Tag: missouri

Missouri AG Andrew Bailey Files Lawsuit Against Media Matters for Refusal to Cooperate with State Investigation and Turn Over Documents Related to Twitter-X Fraud Investigation

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed suit on Monday against Media Matters for America for refusal to cooperate with a Missouri State investigation.

This comes after AG Andrew Bailey sued Media Matters in December for violating state consumer protection laws and defrauding Missourians.

AG Andrew Bailey accused Media Matters of using fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to bully advertisers.

Attorney General Andrew Bailey made this explosive accusation, “We have reason to believe Media Matters used fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to bully advertisers into pulling out of X, the last platform dedicated to free speech in America.”

The Missouri Attorney General did not hold back in his attacks on Media Matters alleging the enemies of free speech, like Media Matters for America, are attempting to kill Twitter-X because they cannot control it now that Elon Musk took over. Bailey added, “I’m fighting to ensure progressive tyrants masquerading as news outlets cannot manipulate the marketplace in order to wipe out free speech.”

Media Matters for America (MMFA) refused to turn over court ordered documents so on Monday Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed lawsuit against MMFA for their refusal to cooperate in the state’s investigation.

Keep reading

23 States and District of Columbia File Amicus Briefs in Favor of Joe Biden and Government Censorship and Regulation of Speech in America – via the MO v. Biden Case

Twenty-three Democrat run states and the District of Columbia, the home of our nation’s capital, filed amicus briefs in support of government censorship and banning of free speech in the United States.

These 23 states and the District of Columbia filed amicus briefs in support of the Biden administration in the SCOTUS case is Murthy, et al v. Missouri, et al, 23-411 (Missouri v. Biden) case.

The states essentially argue that they have an interest in collaborating with tech companies to “encourage” the public to behave themselves and “discourage” the public from believing alleged “disinformation” or engaging in online predatory behavior. The clear message is that they believe that the government has the right to shut down and censor speech.

The list of un-American states that support government censorship include:

New York
Colorado
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Vermont,
Washington,
Washington, D.C.
Wisconsin
New Jersey
New Mexico,
Oregon
Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island,
Delaware,
Hawaii,
Illinois,
Maine,
Maryland,
Massachusetts,
Michigan,
Minnesota,
Nevada

HOWEVER, a number of courageous states filed an Amicus Curiae brief in SUPPORT of Gateway Pundit and the Free Speech Respondents. These (16) heroic states include:

Montana,
Alabama,
Alaska,
Florida,
Georgia,
Iowa,
Idaho,
Tennessee,
Kansas,
Nebraska,
Ohio,
South Carolina,
South Dakota,
Utah,
Virginia,
West Virginia,
and the Arizona Legislature

The “most important free speech case in a generation” Missouri v. Biden (Murthy v. Missouri), is set to be heard by the Supreme Court on Monday, March 18th.

Keep reading

Missouri man arrested on hate crime charges for allegedly threatening to kill white people

On Thursday, Missouri authorities charged a black man with a hate crime after he allegedly threatened to kill white people at a Walgreens in Columbia.

Mark Elliot Lewis, 47, has been charged with harassment motivated by discrimination to frighten or disturb another person. Lewis is being held at the Boone County Jail on a $75,000 bond, according to ABC 17.

Court documents show that Lewis began harassing a pharmacy tech working at a Walgreens located in Columbia. He reportedly started yelling at the employee about needing medication while she was in the process of helping another customer.

During the incident, Lewis allegedly told the tech “I’m gonna start killing white people,” court documents show.

Keep reading

Missouri v. Biden Lawsuit Discovery: Biden Regime Designates YOUR THOUGHTS as Part of Government Infrastructure – They Call It “Cognitive Infrastructure” and They Believe It Is Their Right to Control It

The Gateway Pundit previously reported in May that then Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, along with Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry,  filed a lawsuit (Missouri v. Biden) against the Biden Administration, including Biden himself, Anthony Fauci, the Department of Homeland Security, and nearly a dozen federal agencies and Secretaries.  Schmitt has moved on to represent Missouri in the US Senate.

