Tag: corruption

Rand Paul to Joe Rogan: DOJ Won’t Prosecute Anthony Fauci for Lying

Making an appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) expressed his frustration that the Trump administration has failed to refer Anthony Fauci for criminal prosecution for lying to Congress.

Paul told Rogan that he believes Fauci’s blanket pardon—issued by former President Joe Biden during the waning hours of his presidency—should be challenged in court. Paul said he has provided Attorney General Pam Bondi with evidence that Fauci misled Congress about gain-of-function research and also instructed his deputies to destroy public records in order to stymie scrutiny.

“I’ve summarized it again in a criminal referral to Trump’s attorney general, and I still haven’t gotten action,” said Paul. “They ought to take it to court.”

Paul insisted that he couldn’t guarantee victory in court, given the sweeping nature of the pardon issued to Fauci. But he thought it was worth doing in order to see if the Supreme Court might narrow the pardon.

Reason‘s Christian Britschgi has argued that Fauci’s statements to Congress about whether the agency he oversaw funded high-risk gain-of-function research that could have caused the COVID-19 pandemic were certainly misleading. Moreover, the timeline of the Fauci pardon is quite suspicious, since it covers the period of time during which Fauci plausibly signed off on gain-of-function research despite a presidential executive order mandating a pause on such funding. The pardon window does not cover just his time as the nation’s top coronavirus adviser, nor does it extend to his entire career in government service: It dates to 2014, when President Barack Obama halted gain-of-function research.

Paul and Rogan also recapped many of the erroneous policies recommended by Fauci during the pandemic: made-up social distancing guidelines, mask mandate flip-flops, and vaccine requirements.

It’s always refreshing to see libertarian views being represented on such an important platform. And given President Donald Trump’s misguided zeal to enlist his Justice Department to investigate various political enemies for dubious reasons—James Comey, Letitia James, Jerome Powell, and others—it’s disappointing that the DOJ isn’t contemplating action against Fauci, who is a much more deserving target.

Maybe Bondi just has her hands full drawing black lines all over the Epstein files.

Keep reading

Bank Sues Former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot for Refusing to Pay Bill for 17 Months

JPMorgan Chase Bank is suing former Chicago Democrat Mayor Lori Lightfoot for letting her $11K credit card bill go unpaid for 17 months.

The media has learned that Lightfoot, who became the first Democrat Chicago Mayor not reelected to city hall in about 40 years, was served with a subpoena at her $900,000 Chicago home in October, the Chicago Tribune reports.

Chase ultimately decided in March that her $11,000 bill would be a charge-off, but her last payment of $5,000 on the debt was made on August 7, 2024, according to the bank’s records.

The bank reported that Lightfoot has had the card since 2005.

Lightfoot seems to be struggling to pay her bills despite claiming $402,414 in adjusted gross income in 2021 alone. The Tribune also notes that records show Lightfoot took out $210,000 in early distributions from her retirement account. She also earned $216,000 during each of her four years in office.

The ex-mayor seemed to have just as much trouble paying the bills for the city when she was mayor. As she was headed out of office in 2024, for instance, the city was suffering under an $85 million budget shortfall.

Lightfoot’s next appearance in court for her credit card debt is scheduled late this year.

Keep reading

Assaults On ICE Are ‘Highly Coordinated,’ While Local Law Enforcement Told to Stand Down

The Department of Homeland Security has surged federal law enforcement personnel into Minneapolis amid what officials describe as a sharp escalation in violence against officers operating in the city, which has been designated a sanctuary jurisdiction, according to DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.

McLaughlin said the deployment was necessary because sanctuary policies in Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota restrict cooperation between federal agents and local law enforcement, leaving DHS officers exposed while carrying out immigration enforcement operations.

“So what’s happening with Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota is it is a sanctuary city, so DHS law enforcement, we’re not allowed to engage with their local law enforcement,” McLaughlin said.

“We’re not allowed in their jails, and local law enforcement are not allowed to respond to backup to our officers.”

According to McLaughlin, those restrictions have coincided with what she described as a coordinated campaign of violence against federal officers.

