Tag: corruption

I was threatened by the January 6 committee into staying silent, Trump’s acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller claims

Donald Trump‘s former acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller claims the January 6 committee threatened to ‘make his life hell’ if he kept claiming his former boss authorized National Guard deployment during the Capitol riot.

In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, the former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center said he became ‘fearful’ of aggressive tactics by members of the Democrat-led panel who tried to stop him speaking publicly about a narrative that didn’t align with their final report.

Miller’s bombshell claims follow a report by Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk that reveals the committee withheld a transcript from an interview with a top White House official where he told Vice Chair Liz Cheney and other staffers that Trump did want to deploy troops.

Cheney did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether she or any other members of the Select Committee corresponded with witnesses in a way that could be interpreted as threatening.

Trump appointed Miller as the Pentagon chief in November 2020 after he fired Mark Esper amid attempts to overturn Joe Biden‘s presidential election victory.

He was only in the job for two months, but was thrust in front of the committee during their probe into the events that unfolded on the day the electoral college votes were certified.

Miller claims the members intimidated him, and warned they would repeatedly bring him in for ‘hours’ of additional testimony if he kept going on TV and defending the former president’s actions.

Keep reading

Colorado’s star forensic scientist, Yvonne “Missy” Woods, EXPOSED for alleged data fraud – those she sent to prison now want their convictions reexamined

One of the largest scandals in forensic DNA testing is unfolding in Colorado where a veteran forensic scientist abruptly quit her post last fall amid allegations that her data compilation methods are fraudulent.

Yvonne “Missy” Woods worked as Colorado’s star forensic scientist for nearly three decades supplying police and prosecutors with DNA testing data in some of the most high-profile and baffling crimes in the state’s history – that is, until she resigned in late 2023.

An internal review into Woods’ work revealed anomalies so severe that a criminal probe was launched. What many are now wondering is: Is Colorado’s criminal justice system legitimate?

In order to answer that question, the state says it needs to review and retest about 3,000 DNA samples that Woods handled. The end result could be thousands of cases thought to have been solved having to be looked at a second time, public defenders warn.

Those convicted based on Woods’ potentially corrupted DNA findings could end up suing the state, and prosecutors are now bracing for this onslaught. The state has also allocated nearly $7.5 million in preparation for these possible retrials and case reviews, along with retesting.

“This is a huge, unprecedented mess,” said George Brauchler, a former district attorney in the Denver suburbs whose office oversaw numerous cases in which Woods testified. “I want to know: What in the world did she do?”

Keep reading

Hunter Biden Had Access to Joe Biden’s Top Secret/SCIF-Designated Materials Including National Defense Info Related to US Troop Deployment

Hunter Biden had access to then-VP Joe Biden’s Top Secret/SCIF-designated materials including national defense information related to US troop deployment while he was on vacation in Nantucket.

Via Paul Sperry: China influence-peddling Hunter Biden had access to TOP SECRET/SCI materials including “nat’l defense information” –e.g. US troop deployment/movement– while on vacation in NANTUCKET with his then-VP father where he kept docs out in the open and received daily intel briefings

Last year TGP reported that Hunter Biden likely received classified information from Joe Biden on Ukraine and then emailed the information to his business partner Devon Archer.

According to emails uncovered from the “Laptop from Hell,” Hunter Biden sent his business partner Devon Archer a very detailed email on Ukraine on April 13, 2014 – just one week before Joe Biden visited Ukraine to meet with then-Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk.

It appears Hunter Biden was emailing Devon Archer information he received from a briefing from his father Joe Biden or directly from top-secret documents.

“A curiously well-informed email about Ukraine, Russia and the UK on Hunter Biden’s laptop is a thread that links the President’s classified documents scandal to the Delaware federal investigation into his son’s foreign business dealings.” – the New York Post’s Miranda Devine wrote.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Appears Wary of Blocking Biden Admin-Big Tech Censorship Collusion

During oral arguments in a major First Amendment case on Monday, the Supreme Court expressed reservations about restricting interactions between the Biden administration and social media platforms. This concern emerged during the Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden) case, which delves into the extent of governmental influence over online content.

