Those are the policies and practices that have imposed on American consumers inflation of well over 20% since Biden took office.
The Harris campaign claims it will stop "big corporations" from taking advantage if it is allowed to impose a federal ban "on price gouging on food and groceries.'
The Daily Caller News Foundation noted even Jason Furman, Barack Obama's top economist, was critical.
"The good case scenario is price gouging is a message, not a reality, and the bad case scenario is that this is a real proposal. You'll end up with bigger shortages, less supply and ultimately risk higher prices and worse outcomes for consumers if you try to enforce this in a real way, which I don't know if they would or wouldn't do."
A report from the Federal Reserve of San Francisco release weeks ago, and apparently ignored by Harris, confirmed that "corporate greed" is not the main driver of inflation.
"This is economic lunacy. Price controls are a SERIOUSLY bad idea," Samuel Gregg, of the American Institute for Economic Research, said on X. "They lead to shortages, severe misallocations of capital, and distort the ability to prices to signal the information we all need to make choices."
Another foundation report said former Trump administration official Kevin Hassett blasted Harris's ideas as "absolute socialism."
"For an economist, this is about the most terrifying proposal I've ever seen. Because What Kamala Harris is saying is that the government needs to set the price of things and she's starting with food, but I guess if they set the price of food, they might as well set the price of everything else.
"They've also come out, you might recall, the Biden administration saying that they want to set rents, they think rents are too high, so they're going to have the government decide what the rent for your apartment should be. This is absolute socialism and it never ends well. If you go back and look at countries that have tried this, like Cuba, Venezuela, Ukraine back when the Soviet Union organized it, then it leads to famine and shortages."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
On Friday, Kamala Harris made her first statements about her own policy plans and ideology since a month ago when the Democrat party elites tossed the mentally declining Joe Biden under the bus and hand-picked Harris as his replacement in this year's presidential race.
It took, literally, no time at all before her ideas were condemned as "socialist" or "communist," by not just GOP presidential nominee President Donald Trump but economic experts, too.
Trump's campaign cited the analysis of a commentator from the leftist CNN, Catherine Rampell, who pointed out Harris's plans already have been tried in other locations.
"We've seen this kind of thing tried in lots of other countries before, Venezuela, Argentina, the Soviet Union. It leads to shortages. It leads to black markets, plenty of uncertainty."
Harris, as reported earlier, is opposed to "price gouging," by those involved in distributing and selling America's food supply. And she wants "price controls," a routine technic used by repressive governments to make their economies look better.
Rampell explained, "Well, first of all, nobody can explain what price gouging means. It's like that old line about pornography: I know it when I see it, in the sense that, what does it mean to have an excessive price or an excessive profit margin? That seems to be shorthand for a price or a profit margin that bugs me. That seems too high.
"So, you know, it's very hard to pin down what this would actually mean. If you look at the legislation that, as I mentioned, is already in the Senate, led by Senator Warren and Senator Bob Casey and a slew of others. The particular way that this is written, which is likely to be the template for any proposal that Harris would eventually embrace, is especially bad in that it just bans 'excessive prices, grossly excessive prices, grossly excessive profit margins,' and says that the Federal Trade Commission can use any metric it deems appropriate to decide what that would mean."
She noted that, basically, means "some bureaucrat in D.C." will be deciding grocery prices, not supply and demand.
She continued, "Which seems totally unworkable, first of all, for the FTC to be deciding how much Kroger charges for eggs in Michigan. But it also would be very bad for markets. … And beyond that, the specific way this bill is written might actually increase prices because of some of the other language in it, things like requiring companies, public companies, to disclose in their quarterly reports, the quarterly earnings reports, how they're setting prices, which is a great way to help them collude, which normally we don't want them to do."
A report as Fox Business explained Harris also has a "list of actions" to address affordable housing, including providing $25,000 down payments for first-time homebuyers.
The report said, "Alexander Gorlin, an architect who co-authored the book 'Housing the Nation: Social Equity, Architecture, and the Future of Affordable Housing' told FOX Business he likes the idea, but he and co-author Victoria Newhouse both said they would need to see more about the plan, noting that $25,000 might be great assistance in some areas of the country, but would not go very far in places with higher home prices, like San Francisco."