The suit alleges a massive coordinated effort by the Deep State (permanent administrative state) to work with Big Tech to censor and manipulate Americans – from average citizens to news outlets – on issues including the Hunter Biden Laptop from Hell, 2020 Election Integrity, COVID-19 origin and extent skepticism, COVID-19 vaccine skepticism, among other issues.

The Gateway Pundit reported back in August 2022, that TGP’s Jim Hoft himself became the lead non-governmental plaintiff in the lawsuit against the government.

Tracy Beanz at UncoverDC has been closely following the Missouri versus Biden case for several months now.

On Wednesday Tracy posted on recent findings in the case.  The most shocking item discovered is that the Biden regime designates YOUR THOUGHTS as part of the government infrastructure.  They call it the “cognitive infrastructure” and they believe that they have the right to control it.

Talk about Orwellian!

These lawless beasts believe they have the right to control your thoughts.  And that is exactly what they have been doing.

Keep reading

Missouri Lawmakers Approve Bill To Legalize Psilocybin Therapy For Veterans

A Missouri House committee has unanimously approved a bill to legalize the medical use of psilocybin by military veterans and fund studies exploring the therapeutic potential of the psychedelic.

The House Veterans Committee passed the legislation from Rep. Aaron McMullen (R) on Tuesday, with amendments to align it with a Senate companion version that moved through a panel in that chamber last week.

The revised bill text of the House measure—which received an initial committee hearing last month—hasn’t been published yet, but the Senate version as recently amended would allow military veterans who are at least 21 and are diagnosed with a qualifying condition such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or substance use disorders to legally access laboratory-tested psilocybin.

In order to receive legal protections under the legislation, participants would need to be enrolled, or have sought enrollment, in a study involving the psychedelic.

There are also numerous requirements for patients to provide the state Department of Mental Health (DMH) with information about their diagnosis, the person who would be administering psilocybin and other details on the place and time of the treatment sessions.

Psilocybin could only be administered over a maximum of a one-year period, with the amount of the psychedelic used in that treatment capped at 150 milligrams, though qualifying patients could be also approved to continue for subsequent one-year periods.

Regulators, physicians and state agency officials would all be protected from legal consequences related to activity made lawful under the legislation.

Also, the legislation calls for DMH to provide funding to support research into the therapeutic potential of psilocybin.

Keep reading

Missouri GOP Candidate for Governor Was Only ‘Honorary’ KKK Member

A man with a history of “honorary” membership in the Klu Klux Klan not only managed to make it on the unofficial ballot to be the Republican nominee for Missouri governor, but may even appear atop the official ballot when GOP voters vote in the primary this August. 

Those revelations came to light last night when former Missouri Representative Shamed Dogan (R-Ballwin) tweeted out a screenshot showing the unofficial candidate filing list for governor posted to the Secretary of State’s website. On it, Darrell Leon McClanahan III’s name sits atop more well-known GOP contenders like Mike Kehoe and Jay Ashcroft. 

The candidates’ names are listed in ballot order, and because McClanahan drew a low number his name appears first. 

A 2022 article on the Anti-Defamation League’s website shows McClanahan next to a man in white robes as both men give what appear to be Nazi salutes in front of a burning cross some time around 2019. 

The ADL article claims that the organization’s Center on Extremism has been tracking McClanahan for years, as he has affiliated with various white supremacist and Christian identity groups. 

“Hey @MissouriGOP I just learned the candidate listed first on our primary ballot for Governor is a cross-burning KKK member who ran for US Senate 2 years ago and freely admits his KKK membership & white supremacist beliefs,” Dogan wrote, adding in a subsequent tweet that he hoped the party would reject McClanahan’s filing fee, calling him a “racist loser.”

