Tag: corruption

Missouri Postal Supervisor Busted for Stealing Nearly 100 Checks from Mail, Federal Authorities Reveal

A former U.S. Postal Service supervisor in Missouri has been charged with stealing nearly 100 checks from the mail, further eroding public trust in an institution long plagued by inefficiency and corruption.

Federal authorities revealed the shocking allegations in a Dec. 26 news release.

Benita D. Randle, 42, has been charged with stealing nearly 100 checks from the mail while employed at a St. Louis processing and distribution center.

According to a Dec. 26 release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, Randle was indicted earlier this month and pleaded not guilty to the charge.

Prosecutors allege that on October 31, 2023, Randle, then a postal supervisor, stole approximately 90 checks entrusted to the Postal Service for delivery.

While the exact value and nature of the stolen checks remain unclear, the case underscores the growing mistrust in an agency plagued by inefficiency and systemic issues.

Keep reading

Three Senior DOJ Officials Caught Leaking Non-Public Investigative Details to Media Days Before Election, Inspector General Report Reveals

In a bombshell revelation, three senior officials at Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) were found to have violated internal policies by leaking sensitive, non-public investigative details to the media just days before an election, according to a report released by the DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) on Monday.

The OIG launched its investigation after receiving complaints alleging politically motivated disclosures.

The leaked information, pertaining to ongoing DOJ matters, was shared with select reporters, resulting in two news articles containing confidential details.

The Inspector General’s investigative summary paints a damning picture of the senior officials’ actions. The report reads:

Findings of Misconduct by Three then Senior DOJ Officials for Violating the Department’s Confidentiality and Media Contacts Policy; and by one of these Senior Officials for Violating the Department’s Social Media Policy

The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated an investigation after receiving allegations that actions by a litigating division were politically motivated and violated DOJ policies regarding disclosing information about ongoing matters.

The OIG investigation found that three then Senior DOJ Officials violated DOJ’s Confidentiality and Media Contacts Policy by leaking to select reporters, days before an election, non-public DOJ investigative information regarding ongoing DOJ investigative matters, resulting in the publication of two news articles that included the non-public DOJ investigative information. The OIG investigation also found that one of these three then Senior DOJ Officials violated the Confidentiality and Media Contacts Policy and DOJ’s Social Media Policy by reposting through a DOJ social media account links to the news articles.

The three Senior DOJ Officials were not employed by DOJ when the OIG contacted them for interviews and either declined or did not respond to the OIG’s interview requests. The OIG has the authority to compel testimony from current DOJ employees upon informing them that their statements will not be used to incriminate them in a criminal proceeding. The OIG does not have the authority to compel or subpoena testimony from former DOJ employees.

The OIG has completed its investigation and provided its report to the Office of the Deputy Attorney General and, because the report contained misconduct findings against attorneys, provided its report to the Professional Misconduct Review Unit for appropriate action.

The OIG also provided its report to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which has exclusive jurisdiction to investigate alleged Hatch Act violations, for its consideration of whether the conduct of these officials violated the Hatch Act.

This isn’t the first time the DOJ has been embroiled in allegations of leaks.

According to the New York Post, in September, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) accused the DOJ and FBI of leaking information about a previously closed investigation into then-President-elect Donald Trump.

The investigation, related to alleged Egyptian funding of Trump’s 2016 campaign, was closed in 2020 due to insufficient evidence but resurfaced in an August 2024 Washington Post report, citing leaked court documents and confidential sources.

Keep reading

Two more female cops close to disgraced NYPD Chief Jeffrey Maddrey, including his driver, raked in massive OT and other perks

More female officers in disgraced top cop Jeffrey Maddrey’s orbit pulled down massive overtime and other perks, The Post has learned.

The driver for the former chief of department made an eye-popping $163,414 in OT last year — and resigned days after The Post exposed her boss’s alleged sleazy conduct at police headquarters, records show.  

Detective Ingrid Sanders was the seventh-highest overtime earner in the department, boosting her total salary last fiscal year to $352,462, records show.

That put her pay not far behind Lt. Quathisha Epps, the top earner who made $403,515, including $204,453 in OT. Epps filed an explosive Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint accusing Maddrey of giving Epps overtime shifts in exchange for sex, The Post revealed in a front-page exclusive Sunday.

On the day of the Post’s inquiry, Maddrey quit. Sanders was immediately transferred from One Police Plaza to a Queens precinct, and filed for retirement on Dec. 23, The Post found in police documents.

Sanders is a first-grade detective — the top grade — who served in the chief of department’s office since December 2022. She followed Maddrey there from the Patrol Services Bureau. She didn’t return multiple messages.

Maddrey also sought favors for second detective, Ada Reyes, The Post has learned.

