Blog

Georgia Judge Orders Fulton Commissioners to Pay $10,000 Per Day Over Rogue Democrats Refusing to Seat GOP Election Board Nominees

Earlier today, The Gateway Pundit reported on at least three democrats on the Fulton County Board of Commissioners who refused to seat the lawfully nominated Republican Party nominees Jason Frazier and Julie Adams.

Commissioners Ivory and Barrett took to Instagram to express their disgust that “election deniers” would be appointed to the board and vowed to hold out no matter the costs.  Fellow commissioner Marvin Arrington Jr posted on Instagram that he’d be willing to go jail over this.

This morning, Superior Court Judge David Emerson found “beyond a reasonable doubt that the Board of Commissioners has failed to comply with the court’s order” and has held the Board in civil contempt.  Beginning on Friday, August 29th at 12pm, the Board will be fined $10,000 for every day that they fail to appoint the Republican Party’s members to the Board of Elections.

He further noted that the fine “is to be paid daily” but stopped short of holding the respondents in criminal contempt.

Judge Emerson also awarded attorney’s fees “incurred in both the bringing of this case to compel compliance with the relevant local legislation and for the intentional failure to comply with the court’s order enforcing the law.”  Emerson further wrote:

The court does find that the respondent Board of Commissioners has been stubbornly litigious and acted in bad faith in its conduct prior to this litigation by its failure to comply with clear local legislation which forced the plaintiff to file this action.  The court further finds that it has caused the plaintiff unnecessary difficult in the conduct of this litigation by its failure to comply with the court’s order. (emphasis added)

Keep reading

Venezuela’s Crypto Adoption Surges Amid Inflation Surge And Currency Collapse

Cryptocurrencies are becoming a core part of the economy in Venezuela as citizens turn to digital assets to shield themselves from a collapsing currency and tighter government controls.

From small family stores to large retail chains, shops across the country now accept crypto through platforms such as Binance and Airtm. Some businesses even use stablecoins to pay employees, while universities have begun offering courses dedicated to digital assets.

“There’s lots of places accepting it now,” shopper Victor Sousa, who paid for phone accessories with USDt, told the Financial Times. “The plan is to one day have my savings in crypto.”

Venezuela ranked 13th globally for crypto adoption, according to the Chainalysis 2024 Crypto Adoption Index report, which noted a 110% increase in usage in the year.

Bolívar’s crash pushes Venezuelans into crypto

The continued slide of the bolívar currency has intensified demand for crypto. Since the government stopped defending the currency in October, it has lost more than 70% of its value. Inflation reached 229% in May, according to the Venezuelan Finance Observatory (OVF).

“Venezuelans started using cryptocurrencies out of necessity,” said economist Aarón Olmos. He noted that they face inflation, low wages, foreign currency shortages and difficulty opening bank accounts.

However, access is not always smooth. With US sanctions on Venezuela’s financial sector, Binance restricts services linked to sanctioned banks and individuals. Connectivity issues also hinder widespread use. Still, experts say the ecosystem is resilient, per the FT report.

The government’s stance on crypto remains inconsistent. Venezuela launched its own digital currency, the petro, in 2018, but the project collapsed last year. The main exchange regulator was shut down in 2023 following corruption allegations tied to oil-linked transactions.

Cointelegraph reached out to Binance for comment, but had not received a response by publication.

Keep reading

REPORT: Gavin Newsom’s Wife Rakes in Hundreds of Thousands Per Year From Major Political Donors, Non-Profit

Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the wife of California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is a documentary filmmaker, but apparently makes a very good living through her association with a non-profit and major political donors.

She reportedly makes hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in this way.

It must be great to be a high-profile Democrat. There seem to be endless streams of income available for the taking and the media looks the other way to protect you.

The New York Post reports:

Gavin Newsom’s wife, Jennifer, raking in as much as $300K a year from political mega-donors and nonprofit: Sources

The wife of California governor Gavin Newsom runs companies stacked with her husband’s former Democratic aides and confidants — while raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees from the state and lobbyists, according to public records.

