Tag: doj

U.S. Justice Department official ordered to drop inquiry into Sandy Hook lawsuit against Alex Jones

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has ordered a senior U.S. Justice Department official to drop an inquiry into a retired FBI agent’s involvement in a defamation lawsuit involving Alex Jones’ conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, a person familiar with the matter said Wednesday.

Ed Martin Jr., who leads the Justice Department’s “weaponization working group,” sent a letter dated Sept. 15 to the Sandy Hook families’ lawyer asking for information about former FBI agent William Aldenberg, who responded to the 2012 school shooting and was a plaintiff in the lawsuit, along with victims’ relatives, that led to a $1.4 billion judgment against Jones for calling the massacre a hoax.

Martin’s letter suggested that he was looking into whether Aldenberg broke a federal law by receiving financial benefits for helping to organize the lawsuit. Jones, who said he met with Martin last week in Washington, has accused Democrats and Justice Department officials of orchestrating the lawsuit to silence him.

But Martin’s correspondence to Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families, and Aldenberg, “caused frustrations” within the Justice Department, and Blanche directed Martin to withdraw the letter, said the person familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal agency matters.

Mattei said he received a new letter from Martin on Wednesday that said there was no investigation of Aldenberg and “I hereby withdraw my request for information.”

“Less than 18 hours after calling out Alex Jones and Ed Martin for their corrupt use of the Department of Justice to harass Sandy Hook families and the heroic FBI agent who ran into that school to save any children he could, I am happy to learn that this so-called inquiry has now been withdrawn, if it ever existed at all,” Mattei said in a statement.

Keep reading

BOMBSHELL: Senior DOJ Epstein Investigator Reveals “Epstein Was CIA” – Confirms R*pes Occurred While Bill Clinton Was on the Plane

Senior Justice Department investigator Glenn Prager revealed Jeffrey Epstein was “CIA” and confirmed that rapes occurred while Bill Clinton was on the private plane.

The O’Keefe Media Group on Wednesday released audio of Glenn Prager discussing the DOJ’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.

Prager served as an Inspector overseeing sensitive investigations involving the FBI, DEA, Bureau of Prisons, US Marshals Service, ATF and the US Attorney’s Offices.

Glenn Prager was overheard at a Phoenix airport dropping Epstein bombshells.

“I’ve interviewed all the victims, There’s never been an instance where Trump was on a plane with these kids and the rapes occurred. But that can’t be said for Clinton. And it can’t be said for others,” Glenn Prager was overheard saying at a Phoenix airport. “While the Clintons were on the plane, while Bill Clinton was on the plane, there were rapes that occurred.

“They [DOJ] didn’t want to go after him [Epstein] because he’s an asset for the United States and Israel,” he added.

Glenn Prager said Epstein was CIA.

“It’s not talked about yet but, it’s soon to come out that he [Epstein] was a CIA informant,” he said.

The Justice Department responded to the O’Keefe Media Group’s explosive reporting.

“This individual worked at the Department of Justice as a program analyst over fifteen years ago. He has no understanding of, or access to, the underlying facts in this investigation. His statements should not be considered accurate. It is disgusting that someone would further exploit victims of sexual abuse by fabricating stories for their personal benefit,” a DOJ spokesperson said.

Keep reading

Trans Georgia inmate who made bombs and mailed them to DOJ gets 80-year sentence

A person already in prison has been sentenced to 80 years in federal custody after authorities said the inmate built two bombs while behind bars and mailed them to a federal courthouse in Anchorage, Alaska, and the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C.

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday announced the sentence for the inmate authorities identified as David Dwayne Cassady, 57, who was incarcerated in a state prison in Georgia when the devices were made, authorities said. The inmate pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted malicious use of explosive materials.

The inmate has severe anxiety and gender dysphoria, defense lawyer Tina Maddox wrote in a sentencing memo to the court. The crimes were “acts of desperation born out of unrelenting abuse, hopelessness, and mental distress,” Maddox wrote. The defendant is a transgender woman and now goes by the name Lena Noel Summerlin, the lawyer said in the July 8 court document.

The indictment says both bombs were made at a state prison in Tattnall County, Georgia, and mailed from the prison. The document does not detail how the bombs were built or where the materials were obtained.

The bombs were functional and had the capabilities to explode, a plea agreement states. The inmate admitted to mailing them “in retaliation for prison conditions,” it said.