Epps, Maddrey’s personnel manager, told The Post that part of her OT was devoted to taking care of Reyes.

“The overtime that he would give me he would tell me to buy her things like get her some towels and things from Walmart, a microwave, and stuff like that so she doesn’t have to come out of her pocket,” Epps said. “I make the overtime and then I give things to her.

Keep reading

Witches, Covid, and Our Dictatorial Democracy

On December 1, President Joe Biden announced that he was pardoning his son Hunter for all the crimes he committed from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024. Biden’s sweeping pardon of all of his son’s abuses epitomizes how presidents and their families are now above the law. It also illustrates how the “King James Test for American Democracy” could become the death of the Constitution.

The American Revolution was heavily influenced by a political backlash that began across the ocean in the early 1600s. King James I claimed a “divine right” to unlimited power in England, sparking fierce clashes with Parliament. Since the 9/11 attacks, some of the same moral and legal principles have been advanced in this nation, but few people recognize the historical roots.

Before he became king of England in 1604, James was king of Scotland. He cemented his claims to absolute power thereby launching witch panics and burning hundreds of Scottish women alive to sanctify his power. Harsh methods were not a problem because James insisted that God would never allow an innocent person to be accused of witchcraft.

“While James’s assertion of his [Scottish] royal authority is evident in his highly unorthodox act of taking control of the pre-trial examinations, it is his absolutism which is most apparent in his advocating the use of torture to force confessions during the investigations,” according to the University of Texas’s Allegra Geller, author of Daemonologie and Divine Right: The Politics of Witchcraft in Late Sixteenth-Century Scotland. Torture produced “confessions” that spurred further panic and the destruction of far more victims. England did not have similar witch panics because officials were almost entirely prevented from using torture to generate false confessions. James justified the illicit torture, “asserting his belief that as an anointed king, he was above the law.”

After Queen Elizabeth died and James became king, he vowed that he had no obligation to respect the rights of the English people: “A good king will frame his actions according to the law, yet he is not bound thereto but of his own goodwill.” And “law” was whatever James decreed. Nor did he flatter the men elected to the House of Commons: “In the Parliament (which is nothing else but the head court of the king and his vassals) the laws are but craved by his subjects and only made by him at their rogation.”

James proclaimed that God intended for the English to live at his mercy: “It is certain that patience, earnest prayers to God, and amendment of their lives are the only lawful means to move God to relieve them of their heavy curse” of oppression. And there was no way for Parliament to subpoena God to confirm his blanket endorsement of King James.

James reminded his subjects that “even by God himself [kings] are called Gods.” Seventeenth-century Englishmen recognized the grave peril in the king’s words. A 1621 Parliament report eloquently warned: “If [the king] founds his authority on arbitrary and dangerous principles, it is requisite to watch him with the same care, and to oppose him with the same vigor, as if he indulged himself in all the excesses of cruelty and tyranny.” Historian Thomas Macaulay observed in 1831, “The policy of wise tyrants has always been to cover their violent acts with popular forms. James was always obtruding his despotic theories on his subjects without the slightest necessity. His foolish talk exasperated them infinitely more than forced loans would have done.”

Macaulay scoffed that James was “in his own opinion, the greatest master of kingcraft that ever lived, but who was, in truth, one of those kings whom God seems to send for the express purpose of hastening revolutions.” After James’s son, Charles I, relied on the same dogmas and ravaged much of the nation, he was beheaded. Charles I’s son ascended to the English throne in 1660, but his abuses spurred the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and sweeping reforms that sought to forever curb the power of monarchs.

A century and a half after King James denigrated Parliament, a similar declaration of absolute power spurred the American Revolution. The Stamp Act of 1765 compelled Americans to purchase British stamps for all legal papers, newspapers, cards, advertisements, and even dice. After violent protests erupted, Parliament rescinded the Stamp Act but passed the Declaratory Act, which decreed that Parliament “had, hath, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.” The Declaratory Act canonized Parliament’s right to use and abuse Americans as it pleased.

The Declaratory Act ignited an intellectual powder keg among colonists determined not to live under the heel of either monarchs or parliaments. Thomas Paine wrote in 1776 that “in America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” The Founding Fathers, having endured oppression, sought to build a “government of laws, not of men.” That meant that “government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand — rules which make it possible to foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers,” as Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek noted in 1944.

For generations, American politicians spoke reverently of the Constitution as America’s highest law. But in recent years, the Constitution has fallen into disrepute. The rule of law now means little more than the enforcement of the secret memos of the commander-in-chief.

We now have the “King James Test for American Democracy.” As long as the president does not formally proclaim himself a tyrant, we are obliged to pretend he is obeying the Constitution. Government is not lawless regardless of how many laws it violates — unless and until the president formally announces he is above the law.

