Tag: police state

Judge Ordered Jan. 6 Defendant’s Computer Monitored for ‘Disinformation’—Appeals Court Overturns

A sentencing requirement that Jan. 6 defendant Daniel Goodwyn have his computer monitored by the government for “disinformation” has been vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The court on March 26 published a mandate sending the case back to U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton to remove the computer monitoring requirement he issued as part of the sentencing judgment in the case on June 15, 2023.

“Judge Walton had no legal basis to issue the special condition,” Carolyn Stewart, Mr. Goodwyn’s attorney, told The Epoch Times in an April 3 email.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the judge “plainly erred” in imposing the computer monitoring. Judges Gregory Katsas, Naomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia issued a per curiam order vacating the monitoring provision.

Judge Walton, when imposing a 60-day jail sentence in June 2023, said Mr. Goodwyn spread “disinformation” during a broadcast of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on March 14, 2023. Judge Walton ordered that Mr. Goodwyn’s computer be subject to “monitoring and inspection” by a probation agent to check if he spread Jan. 6 disinformation during the term of his supervised release.

The judge also referred to Mr. Goodwyn spreading alleged “misinformation,” using the term interchangeably with “disinformation.”

Mr. Goodwyn, 35, of Corinth, Texas, pleaded guilty on Jan. 31, 2023, to one misdemeanor count of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority. The charge could have meant up to a year in prison.

Keep reading

Surprise! The IRS Lied About Who Those 80,000 New Agents Would Target

“Never trust a man who lays his hand on his heart when he assures you of anything,” goes the old axiom. That’s why I never trust a Democrat who makes any promise ever about a federal agency or program.

Take Medicare. In 1966 when Medicare began, it cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost about $12 billion by 1990. Instead, it cost $107 billion and today costs the government close to a trillion dollars.

So when Joe Biden and the Democrats assured Americans and Republicans in Congress that the $80 billion the president wanted to augment the IRS tax-collecting ability was only going to target “the rich,” everyone with two brain cells working knew it was a lie.

It will surprise no one that an audit by the Treasury Inspector General For Tax Administration found that “President Biden’s plan to hire a new army of tax collectors is falling flat, and the agents already at work are targeting the middle class.”  

“As of last summer, 63% of new audits targeted taxpayers with income of less than $200,000,” reports the Wall Street Journal. “Only a small overall share reached the very highest earners, while 80% of audits covered filers earning less than $1 million.”

Bank robber Willie Sutton supposedly responded to the question of why he robs banks by saying with a shrug, “That’s where the money is.” So, too, the IRS audits well-off but not “rich” taxpayers because they can’t afford the army of tax attorneys that the super-rich can bring to the table. 

Here’s a gentle reminder of the assurances given to us by the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress.

“These resources are absolutely not about increasing audit scrutiny on small businesses or middle-income Americans. As we’ve been planning, our investment of these enforcement resources is designed around the Department of the Treasury’s directive that audit rates will not rise relative to recent years for households making under $400,000,” wrote IRS commissioner Charles Rettig in an August 2022 letter to concerned senators.

Janet Yellen was even more adamant. “Contrary to the misinformation from opponents of this legislation, small business or households earning $400,000 per year or less will not see an increase in the chances that they are audited,” she wrote in a letter to Rettig.

Keep reading

America’s Hypocrisy as an Authoritarian State Being Exposed as Ukraine Flounders

Even though a growing number of Western elites are awakening to the reality that Ukraine is headed for defeat and will drag NATO along with it, the so-called intellectual cognoscenti of foreign policy, like the editorial board of the NY Times, continue to indulge fantasies and delusions. They conclude a Sunday editorial pleading for more money for Zelensky and the losing cause with this:

Mr. Trump and his followers may argue that the security of Ukraine, or even of Europe, is not America’s business. But the consequence of allowing a Russian victory in Ukraine is a world in which authoritarian strongmen feel free to crush dissent or seize territory with impunity. That is a threat to the security of America, and the world.

