Contrary to what many disinformation agents will lead you to believe child sex abuse is not reserved to the the Deep State, Democratic party, and Hollywood. Republicans are regularly caught committing the same acts and as we’ve shown, there is no difference between a blue child rapist and a red one.
What’s more, while elite politicians are caught committing these child sex crimes like former Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, the scope of the problem is far greater. A potential reason this problem has reached epidemic proportions is the lack of punishment these monsters face after hurting children and law enforcement’s role in failing to prosecute or even investigate the predators.
Our archives are full of cops who escape accountability for preying on children. One could easily chock this up to their blue privilege and many times it is. But what about the cops who look the other way when their political superiors are doing the preying?
As the Free Thought Project has previously reported, the problem of child sex trafficking goes all the way to the top in the UK as well. Sir Edward Heath, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom was found by the police chief to be a pedophile. Just like what happens in the US, his vile crimes against children were allegedly covered up by law enforcement for decades.
One victim recently came forward to detail his chilling accusations of his treatment by police when he reported that he’d been abused by a convicted UK politician, John Humphreys.
Humphreys is currently serving a 21-year sentence that was handed down last August for raping two young boys when he served as a primary school governor — a job similar to a school board superintendent in the states.
His sentence should have come much sooner, according to a former victim of his, but police officers from the Devon and Cornwall police departments helped cover it up. Not only did these officers allegedly cover up the crimes of Humphreys but they threatened the victim after he came forward.
On Wednesday morning, Joao DePina will walk into a Massachusetts courthouse to learn whether he could face the possibility of spending a decade behind bars.
His alleged crime? Heckling a district attorney from afar during a live press conference.
DePina repeatedly interrupted then-Suffolk County D.A. Rachael Rollins during a November press conference to criticize Rollins’ professional and personal behavior. His shouts were picked up on local news broadcasts, and Rollins paused on several occasions to ask DePina to stop interrupting her attempt to give an update on two cops who had been shot earlier that day. DePina also livestreamed his tirade, during which he criticized Rollins’ nomination to be a U.S. attorney (she was confirmed to the post in December, becoming the first black woman to be U.S. attorney for Massachusetts).
While DePina’s behavior during the press conference was clearly uncivil and rude, prosecutors say it’s also criminal. DePina was charged in November with one count of witness intimidation in connection to his antics at Rollins’ press conference. He could face between 2.5 and 10 years in prison if convicted.
“This is the most grossly unconstitutional thing I have seen in my entire career,” Marc Randazza, a free speech attorney who is representing DePina, tells Reason. “If the First Amendment means anything, Joao walks free.”
A year after the Jesuit university announced the reparation fund, descendants of slaves owned by Georgetown have questions
Descendants of slaves owned by the Jesuit religious order and Georgetown University have questions about where the money raised for reparations has gone.
The Catholic university first announced in April 2021 the plans to raise $1 billion to make reparations, though not individual payments, to atone for the Jesuits’ past ownership and sale of slaves. The Jesuits had a goal to raise $100 million in the short-term, according to the initial announcement.
A year later, the descendants of some of the 272 slaves want to know how the money has been spent.
An Iraqi man living in Columbus, Ohio, has been charged by federal authorities for allegedly plotting to smuggle foreign nationals into the United States as part of a plot to assassinate former President George W. Bush.
Agents from the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force arrested Shihab Ahmed Shihab Shihab, 52, Tuesday morning. He appeared in federal court at 2:30 p.m. and his case was unsealed at that time, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Authorities caught Shihab in a sting set up under the direction of the FBI.
In August 2021, Shihab allegedly intended to help who he thought was an Iraqi citizen enter the country for a $40,000 fee.
“Shihab provided specific instructions on how he would smuggle the person into the United States after 60 days. In October and December 2021, Shihab accepted tens of thousands of dollars for the purported smuggling. In reality, the individual was fictitious, and the interaction was coordinated under the direction of the FBI,” the DOJ said in a release.
Top House Republicans are demanding answers from the FBI after court-ordered information came to light showing that the federal agency had collected the information of over 3 million Americans without a warrant.
In a May 25 letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Mike Turner (R-Ohio) asked Wray to explain why his agency had wiretapped and gathered personal information on over 3.3 million Americans without a warrant (pdf).
Limited authority to gather foreign intelligence information is granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Specifically, section 702 of the bill says: “the Attorney General (AG) and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) may jointly authorize the targeting of (i) non-U.S. persons (ii) who are reasonably believed to be outside of the United States (iii) to acquire foreign intelligence information.”
However, this power can grant an expanding circle of possible searches to the FBI and other intel agencies, who can use the same power against American citizens who had any interaction with targeted foreigners.
Historically, insight into how FISA has been used against American citizens has been limited and hidden behind classified reports.
After two-and-a-half years of COVID-19, we’re all moving on. Sure, the virus is still there, albeit generally less dangerous with the Omicron variant, but many Americans no longer don masks and regular life has mostly returned.
The whole “moving on” thing has one serious effect on vaccine makers.
“It’s sad to say, I’m in the process of throwing 30 million doses into the garbage because nobody wants them,” Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said this week. “We have a big demand problem.”
Speaking to an audience at the World Economic Forum, Bancel also said efforts to contact various governments have failed.
“We right now have governments – we tried to contact … through the embassies in Washington. Every country, and nobody wants to take them,” he said.
“The issue in many countries is that people don’t want vaccines,” he added.
After World War II, the possibility of gaining control over a person’s mind became one of the top pursuits for intelligence services. Amid never-ending spy games, the capacity to make someone tell the full truth during an interrogation, or to wipe out a subject’s personality and impose another – perhaps, a controlled one – became quite attractive to secret services.
In 1979, former US State Department officer John Marks published a book called “The Search for the ‘Manchurian Candidate’,” which focused on the CIA’s mind-control experiments and is based on agency documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.
The term ‘Manchurian Candidate’ emerged from a title of a novel by Richard Condon, first published in 1959, which tells the story of a US soldier brainwashed and turned into an assassin by the Communists. Back then, the fear that America’s rivals might use such techniques was not only a fictional fantasy, but a matter of very serious concern.
This is how John Marks describes it: “In 1947 the National Security Act created not only the CIA but also the National Security Council – in sum, the command structure for the Cold War. Wartime [Office of Strategic Services] leaders like William Donovan and Allen Dulles lobbied feverishly for the Act. Officials within the new command structure soon put their fears and their grandiose notions to work. Reacting to the perceived threat, they adopted a ruthless and warlike posture toward anyone they considered an enemy – most especially the Soviet Union. They took it upon themselves to fight communism and things that might lead to communism everywhere in the world.”