Tag: police state

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

CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS DECRY PROPOSED FEDERAL PRISON SOCIAL MEDIA CRACKDOWN

Two civil rights groups castigated the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) this week for a proposed crackdown on imprisoned peoples’ access to social media—including a possible ban on accounts run by family on the outside. The two organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University (KFAI), said the BOP’s suggested new procedures would violate basic civil rights and run afoul of the U.S. Constitution.

To change administrative policies, federal agencies must submit written proposals to the federal register and allow for public comment. In a proposed rule published on Feb. 2, the BOP floats a series of changes to “inmate discipline regulations,” including stricter bans on possessing hazardous tools, escaping from prison, or encouraging others to engage in work strikes. But multiple sections pertaining to the use of social media particularly caught the eye of First Amendment defenders. 

If enacted, one measure would ban “accessing, using, or maintaining social media, or directing others to establish or maintain social media accounts on the inmate’s behalf.” As it stands, many incarcerated people either access social media on tablets or contraband devices or send information to loved ones to post. Many state prison systems already ban imprisoned people from accessing social media and a handful of states, including Alabama and Iowa, ban third parties from posting on prisoners’ behalf.

Violating the new federal code would be considered a “High Severity Level” incident, which could bring a host of punishments, including solitary confinement, damage to parole eligibility, or fines.

Another proposal would label the use of social media to commit “criminal acts,” as well as the use of money-transfer apps such as CashApp, as “Greatest Severity Level” prohibited acts, the most severe offensive level. 

“When inmates use these services to send and receive money, Bureau staff are unable to monitor those transfers,” the proposal says. “CashApp and similar applications employ encryption technology that enables inmates to avoid detection, allowing them to use these platforms for unlawful purposes such as money laundering.”

The period for public comment closed on April 1. The federal register website shows that the proposed rule received 219 comments, though only 22 have been posted online.

In a six-page rebuttal submitted Monday, KFAI attorneys said a blanket social media crackdown would likely violate the Constitution.

“For the nearly 2 million people who are incarcerated in U.S. jails and prisons, maintaining connection with loved ones and communities is associated with better physical and mental health outcomes, reduced recidivism, and successful reentry into society,” wrote attorneys Jennifer Jones, Nicole Mo, and Stephanie Krent. “Social media is increasingly becoming an important part of that connection. As one formerly incarcerated journalist recently recounted, using social media through his wife allowed him to pursue a writing career, stay in touch with his community, and give him hope of reintegration upon release.”

Keep reading

Condemned inmate could face ‘surgery without anesthesia’ if good vein is elusive, lawyers say

Missouri’s execution protocol allows for “surgery without anesthesia” if the typical process of finding a suitable vein to inject the lethal drug doesn’t work, lawyers for a death row inmate say in an appeal aimed at sparing his life.

Brian Dorsey, 52, is scheduled for execution Tuesday for killing his cousin and her husband at their central Missouri home in 2006. His attorneys are seeking clemency from Gov. Mike Parson and have several appeals pending.

A federal court appeal focuses on how Missouri injects the fatal dose of pentobarbital. The written protocol calls for insertion of primary and secondary intravenous lines. But it offers no guidance on how far the execution team can go to find a suitable vein, leaving open the possibility of an invasive “cutdown procedure,” Dorsey’s attorneys say.

The procedure involves an incision that could be several inches wide and several inches deep. Forceps are used to tear tissue away from a vein that becomes the injection point.

“It’s surgery,” said Arin Brenner, a federal public defender and one of the attorneys representing Dorsey. “It would be surgery without anesthesia.”

Keep reading

Officials Along Path of Eclipse Quietly Declaring States of Emergency

They have good reasons for doing it. And we have good reasons for not trusting them.

Sometimes, two seemingly contradictory statements each contain essential truths.

Last week, Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb, of Indiana, signed Executive Order 24-05, a statewide disaster emergency declaration in advance of Monday’s expected total solar eclipse.

Parts of Indiana lay in the eclipse’s path of totality. For that reason, Holcomb predicted “several hundred thousand visitors” to the state.

If that happens, then the massive influx of people “may well stress and/or interfere with first responder and public safety communications and emergency response systems such that a technological or other emergency may occur,” Holcomb’s order read.

Fortunately, according to WLS, Indiana’s membership in the Emergency Management Assistance Compact allows it to call on other member states for resources.

Indiana has not seen a total solar eclipse since 1869 and will not see another until 2099.

Thus, officials in The Hoosier State and elsewhere have begun preparations for a once-in-a-lifetime event.

Chairman Shaun Gilliant, of the Essex County New York Board of Supervisors, for instance, explained that he and other county officials declared a state of emergency in anticipation of heavy traffic and even cellular service disruptions, according to NBC 5 in New York.

According to WHIO in Dayton, Ohio, the city council in nearby Riverside will decide at Thursday night’s meeting whether to declare a temporary emergency.

Keep reading

Irish Government Wants Pre-Election Pact With Tech Giants To Counter Online “Disinformation”

Many governments around the world are no longer at least pretending they don’t see Big Tech as a major political asset, or that they will not try to use that asset to their advantage. Instead, this behavior is slowly being normalized – albeit always qualified as a democracy-preserving, rather than undermining policy.

