Tag: police state

He Lost the Title to His Home Over a Small Property Tax Debt. Years Later, He’s Finally Getting It Back.

A Nebraska man whose house title was seized over a modest property tax debt has finally gotten it back, ending a yearslong legal battle that almost saw him lose his home and all of its value in excess of what he owed the government.

In 2014, Kevin Fair was unable to pay his $588 property tax bill after quitting his job to care for his dying wife, Terry, who had been diagnosed with a debilitating case of multiple sclerosis. The next year, the Scotts Bluff County government quietly sold that debt to a private investor, Continental Resources, which continued to satisfy the Fairs’ property taxes—until 2018, when the company sent the couple a bill for $5,268.

The family would have to pay that total—their tax debt, along with interest and fees—within 90 days, or lose their house. They would also lose all of their equity, even though their home was worth about $55,000 more than what they owed.

That was business as usual in Nebraska, which was one of many states engaging in legalized home equity theft. “People are shocked about how the law actually operates,” Jennifer Gaughan, chief of legal strategy at Legal Aid of Nebraska, told me in 2023. The law was indeed shocking: Local governments were permitted to sell tax debts to investors, without sending correspondence to the debtors. Three years later, as in the Fairs’ case, the investor would mail the property owner the new bill, which, of course, had grown substantially, with 14 percent interest and other fees. If the owner couldn’t pay within 90 days, then the county treasurer would give the title of the house to the investor, who would then take the home, sell it—and keep the change.

“It’s usually elderly people…people who own their homes outright who don’t have a mortgage, and there’s usually some kind of intervening situation,” said Gaughan. “It’s not just poverty. It’s illness, or something happens in their lives….And then they don’t have notice of it. And then [the home] is being taken.”

The Fairs sued, arguing that losing the equity in their house in excess of what they owed violated the 5th Amendment’s Takings Clause, which promises that the government cannot take private property “without just compensation.” The pair lost multiple times, including at the Nebraska Supreme Court. 

The U.S. Supreme Court considered the issue in 2023. The plaintiff in that case, an elderly woman named Geraldine Tyler, accrued a $2,300 property tax debt on her condo in Hennepin County, Minnesota, after some neighborhood incidents, including a nearby shooting, prompted her to move to a retirement community. Unable to finance both her rent and her debt—the total bill came to $15,000 with penalties, interest, and fees—the local government seized her condo, sold it for $40,000, and kept the $25,000 profit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled that was fine.

The high court’s justices unanimously disagreed. “A taxpayer who loses her $40,000 house to the State to fulfill a $15,000 tax debt has made a far greater contribution to the public fisc than she owed,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. “The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, but no more.” Tyler was 94 years old when the decision came down.

With that ruling in mind, Nebraska’s top court reconsidered its previous decision and ruled that Fair would not have to sacrifice the additional equity in excess of his debt. Whether or not he would be able to retain his title, however, remained unclear, until late last month when he came to an amicable agreement with Continental Resources.

Keep reading

Carter and Chile: How humanitarian was the president?

On March 9, 1977, at one of Jimmy Carter’s earliest White House press conferences as president of the United States, the very first question was about Chile.

At a meeting of the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva the day before, a State Department official had expressed “profoundest regrets” for the covert U.S. role in undermining Chilean democracy, and the subsequent “suffering and terror that the people of Chile have experienced” under the military dictatorship. Now, the U.S. media wanted to know if those remarks reflected the new President’s unique position on human rights as a criterion for U.S. foreign policy.

President Carter bluntly disavowed the apology. “I think that the remarks made by the delegate concerning our past involvement in Chilean political affairs were inappropriate,” he declared, dismissing them as “a personal statement of opinion” that did not represent the U.S. government.

But Carter did take the opportunity to call attention to human rights, which, until his election, was utterly disregarded as a principle of U.S. foreign policy. “We are still concerned about deprivation of human rights in many of the countries of the world,” Carter noted. “I think Chile would be one of those [places] where concern has been expressed. And I want to be sure that the American people understand that this is a very sensitive issue.”