Brian Fletcher, Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, presented oral arguments for the petitioners in the case, Biden’s Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy and several other current and former members of the Biden administration.

The respondents in the case, the States of Missouri and Louisiana, and several other individuals who were subject to social media censorship, allege that the federal government had pressured platforms to block or downgrade posts on various topics, including some related to Covid and the Hunter Biden laptop story.

Several lower courts agreed with the respondents, with a district judge describing the Biden administration’s Big Tech-censorship collusion as “Orwellian” and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals finding that the Biden admin likely violated the First Amendment when pushing for social media censorship.

During the oral arguments today though, the justices displayed skepticism towards a broad prohibition on governmental communications with social media platforms. They raised concerns that such a ruling could unduly restrain the government’s ability to address pressing issues.

Fletcher defended the Biden admin’s actions and framed them as the government exercising its right to “speak for itself by informing, persuading, or criticizing private speakers.” He argued that the government is entitled to communicate with social media companies to influence their content moderation decisions, as long as these interactions do not veer into coercion. According to Fletcher, the litmus test for legality should be the presence or absence of threats from the government, asserting that using the bully pulpit for exhortations is a right protected under the First Amendment.

Fletcher also tried to argue for the significant power and autonomy of social media companies, noting their capability to resist governmental pressures.

The solicitor general of Louisiana, Benjamin Aguiñaga, representing one of the Republican-led states behind the lawsuit, argued that the government’s actions amounted to coercion, effectively leading to censorship by social media platforms. He highlighted a significant shift in the focus of government-led content moderation. Initially aimed at tackling foreign interference and misinformation, these efforts increasingly targeted speech by American citizens, particularly around the contentious topics of the 2020 election and the pandemic.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson challenged Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga’s viewpoint. “And so I guess some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country. And you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So, can you help me? Because I’m really worried about that.”

Keep reading

Biden’s State of the Union Address Exposed by US Intelligence Threat Assessment

President Biden used the bully pulpit of the annual State of the Union Address to describe a world that significantly differed from the picture presented just a month earlier in the Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community.

Information fed to the general public is deliberately spun to sell the imperial project. In contrast, intelligence assessments for elite policy makers are designed to sustain the endeavor. That the president’s pronouncements diverge from the conclusions reached by his own intelligence community highlights the chasm between what is foisted on the public compared to what is understood within the bowels of the state.

Unlike Biden’s bullish and bellicose pronouncements about “our leadership in the world,” the Assessment’s view was less triumphal. It states: “The United States faces an increasingly fragile global order.”

The fraying US-imposed “rules based order” and its discredited neoliberal economic system are more and more being challenged by “states engaging in competitive behavior,” according to the Assessment. The report adds, fallout from the Gaza crisis, in particular, serves to “undermine” the US.

Both pronouncements, however, have similar biases. Biden’s address to the nation was overtly political, accusing Trump of “bowing down” to Putin. But the supposedly neutral and objective “collective insights of the Intelligence Community” were likewise predisposed in favor of Democratic Party memes. Both blame Russian electoral interference for Trump’s ascension to the Oval Office in 2016. As proof, the so-called intelligence community again offered nothing more than its own assessment, lacking better evidence.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Appears Wary of Blocking Biden Admin-Big Tech Censorship Collusion

During oral arguments in a major First Amendment case on Monday, the Supreme Court expressed reservations about restricting interactions between the Biden administration and social media platforms. This concern emerged during the Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden) case, which delves into the extent of governmental influence over online content.

Brian Fletcher, Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, presented oral arguments for the petitioners in the case, Biden’s Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy and several other current and former members of the Biden administration.

The respondents in the case, the States of Missouri and Louisiana, and several other individuals who were subject to social media censorship, allege that the federal government had pressured platforms to block or downgrade posts on various topics, including some related to Covid and the Hunter Biden laptop story.

Several lower courts agreed with the respondents, with a district judge describing the Biden administration’s Big Tech-censorship collusion as “Orwellian” and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals finding that the Biden admin likely violated the First Amendment when pushing for social media censorship.

