Tag: corruption

Liz Cheney contacted controversial J6 witness on encrypted app behind lawyer’s back, messages show

While vice chairwoman of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, former Rep. Liz Cheney used an encrypted phone app to directly and indirectly communicate around defense counsel –and possibly ethical rules — with a witness who would later change her testimony in shocking fashion, according to evidence obtained by congressional investigators and Just the News. 

Cheney’s Signal communications with witness Cassidy Hutchinson on June 6, 2022 and her friend, Alyssa Farah Griffin, were recently obtained by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., chairman of the House Administration oversight subcommittee that has identified significant problems with the original Democrat-run inquiry into the Jan. 6 incident.

The communications are now raising fresh concerns about the ethical conduct of that Democrat-run investigation. At the time of the communication, Hutchinson was represented by attorney Stefan Passantino, who told Just the News he did not authorize the contacts with Cheney and was not aware of them until contacted by Just the News. 

Cheney is a licensed lawyer in Washington D.C. where the DC Bar rules state unequivocally that “a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other person or is authorized by law or a court order to do so.”

Loudermilk told Just the News that the communications indicate that Cheney defied her ethical responsibilities and may have influenced a witness outside of her lawyer’s presence, eventually causing Hutchinson to switch lawyers.

Keep reading

What Are They Hiding? Fani Willis Demands Her Lover Nathan Wade Not Answer Questions During Deposition Tomorrow Before House Judiciary Committee

Fulton County Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis sent out a letter to the Chairman Jim Jordan of the House Judiciary Committee on Friday.

Willis demanded that her lover Nathan Wade’s testimony be canceled this week.

House Judiciary Republicans released the letter publicly on Monday.

Fani’s lover Wade will be deposed on Tuesday before Congress. Willis is demanding that he not answer any questions.

Fani argues that Wade’s testimony “could violate protected privileges that are upheld by the Fulton County Attorney’s Office.

Fani wrote, “I am concerned that your demand for Mr. Wade’s testimony would force him to improperly divulge confidential information that is protected by privileges held by the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office and demands that Mr. Wade violates State Bar of Georgia rules that govern the conduct of attorneys.”

Fani wants Chairman Jordan to retract the request for Nathan Wade to testify.

In March, Nathan Wade withdrew from the Trump lawfare RICO case after Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled District Attorney Fani Wills can continue her RICO case against Trump and his associates but that Wade must go.

Both Willis and Wade committed the same “improprieties,” but only Wade was told to step down by the conflicted judge.

In his 23-page decision, Judge McAfee ordered Fani Willis to address the “appearance of impropriety” before the case can move forward. McAfee ruled Willis could stay on the case but must fire her lover Nathan Wade, the top prosecutor she hired to hunt down Trump.

Nathan Wade resigned from the RICO case following the ruling.

“Although the court found that ‘the defendants failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest,’ I am offering my resignation in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and move this case forward as quickly as possible,” Nathan Wade wrote in a letter obtained by WSB-TV.

Fani Willis accepted Nathan Wade’s resignation letter and praised him for his bravery.

Keep reading

Why the Government Won’t Protect You: The Shocking Truth Behind Their Inaction

Our country is in serious trouble. The government is supposed to protect its citizens, defend our borders, and ensure our prosperity. But what we see today is a government that seems to be doing the exact opposite. Critical issues like illegal immigration, foreign ownership of our land, the national debt, and international conflicts are being ignored—or worse, allowed to fester while the American people are left to pay the price.

It’s hard to look at what’s happening and not feel betrayed by those who claim to represent us. We deserve better, but if we don’t act soon, it might be too late.

Why Is China Buying Our Farmland?

Here’s a major red flag: foreign entities—especially those with ties to the Chinese government—are buying up U.S. farmland. And it’s not just about farmland. It’s the strategic locations of these purchases that should concern every American.

Why is this allowed to happen? Why isn’t the government stepping in to stop foreign adversaries from buying pieces of America? The answer is simple: profit. Politicians and their allies benefit financially from these deals. This isn’t about national security for them—it’s about money and power.

If our leaders truly cared about safeguarding the country, they would put a stop to this immediately. Instead, they’re letting it happen, knowing full well the long-term risks this poses to our national security and food supply. The government has been compromised by its own greed.

The National Debt: A Crisis That Can’t Be Ignored

As of 2024, the U.S. national debt has soared past $35 trillion. Let that sink in for a moment. That’s more than $100,000 of debt for every single American citizen. The government is spending money it doesn’t have, and future generations will be the ones forced to pay the price.

But here’s the part that really should get your attention: a significant portion of this debt is owned by foreign countries, including China. The same nation that’s buying our farmland also holds a large part of our financial future. Every dollar we borrow is another step closer to losing control of our own destiny.