Documentary filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the self-described “First Partner” of California, also received donations to her Representation Project nonprofit from companies that lobbied her husband, according to reports.

The Sacramento-based Representation Project, which describes itself as “the leading gender watchdog organization,” pays Siebel Newsom $150,000 a year for a 40-hour work week, according to tax filings.

Its largest independent contractor is Girls Club Entertainment LLC, a for-profit film company which Siebel Newsom also controls.

In 2024, the nonprofit paid Girls Club $150,000 for “writer/producer/director” services, according to that year’s federal filings…

“It is no surprise Gavin and Jennifer Newsom have leveraged their business and non-profit endeavors for personal and political gain,” said Caitlin Sutherland, executive director of Americans for Public Trust, a non-partisan watchdog group.

What are the donors getting in return?

Keep reading

Zelensky’s reckless missile gamble: Ukraine’s new 3,000km weapon risks all-out war

  • Ukraine unveils new 3,000km-range Flamingo missile capable of striking Moscow to bypass U.S. restrictions on deep strikes into Russia.
  • Zelensky’s defiance risks catastrophic Russian retaliation, including cyberattacks, deeper NATO strikes, or even tactical nukes.
  • Ukraine’s dwindling resources, manpower, and Western support make the Flamingo a desperate last gamble rather than a war-winning strategy.
  • Russia’s military and economic superiority ensures Ukraine’s long-range strikes won’t shift the war’s outcome but could trigger uncontrolled escalation.
  • Zelensky’s provocative move signals weakness, not strength, as NATO fractures and Ukraine’s collapse becomes increasingly inevitable.

When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced this week that his military no longer needs U.S. permission to strike deep inside Russia, he wasn’t just boasting — he was rolling the dice on a conflict that could spiral into global catastrophe. The revelation came after reports that the Pentagon has quietly blocked Ukraine from using American-supplied ATACMS missiles to hit Russian territory since late spring. Now, Zelensky claims Ukraine’s new domestically produced Flamingo cruise missile, with a staggering 3,000km range, will let him bypass Washington’s restrictions entirely.

Speaking alongside Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Zelensky declared, “At the moment, we are using our long-range domestically produced weapons, and we haven’t been discussing such matters with the U.S. lately.”

His timing is no coincidence. Just days earlier, he unveiled the Flamingo, a missile capable of reaching Moscow, boasting that mass production could begin as early as February. “The missile has undergone successful tests. It is currently our most successful missile,” he told reporters.

But here’s the problem: This isn’t just another weapon. It’s a provocation that could force Russia’s hand in ways Zelensky clearly hasn’t thought through.

Keep reading

John Bolton Transmitted Classified Emails Over Private Server… and They Were Intercepted by Hostile Foreign Country’s Spy Service

Trump’s former National Security Advisor John Bolton transmitted classified emails over a private server system and they were intercepted by a hostile foreign country’s spy service, according to a leak to The New York Times.

As reported last week, John Bolton is reportedly under investigation for violating the Espionage Act, according to The New York Times.

“The investigation into whether John Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, mishandled classified information is trying to determine if he violated certain sections of the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to illegally retain or transmit national defense information, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss details of the case,” The New York Times reported.

The FBI raided the home of Trump’s former National Security Advisor, John Bolton, last Friday morning.

FBI agents were sent to Bolton’s home because he allegedly sent “highly sensitive” classified materials to family members from a private, unsecured email server while he was working at the White House during the first Trump Administration.

“Investigators reopened a dormant probe into Bolton’s alleged use of a private email to send classified national security documents to his wife and daughter from his work desk before his dismissal by Trump in September 2019, according to a senior US official,” The New York Post reported last week.

The investigation into John Bolton began in 2020 when he used classified information to write his book titled, “The Room Where It Happened.”

The Biden Administration halted the investigation into Bolton, but FBI Director Kash Patel revived it and ordered the raid on the former NatSec Advisor’s home.