During the oral arguments today though, the justices displayed skepticism towards a broad prohibition on governmental communications with social media platforms. They raised concerns that such a ruling could unduly restrain the government’s ability to address pressing issues.

Fletcher defended the Biden admin’s actions and framed them as the government exercising its right to “speak for itself by informing, persuading, or criticizing private speakers.” He argued that the government is entitled to communicate with social media companies to influence their content moderation decisions, as long as these interactions do not veer into coercion. According to Fletcher, the litmus test for legality should be the presence or absence of threats from the government, asserting that using the bully pulpit for exhortations is a right protected under the First Amendment.

Fletcher also tried to argue for the significant power and autonomy of social media companies, noting their capability to resist governmental pressures.

The solicitor general of Louisiana, Benjamin Aguiñaga, representing one of the Republican-led states behind the lawsuit, argued that the government’s actions amounted to coercion, effectively leading to censorship by social media platforms. He highlighted a significant shift in the focus of government-led content moderation. Initially aimed at tackling foreign interference and misinformation, these efforts increasingly targeted speech by American citizens, particularly around the contentious topics of the 2020 election and the pandemic.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson challenged Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga’s viewpoint. “And so I guess some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country. And you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So, can you help me? Because I’m really worried about that.”

Keep reading

Kentucky prison officers accused of forcing inmates to drink urine or be tased upon failed drug test

A lawsuit filed on behalf of seven inmates at the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex claims they were forced to either drink their own urine or be tased after failing a drug test while in custody.

And Department of Corrections spokeswoman Lisa Lamb acknowledged in a statement that some employees have been fired and disciplined in other ways.

“This incident was thoroughly investigated and multiple disciplinary actions were taken including employee terminations,” she said. “As of now, the Department of Corrections has not been served with the lawsuit and cannot provide further comment.”

She would not discuss details of the disciplinary action or terminations, including the results of the investigation. 

WDRB News has requested the investigation and disciplinary action taken through the Kentucky open records law. 

In a June 6th memo to Randy White, deputy commissioner of the Department of Corrections, an investigator said the findings substantiated that staffers were tasing inmates who failed drug test. 

“This determination is based on the preponderance of evidence,” according to an investigative memo obtained by WDRB. “This evidence includes video footage, staff and inmate witness statements , electronic Taser evidence log … and inconsistencies in suspect interviews.” 

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court’s Eastern District in Ashland, claims four correctional officers told the inmates who failed drug tests “they would be able to ‘throw away’ their urine sample if they chose to be subjected to electrocution by taser or to drink their own urine.”

However, the suit also claims the seven inmates were “forced” to either be tased or drink their urine.

Keep reading

Warden is ousted as FBI raids California women’s prison known as the ‘rape club’

FBI agents raided a federal women’s prison in California this week so plagued by sexual abuse that it was known among inmates and workers as the “rape club.”

The action coincided with the ouster of the new warden from the federal correctional institution in Dublin. Warden Art Dulgov — just a few months into his tenure — and three other top managers were removed from their positions Monday by the federal Bureau of Prisons. Dulgov was the third new leader of the low-security prison since Warden Ray T. Garcia, who, along with more than half a dozen employees, was convicted of sexually assaulting multiple women serving time there.

Dulgov and staff are accused of retaliating against an inmate who testified in January in a class-action lawsuit that alleges “horrific abuse and exploitation” at the prison, with rampant sexual assault of incarcerated persons, according to a court filing.

The developments are the latest twist in a years-long scandal surrounding the facility. Since an FBI investigation was launched and resulted in arrests in 2021, eight FCI Dublin employees have been charged with sexually abusing inmates. Five have pleaded guilty, and two have been convicted by juries. Another employee is slated to go on trial this year.

Last year, Garcia was sentenced to 70 months in prison for sexually abusing incarcerated women and lying to the FBI as part of a cover-up.