Jimmy Carter, the peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia, who rose to be the 39th president of the United States, ushered the “sensitive issue” of human rights into the White House. As the first post-Vietnam, post-Watergate President, Carter aimed to restore a righteous decency to a U.S. Government contaminated by the dishonesty and criminality of the Nixon-Kissinger era. Carter also sought to bring a semblance of integrity and morality to the exercise of U.S. foreign policy now known for Henry Kissinger’s imperial abuses of power in smaller countries around the world and embrace of dictatorships in Latin America –most notably the Augusto Pinochet regime in Chile.

Keep reading

Small-Town America “Fights Back” In Court Against Globalists Who Flooded Their Town With Haitians

A resident of Charleroi, Pennsylvania, who was among the first to draw national attention to the massive influx of Haitian migrants into his small town, is now locked in a legal battle with a local food packaging plant that employs primarily migrants from the third world. Eyes on Charleroi first appeared when President-elect Donald Trump highlighted the town’s staggering 2,000% surge in its migrant population before the presidential elections. The resident is also planning a class-action lawsuit on behalf of hundreds of residents, demanding accountability from those responsible for the migrant invasion. 

Local media outlet Pennsylvania Record reports the lawyer of Andrew Armbruster, a resident of Charleroi, filed Pennsylvania’s new anti-SLAPP law, a measure that gives defendants, in some instances, the opportunity to evade litigation. This is regarding a defamation lawsuit filed against Armbruster by the Charleroi business Fourth Street Foods

“SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuits against public participation, and anti-SLAPP laws give defendants a First Amendment argument,” Pennsylvania Record’s John O’Brien wrote.

The motion stated that Fourth Street Foods owner David Barbe filed the lawsuit against Armbruster primarily to suppress protected public expression.

“Armbruster’s rights to speak to public issues, community members, and prevailing wages without ever being accused of mentioning ‘Dave Barbe’ are an incredible encroachment on everyone in Charleroi’s right to free expression on public matters,” the motion said. 

The motion continued, “Not only are they chilled from speaking about Mr. Barbe, by this lawsuit they are chilled from mentioning the hiring practices of a local employer.”

Keep reading

New Idaho Bill Would Set Mandatory Minimum Fine For Marijuana Possession

A Nampa legislator introduced a bill on Thursday to implement a $300 minimum fine for adults possessing three ounces or less of marijuana.

Under Idaho Code, individuals possessing more than three ounces of marijuana can face a felony conviction and may be imprisoned for at least five years, or fined at least $10,000, or both. However, there are no specific penalties for individuals possessing less than three ounces.

Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, introduced the bill to the Idaho House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee, noting that Idaho judges can apply fines ranging from $2 to $500 for people possessing three ounces or less of marijuana.

According to the bill, individuals possessing three ounces or less of marijuana would be subject to a misdemeanor upon conviction and subject to a minimum fine of $300. Individuals under the age of 18, however, would be exempt from the penalties, Skaug said.

“We do not want this to become a marijuana state,” Skaug told the committee.

Last year, Skaug introduced a similar bill attempting to implement a minimum $420 fine for marijuana possession of three ounces or less, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported.

The bill died in committee after legislators pointed to concerns that it would take away judicial discretion.

Keep reading

The Idiot’s Guide To A Class Analysis of The Great Reset – Part I: Who are ‘They’ and Who are We?

The ruling class – the oligarchy, aka the plutocracy, aka the Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital (OCGFC); aka the leaders of ‘they’.

Preamble

Is the Great Reset, underpinned by its much vaunted Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), a class war? If so, what class are you in and will you survive? How should we define class in modern Western economies dominated by the ‘service’ sector? Does class matter anymore?

I want to reassert David Hughes’ view that this is indeed a class war. ‘Twas ever thus, but it has entered a new and decisive phase – a final top-down revolution, if they succeed. Hughes describes it as “an undeclared global class war… aimed at the controlled demolition of liberal democracy and the institution of global technocracy, a novel, bio-digital form of totalitarianism.” Correct, notwithstanding that liberal democracy was always an illusion. The illusion is now being dispensed with, although the language of ‘democracy’ persists in the way that uplifting music was sometimes played to accompany a concentration camp inmate to his execution.

