Blog

Taxpayers On Hook For $3.5 Billion To Replenish Munitions US Used Defending Israel

Taxpayers are yet again on the hook for America’s supposed “closest Middle East ally” as the Pentagon is planning to allocate at least $3.5 billion to restock weapons used in defense of Israel.

A Bloomberg report issued this week has reviewed Department of Defense budget documents prepared through mid-May. Emergency expenditures are highlighted which include US combat operations “executed at the request of or in coordination with Israel for the defense of Israeli territory, personnel or assets during attacks by Iran” or its proxies.

The largest single portion of the funding is $1 billion that is earmarked for replenishing Standard Missile interceptors, specifically the SM-3 IB Threat Upgrade models made by Raytheon and deployed by US Navy ships to intercept ballistic missiles.

Each of these big missiles are estimated to be between $9 million and $12 million, and these were used in the initial April 2024 flare-up and brief round of fighting between Israel and Iran.

The US assisted Israel following the Netanyahu government’s airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus – which was the first such deliberate attack by a sovereign government on a foreign embassy in history (the lone precedent being the Chinese embassy strike in Belgrade in 1999, which the US apologized for as an ‘accident’).

The second-largest funding request in the documents is $204 million to restock THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) interceptors, produced by Lockheed Martin at a price tag of about $13 million each.

All of this will be pushed through despite recent polls showing public support for Israel being at a recent all-time low. The American public is also generally war-weary, given the now years-long conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, and the fact that Washington has sunk billions into supporting one side of each war.

Keep reading

California Content Law Design Code Faces Free Speech Clash

Efforts to implement California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code continue to face resistance from both the tech industry and digital civil liberties groups, who argue that the law’s restrictions violate constitutional protections and would compel sweeping surveillance and censorship online.

The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which represents companies including Google, Amazon, Meta, and eBay, recently filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case NetChoice v. Bonta.

Stephanie Joyce, the group’s senior vice president and director of its litigation center, condemned the legislation in blunt terms: “The Constitution prohibits the government from dictating what lawful content readers can see, and it extends that protection regardless of the reader’s age.

Though well-intentioned, California’s internet age restriction law is unconstitutional, and the court of appeals should affirm the decision to block it.”

The case marks the second time this legal clash has reached the Ninth Circuit. Previously, the court blocked only a portion of the law and returned the rest for further review.

Now, with renewed scrutiny, the court could determine whether the entire statute fails to withstand constitutional challenge.

NetChoice, an industry coalition that includes many of the same members as the CCIA, has led the charge against a wave of so-called “age assurance” laws.

These policies would require digital platforms to verify the ages of users and potentially restrict minors’ access to content deemed unsuitable. But free speech advocates warn the consequences would be broader and more dangerous than legislators admit.

Groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) have also weighed in with their own amicus brief, arguing that the law’s age estimation mandates undermine essential First Amendment rights. “CDT and EFF’s brief argues that the appeals court should uphold the injunctions solely on the basis of its overbroad, unconstitutional age verification requirement because that requirement is not severable from other provisions and should doom the entire statute.” The brief warns that such mandates not only chill access to lawful speech but also erode online anonymity and place users’ personal data at risk.

They also emphasize that minors’ ability to engage freely online is a critical part of their development and civic participation. “Social media helps minors develop their own ideas, learn to express themselves, and engage productively with others in our democratic public sphere,” the brief states.

Keep reading

Fulton County Defies Court Orders Requiring Confirmation Of GOP Election Board Nominees

The Democrat-led Fulton County Board of Commissioners is once again defying a court order in its determination to block two Republicans from taking their seats on the county’s elections board.

The Republican Party of Fulton County nominated Julie Adams and Jason Frazier to serve on the elections board in May. Despite state law requiring that the county commissioners “shall” accept the appointments, they had previously refused to do so, criticizing Adams and Frazier for their election integrity efforts.

Even after the Fulton County Republican Party filed suit in June, and the court found in their favor early in August, the commissioners still refused to comply.