The Washington and New York establishments continue to insist that Vladimir Putin is an “authoritarian strongman.” I have one word of advice — look in the damn mirror and pay attention to what is happening in the United States before you mount your moral high horse and gallop off to lecture other countries on democracy and human rights.

When I read the penultimate sentence in the paragraph above I asked myself the question, “How many political prisoners are there in Russia?” I was not surprised by the answer.

“For political prisoners, the situation is often worse, because the state aims to additionally punish them, or additionally isolate them from the world, or do everything to break their spirit,” Vaypan said. His group counts 680 political prisoners in Russia.

Guess what? The United States has prosecuted (and persecuted) twice as many political prisoners than Russia.

Keep reading

Combating “Hate”: The Trojan Horse For Precrime

Philip K. Dick’s 1956 novella The Minority Report created “precrime,” the clairvoyant foreknowledge of criminal activity as forecast by mutant “precogs.” The book was a dystopian nightmare, but a 2015 Fox television series transforms the story into one in which a precog works with a cop and shows that data is actually effective at predicting future crime.

Canada is trying to enact a precrime law along the lines of the 2015 show, but it is being panned about as much as the television series. Ottawa’s online harms bill includes a provision to impose house arrest on someone who is feared to commit a hate crime in the future. From The Globe and Mail:

The person could be made to wear an electronic tag, if the attorney-general requests it, or ordered by a judge to remain at home, the bill says. Mr. Virani, who is Attorney-General as well as Justice Minister, said it is important that any peace bond be “calibrated carefully,” saying it would have to meet a high threshold to apply.

But he said the new power, which would require the attorney-general’s approval as well as a judge’s, could prove “very, very important” to restrain the behaviour of someone with a track record of hateful behaviour who may be targeting certain people or groups…

People found guilty of posting hate speech could have to pay victims up to $20,000 in compensation. But experts including internet law professor Michael Geist have said even a threat of a civil complaint – with a lower burden of proof than a court of law – and a fine could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.

While this is a dangerous step in Canada, I also wonder if this is where burgeoning “anti-hate” programs across the US are headed. The Canadian bill would also allow “people to file complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission over what they perceive as hate speech online – including, for example, off-colour jokes by comedians.”

There are now programs in multiple US states to do just that –  encourage people to snitch on anyone doing anything perceived as “hateful.”

The 2021 federal COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act began to dole out money to states to help them respond to hate incidents. Oregon now has its Bias Response Hotline to track “bias incidents.”

In December of 2022, New York launched its Hate and Bias Prevention Unit. Maryland, too, has its system – its hate incidents examples include “offensive jokes” and “malicious complaints of smell or noise.”

Keep reading

‘COVID Was A Lie, An Illusion Created by Government to Take Complete Control’ & ‘The Penny Is Dropping Everywhere!’

“We have lived through a dark time” said Professor Dr. Stefan Homburg in a speech delivered last year and was reported in the Exposé soon after. However, the video of the speech has had a new lease of life on the X platform and is said to have gone viral. Dr David Cartland shared the video and wrote in his Tweet:

“Penny is dropping everywhere! I wouldn’t want to be a covid cultist/jabaholic doctor/nurse or one that knows deep down what’s happened and the collateral harms/injuries/deaths but is remaining silent to calling out the biggest medical fraud/crime ever committed on humanity! Justice is coming…..the house of cards is collapsing!”

The speech was from the 2nd Coronavirus Symposium was held in the German Bundestag, which Dr Homburg attended on 11th November 2023 along with several prominent voices against unscientific measures and the harmful vaccination campaign.

Among others, Dr. Michael Yeadon, Prof. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, Prof. Dr. Stefan Hockerz, Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen and many other important critical voices who have spoken out during the coronavirus era.