And Tony Fiorillo, owner of Asset Management Strategies, Inc., told FOX Business that Harris's ideas are "a perfect formula to create inflation."
"Providing this benefit from the government would increase demand for houses at a time when there is already a shortage of homes available for sale," he explained.
Elon Musk, in the Fox report, said yes, on social media, when the question was asked, "[W]on't that just increase the price of all homes by $25,000 while also increasing the deficit."
Wealth adviser Cody Moore of Alpharetta, Georgia, said, "In my opinion, it is just an attempt to garner more votes for the upcoming election by utilizing handouts."
Biden, while he was campaigning, multiple times promised to "cancel" the debt of student loan borrowers, in an obvious attempt to purchase goodwill.
The Supreme Court at one point said he couldn't do what he wanted, and the facts are that Biden wasn't "cancelling" any debt, he was just forcing taxpayers to pay it instead of those who borrowed and spent the money.
Another report at Fox explained that her policies "may be even worse than Biden's failed 'Bidenomics.'"
Those are the policies and practices that have imposed on American consumers inflation of well over 20% since Biden took office.
The Harris campaign claims it will stop "big corporations" from taking advantage if it is allowed to impose a federal ban "on price gouging on food and groceries.'
The Daily Caller News Foundation noted even Jason Furman, Barack Obama's top economist, was critical.
"The good case scenario is price gouging is a message, not a reality, and the bad case scenario is that this is a real proposal. You'll end up with bigger shortages, less supply and ultimately risk higher prices and worse outcomes for consumers if you try to enforce this in a real way, which I don't know if they would or wouldn't do."
A report from the Federal Reserve of San Francisco release weeks ago, and apparently ignored by Harris, confirmed that "corporate greed" is not the main driver of inflation.
"This is economic lunacy. Price controls are a SERIOUSLY bad idea," Samuel Gregg, of the American Institute for Economic Research, said on X. "They lead to shortages, severe misallocations of capital, and distort the ability to prices to signal the information we all need to make choices."
Another foundation report said former Trump administration official Kevin Hassett blasted Harris's ideas as "absolute socialism."
"For an economist, this is about the most terrifying proposal I've ever seen. Because What Kamala Harris is saying is that the government needs to set the price of things and she's starting with food, but I guess if they set the price of food, they might as well set the price of everything else.
"They've also come out, you might recall, the Biden administration saying that they want to set rents, they think rents are too high, so they're going to have the government decide what the rent for your apartment should be. This is absolute socialism and it never ends well. If you go back and look at countries that have tried this, like Cuba, Venezuela, Ukraine back when the Soviet Union organized it, then it leads to famine and shortages."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Kamala Harris's cackle, her loud guffaw that breaks into her speech at the most inopportune times, is being described as a "sickening taunt" in a report about her actions when she successfully convicted an innocent man of murder, and their eyes met as he faced going to prison for what could be the rest of his life.
It is the Daily Mail that reported on that "taunt" from Harris in a case involve California man Jamal Trulove.
He was wrongfully convicted of murder by Harris, and he now has charged that she "laughed in his face when the verdict was read out in court."
His sentence was 50 years.
But it turned out he was framed by police for the shooting death of his friend Seu Kuka, in 2007.
Harris was the prosecutor in San Francisco at the time.
The conviction was overturned, but only after Trulove spent six years in prison for something he didn't do.
He eventually was paid $13.1 million by the city to settle his lawsuit over a conviction orchestrated by Harris.
In an interview with The Art of Dialogue talk show, he said he's been unable to shake Harris's cruel taunt.
"We locked eyes this one time, and she laughed," he said. "She literally just, like, kind of busted out laughing. Almost as if she was pointing like, 'ha-ha.' She didn't point, but that's how it felt."
He has said he'll be supporting Trump in this election.
Trulove, exonerated in a 2015 retrial, charged in his civil case that four officers fabricated evidence, forced a key eyewitness and withheld critical information.
The civil jury determined two homicide detectives violated his civil rights.