Last Wednesday, the board of commissioners filed a motion asking the court to reconsider. Two days later, Fulton County Superior Court Judge David Emerson once again ordered them to confirm Adams and Frazier at the board’s “next regularly scheduled meeting,” describing their actions as a “bad faith” stall tactic.

“The court directs the defendant board to comply with its order,” Emerson wrote.

The board of commissioners even filed an emergency motion with the Georgia Supreme Court, which was transferred to the Georgia Court of Appeals and quickly denied.

But even that did not stop them from behaving like petulant children who aren’t getting their way. In a 2-2 vote on Tuesday, with three members absent by the time the vote happened, the board of commissioners failed to pass Republican Commissioner Bridget Thorne’s motion to confirm the appointees. (You can watch the relevant portion of the meeting here, or read an AI-generated transcript here.)

Thorne argued that the unlawful delay caused “irreparable harm,” and noted an upcoming special election for a state senate seat. It’s a point that Fulton County GOP Chair Stephanie Endres has also emphasized. “There are elections happening right now and our representation is being denied,” Endres told me.

In response to Thorne’s motion, Democrat Commissioner Dana Barrett insisted “no judge” could “compel” her to approve the nominations, minutes before claiming to “respect the rule of law.” She told the activists at Democracy Docket she was willing to “risk contempt charges and fines or jail.”

Her fellow Democrat Commissioner Mo Ivory chimed in, saying “No one should force an elected official or any voter to cast a particular vote.” Ironically, Democrats’ complaint about Adams is her decision not to certify the results of a primary election.

Following Wednesday’s vote, Jason Frazier told me he was “disappointed by the decisions of the Democrat board members,” and that his “only goal is to help Fulton County follow election laws and run clean elections.”

Julie Adams said simply, “The Fulton [Board of Commissioners] was ordered to comply with the order of the court on Friday or risk being held in contempt. Today, they defied that order.”

Keep reading

Fears About Un-Aired Footage of ‘Drowsy’ Biden Led Paramount to Settle with Trump: Ex-Chairwoman

Sometimes the smallest details tell the biggest parts of a story.

One of the key reasons the parent company of CBS agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit brought by Donald Trump is buried dozens of paragraphs into a New York Times report about now-former Paramount non-executive chairwoman Shari Redstone and the company’s decision-making process.

And it turns out, it involves an apparent play to protect now-former President Joe Biden.

Trump had sued CBS in October over its editing of an interview on the “60 Minutes” program with then-Vice President Kamala Harris. He maintained that “60 Minutes” edited Harris’ answers to make her appear more coherent than she actually was.

Paramount settled the suit in early July with a $16 million donation to the Trump presidential library fund.

According to The New York Times, Redstone and her son, Tyler, feared the lawsuit would bring attention to another CBS interview — this one with President Joe Biden.

“Ms. Redstone said CBS personnel had told her that in October 2023, when Scott Pelley of ’60 Minutes’ interviewed President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the president had seemed drowsy and had to be prodded to answer. She and Tyler worried that CBS might be accused of editing the interview to conceal Mr. Biden’s failings.”

“This case was never as black-and-white as people assumed,” Redstone told the newspaper.

What’s interesting here is that in the “60 Minutes” report itself, correspondent Scott Pelley — a man who openly declared his liberal leanings at a May commencement speech at North Carolina’s Wake Forest University — acknowledged that Biden was “tired,” though he tried to put the best face on it.

From the show’s transcript: “As we spoke to the president, his secretary of state was in Israel, his secretary of defense was in a NATO meeting on Ukraine. America’s oldest president seemed tired from directing all of this. But he was very clear on what he stood for and how his policies, in his view, would see America through.”

If Pelley and “60 Minutes” felt the need to put in posterior-covering garbage like that, it’s truly hard to imagine how bad the actual footage the program left out really was.

The fact that Redstone was worried about raw footage being cherry-picked (the article’s word) by Trump’s lawyers is a pretty good sign that the then-sitting president of the United States — a man with a nuclear arsenal at his command — came across like he was drooling his way through an after-lunch nap.