“Aufarbeitung”

Prof. Dr. S. Homburg’s speech, published on his website, provides a fact-based overview of the coronavirus era and although a translation of the speech has been published below, the word “Aufarbeitung” is a German word that according to Dr. Peter F Mayer is not easy to translate into English. He has however, provided what he says is best possible translation which he says is probably

“To deal with, to come to terms with the past”.

Dr Mayer has provided more of his thoughts on the word Aufarbeitung which readers may also find interesting. He continues:

“The main question of Aufarbeitung in a historical context is how Germans deal with their fascist past. This question has been addressed by the philosophers Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer, among others, and their critical theory has had a profound influence on German post-war history.

Here is one of Adorno’s important thoughts:

“The past will only be dealt with when the causes of what has happened have been removed. It is only because these causes still exist that the ties of that past have not yet been severed.”

Benito Mussolini said bluntly about this thought of Th. W. Adorno: “Fascism is more appropriately called corporatism, because it is the fusion of the power of the State and the power of the corporations.”

If you want to look more closely at this subject, take the story of IBM as an example. If it had not been for this American company, Auschwitz would not have been possible on this scale. Of course, this does not mean that the German responsibility can be brushed aside. (Source)

One of the conditions for Aufarbeitung – overcoming – is that we can talk about the past without prejudice and accept it. This dialogue between our friends and acquaintances is a task for each of us. It is the only way to heal wounds and to preserve relationships. (Such a clarification of the past has not happened in Germany, or has only partially happened. For example, personal traumatic war experiences were not discussed. The consequences are still felt today.) (source)

Keep reading

Police are still arresting journalists. Why?

Journalists Carolyn Cole and Molly Hennessy-Fiske were reporting for the Los Angeles Times on the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis on May 30, 2020, when they were brutally attacked by the Minnesota State Patrol. Last week, they settled a lawsuit against the city for $1.2 million.

It’s a welcome sign of accountability for police who violate the rights of journalists covering protests. But nearly four years after the Floyd protests led to a spike in journalists arrested and assaulted, protests remain a dangerous place for reporters.

Just a few months into 2024, the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker has documented four arrests or detentions of journalists covering protests in New York, Tennessee, and California.

None of these arrests have received much attention or public outcry. That’s a shame. These arrests violate journalists’ rights, and they undermine the right of the public to learn about newsworthy events happening in their communities.

They also show the disturbing and stubborn persistence of a system of policing that either doesn’t know or doesn’t care about First Amendment rights. A closer look at each of the cases documented by the Tracker so far this year reveals that — even after large settlements or acknowledgments by the federal government that journalists must be allowed to cover protests — police around the country are still routinely arresting reporters who are simply doing their jobs.

Keep reading

German Intel Chief Defends His Efforts To Police The “Thought And Speech Patterns” Of Citizens

The German Interior Ministry continues to defend its controversial and widely criticised plans to restrict the speech, travel and economic activity of political dissidents. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), our domestic intelligence service and political police, have sacrificed substantial popular regard in the face of this campaign. According to a poll published last month, a plurality of Germans believe that the BfV is being misused for political purposes. The sentiment is prominent across all parties, except of course for the Greens, who believe that all is well with the Federal Republic.

The creepy, dissolute and rodent-looking BfV chief, Thomas Haldenwang, has taken to the pages of the Frankfurter Allgemeine to defend the conduct of his office and his plans to shape the “thought and speech patterns” of ordinary people through official repression.

The thing about “freedom of expression,” Haldenwang explains, is that it “is not carte blanche for enemies of the constitution”.

Recently, public discourse has repeatedly featured headlines and articles calling the work of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) into question. There is talk of an “opinion police,” a “language police” and even a “Government security service”. They say the BfV discredits political opinions “on command” as extremist as soon as they depart from the social and political mainstream, or when they embark upon criticism of Government action or the work of the democratic parties.

One thing should be unmistakably clear: freedom of opinion prevails in Germany – and that is a good thing! Freedom of opinion is a fundamental element of our constitution and one of the greatest assets of our liberal democratic order. As such, it is also protected by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

“Freedom of opinion,” Haldenwang explains, is what “distinguishes a democracy from an autocracy or a dictatorship.” In the Federal Republic even “offensive, absurd and radical opinions” are protected.