Worse than pursuing a wrongful conviction, Harris has been accused of trying to keep those convictions when they are documented as wrong.
It is Lara Bazelon, formerly director of Loyola Law School's Project for the Innocent, who explained, "Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Democrats, giddy with the idea they were getting rid of Joe Biden as their presidential nominee this year, surged around Kamala Harris when the party's elite picked her to replace the mentally failing president.
Polls reflected that and headlines proclaimed the race was closer than ever, that Harris actually was leading, that swing states thought to be trending Republican actually were in play.
That bump in popularity, which happens whenever there's a major political campaign announcement, a convention, a VP announcement and the like, may be over.
Polling by Napolitan Institute, released on Friday, shows Trump back in a lead similar to that he held over Biden before the Democrats torpedoed him and gave his campaign cash to Harris.
"In the race for the White House, Donald Trump leads Kamala Harris 46% to 45%. When leaners are included, the Napolitan News survey of 3,000 Likely Voters shows Trump ahead 49% to 47%. A week ago, the candidates were tied at 49% among Likely Voters," the polling organization said.
"These numbers suggest that the initial Harris bounce is over. However, the core dynamics of the race remain unchanged. Love him or hate him, voters know what they think of Donald Trump. At this point in time, Kamala Harris remains largely unknown. That means events like the upcoming Democratic convention and presidential debates could have a bigger impact than usual."
The organization said the presidential race, at this point, remains too close to call. But analysts have pointed out that in the previous two elections, President Trump has delivered a performance a fair margin above his polling numbers.
"Trump voters are slightly more likely to vote than Harris supporters. So, the former president does a bit better with a lower turnout. What's especially amazing about this close race is that it's quite plausible to envision either party winning a trifecta: control of the Presidency, the Senate, and the House. The most important race to determine Senate control is in Montana. The latest Napolitan News survey there shows Democrat Jon Tester with a narrow lead but the state's political gravity is likely to boost Republican Tim Sheehy."
A report at Just the News cited the poll to explain respondents are "catapulting Trump to lead and ending Harris surge."
The report noted Harris was leading Trump 44% to 43% in the same survey just a week ago, and held a five-point lead at the beginning of the month.
The report noted pollster Rasmussen previously had warned that Harris's "initial surge" could have been a "sugar high" based on the ouster of Biden as the candidate, and her momentum "appears to have stopped."
"These numbers suggest that the initial Harris bounce is over," Rasmussen told Just the News
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
During the 2020 election, Mark Zuckerberg used his billions – actually only some $400 million plus – to influence the presidential election.
Through foundations, his cash was delivered to mostly leftist local election officials who mostly used it to recruit voters in Democrat districts.
It was one of two major undue influences on that vote, the other being the FBI's decision to interfere with its advisory, known to be false at the time it was issued, that the Biden scandals detailed in Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop were "Russian" disinformation.
Now the administration run by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris is attempting to reproduce the influence of Zuckerberg's operation, without his money. Instead, they are using taxpayers' money.
Their scheme was made public at the outset of the Biden presidency when he ordered all federal agencies to work with him, and a multitude of far-left organizations, to encourage voting.
A report at the Federalist explains multiple Republican-led states now have sued to stop the influence scheme.
Biden's plan is known as the "Bidenbucks" plan, after the 2020 "Zuckerbucks" scandal.
Attorneys general from nine states — Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and South Dakota — filed their action in federal court in Kansas seeking to shut down Biden's executive order and its influence plans.
"Among the charges, the complaint alleges the Biden administration has usurped the appropriating power of Congress, which did not grant the executive branch authority to fund the unprecedented GOTV [get-out-the-vote] initiative," the report explained.
"We're not going to stand by and let the federal government get turned into a giant voter turnout machine for Democrats. We're going to make sure you follow the law," Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen told the Federalist.
"You've got an executive branch that is far exceeding the authority that has been given to them. This is something that's never been done before at the federal level."
The charges include that Biden and Harris are redirecting federal money to projects that were not authorized by Congress.
Further, states, not the White House, are assigned to run elections.