So why isn’t the government tackling this problem? Why do politicians keep borrowing and spending like there’s no tomorrow? It’s because they don’t care about the long-term consequences. They’ll be out of office by the time the bill comes due, leaving the mess for someone else to clean up. Meanwhile, they get to look good by funding expensive programs and racking up political points, all at your expense.

This reckless spending has to stop. The national debt isn’t just a number on a page; it’s a ticking time bomb. And when it goes off, it won’t be the politicians who suffer—it will be everyday Americans.

Keep reading

Former Harvard Pres Claudine Gay Receives ‘Leadership And Courage’ Award Despite Controversy-Plagued Tenure

Claudine Gay, the former president of Harvard University, was recently given a “Leadership and Courage” award despite her controversial response to anti-Semitism and the plagiarism allegations that surrounded her time in Harvard’s leadership.

The Harvard Black Alumni Society granted the award to the former Harvard president on Sept. 28 at a gathering of the school’s black alumni. 

Harvard Black Alumni Society President Monica M. Clark praised Gay and said: “This reunion — all these people who were expressing all this support for her — they were all there. Celebrating her, and clapping for her, and cheering her on.”

One alumnus, Thomas G. Stewart, said: “She’s humble, she’s smart, she’s — fortunately — someone that still is affiliated with the University, and has pledged her support to it to her dying day.”

“She’s in good spirits, and folks should know that,” Stewart added.

Claudine Gay resigned on Jan. 2 following her controversial congressional testimony, during which she failed to unequivocally state that she would condemn rhetoric “calling for the genocide of Jews.”

Gay was asked at the hearing: “At Harvard, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment?” Gay responded: “It can be, depending on the context.”

“I got caught up in what had become at that point, an extended, combative exchange about policies and procedures,” Gay told The Harvard Crimson at the time. “What I should have had the presence of mind to do in that moment was return to my guiding truth, which is that calls for violence against our Jewish community — threats to our Jewish students — have no place at Harvard, and will never go unchallenged.”

Gay was plagued by a controversy regarding her allegedly repeated plagiarism as well. 

Keep reading

Former CBS Staffers Call For Outside Investigation of ’60 Minutes’ Interview with Kamala Harris After They Edited Her Answer with Previous Soundbite to Make Her Sound Coherent

As previously reported, fake news ’60 Minutes’ was caught editing Kamala’s answers to make her sound coherent and normal.

Harris’s interview was so bad that ’60 Minutes’ spliced her nonsensical answer and replaced it with a completely separate sentence she said earlier in the interview.

CBS is refusing to release the unedited transcript from the ’60 Minutes’ interview with Kamala Harris.

Here is the original 60 Minutes exchange:

Bill Whitaker: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening?

Kamala Harris: Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.

And here is ’60 Minutes” edited exchange:

Bill Whitaker: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening?

Kamala Harris: We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.

Kamala Harris has no clue what she’s talking about.

“60 Minutes” knows Kamala Harris is stupid which is why they edited her exchange to make her sound more coherent.

Keep reading

Court Confirms Merck Lied on Mumps Vaccine Label — But Lets Drugmaker Off the Hook in Antitrust Lawsuit

An appeals court this week ruled that even though Merck misrepresented critical data to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gain approval for its updated mumps vaccine — and even though the FDA knew about the false claims — because the agency approved the vaccine anyway, Merck can’t be held responsible for unfairly hurting competitors.

The ruling stems from a class action lawsuit brought by a group of physicians and physicians groups who alleged Merck violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by making false claims about the efficacy of its mump vaccine on the product’s label in order to stifle competition and maintain a monopoly in the marketplace.

The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits companies from conspiring to create a monopoly.

The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t dispute the plaintiffs’ allegations that Merck lied to the FDA about the vaccine’s efficacy.

However, citing the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, the court ruled that because the FDA took no action against Merck after discovering the false claims, it was the FDA’s decision — not Merck’s fraud — that injured competitor GSK and the physicians and physicians groups who bought the ineffective vaccine at inflated prices.

Keep reading

Pharma Execs Charged in $1.3 Billion Drug Scheme + More

Five pharmaceutical distributor executives and five pharma sales representatives have been charged by the Department of Justice for the unlawful distribution of about 70 million opioid pills and 30 million doses of other prescription drugs, worth more than $1.3 billion on the black market.

The charges were unsealed in the Southern District of Texas, Southern District of Florida, Eastern District of Missouri and Eastern District of North Carolina.

Three Houston-area pharmacy operators were also charged in the Southern District of Texas for their role in the schemes.