Keep reading

US To Fund $500 Million Boeing KC-46 Tanker Aircraft Deal for Israel

The Israeli Defense Ministry announced on Wednesday that it will be signing a contract to purchase two Boeing-made KC-46 tanker aircraft in a deal worth about $500 million that will be funded by US military aid.

“This is a follow-on contract with the US Government for procuring two advanced refueling aircraft in addition to four previously purchased KC-46 aircraft. This will expand the IDF’s new refueling fleet to six aircraft,’ the Defense Ministry wrote on Facebook.

“The new aircraft will be equipped with Israeli systems and adapted to the IAF’s operational requirements. The contract’s scope is estimated at approximately half a billion USD and is funded through US aid,” the ministry added.

The US provides Israel with $3.8 billion in military aid annually, including $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing, a State Department program that gives foreign governments money to purchase US weapons.

Since October 7, 2023, the US has provided Israel with significantly more aid, including an additional $3.5 billion in FMF that was part of a $17 billion military assistance package for Israel tucked into a $95 billion foreign aid bill authorized by Congress and signed by President Biden last year.

Keep reading

Trump Attempted Assassin’s Identity Still Not Known in Butler, PA

AbleChild has recently obtained a copy of the much sought after autopsy results of alleged attempted assassin, Thomas Matthew Crooks. In a word, the autopsy leaves a lot to be desired and, frankly, even with the autopsy, the public still has not been provided physical evidence to, once and for all, indict Thomas Matthew Crooks as the shooter.

First, the autopsy of the alleged shooter was only made public when the Headline USA reporter, Kenneth Silva, filed suit with the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records (OOR) to obtain “the medical examiner case information summary, as well as all lab analysis reports, exam images, pathology reports, histology slide recuts, toxicology reports, and scene images for Thomas Matthew Crooks.” The request also included “all records that document the transportation and chain of custody of Crooks’s body from the crime scene to the Alleghany (sic) County Office of the Medical Examiner or any other coroner’s office, including yours – including all internal communications about this decision.”

As expected, and in keeping with all the other investigative reports and materials surrounding this attempted assassination, the request was denied. Silva appealed and was awarded the right to the autopsy but any information dealing with the “histology slides (which would determine the DNA of the shooter), crime scene photos and exam images were denied.

What is most interesting is that despite the entire free world still blabbing about Thomas Matthew Crooks being the shooter, the data released by the Allegheny County Medical Examiner (ME) not only doesn’t describe how the body autopsied was identified, but admits that the Butler County Coroner, William Young, did not provide written communications about the transport or chain of custody of the deceased. Why?

For the record, neither the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Secret Service, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), Pennsylvania State Police (PSP), Butler Police Depts., Butler County Coroner, or the Allegheny County Medical Examiner have publicly provided any physical evidence that conclusively identifies Crooks as the shooter.

Keep reading

Trump’s Pick For Traffic Safety Agency Will ‘Double Down’ On Marijuana-Impaired Driving Warnings As More States Legalize

President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead a key federal traffic safety agency says he’s prepared to “double down” on increasing awareness about the risk of marijuana-impaired driving in partnership with the White House.

During a Senate committee hearing, the nominee to serve as administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Jonathan Morrison, was pressed on the need to develop technology to detect impairment from THC and also educate the public about the issue.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO), who has long focused on promoting public safety around cannabis and driving, noted at the hearing that while there’s a national standard for assessing alcohol impairment, “currently, there is no uniform national standard to measure marijuana impairment.”

“Creating a national standard marijuana impairment is going to ease the burden of law enforcement, prosecutions, help clarify legal requirements for states and, without question, save countless lives,” the senator said.

The NHTSA nominee agreed and added that he feels “there isn’t necessarily public consciousness that when people are using marijuana, that it has an impairing effect on their ability to drive a vehicle.”