Since the early 1990s, the inmate has been held in a variety of Georgia prisons after being convicted of more than a dozen crimes including kidnapping and aggravated sodomy, according to records from the Georgia Department of Corrections.

Keep reading

DOJ Charges Man For Trying to Take Down Marine One with Red Laser Pointer While Trump Was Onboard

The Justice Department on Monday charged a man for trying to take down Marine One with a red pointer laser on Saturday.

According to a legal complaint filed on Monday, the suspect, Jacob Samuel Winkler, pointed a red laser at Marine One while President Trump was onboard.

“The red laser beam hit Officer Santiago’s eyes and briefly disoriented him. At this time, Marine One flew at a relatively low height and directly above Officer Santiago and [Winkler’s] location. Marine One was close enough that the rotor noise was loud, and the aircraft appeared large overhead. Officer Santiago approached [Winkler] after being flashed in the face with the red laser. Upon approach, [Winkler] looked up, oriented the same red laser pointer at the direction of Marine One and activated the red laser beam,” the legal complaint said.

“From Officer Santiago’s training and experience, Officer Santiago immediately identified [Winkler’s] action as a danger to Marine One and everyone on-board. [Winkler’s] conduct posed a risk of flash blindness and pilot disorientation, especially during low-level flight near other helicopters (U.S. Park Police, U.S. Marine Corps) and the Washington Monument. This placed Marine One at risk of an airborne collision,” the complaint said.

Winkler was immediately put in handcuffs.

According to the complaint, after Winkler was handcuffed, he got on his knees and said, “I should apologize to Donald Trump,” and “I apologize to Donald Trump.”

“The defendant, Jacob Samuel Winkler, did knowingly aim the beam of a laser pointer at an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, or at the flight path of such an aircraft,” the complaint read.

Winkler was charged with 18 U.S. Code § 39A, a law that prohibits aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft.

Keep reading

DOJ ended probe of ‘border czar’ Tom Homan for allegedly accepting $50K in FBI sting: Sources

The Department of Justice shut down an investigation involving President Donald Trump’s “border czar,” Tom Homan, in which he had been recorded allegedly accepting cash from FBI agents posing as business executives, multiple sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

The sting operation, which stemmed from a broader public corruption probe that did not initially target Homan, led agents to an encounter in which they recorded Homan allegedly accepting a bag containing $50,000 in cash while agreeing to potentially help the men obtain government contracts in the event Trump won the 2024 election, the sources said.

The investigation, started during the Biden administration, was handed over to the Trump administration. Officials briefed Justice Department leadership about it in the early days of Trump’s presidency as part of their ongoing efforts to vet personnel who had been appointed to senior leadership posts in his administration, the sources said.

Investigators at the time were still working to determine whether Homan would have followed through on arranging the government contracts, as some in the Justice Department questioned the legal viability of charges in a scenario where Homan had proposed the government contract when Trump’s election victory wasn’t yet guaranteed, according to the sources.

Keep reading

“Hate Speech” Isn’t Real and Pam Bondi Is an Enemy of Freedom

Following the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, many critics of Kirk posted content on social media in which they said rude things about Kirk—and even about his family members—while expressing delight about Kirk’s death.  Not surprisingly, many of Kirk’s supporters—and many other ordinary people—found these comments offensive and reprehensible. 

Perhaps as part of an effort to exploit the situation to improve her own political fortunes, US Attorney General Pam Bondi then declared that she, a government prosecutor, will “go after” those who engage in what she called “hate speech.” 

“Hate speech,” however, does not exist. At all. That’s a phrase the Left invented to define speech the Left doesn’t like as outside the legal protections of Bill of Rights. Put another way, the concept of “hate speech” was invented to justify state-enforced censorship of speech. That Bondi buys into this nonsense is made clear by Bondi’s pledge to “go after” people who are guilty of this hate-speech “crime” that Bondi apparently imagines in her head.  

These comments, coming from a sitting Attorney General, are extremely problematic, to say the least. The very fact that Bondi unironically uses the term “hate speech” illustrates how deeply immersed she is in the culture of coercion and despotism that permeates the Washington ruling class. Any politician who promotes the concept of “hate speech” should be considered an enemy of our most fundamental natural rights, and his or her political career deserves to be ended permanently. 

There Is No Such Thing as Hate Speech

Bondi’s dangerous comments on so-called hate speech came as part of her Monday appearance on the Katie Miller podcast. When asked by the host if colleges and universities are somehow complicit in Kirk’s murder, Bondi agreed and stated:

on a broader level, the anti-Semitism—what’s been happening at college campuses around this country— it’s disgusting, it’s despicable and we’ve been fighting that, we’ve been fighting these universities left and right and that’s not going to stop.  There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society …. We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.

