Tag: democrats

Durbin calls on DOJ to investigate anonymous pizza deliveries to judges’ homes

The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee has called on the Department of Justice and the FBI to “immediately investigate” a string of anonymous pizza deliveries sent to judges’ homes.

In the event that the DOJ and the FBI have already initiated investigations, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin, D-Ill., also asked Attorney General Pam Bondi and Kash Patel for an update on those efforts. 

“In recent months, federal judges and their relatives have received anonymous deliveries to their homes,” Durbin wrote in a letter to Bondi and Patel on Tuesday. “These deliveries are threats intended to show that those seeking to intimidate the targeted judge know the judge’s address or their family members’ addresses. The targeted individuals reportedly include Supreme Court justices, judges handling legal cases involving the Administration, and the children of judges. Some of these deliveries were made using the name of Judge Esther Salas’s son, Daniel Anderl, who was murdered at the family’s home by a former litigant who posed as a deliveryman.”

Keep reading

Top California Democrats Fight To Protect Purchasing Sex With Kids

Should it be a felony to purchase an underage minor for illegal sex? 

For most of us, the answer is a very easy yes. This is not a hard one. You will likely encounter three dozen questions today or tomorrow that will be considerably more difficult to answer. Generally, if someone is asked if there should be severe legal penalties for underage sex trafficking, the response is an immediate, unhesitating affirmative. 

Democrats in California feel differently. The state assembly there this past week considered a bill — AB-379 — that would have amended state law to make it a felony to solicit paid sex from “any person under 18 years of age.” In other words, if you seek out and pay a minor for sex — if you engage in child sex trafficking — you would be guilty of a felony.

This should have been an easy move for the assembly; the debate should have taken about 30 seconds and ended with a unanimous vote, passage to the state senate, and a quick signature by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The ink should have still been drying on the bill by suppertime on Wednesday. 

Democrats were not so obliging. In fact, they mounted a major opposition to the bill. By the time they were done with it, the bill’s protections for 16-year-old sex crime victims had been stripped from the measure. Democrats added language claiming it was “the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year old victims.” Which is strange since, when given the opportunity to do just that, they refused. 

What reason could Democrats have for opposing the bill? Advocates in no small part seemed concerned that the measure could disproportionately affect … LGBT Californians. (Really stop and think about that for a minute.) The ACLU of Southern California claimed in part that similar measures “have been used disproportionately against … LGBTQ+ individuals.” Other opponents of the bill claimed that the measure could be used by parents who are upset that their children are in “LGBTQ relationships.”

One group claimed there were concerns “about the way that automatic felonies [could be] levied against older teens in relationships with other minors.” State Sen. Scott Wiener, a longtime LGBT booster, argued on social media that “sending an 18 year old high school senior to state prison for offering his 17 year old classmate $20 to fool around isn’t smart criminal justice policy.”

We should all pause for a minute and consider what is being argued here. At best, Democrats and other opponents of this bill are attempting to defend underage prostitution as a normal feature of young relationships (it’s not). At worst, they are revealing, inadvertently, that LGBT individuals are apparently regular participants in the sex trafficking of minors. 

Which one is it? They should probably decide what their position is and stick with it. But it bears repeating that the bill concerns itself only with paying for sex with minors. Any criticism of this bill in the context of the “relationships” it may affect cannot ignore that simple fact. 

Most functioning adults consider it a very bad thing when underage children are paid for sex, no matter the circumstances. Opponents of this bill are acting as if they are defending meaningful, intimate relationships, rather than innately harmful, exploitative, and dangerous ones. “Think of how this will negatively affect 18-year-olds who bribe their underage friends for sex!” is not persuasive.

Keep reading

Jasmine Crockett Gives Commencement Address, Appears to Hint Graduates Should Be Prepared “Use a Chair” as a Weapon

On Sunday, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX)  gave a commencement address at Tougaloo College, a historically black college in Jackson, Mississippi, that was anything but uplifting.

During her remarks, Crockett appeared to hint at the promotion of using violence, telling the grads they need to know “how to use a chair” against people who say they don’t belong.

“There are going to be people that tell you that you don’t belong, and I am here to tell you over and over and over that you absolutely belong,” Crockett told the graduates.

“There are people that are gonna tell you that there is not a table in which there is a seat for you, but I am here to remind you of Montgomery and those folding chairs. Let me tell you that we know how to use a chair, whether we’re pulling it up or we’re doing something else with it. Let me be the first one to tell you that I know that y’all are ready to put your boots on the ground.”

According to The Daily Caller, Crockett appears to reference an incident where a folding chair was used as a weapon during a brawl.

Crockett appeared to reference a 2023 brawl in Montgomery, Alabama, where some white private boaters brawled with a number of black men, including a dock worker, with at least one of the black men using a folding chair as a weapon during the incident.

Keep reading

ICE Responds to Accusations of Illegal Raid: “WRONG!”

After Democrats accused ICE of raiding the wrong house and terrorizing a U.S. citizen family in Oklahoma, the Department of Homeland Security fired back, beginning their official statement on X with a blunt response: “Wrong.”