Keep reading

Years of Government Censorship Called ‘Potential Health Danger’

There’s a real danger coming for Americans should there be another pandemic, which in all probability will happen at some time.

And it’s not necessarily from the actual health danger, it stems from the censorship and misinformation campaigns that the American government launched during the COVID-19 threat.

That’s according to Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University.

Long considered a constitutional expert, he’s testified before Congress on a variety of constitutional disputes, and even represented members in court.

He cited the misinformation delivered by the government during COVID, its crackdown on alternative views about treatments, the mandatory shots, the masks and much, much more.

That all has produced in the American public a distrust of government, as many of the views mandated by the government have since proven wrong, and many of the perspectives censored for being wrong have been documented as being right.

Keep reading

In California and Elsewhere, Fear of Crime Drives the Surveillance State

Did somebody say something about never letting a crisis go to waste? That may well have been on California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s mind when he announced the installation of hundreds of surveillance cameras in Oakland to address public concerns about crime. Whether or not robberies and assaults decline because of police monitoring, you can bet those cameras will remain in place long after everybody has forgotten the reason for their existence.

“Building on public safety investments in Oakland and the East Bay, Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the California Highway Patrol (CHP) has entered into a contract with Flock Safety to install a network of approximately 480 high-tech cameras in the City of Oakland and on state freeways in the East Bay to combat criminal activity and freeway violence,” the governor’s office announced Mar 29.

The surveillance plan essentially bypasses local authorities, involving a contract between the California Highway Patrol and Flock Safety to install and maintain 290 cameras along surface streets and 190 cameras along state highways. Still, Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, a Democrat, embraced the announcement, saying “this new camera network will help us stop crime and hold more suspects accountable.”

Discussing crime rates is a good way to start an argument. Data is self-reported by law enforcement agencies and always about a year out of date. Polling finds a majority of Americans concerned about crime, while the FBI reports most violent crimes declining as of 2022 (the most recent data) after a surge during the chaos of 2020 that broke from decades of declining rates. Robbery and property crimes, on the other hand, spiked upwards, according to the FBI. Evidence suggests further reductions in violence in 2023, though the data isn’t yet complete.

Keep reading

“Oh Man, This Is Huge”: Video Revealed By Jan. 6 Defendant Raises Questions About Undercover Agents

Recently released Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol Police security video shows a suspected FBI special agent clapping and cheering as crowds surged up steps to the Columbus Doors and another meeting with an FBI tactical team just before it entered the Capitol after the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt.

The videos were first identified by defendant William Pope of Topeka, Kansas, in court filings in his own Jan. 6 criminal case. Exhibits Mr. Pope originally filed under seal have become public since the release of thousands of hours of Jan. 6 security video by the Committee on House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight.

Two possible FBI special agents and a third unknown colleague were with John D. Guandolo, the FBI’s former liaison with U.S. Capitol Police, at the Women for a Great America event on the East Front of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to Mr. Pope.

In sworn testimony in a December 2022 Alaska civil court trial and in numerous media appearances, Mr. Guandolo said he was with two FBI special agents and a colleague with whom he traveled to Washington on Jan. 6. Mr. Guandolo has indicated that he was also introduced to other FBI personnel at the Capitol that day.

Mr. Pope is seeking to compel federal prosecutors to identify them all. He said even if the men were at the Capitol on personal time, their free movement around the grounds shows they did not believe the Capitol was off limits to the public.

Mr. Guandolo, who handled counterterrorism and criminal investigations for nearly 13 years—from 1996 to 2008—as an FBI special agent, has said he was at the Capitol in a personal capacity and went primarily to pray.

He was interviewed by the FBI about his Jan. 6 visit on July 6, 2022. A heavily redacted copy of the FBI 302 interview summary has been made public.

Keep reading