Keep reading

DOJ Quietly Deletes Study After Charlie Kirk’s Death That Says Right-Wing Extremists Engage in ‘Far More’ Political Violence

  • A study on the growing frequency of “far-right attacks” was removed from the Department of Justice’s website
  • The removal happened after right-wing political commentator Charlie Kirk was shot and killed on a college campus in Utah
  • An archived version of the study is still available online, and states that “far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides” than the left

The U.S. Department of Justice appears to have quietly removed information online regarding right-wing violence following the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

As of Friday, Sept. 12, a 2024 study titled “What NIJ Research Tells Us About Domestic Terrorism” no longer appears on the DOJ website under President Donald Trump‘s administration. However, it is still viewable as an archived post on Wayback Machine.

“Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism,” the first two lines of the study read.

Keep reading

Pam Bondi Says Government Will “Go After” Hate Speech, Drawing First Amendment Criticism

US Attorney General Pam Bondi has stirred controversy with recent comments seeming to suggest that certain forms of speech could fall outside First Amendment protections, a stance that is fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution.

During an appearance on The Katie Miller Podcast following last week’s assassination of conservative activist and commentator Charlie Kirk, Bondi stated, “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society…” She added, “We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”

Her remarks immediately drew sharp responses from across the political spectrum, with many warning that her approach opens the door to dangerous government overreach.

Bondi later attempted to narrow the scope of her original statements in a post on X, writing, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime.”

She continued, “For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights (FIRE), a civil liberties group focused on free speech, fired back, stating, “There is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment.”

The Supreme Court has long protected even offensive or unpopular speech, with the Court’s view being that the “proudest boast” of America’s free speech legacy is “freedom for the thought that we hate.”

Conservatives who typically align with Bondi’s broader political positions also voiced concern.

Keep reading

DOJ Declares School Dissent Protected Under First Amendment

Attorney General Pamela Bondi issued a memorandum to all United States Attorneys highlighting the Department of Justice’s policy to prevent and act upon violations of parental rights and First Amendment liberties in educational settings. 

Bondi directed United States Attorneys to work with federal, state, and local partners to identify and respond to credible threats against parents whose federal rights have been violated.

“The First Amendment guarantees the right of every citizen to speak freely, assemble peaceably, and petition the government for redress of grievances-including at public school board meetings,” the memo said. “These rights do not yield to political trends or bureaucratic convenience. While schools must maintain order, such authority cannot be used as a pretext to silence dissent or punish parents for expressing their views. 

The new memo says it will protect the right of parents to dissent during school board meetings. 

“Let me be clear: when school board members, administrators, and other government officials threaten law-abiding parents, they can and will be held accountable,” the letter said. 

Keep reading

Ryan Routh, DOJ Offer Opening Arguments in Trump Assassination Attempt Trial

The trial of Ryan Wesley Routh, who is charged with the Sept. 15, 2024, attempted assassination of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, has begun in Florida amid growing concerns about politically motivated violence in the United States.

Routh, who is representing himself, and Assistant U.S. Attorney John Shipley offered opening arguments on Sept. 11 before hearing from a Secret Service agent, who testified that he confronted Routh at Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida, in September 2024, just weeks before the presidential election.

Shipley’s opening argument laid out his findings regarding Routh’s preparations for the alleged assassination attempt, including allegedly traveling to Florida, using various aliases, using encrypted communications, and purchasing a firearm. The case, he said, is not about whether the jury likes Trump or not but whether an attempt was made on Trump’s life.

“[Routh] wanted to make sure the people of this country could not reelect [Trump],” he said.

Opening arguments began nearly a year after the incident on Sept. 15, 2024, and just a day after the assassination of conservative commentator and Trump ally Charlie Kirk. It followed a lengthy pretrial period in which Routh decided to represent himself and submitted bizarre court documents, such as one requesting to subpoena Trump and suggesting a golf match with the president that would end with either Routh dying or becoming president himself. Jury selection took place earlier in the week.

On Sept. 11, Routh, wearing a gray blazer, white shirt, and tie, could be seen smiling often in the relatively small courtroom. According to his indictment, among other things, he has been charged with an attempted assassination of a presidential candidate and faces years in prison. In 2024, he pleaded not guilty.

Keep reading