Keep reading

U.S. Media Ignored How CIA’s Operation Timber Sycamore Paved the Way For the Syrian “Revolution”

On December 8, 2024, Syria’s long-standing ruler Bashar al-Assad fled to Russia after being deposed by Sunni militia forces in what New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman called the “biggest…most game-changing event in the Middle East in the last 45 years.”[1]

Friedman was enthusiastic about the regime change, though Syria’s new head of state, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, had a $10 million bounty placed on his head by the U.S. State Department in 2017 as a wanted terrorist.[2]

The “blazer-wearing revolutionary,” as CNN called him,[3] had been imprisoned from 2006 to 2011 at Abu Ghraib and other U.S. military prisons for supporting al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Colin P. Clarke, a counterterrorism analyst at a security consulting firm in New York was quoted in The New York Times as stating that, under Jolani’s rule, northwest Syria was “a harsh place where critics are silenced, tortured, jailed and disappeared.”[4] Hookahs and music were also banned, as they were under the Taliban in Afghanistan.[5]

Keep reading

Leaked files show secret UK Syria project boosted Jolani’s HTS 

In the name of building a “moderate opposition,” London established a social service and media network in areas controlled by HTS, benefitting the group it branded as a dangerous Al Qaeda affiliate.

Leaked British intelligence files reviewed by The Grayzone raise grave questions about whether London has aided the rise of Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham, the Islamist group which was proscribed by Western governments until it seized power in Syria this December. 

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has stated it is “too early” to remove HTS from Britain’s list of proscribed terrorist organizations. When the group was added in 2017, its entry stated it should be considered among “alternative names” for Al Qaeda. It was therefore illegal for British government officials to meet with HTS representatives while its status endured.

However, on December 16, British diplomats including Ann Snow, London’s special representative for Syria, convened a summit with Jolani and other HTS leaders in Damascus.

That same day, The Times of London granted Jolani a sympathetic interview, during which he called for an end to Western sanctions on the country, promising Syria would not be a “launchpad for attacks on Israel” under his watch. This followed a fawning BBC profile intended to highlight Jolani’s “rebranding” of HTS. The stage now appears set for HTS’ proscription to be rescinded, and London to recognize the group as legitimate rulers of post-Assad Syria. 

The UK’s embrace of HTS represents the culmination of a long and secretive process which began when the group’s leadership was still closely aligned with Al Qaeda’s Syrian branch, Jabhat Al Nusra, and even the Islamic State. While British intelligence once embarked on a campaign to undermine HTS in opposition-controlled areas of Syria, while cultivating supposedly “moderate” factions, leaked files reviewed by The Grayzone reveal the clandestine efforts wound up strengthening Jolani’s organization, helping pave its path to power. More troublingly, these documents suggest that, contrary to mainstream accounts of the group’s split from Al Qaeda, the pair remain close collaborators in Syria.

Keep reading

MSM Quietly Acquits Itself with Hushed Admissions of Major White House Coverup

Another one of those bombshell MSM pieces slipped past this week, not far in gravity from the seminal Time exposé about the ‘shadow campaign’ that stole the 2020 election.

This time it dealt with the revelation surrounding Biden’s “diminished” mental capacity, long known to all those around him, and how he was essentially ventriloquized, shielded, and stage managed into an acceptable simulacrum of a ‘president’. Of course, as usual the admissions are made long after the fact, with the damage long done and the MSM shills feeling they can now provocatively milk the revelation when the chance for any accountability has been dissipated and America’s attention redirected elsewhere.

More significantly the article indirectly sheds light on the structure and contours of the deep state and just how the powers that be work behind the scenes to control policy by taking advantage of crises to foment ideal circumstances that can be used to steer events and people in power.

In this case, the article makes direct mention of how Biden’s staff ‘took advantage’ of the Covid era protocols which insulated the president from excessive meetings and contact, stretching the new normal out indefinitely to the present in a way that evoked few real protests yet kept Biden under the thumb of a small claque of inner staff.

And that word—insulated—is an operative one: it’s used in various forms nearly ten separate times in the article, including as title of a subheading, with the very theme consequently being Biden’s total insulation from the outside world, which included members of Congress and Cabinet.

Keep reading

Former ‘GMA Producer’ Accused of Taking Thousands from Florida Lobbying Firm for ‘Hit Job’ Interviews Sues NPR, Floodlight, and High-Profile Players

Freelance television producer Kristen Hentschel has filed a high-profile lawsuit against a web of powerful individuals and organizations, alleging that a conspiracy led to the destruction of her once-flourishing career.