Nine of the 10 individuals charged have pleaded guilty, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Keep reading

EPA Knows These Commonly Used Pesticides Affect Brain Development

Rodent studies given to U.S. regulators by insecticide makers close to 20 years ago revealed the chemicals could be harmful to the animals’ brain development — data worrisome for humans exposed to the popular pesticides but not properly accounted for by regulators, according to a new research report published on Oct. 1.

The analysis examined five studies that exposed pregnant rats to various types of insecticides known as neonicotinoids (commonly called neonics). The studies found that the offspring born to the exposed rats suffered shrunken brains and other problems.

Statistically significant shrinkage of brain tissue was seen in the offspring of rats exposed to high doses of five types of neonics – acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam, the paper states.

The authors said the impacts on the brain appeared similar to the effects of nicotine, which they said is known to disrupt mammalian neurological development.

The animal studies also support the possibility of a link between neonic exposure and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the authors said.

In most cases, the companies submitting the studies did not submit data for all dosage levels, leading the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assume negative effects were only seen at the high dose, according to the study.

“We found numerous deficiencies in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s regulatory oversight and data analyses,” the authors state in the paper, published in the journal Frontiers in Toxicology.

The industry studies, which the EPA used to determine what neonic exposure levels are considered safe for humans, were not publicly available and were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

“Consistently, effects were found at the high dose and EPA did not demand data for the lower doses, therefore leaving it unclear how little of a substance it takes to actually cause adverse effects such as reduced size of certain brain regions,” said Bill Freese, the science director for the environmental advocacy group Center for Food Safety and an author of the study.

The study found that the EPA consistently made determinations about what levels of neonic exposure were “safe” for humans without enough data to support its conclusions.

Keep reading

FEMA Doesn’t Care About Helping Americans After A Disaster, It Cares About ‘Disaster Equity’

What’s the point of a federal disaster agency if the chief priorities of said agency are not to save Americans from disaster?

In September last year, FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell joined the president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to sign the “Agreement to Advance Equity in Disaster Resilience.”

According to an NAACP press release, the group’s “Emergency Management Task Force … will meet regularly with FEMA leadership to advance progress on equity within disaster preparedness and resilience.”

“The signing comes on the heels of an Intergenerational Climate Resilience Roundtable recently hosted by NAACP and FEMA during NAACP’s Climate Week NYC activations,” the release read. “The roundtable focused on disaster preparedness, climate resilience and instilling equity in emergency management.”

FEMA’s website characterized the roundtable as a forum where “presenters shared their wealth of knowledge and information gleaned from their areas of expertise and personal experience regarding the intergenerational impacts of climate change and how disaster resilience can be improved.”

“At a time when we are experiencing some of the worst natural disasters, we need effective collaboration, communication and transparency of resources to help Black communities,” said the NAACP’s director for Environmental and Climate Justice.

Keep reading

Fact-Checking or Fact-Shielding? Twitter Files Journalist Slams PolitiFact’s Defense of Government Pressure on Big Tech

Poynter Institute’s PolitiFact, a Meta fact-checking partner, has decided that the Biden-Harris administration is not engaged in censorship at an industrial scale.

This claim made by vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance is false, PolitiFact has asserted, because the Biden-Harris White House “contacting” (according to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, they were contacted to be pressured) social media companies to flag content for removal “didn’t cross the line into coercion.”

Not only that but pressuring these companies (yet allegedly never coercing) to censor online speech is not a threat to democracy, PolitiFact was told by a Colombia professor – if the censors decide that speech is disinformation about Covid or election results.

The scale and nature of the way the US government leaned on tech companies to stifle speech that did not suit its political agenda is, to date, best revealed in the Twitter Files.

One of the journalists who worked on publishing the internal documents, Michael Shellenberger, now examined this PolitiFact “verdict” and the arguments the organization used. He rejects the notion that suppressing voters’ free speech is somehow “not a threat to democracy.”

Shellenberger was equally unimpressed by PolitiFact trying to explain its opinion regarding Vance’s claim by referring to the Supreme Court, which they said ruled it was not unconstitutional for the government to exert the kind of pressure it did.

“But the Court did not consider the US government’s pressure of Meta or many other cases of government demands for censorship,” Shellenberger writes and notes that the ruling (in the Murthy v Missouri case) was based on the judges deciding there were no legal grounds to bring the case.

To the question – as old as the rise of the fact-checking industry – why did a fact-checker (in this case, PolitiFact) get things wrong, the journalist suggests it’s more a case of “playing on the same team”.

PolitiFact, he writes, is “part and parcel of the Censorship Industrial Complex.”

Keep reading