Keep reading

Federal Appeals Court Gives Medical Marijuana Patients Who Want To Own Guns A Win

As the U.S. Supreme Court considers a series of cases challenging the current ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana, another federal appeals court has ruled in favor of medical cannabis patients who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights to possess firearms.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh District, in a opinion authored by Judge Elizabeth Branch, departed from the ruling of a district could that upheld the federal statute, Section 922(g)(3), that precludes any “unlawful users” of controlled substances from owning or purchasing firearms.

While the Justice Department has repeatedly argued that people who use cannabis, in compliance with state law, are uniquely dangerous—and that there are historical analogues in U.S. gun laws that justify the ban—the appeals court disagreed, vacated the prior ruling and remanded the case back to a lower court.

The federal government’s “allegations in the operative complaint do not lead to the inference that the plaintiffs are comparatively similar to either felons or dangerous individuals.”

The plaintiffs in the years-long case are Vera Cooper and Nicole Hansell, who are registered medical cannabis patients denied gun purchases over their admission to participating in the program, and Neill Franklin, a former police officer who wants to access medical marijuana without jeopardizing his right to own a firearm.

Former Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried (D) initially led the suit against the federal government, but she was removed from the case after leaving her state office. The Republican commissioner who replaced her declined to become involved in the legal proceedings.

One of the most controversial aspects of the many active firearms and marijuana cases deals with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2022 where justices generally created a higher standard for policies that seek to impose restrictions on gun rights. The ruling states that any such restrictions must be consistent with the historical context of the Second Amendment’s original 1791 ratification.

To that end, the Justice Department has argued that the two medical cannabis patients in the Florida case should be deprived of their gun rights due to their alleged felonious activity and dangerousness.

After reviewing the district court ruling on appeal, the Eleventh Circuit said “nothing in the [complaint] indicates that [plaintiffs] have committed any felony or been convicted of any crime (felony or misdemeanor), let alone that their medical marijuana use makes them dangerous.”

“Thus, the government failed to meet its burden—at the motion to dismiss stage—to establish that disarming medical marijuana users is consistent with this Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation,” the opinion says.

Keep reading

Trump threatens funding for all California schools over transgender policies

US President Donald Trump on Aug 21 said any California school district that does not adhere to his administration’s transgender policies will not receive federal funding, but gave no other details.

Representatives for the White House and the US Department of Education did not immediately respond to requests for detail following Mr Trump’s comment, posted to his social media platform.

US schools receive the vast majority of their funding through local and state sources, but do receive some money from the federal government.

Mr Trump’s post is the latest salvo in his fight against transgender rights as well as the state of California, led by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom.

His administration 

sued California in July over its policy to allow transgender athletes to compete in girls’ school sports, alleging that it was a violation of federal anti-discrimination laws.

In February, the Republican President 

signed a directive to strip federal funding from any school that allows transgender women or girls to compete in female sports.

Representatives for Mr Newsom’s office could not be immediately reached. REUTERS

Keep reading

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass Demands End to ICE Raids that Captured Illegal Alien Child Molester Working at Car Wash

Los Angeles, California, Mayor Karen Bass (D) is demanding that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) end all worksite raids “at fruit stands and car washes” in the sanctuary city, just as agents arrested an illegal alien convicted child molester at an Orange County, California, car wash.

This week, Bass posted on X that ICE raids “at fruit stands and car washes must end,” calling such raids “un-American” and declaring that she “will never accept these tactics as a new normal.”

United States Border Patrol agents arrested illegal alien Claudio Reyes-Vasquez during a targeted operation at Chapman Car Wash in Orange County, just an hour outside of Los Angeles.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials called Reyes-Vasquez “one of the worst of the worst,” noting that he had been arrested for lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 years old and had an active federal warrant for his arrest after violating his probation.

Most significantly, perhaps, Reyes-Vasquez has a criminal record going back to 1990 — having been convicted of molesting a child, beating his spouse, two DUIs, battery, petty theft, and illegal reentry.

Keep reading