The ‘Emmy-nominated producer’ accuses Jeffrey Pitts, a former CEO of the controversial consulting firm Matrix LLC, along with public relations powerhouse McNicholas & Associates, and prominent news outlets NPR and Floodlight, of orchestrating a campaign of defamation, false light, and invasion of privacy.

“Plaintiff Kristen Hentschel (“Plaintiff” or “Hentschel”) brings this action against Defendant Jeffrey Pitts (“Pitts”) for tortious interference with business relationships, defamation, false light, and invasion of privacy, against Defendant McNicholas & Associates, Inc. (“McNicholas”) for invasion of privacy and false light, and against Defendants National Public Radio, Inc. (“NPR”) and Floodlight, Inc. (“Floodlight”) for defamation and false light,” according to the court filing obtained by The Gateway Pundit.

Hentschel, who previously worked behind the scenes at ABC News, claims her professional and personal life became collateral damage in a power struggle between Pitts and Matrix’s owner, Joe Perkins.

The allegations center on Pitts, who allegedly “groomed” Hentschel to serve his interests before sacrificing her career to protect high-profile clients, including Florida Power & Light and Florida Crystals.

Hentschel contends that Pitts provided false information to media outlets, resulting in NPR and Floodlight publishing defamatory articles that irreparably damaged her reputation.

The stories, published in late 2022, accused Hentschel of unethical journalism practices, including leveraging her ABC credentials for corporate espionage—a claim she vehemently denies.

The Journalist’s Resource reported that the operations of Matrix LLC, a political consulting firm, and its alleged payments to local news outlets to shape coverage in favor of powerful clients, might have remained undisclosed if not for an anonymous whistleblower who leaked hundreds of internal documents in 2022.

The leaked trove included emails, financial ledgers, and other records that laid bare the firm’s covert tactics.

Keep reading

UK’s National Weather and Climate Service Caught “Inventing” Data

Britain’s official meteorological service appears to be making up a worrying proportion of its published temperature readings, according to a new investigation. The most serious implication is that science could beis being corrupted in pursuit of green ideology; at the very least, it shows that UK weather-recoding infrastructure is in need of a serious upgrade.

When citizen journalist Ray Sanders made Freedom of Information requests to the Met Office and visited individual stations, he discovered that 103 weather stations, out of 302 sites supplying temperature averages, do not exist. This poses serious questions about how they are being used to collect useful scientific data, which in turn is used to inform climate policy.

For instance, in his English home county of Kent, Sanders observed that half of the eight official Met Office sites are in his words, “fiction.”. While Dungeness station closed in 1986, it apparently keeps on producing rolling temperature averages to the second decimal place of a degree. Like the stations alleged to be at Folkestone, Dover, and Gillingham, it does not have a classification from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), in contrast to various other recognised and listed Met Office sites.

Online inquiries about Dover are redirected to Dover Harbour (Beach)—the “nearest climate station”—yet Dover still manages to provide a full set of rolling 30-year temperature averages. A physical visit to the official site coordinates on Dover beach takes you to a place that would be submerged by the tide on a regular basis.

According to Sanders, the Met Office “declined to advise” him exactly how ‘data’ were being derived from 103 non-existent sites (out a total of 302). He asks

How would any reasonable observer know that the data was not real and simply ‘made up’ by a Government agency?

Demanding an “open declaration” of the likely inaccuracy of existing published data, Sanders hopes “to avoid other institutions and researchers using unreliable data and reaching erroneous conclusions.”

Taking to X, social commentator Toby Young posted:

Shocking evidence has emerged that points to the U.K. Met Office inventing temperature data from over 100 non-existent weather stations. One such ‘ghost’ station, Dungeness, closed in 1986 but still reports “observations”.

Keep reading

Unearthed Trump Era Video From 2018 Shows Homeland Actress Claire Danes Telling Stephen Colbert the Intelligence Community Allied With Journalists

A video clip resurfaced Tuesday of Homeland actress Claire Danes telling CBS Late Show host Stephen Colbert in February 2018 that the “intelligence community was…allying itself with journalists” during its battles with the Trump administration. Homeland ran on Showtime, starting during the Obama administration in 2011 and ending in 2020 during Trump’s first term.

Danes told Colbert that each year during the show’s run the cast, writers and producers would spend a week in Washington, D.C. for a “spy camp” with “real spooks”, meeting at a Georgetown club with people from the intelligence community, the State Department and the media.

Danes said the relationship between the Trump administration and the intelligence community soured at the start of 2017 (“there wasn’t great faith in the very beginning”) and that the spooks started allying with journalists. (Note: The alliance started earlier with the 2016 Russia hoax Steele Dossier and the early January 2017 intel-fed Washington Post hit that helped to take out Trump’s first national security advisor, Gen. Michael Flynn.)

Keep reading