Normies love to indignantly ask us “what do you mean by ‘they’?”, when we use the pronoun to loosely refer to the psychopaths who govern us and their eager minions. It seems to me that the main objective of class analysis ought to be to systematically arrive at an understanding of who is being screwed by whom in modern industrialised societies. This tool was developed and perfected by the Left, so it beggars belief when a mainstream leftie, and idiot, asks, “Who is this ‘they’? I believe that looking at the Great Reset through the lens of class is an effective way to identify this ‘they’. It also helps to highlight how ‘they’ make fools of us by using class to divide and rule.

What does it mean to be working or middle class today? If the Great Reset is a class war, and you are neither working class nor owning class, whose side are you on? One’s economic status, the type of work one does, conflicts between and within the individual, and whose interests you serve in acting and thinking in certain ways are paramount in answering these questions.

I won’t use terms like ‘petite bourgeoisie’, except in this one sentence. I’d love to, but I don’t want this Idiot’s Guide to look like it was written by an idiot, as defined at the start. What I’ll try to do instead is use recent articles by John Spritzler and Brett Scott as a springboard for my thoughts on other people’s interesting thoughts about class and its relevance to the 4IR.

It should go without saying that you should not interpret this piece as a full endorsement of Spritzler’s or Scott’s ideas, as interesting and stimulating as they are. Nor should you interpret this piece as me putting words into their mouths. If you want to know what Scott and Spritzler think, read their pieces, which I will link in due course. If you’re vaguely interested in what I think, continue reading this piece!

You might want to think of this piece as the first in a series about who the ultimate global hegemon is. Approaching the question through the lens of class is a way of analysing the mess we’re in from a systems or structural perspective, as opposed to listing organisations, people, victims and dastardly acts. I have stated in previous pieces who I think wields the most power in world affairs, but I haven’t fully made the case for it, so I will continue to do so with more evidence. I’m now reasonably certain that until we are fully cognisant of who or what wields the most power, we risk misinterpreting the actions of the subsidiary hegemonic powers beneath it.

Like football, this guide will be a game of two halves:

· Some big-picture thoughts about class, and in particular the middle class, whom I plan to give a bit of a kicking. I think it’s deserved and long overdue, but don’t take it personally. It’s directed as much at myself as anyone else.

· In part II, I’ll ponder divide-and-rule, again through a class lens, and why it matters.

First, some overarching thoughts about class and my own somewhat conflicted position. In examining the boundary between the working and middle class, traditional class analysis up to the late 1970s did not ignore economic status, but placed greater emphasis on politicised ideas of class based on identity, exploitation, and domination. From the 1970s onwards, a shift coinciding with the rise of neo-liberal economics transformed class analysis into a technical issue of measurement. That said, class analysis has not successfully adapted to spiralling levels of income inequality accompanied by neo-liberal market forces.

This has led to what Mike Savage terms the “paradox of class” – people’s subjective class membership or identity declining as social inequality increased. We have essentially become more confused about class, and I discuss this more in Part II where it is most relevant to the issue of divide and rule. There is another paradox forced by the exigencies of neo-liberalism. The intellectual Left was fooled into thinking class didn’t matter anymore; that the class war was over. It was in fact merely entering a new phase. At precisely the moment the intellectual Left should have doubled down, it sold out. But then again, the reason for this, as John Spritzler argues very convincingly, is that intellectuals on both the left and right have always despised ordinary people. They have always despised the working poor.

The problem of class identity has not gone away, and nor has class utility for the ruling class. This somewhat facetious guide does not attempt to disentangle that mess, but to rather propose a way of moving past it with the objective of uniting all of us against the ruling class, who have strengthened their position by blurring the boundaries between middle and working class. ‘They’ are still the problem from the perspective of resistance to the Great Reset and 4IR.

Keep reading

Futurist John Petersen: Cyclical economic analysis model predicts a potential GLOBAL CIVIL WAR starting this year

John Petersen, futurist and founder of The Arlington Institute, recently joined the “Health Ranger Report” with Mike Adams to talk about predictions and forecasts that could shape the next few years of global governance.