Keep reading

The White House Claims Borrowing $16 Trillion Over the Next Decade Is Fiscally Responsible

The budget plan President Joe Biden unveiled on Monday would hike taxes, increase federal spending to unprecedented levels, and lock in budget deficits that average nearly $2 trillion annually for the next decade.

But possibly the craziest detail is the fact that the White House is trying to frame all of that as being an exercise in fiscal restraint.

No, really. In a “fact sheet” released alongside the budget, the White House touted how the proposal would cut the deficit by $3 trillion over the next 10 years. “Strong and shared growth that benefits all Americans isn’t just good for working families and the economy; it will also lead to better fiscal outcomes,” the administration claims, adding that Biden believes “long-term investments in our nation and its people should be paid for.”

Someone in the White House might want to Google what the phrase “paid for” actually means, because Biden’s budget assumes the federal government will keep borrowing at near-record levels for the next decade.

For fiscal year 2025, which begins on October 1 of this year, Biden is asking Congress to spend $7.3 trillion while the federal government will collect just $5.5 trillion in taxes. That will necessitate borrowing $1.8 trillion to make ends meet. Over the 10-year window covered by the president’s budget plan, federal revenues would exceed $70 trillion, but Biden is proposing to spend $86.6 trillion.

This is what “paid for” looks like, apparently.

Keep reading

Beijing’s military hacked U.S. nuclear firm before Hunter Biden aided Chinese bid to acquire it

U.S. officials were acutely aware that Beijing was trying to obtain America’s premiere nuclear reactor technology, including through illicit hacking, months before Hunter Biden and his business partners sought to arrange a quiet sale of an iconic U.S. reactor company to a Chinese firm, according to court records and national security experts.

Hunter Biden’s unsuccessful efforts to help CEFC China Energy acquire Westinghouse, one of America’s most famous electricity and appliance brands, and its state-the-art AP1000 nuclear reactor began in early 2016 while Joe Biden was still a sitting vice president, memos published Wednesday by Just the News show.

Just 20 months earlier, his father’s Justice Department charged five members of a Chinese military hacking unit for breaching the company’s computer systems in search of intellectual property and internal strategy communications, according to a copy of the indictment.

In May 2014, the five operatives of the People’s Liberation Army’s Unit 61398 were charged with hacking into the systems of six U.S.-based companies across different industrial sectors, including Westinghouse Electric Co., SolarWorld, United States Steel Corp., and a union. The attorney general at the time, Eric Holder, called the breach a classic case of “economic espionage.”

One operative gained access to Westinghouse’s computers in 2010 and “stole proprietary and confidential technical and design specifications related to pipes, pipe supports, and pipe routing” pertaining to the company’s advanced AP1000 nuclear reactor design, according to an indictment filed by the Department of Justice.

“Among other things, such specifications would enable a competitor to build a plant similar to the AP1000 without incurring significant research and development costs associated with designing similar pipes, pipe supports, and pipe routing systems,” the indictment reads.

File

Criminal No. 14-118 USA vs. Wang Dong et al.pdf

National security experts said Thursday they were floored that the son of a sitting vice president would be involved in trying to help a Chinese firm get a leg up on the United States in the race for nuclear energy and that Hunter Biden’s involvement with CEFC almost certainly would have been detected by U.S. intelligence and prompted concern. 

Documents previously released by Congress in the Biden impeachment inquiry show the Biden family appeared to be acutely aware that CEFC was tied directly to the communist government in China.

While there is no evidence at the moment that Hunter Biden was aware of or involved in the hacking efforts by the Chinese, Hunter Biden wrote in one text message in 2017 that he believed one of the CEFC officials he worked with, Patrick Ho, was the “f—ing spy chief” of China (Ho was lated indicted in the U.S. and charged with corruption) while Joe Biden’s brother James told the FBI he believed CEFC Chairman Ye Jianming had a relationship with China’s communist president.

“It’s beyond outrageous that Hunter Biden would be involved in any such deal with Communist China while his father is the sitting vice president,” former Trump-era Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates told the “Just the News, No Noise” television show. “I mean just the glaring conflicts of interest are hard to wrap your brain around. But particularly with Westinghouse.”

Keep reading