In other words, something driven by the need to combat “disinformation” and not what critics suspect it is – the need to harness and control the massive reach, influence, and power of major social platforms.

Judging by reports out of Ireland, it is among those countries, with big words like “supercharged disinformation threats to democracy” flying around as the government looks to use what some might call “supercharged fearmongering” to secure no less than a “pre-election pact with tech giants.”

Some of this is yet to be enacted through the Electoral Reform Act, so in the meanwhile Big Tech representatives have been summoned to a meeting, via lobbyists representing them, Technology Ireland, to discuss the said “threats.”

The Electoral Reform Act is supposed to formalize new rules for both platforms and those buying ads, while during the meeting, set to take place in late April, tech companies will be expected to sign “the Irish Election Integrity Accord.”

A letter signed by Minister for Housing Darragh O’Brien and Minister of State Malcolm Noonan explained that the Accord will be new, but based on the Electoral Reform Act from 2022, and always focusing on “disinformation,” and advertising. What the giants are expected to sign up to is “a set of principles for the sector and the state to work by to safeguard our democracy over these crucial next few months.”

The Accord appears to have been put together to bridge the gap between the time of campaigning and elections, and the full enactment of the Electoral Reform Act, envisaged to complement and “reaffirm” similar legislation in the EU and member countries.

Keep reading

Police Scotland Paying Officers Overtime To Deal With Slew Of ‘Hate Crime’ Reports

Following the passage of what is probably the most stupid law in history, Police Scotland are having to pay officers in their control room “hundreds of thousands” in overtime to deal with a deluge of ‘hate crime’ reports.

The Telegraph reports that David Kennedy, the general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, commented that the excess costs are already piling up as police try to deal with the influx of more than 6,000 complaints of “stirring up hatred”.

“Although there are lots of complaints coming in, a tiny percentage of that are turning into actual investigations. It will all be done within the control room, the control room will be paying extra overtime and using officers from the control room area to do it,” Kennedy stated.

Keep reading

EU’s Plan To Mass Surveil Private Chats Has Leaked

The latest version of the proposed European Parliament (EP) and EU Council regulation to adopt new rules related to combating child sexual abuse has been made available online.

Despite its declared goal, the proposal, which first saw the light of day in May 2022 and is referred to by opponents as “chat control” is in fact a highly divisive draft of legislation that aims to accomplish the stated objective through mass surveillance of citizens’ private communications.

Now, the French site contexte.com has the full text of the newest version of the proposal – yet another controversial undertaking of the current, 6-month Belgian EU presidency. Judging by the leaked document, the key and most contentious components of “chat control” have not been changed.

German EP member (MEP) Patrick Breyer and long-time vocal critic of the proposal said on his blog that the text would be discussed by a law enforcement working party at the Council on Wednesday, with the target date for adoption being sometime in June.

That will happen once any political differences have been smoothed over at the EU’s Committee of Permanent Representatives (“COREPER”).

Commenting on the development, Breyer remarked that the Council’s legal service has also confirmed that the new version “does not change the nature of detection orders.”

“Limiting bulk chat searches to ‘high-risk services’ is meaningless because every communication service is misused also for sharing illegal images and therefore has an imminently high risk of abuse,” the MEP noted of the latest proposal, adding:

“Informing law enforcement only of repeat hits is also meaningless, as falsely flagged beach pictures or consensual sexting rarely involve just a single photo.”

He went on to explain that the upcoming regulation is set up in a way that will result in the end of the privacy of people’s digital communications, since the subject of content searches will be “millions” of chats and photos, including those belonging to persons who have no links to child sexual abuse.

And because the technology proposed to carry out the mass surveillance is unreliable, there are also risks of this content getting leaked.

Keep reading

Net Neutrality Could Expand Biden’s Social Media Censorship To The Whole Internet

The Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in one of the most important cases this term, one with critical implications for First Amendment free speech rights as society proceeds further into a world reliant upon internet service.

The controversy at the heart of Murthy v. Missouri is the Biden administration’s effort to pressure or “jawbone” social media to censor various opinions and public policy advocacy about the Covid pandemic that it found objectionable. 

The Biden administration naturally claims it was simply engaging in discourse with social media leaders to “inform and persuade,” but discovered correspondence included direct threats against the companies while White House officials openly and publicly threatened new “legal and regulatory measures” if the targeted groups failed to submit to its desires. 

Those revelations only confirm widespread suspicion that the left-leaning administrative state, favored and further empowered by the Biden administration, seeks to exploit its vast authority to suppress the speech of Americans who don’t share its preferred narratives or big-government goals.

The Supreme Court must now determine whether that White House pressure campaign crossed the line into unconstitutional intimidation and censorship, even without formal government prosecution or enforcement. Under applicable Supreme Court precedent, the Biden administration’s form of “informal censorship may sufficiently inhibit the circulation of publications to warrant injunctive relief,” even where the targeted groups are “free” to ignore its threats, because “people do not lightly disregard officers’ thinly veiled threats.” 

Keep reading