“So what we’ve been seeing is a highly coordinated campaign of violence against our law enforcement officers,” she said.

Keep reading

Federal Reserve ‘ignored’ US attorney’s office inquiries into Powell’s congressional testimony ‘on multiple occasions’: Pirro

The Justice Department was forced to use the “legal process” to obtain information related to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s congressional testimony about renovations at the central bank after he “ignored” requests from prosecutors, US Attorney Jeanine Pirro said Monday. 

Pirro, the top federal prosecutor in Washington, DC, downplayed Powell’s shocking Sunday night suggestion that he was facing a criminal indictment after grand jury subpoenas were served to the Federal Reserve related to his June 2025 testimony to the Senate Banking Committee about the renovation project, which has been panned by President Trump. 

“The United States Attorney’s Office contacted the Federal Reserve on multiple occasions to discuss cost overruns and the chairman’s congressional testimony, but were ignored, necessitating the use of legal process — which is not a threat,” Pirro wrote on X. 

“The word ‘indictment’ has come out of Mr. Powell’s mouth, no one else’s,” the US attorney continued. “None of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach.” 

Keep reading

‘No one is above the law.’ Former New Haven police chief admitted to stealing at least $10,000, city officials say

The city of New Haven is freezing a police bank account used to fund its confidential informant program after former police chief Karl Jacobson admitted to stealing thousands of dollars from it.

City officials shared new details about the investigation Wednesday.

The scandal began on Monday, when a group of assistant chiefs questioned Jacobson about discrepancies in withdrawals from the city’s confidential informant fund.

Mayor Justin Elicker says the former police chief admitted to stealing $10,000 from the city, but the amount could actually be more.

“Everything I’ve heard from everyone is just how shocked they are,” Mayor Elicker says. “I want to make it clear: we do not know how much money was taken.”

Jacobsen oversaw the account as assistant chief.

Despite calls for him to relinquish control when he was promoted to chief, city officials say Jacobson continued to make authorized routine withdrawals of $5,000 each month from the account to pay confidential informants.

“What the chief had done was basically make it where he would be the sole holder of the money,” acting police chief David Zannelli says, “and what he would say to us commonly is that he was doing that to protect us from any kind of liability.”

The preliminary investigation uncovered two extra $5,000 withdrawals were made by Jacobson at the end of 2025: one in November, and another in December.

Mayor Elicker was originally going to place him on administrative leave, but Jacobson said he was retiring instead.

The confidential informant program has been paused as state investigators work to find out if any other city bank accounts were affected and if any other police officers were involved.

“No one is above the law, and we are all held accountable,” acting police chief David Zannelli says. “We will move forward as a police department.”

Keep reading

James Comer Says Ilhan Omar Is “At the Top of the Suspect List” in Massive Minnesota Fraud Scandal — Ethics Complaints Incoming, Claims Her Husband Profited

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer dropped a bombshell this week, suggesting that far-left Rep. Ilhan Omar sits “at the top of the suspect list” in the sprawling Minnesota fraud scandals involving taxpayer-funded daycare and healthcare programs.

The comments came during a pointed exchange with journalist Alison Steinberg, who raised serious concerns about whether members of Congress themselves may have benefited from money funneled through political action committees tied to fraudulent daycare and healthcare schemes.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn has leveled explosive allegations against Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, claiming that a lack of accountability regarding massive taxpayer fraud in Minnesota is linked to the Speaker’s own financial networks.

Minnesota has become ground zero for some of the largest pandemic-era fraud cases in U.S. history, involving the alleged theft of hundreds of millions of dollars intended to feed children and provide healthcare services.

Many of these cases have centered on networks tied to Somali-run nonprofits and daycare operations, fraud that went unchecked for years under Democrat leadership.

When asked how Americans can trust Congress to police fraud if lawmakers themselves are implicated, Comer made it clear that there is a formal mechanism to deal with corruption on Capitol Hill.