What actually happened was that ICE conducted a lawful, court-authorized search targeting a property long tied to a human smuggling network, not specific individuals. Surveillance conducted the day before the raid confirmed that a member of the Lima Lopez Transnational Criminal Organization was still paying utility bills at the home, which remained legally owned by an indicted smuggling suspect. The warrant, based on an 84-page affidavit, authorized the seizure of evidence regardless of who was present. As DHS stated, “This is an ongoing investigation, and we have not ruled out current occupants’ involvement in the smuggling ring.”

Federal agents executed the search warrant on April 24 at a single-family home in northwest Oklahoma City. According to DHS, the property had been used as a stash house for human and drug smuggling involving individuals from Guatemala, Mexico, Colombia, and China. When agents entered the home, they encountered a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Guatemala and her three daughters, the youngest of whom was 17. Although none of them were detained, DHS emphasized that the investigation is ongoing.

Local news outlet KOCO 5 confirmed that the house remains in the name of Cidia Marleny Lima Lopez, a key suspect in the smuggling ring, and that utility records showed members of the criminal organization were still linked to the property as of the day before the raid, “despite the fact that new residents had moved in.” DHS clarified that the warrant legally allowed agents to seize electronic devices and documents found in the home, regardless of the current occupants.

Keep reading

New Jersey Democrats INDICTED AGAIN in Expanding Voter Fraud Case — Accused of Stealing and Forging Ballots and Voter Registrations to Rig 2020 Election

Paterson City Council President Alex Mendez faces new charges in a superseding indictment related to the May 2020 municipal election.

Alongside his wife, Yohanny Mendez, and campaign workers Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo, Mendez is accused of orchestrating a scheme involving the theft and forgery of ballots and voter registrations to secure his council seat.

The indictment alleges that the group unlawfully collected and tampered with vote-by-mail ballots, including destroying ballots not cast for Mendez and submitting fraudulent ones in their place.

According to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office,

“The 10-count superseding indictment alleges that Mendez, who represents the Third Ward on the Paterson City Council, his wife Yohanny Mendez and campaign workers Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo tried to deprive Paterson residents of a fair election. Alex Mendez was first indicted in 2021 for election-related offenses. Further investigation by OPIA resulted in additional charges filed by complaint in October 2023 against the co-defendants, as well as additional charges for Alex Mendez, all stemming from the May 2020 election.

[…]

Based on publicly filed documents and statements in court in this case, the OPIA investigation began after hundreds of mail-in ballots for the May 2020 Paterson election were found in a postal box in the neighboring municipality of Haledon, when all voting was being conducted via vote-by-mail because of COVID-19.

Members of the alleged conspiracy face several charges including Tampering with Public Records or Information (third degree), Falsifying or Tampering with Records (fourth degree), Forgery (third degree), and Election Fraud (second degree). Among the allegations, they are accused of submitting fictitious or fraudulent vote-by-mail registrations and ballots.

The superseding indictment contains a new charge of Theft (third degree) against the four defendants for allegedly taking other peoples’ ballots with the intent to deprive them of their vote. It also includes a new count of Receiving Stolen Property (third degree) for those four defendants, alleging they received ballots that they knew had been stolen.

It is further alleged that the defendants tried to cause one or more witnesses previously contacted by investigators to make additional, contradictory, and false statements – leading to the superseding indictment’s new charge of Witness Tampering (third degree).

The superseding indictment also charges an additional defendant, Ninoska Adames, a Paterson resident, with Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution (third degree) and Tampering with Public Records or Information (third degree). She allegedly falsified a voter certificate on a vote-by-mail ballot and gave false information to detectives with the intent to hinder the State’s investigation into the May 2020 election.

The charges are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Second-degree charges carry a sentence of five to 10 years in state prison and a fine of up to $150,000. Third-degree charges carry a sentence of three to five years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000. Fourth-degree offenses could lead to up to 18 months in state prison and a fine of up to $10,000.”

“As alleged, this case is not simply about a city council seat. The people’s right to vote and to have their voices heard was subverted by what we allege to be an unlawful conspiracy,” said Attorney General Platkin. “This was unfair to the voters of Paterson. It was, as the grand jury charged, fraud and theft.”

“The tenacious, hard work of the investigators and prosecutors on this case uncovered new information about the lengths the defendants allegedly went to in an attempt to rig Paterson’s municipal election and cover up their conduct,” said Drew Skinner, Executive Director of OPIA.

Mendez was initially indicted on election fraud charges in 2021.

In 2023, new charges have been brought against him, his wife Yohanny Mendez, and two other Paterson residents, Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo.

Keep reading

Biden press secretary Jen Psaki makes outlandish claims about former president’s cognitive decline

Former President Joe Biden‘s press secretary claims she didn’t know about her boss’ cognitive decline until his train wreck performance during last summer’s presidential debate.

Jen Psaki – the former White House spokesperson and now MSNBC anchor – made the extraordinary confession during Semafor’s Mixed Signals podcast.