John Bolton has not been arrested or charged with any crimes (yet).

The New York Times on Wednesday reported that the US Government actually discovered John Bolton’s classified emails while gathering information from an “adversarial country’s spy service.”

Keep reading

Trump Calls For RICO Charges Against Soros Over Violent Protest Support; Gates Foundation Abruptly Severs Ties With Rogue Arabella Advisors

Commentary via Peter Schweizer & Seamus Bruner of the Government Accountability Institute:

The Arabella network has been exposed as a dark money machine for the radical Left. Gates has decided he doesn’t like the look. Amazing how quick these ‘Controligarchs’ change course once they feel which way the political winds are blowing. Gates isn’t suddenly a conservative hero, he’s just hedging his bets because he knows the radical Left’s grip is slipping.

The Gates Foundation has funneled more than $200 million to the Arabella network funds since, according to the most recent financial disclosures.

The “dark money” network operated by Arabella Advisors has reportedly lost one of its top funding sources: a leftist billionaire’s foundation.

Equally significant in the news cycle this morning, President Trump stated on Truth Social that George Soros and his radical leftist son, Alex Soros, “should be charged with RICO because of their support of violent protests.”

Keep reading

The Developing World’s Alleged Solar Boom: Survival Amid Government Dysfunction, Not a Model for the Rest of Us

Mainstream media and green agenda advocates celebrate the spread of solar in developing countries as proof that fossil fuels can and should be abandoned, presenting it as both an environmental necessity and a path to prosperity. British officials urge investment in a “solar revolution across Africa,” citing projects that combine solar with mobile technology, while the World Economic Forum praises Pakistan’s “solar boom” as a lesson for others.

The reality is less glamorous. Roughly 1.3 billion people worldwide lack access to grid electricity. In countries where corrupt or dysfunctional governments cannot deliver reliable power, people turn to solar out of necessity, not climate concern. Off-grid solar is a survival tool, not a lifestyle choice.

What most households can afford is minimal: a small panel that, after charging all day, might power a single light bulb for a few hours at night or charge a phone. These systems cannot handle laptops, refrigerators, washing machines, or other appliances that define modern life in the West. They also fail with larger energy demands such as machinery, agricultural equipment, or water pumps, necessary machines for survival in these regions. As a result, people still rely on generators and fossil fuels to operate this type of machinery.

At night, a house may have only one bulb lit, giving off very limited light. As a result, families still rely on flashlights, candles, or kerosene lanterns to move around, forcing them to buy flashlights and batteries, lanterns and fuel, or else purchase additional solar panels just to recharge their flashlights during the day.

The so-called solar boom is not a green revolution. It is a desperate response to government failure, a stopgap solution that provides the bare minimum rather than a path to prosperity.

On paper, the solar numbers in the developing world look impressive. Developing countries now account for more than half of global solar capacity, compared with less than 10 percent a decade ago. In 2017, they even surpassed industrialized nations in renewable energy production, largely due to solar.

Across Africa, more than 1.5 million households now rely on solar home systems, a nearly 300 percent increase since 2015, supported by mobile-money financing. Kenya leads in installations per capita, with some 30,000 small panels sold annually. Bangladesh has rolled out over 5.2 million systems, bringing electricity to nearly 12 percent of its 160 million people. India added a record 9,255 megawatts of solar capacity in 2017, with another 9,600 megawatts under development.

While these numbers may look impressive, scaling solar to sustain modern living standards would be unimaginably expensive, requiring vast resources, land, and infrastructure. Worse, such a build-out could cause more environmental damage than the continued, use of fossil fuels.

The power requirements of modern appliances far exceed what small off-grid systems can deliver: hair dryers need 1,200–1,800 watts, central air conditioners 3,000–3,500 watts per hour, and one ton of cooling capacity requires about 1,200 watts of solar panels. To run a central AC unit efficiently would take around 3 kilowatts of output, roughly thirty 100-watt panels. Meanwhile, the average American home consumed 10,791 kWh of electricity in 2022, demanding about 25–30 panels per house.