"President Biden has sought to convert the federal bureaucracy into a voter registration organization and to turn every interaction between a federal bureaucrat and a member of the public into a voter registration pitch," the case charges. "That exceeds any authority executive entities have under federal law, violates the Constitution, threatens States' attempt to regulate voter registration, and thus ultimately undermines the voter registration systems set up by the States."
The case is similar to one filed earlier by Pennsylvania lawmakers.
The report continued, "As The Federalist has reported, Bidenbucks is making Zuckbucks look like chump change. In fact, not even Congress knows how much taxpayers are on the hook for; the administration refuses to turn over requested documents about the initiative. We do know that the leftist group Demos drove Biden's constitutionally suspect executive order."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
For years already, Democrats and other leftists in America have orchestrated a multi-level lawfare campaign against President Trump.
Even while he was president they made wild claims that he orchestrated an "insurrection" against the nation even though the events were just a protest that got out of hand, and even though those charges weren't filed. Nor did they succeed in their two failed attempts to impeach him and remove him from office, even once after he had left office.
But they made claims about business records misdemeanors that were now felonies for Trump, there were paper custody violations that generated a host of felonies against Trump even though almost identical violations by Joe Biden and Mike Pence were dismissed as not worthy of prosecution. They've even alleged he ran a corrupt criminal organization to overturn the 2020 election.
They've run into headwinds with valid arguments that their special prosecutor was appointed illegally, and the Supreme Court ruling presidents are immune to many claims based on their actions in office.
But now a commentator at Fox News is warning they're about to ramp up their war against Trump to the nuclear level, ordering him to jail.
It is commentator Andrew McCarthy who is warning that the judge in the business records case, characterized by Trump critics throughout as a "hush money" complaint, already has signaled his intent to impose a jail sentence.
The case involved Trump's payments to a woman to keep quiet about an "affair" the two were alleged to have had – even though both have denied it.
Those payments were characterized as legal expenses, since the payments were made through a lawyer. Much like Hillary Clinton characterized as legal expenses her payments during the 2016 race to a legal team which in turn hired someone to make up salacious allegations against Trump in what has become known as the Steele dossier, a series of debunked claims.
The judge, Juan Merchan, has refused to step away from the case even though there's an obvious appearance of a conflict of interests as his daughter, a Democrat campaign activist, has been making money off the decisions her father makes in the courtroom against Trump.
"To the surprise of no one, Judge Juan Merchan has yet again denied former President Donald Trump's motion that the judge recuse himself. I am speaking, of course, about the case in which Manhattan's elected progressive Democratic district Attorney, Alvin Bragg, is prosecuting Trump. In early June, a jury found the former president and current GOP presidential nominee guilty on 34 counts of business-records falsification " the commentary started.
"It is not just that Judge Merchan had previously denied the recusal motion. The judge has signaled that, come hell or high water, he intends to sentence Trump on September 18. If you're keeping score, that would be two days after early voting in the 2024 election begins in Pennsylvania," he said.
Trump's lawyers have ammunition for their requests but McCarthy said this is no ordinary case.
"On July 1, the U.S. Supreme Court held that presidents (including former presidents) are (a) presumptively immune from criminal prosecution for any official acts taken as president, and (b) absolutely immune if the official acts are core constitutional duties of the chief executive. The Court instructed that this immunity extends not only to charges but to evidence. That means prosecutors are not just barred from alleging official presidential acts as crimes; they are further prohibited from even using such acts as proof offered to establish other crimes," he explained.
He explained there is no doubt Bragg's case used "Trump's official acts" to support their claims.
"Unsurprisingly then, Trump's lawyers moved post-trial to have the guilty verdicts thrown out based on the high court's immunity ruling," he noted.
Merchan has said he'll issue his ruling soon.
"Most importantly, though, Merchan admonished the parties to prepare for the court to move ahead with the imposition of sentence on September 18. He instructed the lawyers to submit promptly any arguments they intend to make on that subject," McCarthy said.
The logical conclusion is that Merchan already has decided to reject Trump's immunity arguments, and there is "a high likelihood that he will impose a prison sentence against Trump right after that."