Keep reading

‘Total disgrace:’ LGBTQ nursing course called out for prioritizing activism over healthcare

A Missouri lawmaker recently criticized a new LGBTQ nursing class at the University of Missouri at Saint Louis where students wrote songs and books to raise awareness about the “disparities and injustices facing the LGBTQ community.”

The course, “Healthcare Within the LGBTQIAA+ Community,” was offered for the first time in the fall 2023 semester through the nursing and honors colleges, but there are no plans to offer it again in the future.

Missouri State Rep. Chris Lonsdale, a Republican from Liberty, described the course as “a total disgrace to the healthcare industry and Missouri” in a statement to The College Fix late last month.

In the class, students learned about “health disparities and injustices facing the LGBTQ community, including implicit bias, the lack of rights for same-sex parents and state laws targeting the queer community,” according to UMSL Daily, the school’s online news outlet.

“Universities are worried more about pushing political propaganda than delivering real healthcare to Missourians. It’s a total disgrace to the healthcare industry and Missouri,” Lonsdale said.

Keep reading

Missouri Legislation Would Impose Restrictions On Intoxicating Hemp Products, Sparking Clash Over How To Regulate

Missouri lawmakers have heard hours of heated testimony at two hearings in the last week over bills aiming to regulate intoxicating hemp products that get people high the same as marijuana.

Currently there’s no state or federal law saying teenagers or children can’t buy products, such as delta-8 drinks, or that stores can’t sell them to minors—though some stores and vendors have taken it upon themselves to impose age restrictions of 21 and up.

And there’s no requirement to list potential effects on the label or test how much THC is actually in them.

“There’s zero reason why these THC products should not be treated like any other THC product in our state,” said state Sen. Nick Schroer, a Republican from Defiance, during a Monday Senate committee hearing.

The legislation’s proponents and opponents both agree the state should regulate the existing “Wild West” market for intoxicating hemp products.

The debate, however, is over whether the agency that oversees the state’s marijuana program, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS), should regulate these hemp products.

If DHSS is put in charge, the products would have to be sold at DHSS-licensed dispensaries.

That’s what is proposed in legislation sponsored by Schroer and in the House filed by state Rep. Chad Perkins, a Bowling Green Republican.

“Similar to alcohol, one regulatory body covers all intoxicating liquors and alcohol, such as beer, bourbon, wine, moonshine, brandy and even hooch,” said Schroer, who chairs the legislative committee that oversees Missouri’s marijuana rules.

Opponents contend restricting hemp-derived THC products to be sold at the dispensaries would allow the “marijuana monopoly” to take over the market, given the limited number of licenses for dispensaries available.

They argue there should be a separate regulating system in place for intoxicating hemp products that would allow them to continue to be sold in gas stations and liquor stores.

Keep reading

Missouri Courts Ask For $3.7 Million To Continue Expunging Past Marijuana Convictions

Missouri circuit courts have cleared more than 100,000 marijuana charges from people’s criminal records so far—a mandate that was a big selling point for those who voted to pass the constitutional amendment that legalized recreational marijuana in 2022.

However, court officials say it’s hard to determine how many more charges are left because many court records are not digitized.

Missouri court officials are set to request another $3.7 million to complete marijuana expungements in the coming budget year, making their case Wednesday to a House appropriations committee.

By law, any revenue the state collects from taxes on recreational marijuana sales, along with fees the businesses pay, must first go towards the state’s costs of regulating the program. Then it goes to expenses incurred by the court system for expunging certain marijuana offenses from people’s criminal records.

Last year lawmakers signed off on $4.5 million for state courts to pay their employees overtime or to hire temp workers to complete the massive number of expungements required by law. They approved an additional $2.5 million in a supplemental budget on May 5.

Circuit courts must request funds to reimburse their expenses for completing expungements from the Circuit Court Budget Committee, which oversees the special assistance program.