In dense suburban neighborhoods, there simply isn’t enough roof space, while ground installations would consume vast tracts of land. Building solar farms on this scale would devastate the environment, casting shadows that kill crops and vegetation, requiring tree removal, and converting natural habitats into industrial solar sites.

Cities in northern latitudes or regions with heavy cloud cover would still face major energy shortfalls. On top of this, manufacturing, installing, maintaining, and replacing billions of panels would create more pollution than fossil-fuel generation ever did.

As an example of scalability, consider the land and infrastructure required. To power New York City with solar would take a system of about 40 gigawatts, covering roughly 200,000 acres, or 312 square miles, an area equal to five Districts of Columbia or 50,000 Walmart stores.

Other estimates put the requirement at 420 square kilometers (103,800 acres) just to meet the city’s 10.5 gigawatt demand. At the national level, powering the entire United States would require between 13.6 million and 22,000 square miles of solar farms, about half the size of Pennsylvania, or the size of Lake Michigan.

But solar panels alone are not enough. A zero-carbon grid with 94 percent renewables by 2050 would require 930 gigawatts of energy storage and 6 terawatt-hours of battery capacity. For context, the average U.S. household uses about 30 kWh per day, while a Tesla Powerwall stores only 14 kWh. Scaling battery storage to national demand would exceed current global production by orders of magnitude.

Keep reading

The Right to Be Left Alone

What if the federal government captures in real time the contents of every telephone call, email and text message and all the fiber-optic data generated by every person and entity in the United States 24/7? What if this mass surveillance was never authorized by any federal law and tramples the Fourth Amendment?

What if this mass surveillance has come about by the secret collusion of presidents and their spies in the National Security Agency and by the federal government forcing the major telephone and computer service providers to cooperate with it? What if the service providers were coerced into giving the feds continuous physical access to their computers and thus to all the data contained in and passing through those computers?

What if President George W. Bush told the NSA that since it is part of the Defense Department and he was the commander in chief of the military, NSA agents could spy on anyone, notwithstanding any court orders or statutes that prohibited it? What if Bush believed that his orders to the military were not constrained by the laws against computer hacking that Congress had written or the interpretations of those laws by federal courts or even by the Constitution?

What if Congress has written laws that all presidents have sworn to uphold and that require a warrant issued by a judge before the NSA can spy on anyone but Bush effectively told the NSA to go through the motions of getting a warrant while spying without warrants on everyone in the U.S. all the time? What if Presidents Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Donald Trump have taken the same position toward the NSA and ordered or permitted the same warrantless and lawless spying?

What if the Constitution requires warrants based on probable cause of criminal behavior before surveillance can be conducted but Congress has written laws reducing that standard to probable cause of communicating with a foreign national? What if a basic principle of constitutional law is that Congress is subject to the Constitution and therefore cannot change its terms or their meanings?

What if the Constitution requires that all warrants particularly describe the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized? What if the warrants Congress permits the NSA to use violate that requirement by permitting a federal court — the FISA Court — to issue general warrants? What if general warrants do not particularly describe the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized but rather authorize the bearer to search indiscriminately through service providers’ customer data?

What if the government has no moral, constitutional or legal right to personal information about and from all of us without a valid search warrant consistent with constitutional requirements?

Keep reading

Surge in pilot deaths and incapacitation began in 2021, and the FAA has been trying to cover it up