McCarthy explained, "I suspect that Merchan will rationalize that Trump (a) was not charged based on official presidential acts, and (b) would have been convicted even if Bragg's prosecutors had not introduced arguably immunized evidence. Such a ruling might be wrong, especially on the latter point (at trial, prosecutors described some of the testimony from Trump staffers as 'devastating'); but Merchan made so many outrageous rulings in the case that it would be foolish to expect him to change course now."
Additionally, he said there's another defense Trump's lawyers can use on appeal: that Merchan refused Trump the right to a unanimous jury decision on the evidence.
McCarthy noted the Supreme Court has affirmed "in criminal cases, important proof elements affecting the potential sentence must be found unanimously by the jury," a right that Merchan refused to allow Trump.
That's critical because "a unanimous verdict on the supposed crime (conspiracy to influence the election by illegal conduct)" was what "Bragg alleged Trump was trying to conceal by falsifying his business records. That crime is what turned a misdemeanor into a felony, and what allowed Bragg to get around the two-year misdemeanor statute of limitations."
He said the main point is that Bragg's prosecution was politics.
"That's why we call it 'lawfare.' The prosecutors and judge are not concerned about whether convictions ultimately get thrown out on appeal. And it's not like Merchan is actually going to put Trump in prison; it is virtually certain that Trump will get bail pending appeal, so Merchan can appear to impose a stiff incarceration sentence without any real incarceration – at least for now, and probably ever."
He said what the Democrats want out of their potpourri of wild claims is "to enable Vice President Harris and the media-Democratic complex to label Trump 'a convicted felon sentenced to prison' just weeks before Election Day."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Minnesota grandmother who was jailed by her governor, now-Democrat VP candidate Tim Walz, over COVID politics is issuing a warning to America about his tyranny and abuse.
"This man would like to take your rights away. He will take your rights away. Because what happened to me could have happened to anybody. What happened to me will happen to you," said the woman, in a report from Fox News.
It is Lisa Hanson, who formerly owned a wine and coffee bistro, who is talking about Walz's lockdown agenda that resulted in her being thrown in jail for some 60 days.
She charged that Walz essentially "shut down and destroyed" her small business and that Americans "do not want tyranny at this level."
As the medical evidence now confirms masking wasn't effective against COVID and lockdowns were imposed unevenly, and some accuse irrationally, so the various state-level orders regarding the China-originated virus often were political.
That would explain why, for example, big box stores in Minnesota were allowed to continue operating, but small stores and churches faced extreme restrictions.
Hanson, a mother of eight and soon to be 18 grandchildren, has owned businesses with her husband for more than 30 years.
"At the time the COVID-19 pandemic was in full swing in 2020, Hanson said The Interchange Wine & Coffee Bistro in Albert Lea, about 90 miles south of Minneapolis, had been open for eight years," Fox explained.
That March, she initially complied with Walz's orders that businesses close, even though his demands always exempted big box stores, liquor stores and even strip clubs.
But months later, he continued his attacks on bars, restaurants, gyms, dance studios, hair salons, and churches.
She explained, "He shut down a lot of the mom-and-pop shops, those folks that were just trying to make a living and provide a great product and a great service. In contrast, he allowed big box stores, etc. to stay open. Really incredible, an incredible use of tyranny against the people."
Eventually, she reopened her business anyway, and was convicted of misdemeanor charges, facing a sentence of 90 days in jail, of which she served about 60. Also a $1,000 fine.
"This is the story that America needs to hear, that Tim Walz is not some cuddly, joyful coach, like all the things that the MSMs are calling him. That is not who this man is. This man would like to take your rights away. He will take your rights away. Because what happened to me could have happened to anybody. What happened to me will happen to you."
She noted she missed a Christmas celebration with her family, her wedding anniversary, and the birth of a grandchild.
"I can never have that time back. That time was stolen from me. My business was destroyed. My business is gone. After everything that happened, Tim Walz and [state Attorney General] Keith Ellison destroyed my business. They wrecked my life."