At the core of the discussion was a startling prediction by Martin Armstrong, known for his cyclical economic analysis model, Socrates. Armstrong forecasts that a global civil war could begin as early as 2025, driven by widespread dissatisfaction with government institutions.

According to Petersen, Armstrong’s prediction is based on a broad-based, planet-wide uprising of the people against government institutions. This shift in public opinion is characterized by a deep sense of betrayal from the governed, stemming from the perception that those in power have misused their authority and resources. This sentiment has already manifested in multiple examples around the world, including political upheavals in Germany, Canada, France and the United States. (Related: Historian warns four out of five major predictors for CIVIL WAR in the United States have already happened.)

The root of this discontent lies in the erosion of public trust. Events such as the handling of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, economic mismanagement and perceived betrayal of public trust have eroded faith in government institutions. This erosion is exacerbated by emerging technologies and the increasing transparency that exposes previously hidden secrets and unethical behaviors by governments and corporations.

“It all hinges on betrayal, that there’s this notion that builds itself up into the populace that says, ‘The government, you guys, we trusted you. We gave you our money, gave everything and you betrayed us.’ And that’s the broad base,” Petersen said.

Petersen and Adams envision a transition scenario that pivots on the role of emerging technologies and the decentralization of knowledge. This is where projects like the Arlington Institute’s TransitionNet come into play. Transition Net aims to create a global collaboration platform designed to harness the collective intelligence of millions of contributors in building a new, emergent model of governance and societal structure.

Keep reading

Mass Protests Break Out in China After Student’s Death

Protests broke out in China’s northern province of Shaanxi on Thursday, a week after a teenage boy fell to his death from a school dormitory.

The protest was unusually large and fierce for subjects of the authoritarian Chinese Communist regime. Security forces responded with vicious beatings, while government censors frantically deleted videos of the scuffles posted to social media.

The victim of the January 2 dormitory accident, a 17-year-old identified only by his surname “Deng” (as is common in Chinese media), was a third-year student at the Pucheng Vocational Education Center.

According to local officials, Deng was awakened on the night of his death by other students talking loudly in the dormitory. He launched into a “verbal and physical altercation” with another student, which was broken up by a school official.

What happened next is uncertain. Deng’s body was discovered by another student outside the dormitory building later that evening. The sliding window of a bathroom overhead was open, and a wooden stool was reportedly discovered under the window.

The police conducted a hasty autopsy and decided his death was not a “criminal case.” The school issued a statement describing his death as an “accident where a student fell from a height.”

Deng’s family rejected this account of the young man’s death, insisting that he was “bullied on campus” and his body displayed injuries that were inconsistent with death from a fall. The family said police hustled them away from viewing the body before they could perform a thorough examination.

The family also said the school told them its surveillance system was mysteriously “damaged” so there was no security footage from the night of Deng’s death to review. When his relatives took possession of his cell phone, they found some of his photos had been deleted without explanation.

Keep reading

Gabbard reverses course on key intel-gathering tool as nomination teeters

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for director of national intelligence, is changing her tune on a key intelligence-gathering authority she once sought to repeal as her Senate confirmation hangs in the balance.

Gabbard’s past criticisms of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act have emerged as a central issue in her confirmation process, leaving GOP senators — including some in leadership — increasingly skeptical about the former Democrat’s confirmation prospects.

In her first public comments since being nominated, Gabbard told us in an exclusive statement that she now supports Section 702, saying the program is “crucial” and “must be safeguarded to protect our nation while ensuring the civil liberties of Americans.”

“If confirmed as DNI, I will uphold Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights while maintaining vital national security tools like Section 702 to ensure the safety and freedom of the American people,” Gabbard said.

In private meetings, senators are questioning Gabbard about legislation she introduced in 2020 that would repeal Section 702.

However, Gabbard now appears to be walking that back, citing Fourth Amendment protections implemented since then to prevent the incidental collection of Americans’ data:

“My prior concerns about FISA were based on insufficient protections for civil liberties, particularly regarding the FBI’s misuse of warrantless search powers on American citizens. Significant FISA reforms have been enacted since my time in Congress to address these issues.”