  • A sudden, unprecedented surge in pilot deaths and incapacitations began in 2021, with a 40 percent increase in pilots dying before retirement age and a tripling of long-term disabilities, coinciding with COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
  • FAA regulations were violated en masse when airlines coerced pilots into taking experimental mRNA injections, despite federal laws prohibiting pilots from using unapproved medical products.
  • Pilots were trapped in an impossible choice: Violate their religious or medical convictions and risk their health, or refuse the jab and lose their livelihoods — all while the FAA abandoned its duty to track vaccine-related adverse events.
  • The spike protein produced by mRNA jabs is directly toxic, causing inflammation, blood clots, myocarditis, and neurological damage — conditions that are catastrophic in a cockpit.
  • The FAA dismantled its pilot incapacitation database in 2022, eliminating a critical tool for tracking trends in pilot health just as incidents began to skyrocket.
  • Near-misses and in-flight emergencies have reached crisis levels, with aviation officials attributing the chaos to everything but the elephant in the room: the COVID-19 vaccines.
  • Pilots describe a culture of fear and silence, where speaking out against the jabs means professional suicide, leaving passengers unknowingly at the mercy of impaired crews.

The great airline vaccine heist: How pilots were strong-armed into a medical experiment

When the COVID-19 vaccines rolled out under Emergency Use Authorization, they came with a critical caveat: No one could be forced to take them. That legal protection was swiftly ignored. For airline pilots, the choice wasn’t really a choice at all. It was a gun to the head — comply or be erased. Major carriers like United Airlines didn’t just encourage the jab; they demanded it, offering cash bonuses to the compliant and pink slips to the resistant. Never mind that federal aviation law explicitly prohibits pilots from using experimental medications. Never mind that the FAA’s own Aeromedical Advice Manual warns against unapproved substances that could impair performance. The rules were rewritten in real time, not by scientists or safety experts, but by corporate executives and bureaucrats who had already decided the narrative: Get the shot, or get out.

Dr. Kevin Stillwagon, a retired airline pilot and immunology expert, doesn’t mince words. “They were illegal,” he says of the mandates. “You cannot put an experimental product into a pilot.” The law is clear: If a pilot takes an unapproved substance, flight surgeons must ground them until the FAA verifies its safety. But in 2021, that process was bypassed entirely. Airlines, backed by the federal government, bulldozed through legal and ethical barriers, turning pilots into lab rats in a real-world trial with no control group. The result? A wave of cardiac arrests, neurological disorders, and sudden deaths that has left the industry scrambling to explain away the carnage.

Stillwagon’s data is damning. Before 2021, pilot incapacitations were rare — about eight per year, according to a 2018 study in Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance. But in the wake of the vaccine rollout, the numbers exploded. At Washington National Airport alone, near-misses jumped from one in decades to 28 in a single year. The FAA’s own 2004 research found that pilot cardiac events were the leading cause of in-flight fatalities. Now, those events are happening at an unprecedented rate, and the agency’s response? Cricket sounds. Worse, they discontinued their centralized database for tracking pilot incapacitations in 2022, just as the crisis was unfolding. Coincidence? Stillwagon doesn’t think so. “The data silence that the FAA has created is preventing systemic trends from being detected,” he warns. In other words, they’re hiding the bodies.

Keep reading

Did Putin Give the US Permission to Encircle Venezuela?

The contagion of war is spreading like wildfire. Venezuela has been feuding with the United States since 2019, when all communication came to a standstill. In recent weeks, the US placed a $50 million bounty on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and has accused him of aiding the world’s top drug traffickers. The US has sent thousands of illegal Venezuelan migrants back to Venezuela despite pushback from the government. Tensions have boiled over after Trump visited with Putin.

Did Putin give Trump the green light to move in on Venezuela? Deep ties with Russia have protected Venezuela, but all alliances can come to an end with the proper incentives. On Monday, over four and a half MILLION Venezuelan troops were deployed after it was announced that US warships were circling Venezuela. “This week, I will activate a special plan with more than 4.5 million militiamen to ensure coverage of the entire national territory — militias that are prepared, activated and armed,” Maduro announced on state television. “The empire has gone mad and has renewed its threats to Venezuela’s peace and tranquility,” Maduro continued.

Maduro was indicted in 2020 during Trump’s first term under suspicion of narco-terrorism. The US placed a $15 million bounty on Maduro, which was later raised to $25 million under Biden but powerful people are protecting the Venezuelan president.

Keep reading