Her warning to voters continued, "I've heard some people say that Tim Walz is a real nice guy. Yeah, well he's not. Take my word for it. Through this whole process, I've gotten to know other people. Similar things have happened to them when they were trying to run their business and survive. Mostly women, by the way. So Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison really like to go after women. They're bullies.
"And they like to go after women and torment and destroy women's lives. This is what they have done in the state of Minnesota. So let America know you do not want Tim Walz as vice president. You do not want tyranny at this level. I have seen firsthand. We, the people of Minnesota, have seen what Tim Walz, the type of evil he orchestrates if he is elected as vice president of this country. He, in lockstep with Harris, who is also evil, will perpetuate this same type of evil on the American people. We do not want that. So this is the truth about Tim Walz."
Hanson said a just result would be for Walz to be impeached and "prosecuted for the crimes he has committed against the people of Minnesota."
She pointed out at the time Walz ordered businesses closed, there was no law allowing him to do that.
"He really did step outside of statutory law. But even more important, constitutional law. Because we have that right to be able to run our businesses and conduct our lives as we see fit, of course, staying within the rule of law."
She described Walz as "evil" and said, "That man is a wrecking machine. He needs to be stopped."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Now it is Joe Biden's apparently free luxury vacations at exotic locales and resorts most Americans can only see in pictures that are the subject of a complaint, and request for investigation.
For months, even years, Democrats and other leftists have been scorching individual justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, mostly conservatives Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, for their vacations in the company of friends they have.
Democrats are demanding a new Congress-run code of ethics for the justices. Biden has joined in that agenda.
But a report from Just the News explains that even as Biden and Democrats have been pushing for Supreme Court "reform" that would give members of Congress control over the way the justices make decisions, Biden apparently has been taking freebies – and not reporting them.
"Rules for thee, but not for me?" the report taunted, explaining, "Biden and his family have repeatedly vacationed at wealthy friends' homes over the years without disclosing them on financial forms, yet encouraged media scrutiny of SCOTUS' similar actions."
Leftists in the media have been joining the progressives in the Democrat party to call for new congressional controls over the high court – one idea would be to let Congress decide when a justice can rule on a case.
But Biden's own decision to take apparently free vacations at resort locations is the subject of a recent complaint filed by the Center for Renewing America, which asked the Department of Justice to investigate.
"Whenever Biden wishes to celebrate a holiday or go on vacation, there seems to be a billionaire whose interests can be benefited by the president waiting to offer a vacation home. The potential for conflicts of interest is vast. Indeed, former ethics officials of both parties have roundly condemned these activities and pointed out their illegality," CRA President Russ Vought explained.
He was director of the White House Office of Management and Budget under President Trump.
Just weeks ago, Biden proposed to "reform" the Supreme Court by casting justices aside after 18 years of tenure, imposing a code of conduct and reversing the court's decision that presidents have immunity for many of their actions while in office.
Democrats specifically are demanding that because they insist on putting President Donald Trump on trial, in both criminal and civil courts, for his actions in office.
Democrats are on a rampage to change the court because of the three, relatively conservative, justices appointed to the bench by Trump during his first term in office.
That gave the court a 6-3 often conservative majority, meaning that Democrats are unable now to have the high court rubber-stamp their agenda points as happened when there was a leftist court which, for example, created out of nothing related to the Constitution same-sex "marriage" and imposed it on the entire nation.
The report noted Thomas and Alito both have been criticized for accept gifts from, and traveling with, their own wealthy friends.
They later released financial documents showing the gifts and travel, something that Biden has not yet done.
The report noted that "Biden has taken multiple free vacations over the years, allegedly not reporting them on financial disclosure forms."
Just last year, Just the News said, "Biden took four vacations at wealthy supporters' homes that he did not disclose on his Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report, the New York Post reported."
Those included a stay the beachfront St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, home of rich business owners Bill and Connie Neville.
"For a six-day Thanksgiving vacation, Biden stayed at billionaire hedge fund founder David Rubenstein's compound in Nantucket. He also vacationed at billionaire climate activist and investor Tom Steyer's place in Lake Tahoe, Nev., for nine days last August," the report revealed.