Inside Gabbard’s Senate meetings: Multiple senators from both parties who met with the former Hawaii lawmaker in recent days told us they emerged from those sessions unsure about Gabbard’s position on the 702 program. During these meetings, senators have pressed Gabbard on her previous public statements on the issue, as well as her votes against 702 reauthorization throughout her eight years in Congress.

Keep reading

UK Government Investigating Elon Musk’s TWEETS About Muslim Pedophile Gangs

Elon Musk’s tweets about Muslim pedophile gangs are being assessed by the UK Government’s counter-extremism unit, as a potential threat to the security of the country, it has emerged.

The Daily Mirror reports that The Home Office unit has stepped up social media monitoring of accounts with large followings, including Musk’s, as pertains to the grooming gangs issue.

Musk has posted hundreds of tweets in the past week related to the scandal, including openly calling Prime Minister Kier Starmer “evil,” accusing him of facilitating a cover up, and labelling Starmer and safeguarding minister Jess Philips as complicit in the “rape” of Britain.

The Mirror report states that the UK government’s counterterrorism unit has “been involved in content analysis and wider risk assessment.”

A government source told the Mirror “We keep a close eye on how disinformation and hate can proliferate, including online.”

Keep reading

New York Democrat Files Bills To Restrict THC Potency In Marijuana And Ban Consumption Within 30 Feet Of Children

A New York Democrat has introduced a pair of bills that would put new restrictions on marijuana in the state. One measure would limit the THC potency of cannabis products, while the other would prohibit cannabis consumption within 30 feet of where any child lives.

Both bills, A977 and A1007, were filed on Wednesday by Assemblymember Phil Steck. The potency proposal would limit marijuana flower to no more than 15 percent delta-9 THC, while all other cannabis products—including concentrates and hemp-derived products—would be capped at 25 percent delta-9 THC.

Growing, processing or distributing products exceeding those limits would be a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The consumption measure, meanwhile, would outlaw smoking or vaping cannabis “within thirty feet of a child or within thirty feet of any location in which children reside or attend for any recreational or educational purpose.”

The restriction would include “areas separated by walls, closed door or floors within a building,” meaning the change could theoretically limit cannabis consumption even within users’ private residences if their neighbors have kids.

In addition to that provision, the consumption bill would also step up penalties for second and subsequent offenses around unlawful marijuana use, such as consuming near schools or using in areas where smoking or vaping is otherwise prohibited. Currently those activities are civil violations that carry a fine of up to $25 or community service. Under Steck’s bill, that would still be true for the first offense, but subsequent offenses would be charged as Class B misdemeanors.

A legislative memo in support of tighter consumption restrictions says that research has “shown that second-hand smoke from vaping and smoking cannabis are proven to be harmful to the health of adults and children.”

“Most adults have to ability to remove themselves from the area, children may not have the same ability,” the memo says. “This bill requires adults maintain a safe distance from children when smoking or vaping cannabis.”

As for Steck’s proposed THC limit, the memo in support of that proposal says that “the most egregious omission in legalizing adult-use cannabis in New York State is the absence of any cap on its potency.”

“Most people can use cannabis safely,” it says, but with increased availability of higher THC concentrations, there have been more adverse drug reactions.”

The memo also says that in particular, “edibles are trouble,” citing a study out of Colorado that found that edibles accounted for less than 1 percent of statewide cannabis sales but were responsible for 11 percent of emergency room visits.

“With an eye towards public health and safety,” it adds, “this legislation imposes a 15 percent cap on any cannabis flower, and a 25 percent cap on the concentration of the active ingredient delta-9 tetrahydrocannibinol in all manufactured cannabis products in the state.”

Notably, the bill would not adjust the total allowable THC limits in state-legal cannabis edibles, and the percentage-based limits would likely do little to rein in potency of the products. Even at the proposed 25 percent THC limit, a gummy weighing just 2 grams could contain up to half a gram of THC—a massive dose for most consumers.

The advocacy group NORML quickly came out against the new potency bill, A977, calling its proposed limits “arbitrary” in an email to supporters on Thursday.

Keep reading