‘I never saw the person on that debate stage. I was in the Oval Office every day… I’m not a doctor. Aging happens quickly,’ Psaki said

Psaki then attempted to tamp down speculation of a coordinated cover-up. But her own words only poured gas onto the political firestorm that has been smoldering since Biden’s dramatic withdrawal from the 2024 race last July.

‘Cover-up is a very loaded term,’ she said referring to how some described the Biden’s health issues. 

‘People use that term as related to Watergate or the covering up of not sharing public information about a war… I think it’s a bit of a dangerous term.’ 

Psaki stood beside Biden for more than a year: serving as his public voice, managing briefings, shaping narratives, and defending his clarity and capability from the White House podium. 

Her stunning admission rang hollow. Claims that she was blindsided by his mental decline sparked intense backlash and reignited questions about what the administration – and the press – knew about Biden’s condition.

Keep reading

The Coup Against Sen. Fetterman Is Officially Underway

Three years ago, the Democratic Party nominated John Fetterman to the Senate, despite his significant health problems. It wasn’t a secret: Fetterman’s brain trauma was on full display during his horrendous debate against Dr. Mehmet Oz, where he stammered, stuttered, and (repeatedly) lost his train of thought.

Fetterman won anyway, beating Oz by nearly 5% points, helping the Democrats flip the only Senate seat of the 2022 midterms, giving the Donkeys control of the Senate for the first time since 2015.

It was an important election — and a Faustian bargain: In order to wrest control of the Senate away from the Republicans, they had to link their future to a brain-damaged man.

Just six weeks after taking office, Fetterman checked himself into the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for clinical depression. He was hospitalized for over a month.

No matter: Even though Fetterman is routinely AWOL (he’s missed more votes than any other senator), when he’s there, he votes the way his party elders demand. 

At least, he used to.

But after breaking with the party on issues such as Israel and (gasp!) voting for a few Trump nominees, the liberal base is in a tizzy. They feel betrayed.

And now they’re planning a coup.

Keep reading

3 Questions Angry Democrats Need To Answer About Illegal Alien Deportations

Democrats and their supporters in the corporate media are still attempting to controversialize the Trump administration’s efforts to remove illegal aliens from the country, as required by federal law. But there are three questions they should all be forced to answer before anyone has to hear more of their whining. Here they are, in no particular order.

1. Can You Identify a Single Alien You Would Deport?

This is the most important question because the answer is no, they can’t, because they don’t want to deport anyone. We know that because they’re on record opposing the most innocuous efforts during President Trump’s first term to remove violent Latin American gang affiliates.

In 2018, Democrats, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, pushed to “abolish ICE.” That same year, Senate Democrats blocked a vote on a bill that would have withheld federal funds from “sanctuary cities” that refused to comply with federal immigration law enforcement. They shouldn’t get to pretend they’re not opposed to deporting illegal aliens if they can’t answer this simple question.

Keep reading

Dem Rep. Eric Swalwell Vows Use of ‘Subpoena Power’ to Investigate Whether Elon Musk’s Starlink Rigged Election For Trump

Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell has stoked a conspiracy theory Elon Musk used his Starlink satellite network to rig the 2024 presidential election for Trump.

During an appearance with a left-wing podcaster, Swalwell was asked about the integrity of the previous election and the role that Starlink may have played.

The host remarked:

The enemies allegedly stole U.S. data. The leak came through Elon Musk’s Starlink. I mean, I’m sure you’ve heard people, based on all of this information that’s happened since then, wonder if 2024 was secure. But more importantly, Representative, about 2026 and 2028, can you talk about that a little bit? Do you have concerns?

Swalwell, who is best known for being honey-trapped by a Chinese spy named Fang Fang, responded:

Elon Musk has done nothing in the last five months to make me think that we shouldn’t ask questions about what the hell he was doing in 2024.

Maybe we gave him too much of the benefit of the doubt, you know, after the election, but the way that he’s conducted himself with DOGE, and the way that, you know, he’s exposed us to so many hackers outside.

The way that he’s taken data, you know, from Americans, from our records — whether it’s Social Security or health care records, the only way that we can understand, you know, what the hell Elon Musk has been doing is to be in the majority.

Swalwell added that being in the majority would give Democrats “subpoena power,” which he would use to investigate the spurious allegations.

Keep reading

Sick: The Child Prostitution Fight That’s Tearing California Democrats Apart

There’s a mind-blowing battle playing out in Sacramento among the Democrats who dominate California politics.  We told you this week about how these same Democrats quietly killed a bipartisan bill, without debate, that would have implemented the successful reading instruction program that has allowed Mississippi students to overtake California kids in early literacy.  They did so at the furious behest of California’s anti-education, anti-child teachers unions, who are among the deep-pocketed left-wing special interest groups who rule the party that rules the state.  This maneuver even offended the leftist editors of the leftist San Francisco Chronicle, but it’s business as usual in the leftist state.  If that weren’t bad enough, Democrats have chosen to double down on cartoonish evil — and I don’t use that word lightly — by debating over whether purchasing children for sex should be a felony.

Keep reading