So far, the committee has given $4.2 million to the county courts, said Beth Riggert, communications counsel of the Missouri Supreme Court. And the committee has allocated the funds to any circuit court that has requested it, she said.

“Some circuit courts have advised they have not requested special assistance funds because they did not have current court clerks willing or able to work overtime,” Riggert said, “and/or have been unable to find qualified individuals to provide special assistance because the analysis required is complicated and better done by experienced personnel, such as retired clerks.”

As of January 2, Missouri courts have granted 103,558 expungements. Out of all the counties, Greene County has received the most funding, nearly $940,000, and has completed the most expungements at 4,306.

After Greene, the counties that have completed the most expungements are not necessarily the largest counties or the ones that have received the most money.

The second highest number is 3,515 from Laclede County, which has a population of 36,000. The county has received a little more than $35,000 from the special assistance program.

In third place is St. Louis County, the state’s largest county with more than a million people, where court officials have processed 3,479 expungements. The county has received just over $135,000. The court has reviewed 11,300 files, a spokesman for the 21st Circuit Court said.

Franklin County, which has a population of 104,000, is fourth, completing 3,200 expungements and receiving about $53,000. Franklin is just ahead of Jackson County, which has a population of 717,000. Jackson has completed 2,900 and received nearly $195,000.

Keep reading

CRIME SCENE DNA DIDN’T MATCH MARCELLUS WILLIAMS. MISSOURI MAY FAST-TRACK HIS EXECUTION ANYWAY.

FELICIA ANNE GAYLE PICUS was found dead in her home, the victim of a vicious murder that devastated her family and rattled her neighbors in the gated community of University City, Missouri, just outside St. Louis. Police suspected a burglary gone wrong. The scene was replete with forensic evidence: There were bloody footprints and fingerprints, and the murder weapon — a kitchen knife used to stab Picus — was left lodged in her neck.

That detail caught the medical examiner’s attention. Weeks earlier, another woman had been stabbed to death just a couple of miles away, and the weapon was left in the victim’s body. Days after Picus’s murder, the University City police chief told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that investigators had identified a “prime suspect,” someone they said had been spotted in the area “in recent weeks,” whom they believed had killed before.

But whatever became of that lead is unclear. After Picus’s family posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of her killer, a jailhouse informant named Henry Cole came forward with a story about how his former cellmate, Marcellus Williams, had confessed to murdering Picus. Soon, police secured a second informant: Laura Asaro, Williams’s former girlfriend, also told the cops that Williams was responsible for the killing. There were reasons to be wary of their stories. Both informants were facing prison time for unrelated crimes and stood to benefit. Many of the details they offered shifted over the course of questioning, while others did not match the crime. Nonetheless, Williams was charged with Picus’s murder, convicted, and sentenced to death.

Questions about the investigation and Williams’s guilt have only mounted in the years since the August 1998 crime. DNA testing on the murder weapon done years after his conviction revealed a partial male profile that could not have come from Williams. On the eve of Williams’s scheduled execution in 2017, then-Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens intervened. He issued an executive order that triggered a rarely used provision of Missouri law, empaneling a board to review the evidence, including DNA, that jurors never heard about at trial.

While that review was ongoing for most of the last six years, the board never submitted a final report or recommendation to the governor, as the law requires. Instead, last June, Gov. Mike Parson announced that he was rescinding his predecessor’s order, effectively dissolving the panel that had been reinvestigating the case.

The question now is whether Missouri law allows the governor to simply disappear an ongoing investigation. Because the law has so rarely been used, its contours have never been fully litigated, prompting the Midwest Innocence Project, which represents Williams, to file a civil lawsuit seeking to invalidate Parson’s order. The state’s attorney general balked, arguing that Williams was trying to usurp the governor’s independent clemency powers. The AG has asked the Missouri Supreme Court to toss the lawsuit — and clear the way for Williams’s execution.

Keep reading