Keep reading

Somali Refugee in Lewiston, Maine Resigns After Controversial Swearing In Despite Active Investigations and Criminal Charges

Last week, Iman Osman, a Somali migrant and community leader, was sworn in as the Ward 5 Councilor despite facing two felony charges related to stolen property, including the unauthorized taking and receiving of stolen firearms from two estates.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that, according to court documents obtained by WMTW, the alleged crimes involve weapons taken from two separate estates between November 15, 2023, and October 11, 2024.

Although his lawyer initially said he would not resign, in a letter to Lewiston Mayor Carl Sheline and City Council President David Chittim, he tendered his resignation.

WMTW-TV reports that in his letter, Osman said he “did not come to the decision lightly.”

The letter reads in part:

“For the betterment of our community and in the best interest of our city, I believe it is time for me to step aside. I hope my resignation serves as a call to action for those who remain — an opportunity to reflect on the values of respect, inclusivity and kindness that should guide our public service,” Osman said.

“I am grateful for the support I have received from my family and friends, my community and my constituents during my time in public office. I remain committed to our city’s progress and will continue to advocate for positive change in Lewiston.”

On Wednesday, Osman was arraigned in Lewiston District Court.

Keep reading

Fed Subpoenaed As DOJ Launches Criminal Probe Into Jerome Powell, Who Vows To “Stand Firm”

Not content with launching a dizzying cascade of international conflicts, Trump just lobbed a nuke at the Fed. 

While Trump’s vendetta against the Fed’s Lisa Cook set for a January showdown before the Supreme Court, the Trump admin dramatically raised the stakes on Sunday when the NYT first reported, and minutes later Fed Chair Jerome Powell confirmed that the US central bank had been served grand jury subpoenas from the Justice Department threatening a criminal indictment, in what Bloomberg said was a dramatic escalation of the Trump administration’s attacks on the Fed.

As the NYT first reported, the US attorney’s office in the District of Columbia has opened a criminal investigation into Powell over the central bank’s renovation of its Washington headquarters and whether the Fed Chair lied to Congress about the scope of the project. The inquiry, which includes an analysis of Powell’s public statements and an examination of spending records, was approved in November by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of President Trump who was appointed to run the office last year, the NYT sources said.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed US attorneys offices to look into cases of potential taxpayer abuse, said one of the NYT sources. In comments broadcast by NBC, Trump said that the DOJ’s Fed subpoenas “nothing to do with interest rates” and denied any involvement in the legal matter.

The investigation escalates Trump’s long-running feud with Powell, whom the president has continually attacked for resisting his demands to slash interest rates significantly (and, in retrospect, Trump was right as the Fed did in fact cut rates at its last 3 meetings having belatedly observed the dramatic deterioration in the labor market without an offsetting surge in inflation). The president has threatened to fire the Fed chair – whom he nominated for the position in 2017 – and raised the prospect of a lawsuit against him related to the $2.5 billion renovation, citing “incompetence.”

In a striking public response to the NYT report, Powell – who has historically ignored public commentary on Trump’s public assaults – issued a forceful written and video statement released Sunday evening using the Federal Reserve’s official account on X, in which he said the action was related to his June congressional testimony on ongoing renovations of the Fed’s headquarters. But he said “this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure.” The Fed Chair then continued:

“This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’s oversight role; the Fed through testimony and other public disclosures made every effort to keep Congress informed about the renovation project. Those are pretexts.”

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

“I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one—certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve—is above the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure,” 

“Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats. I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people.”

Keep reading

FDA Commissioner CONFIRMS Agency Lied About DIETARY FAT for Decades to Benefit Big Pharma Interests — Says Low-Fat Advice Drove Americans to Eat More SUGAR and Suffer Higher HEART ATTACK Rates

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary admitted that for nearly 20 years, the agency’s dietary guidance on fat was not just wrong, it was misleading, triggering a cascade of unhealthy eating habits that have devastated American health.

Speaking at a White House briefing on Wednesday alongside HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Makary unleashed a scathing indictment of the “medical dogma” that has governed American kitchens since the 1980s.

The Commissioner revealed that the government’s crusade against saturated fats, meat, butter, and eggs, was not only scientifically hollow but directly responsible for the explosion of the chronic disease epidemic.