The New York post initially said the White House claimed Biden was going to pay for the stay at Steyer's home, "but a subsequent local investigation into Steyer's lacking a rental permit was abruptly dropped and there has been no disclosure of the rental term agreement."
Further, it appears the homeowners were absent during Biden's vacations, meaning the stays could be considered other than "personal hospitality."
The White House has denied the Bidens had any "required disclosures of gifts or travel reimbursements during the reporting period (January to December 2023)."
But the Bidens also made a similar round of vacation stays at exotic locations in 2022, as well.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A member of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee is sounding the alarm about more assassination plots against Donald Trump, as the former president continues his quest for the White House this November.
"The plots are ongoing … Trump is still out there," said U.S. Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., on "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox News Channel.
Waltz hammered the United States Secret Service during the interview, saying: "We are getting more and more visibility on all the Secret Service failures that happened around Butler, Pennsylvania. But not a single person has been disciplined, has even been suspended pending the investigation. They're out still doing security today."
"On top of that, you have multiple assassination plots from the Iranians. This Pakistani national was recruiting females as spotters, he had recruited hitmen and had made a down payment. He was even recruiting protesters as a distraction, and yet the Department of Justice, when they the unveiled the indictment, didn't even name Trump as the target. They tried to soft pedal it and say, 'Oh, it was a politician.'"
As WND reported on Tuesday, federal authorities jailed Asif Merchant, aka "Asif Raza Merchant," a Pakistani man ccused of working on a plot to assassinate a politician "or U.S. government officials" that may have included Trump.
Waltz said the July 13 assassination attempt of Trump in Pennsylvania was not "an isolated incident."
"These plots from Iran are ongoing, and when Biden says nothing, Harris says nothing, the DOJ tries to bury it, what message does Iran get? They get that we can keep trying to take Trump out and have no consequences.
"They tried to hack his campaign, or did hack his campaign this week. They're trying to kill him. And we know from the intelligence community, Iran doesn't want Trump back. Why? Because he held them accountable.
"And you overlay that with how has Biden and Harris treated Iran. Well, Iran knows that that they're sympathizers. Just last week we had six American soldiers get sent to critical condition after our bases had been attacked once again, and what has Harris said? Nothing. What has Biden said? Nothing. What Trump knows, what Bibi Netanyahu knows is sometimes you have to escalate and punch the bully in the mouth in order to de-escalate. Biden-Harris continues to appease Iran, and the Middle East is on fire because of it."
Waltz also criticized the FBI for its handling of the probe into the plot to kill Trump.
"The FBI and the Secret Service are moving at a snail's pace with this investigation. And I certainly have encouraged the task force, we need to get in their spaces, we need to see their data, we need to see these encrypted accounts that he had in three different countries, in Belgium, in New Zealand and in Germany.
"What was that all about? There's so much to get to the bottom of, but the plots are ongoing, Maria. Trump is still out there."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to answer a $30 million wrongful death lawsuit filed on behalf of the estate of Ashli Babbitt.
The unarmed protester was at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, like many others, opposing the certification of Joe Biden as president.
In a crowd in the building, in which two individuals already had dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors, she was raising herself into the opening when Capitol police officer Michael Byrd shot and killed her.
The order for the government to respond was from Judge Ana Reyes in Washington.
Her order also noted Judicial Watch can file a reply brief by August 23 in its petition to have the case returned to Babbitt's home in San Diego where it was originally filed.
The 35-year-old Babbitt owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband, Aaron.
She traveled alone from San Diego to Washington to attend a "Women for America First" rally on that day.
The lawsuit was filed earlier this year, and it cites a long list of prior incidents involving Byrd, the Capitol Police, and others.
A list of parties, including Congress, "knew or should have known that Lt. Byrd was prone to behave in a dangerous or otherwise incompetent manner."
Another hearing is set for Sept. 20.
Tom Fitton, of Judicial Watch, said, "Ashli Babbitt's family is thrilled the $30 million wrongful death lawsuit for her outrageous killing is moving full speed ahead."
After she was shot, the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Babbitt, and at the same authorities refused to prosecute Byrd for the shooting.