“For decades, we’ve been fed a corrupt food pyramid that has had a myopic focus on demonizing natural healthy saturated fats, telling you not to eat eggs and steak, and ignoring a giant blind spot: refined carbohydrates, added sugars, ultra-processed food,” said Makary.

“Ironically, they took out the healthy, saturated fat and added sugar, and that was supposed to be healthier. We now have a chronic disease epidemic. The focus on fat has paralleled and ushered in an entire generation of kids with high insulin resistance and levels of inflammation never seen before in the human race.”

On Thursday, Makary doubled down on this new finding, criticizing the long-standing “low-fat” dogma that had led Americans to load up on sugar while avoiding healthy fats.

He suggested the narrative was kept alive, at least in part, to shield powerful corporate interests—including Big Pharma.

Most damning, Makary cited data showing that people who followed low-fat diets actually suffered higher rates of heart attacks than those who consumed healthy fats, directly contradicting decades of so-called “expert” federal nutrition advice.

Keep reading

Jack Smith Deposition Shows His Get-Trump Lawfare Was Also A War On Free Speech

In the last few months, we have gained valuable insights into former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s unprecedented effort to criminally prosecute President Donald Trump, at the time a former president and leading contender for the presidency.

In Injustice, Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Aaron Davis, appearing to rely heavily on accounts from Smith’s top deputies, paint a picture of a prosecutor doggedly focused on one objective: prosecuting Trump. On New Year’s Eve, however, the House Judiciary Committee released the transcript of Smith’s closed-door deposition. While a prosecutor’s crusade to imprison a presidential candidate is troubling in itself, Smith’s deposition testimony was alarming, as it betrayed Smith’s utter disdain for the fundamental right to freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment. 

Smith’s so-called “election interference” case in Washington, D.C., has long raised a fundamental question: What was the crime? In his deposition, Smith claimed Trump’s statements that the 2020 election was “rife with fraud” were “absolutely not” protected by the First Amendment and, indeed, formed the basis for his prosecution. Smith went on to claim that Trump would reject information that Smith believed he should have credited and reached out to individuals whom Smith deemed uncredible. 

Whether you are the president of the United States or an anonymous poster on X, the First Amendment protects your right to speak about elections. The First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech is a critical check on the power of the government, as it prevents the government from punishing those who speak out against it. Punishing speech regarding an election is especially insidious: American history is replete with instances in which litigation has changed the results of elections, and election fraud has been proven.

For example, in Hawaii, a court-ordered recount changed the outcome of the presidential contest in that state. And it was only because President John F. Kennedy sent a slate of alternate electors to Washington that Kennedy’s victory in Hawaii was counted. Criminalizing the questioning of elections is an invitation for election fraud and, regardless, tramples on the right we all enjoy to criticize our government. 

Smith’s disdain for the First Amendment did not end with his attempt to prosecute Trump for speaking about the 2020 election. Speaking about the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, Smith stated unequivocally that Trump “caused it.” The Department of Justice (before and after Smith’s appointment as special counsel) and the Jan. 6 Committee each spent years (and millions of dollars of taxpayer money) investigating the Capitol demonstration, and neither uncovered a shred of evidence that Trump had any role in planning the riot. Indeed, Smith never sought an indictment against Trump for inciting a riot, which would have been the obvious charge if Smith had uncovered such evidence. Yet Smith tried to justify his extraordinary claim that Trump caused the riot by saying Trump’s statements about the 2020 election “created a certain level of distrust.”

If an American — president or otherwise — could be criminally responsible for what others do in response to political speech, the possibilities for prosecution would be limitless. In the lead-up to the 2024 election, Trump survived two assassination attempts. The would-be assassins were surely radicalized by someone, likely media figures or other politicians who spent years falsely deriding Trump as a dictator or puppet of Vladimir Putin.

Politicians’ reckless rhetoric in the wake of George Floyd’s death led to massive riots in multiple American cities, causing the destruction of many small businesses. But the notion of a special counsel seeking an indictment of an MSNBC personality for the Trump assassination attempts or a Democrat member of Congress for the Black Lives Matter riots is downright farcical (as it should be).

Keep reading