As usual, globalist-satanists at forefront for vote-fraud, election-rigging by any means available

[Apollonian]

‘Perfect Storm’: New Report Highlights Major Questions Over Security Of Automatic Voter Registration

• by: Arjun Singh
• 11.08.2023

Link: https://dcenquirer.com/perfect-stor...ver-security-of-automatic-voter-registration/

A new report indicates that “automatic voting registration,” a system pursued by several Democratic-led states, may be at risk of registering voters twice and allowing foreign nationals to vote in U.S. elections, according to a report released on Tuesday by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity (CUP).
Currently, 23 states and the District of Columbia automatically register U.S. citizens to vote using various state forms they may submit, such as driver’s license applications, according to the CUP’s report, titled “Automatic Voter Registration: A Perfect Storm for Voter Fraud.” Drawing on published statistics, it argues that automatic voter registration programs enable some voters to be registered twice and may inadvertently register foreign nationals residing in the U.S. as voters, which it claims amounts to “voter fraud.”
“[A]utomatic voter registration registers the person automatically without asking – effectively without their consent – and whether they are eligible to vote or not,” the report reads. “It also would register people using information in various existing state and federal government databases, which predictably will lead to the registration of large numbers of ineligible individuals such as aliens and felons, as well as multiple or duplicate registrations of the same individual, both in the same and different states.”
The report claims that the current inaccuracy of voter registration systems makes automatic registration a risky proposition. “Pew found that approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States were no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. About 2.8 million people were registered in more than one state, and 1.8 million registered voters are dead. In most places, it’s easy to vote under the names of such people with little risk of detection,” the report says.
Democratic Party leaders and left-wing groups have frequently touted automatic registration as a way to turn out more voters. The report cites former Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez’s statements in 2012 that “all eligible citizens can and should be automatically registered to vote…from databases that already exist,” as evidence.

“Outdated voter registration systems contribute to the United States’ low participation rates. Automatic voter registration could put every eligible voter on the rolls and give more Americans a voice,” reads a report by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, which advocates for the practice.
Automatic registration was included as a provision of H.R. 1, the “For The People Act” — a large election reform package — which was passed by the Democratic-led House of Representatives in the 117th Congress but failed to overcome a filibuster in the Senate, with all Republicans voting in opposition.
Regarding foreign nationals voting, which is illegal under federal law, the report indicates that even when foreign nationals do not seek to register to vote using state forms, they are often inadvertently registered. The aliens had “self-identified” as noncitizens when they applied for a driver’s license, yet were registered anyway, the report indicates, while also warning that some state processes that do not inquire about citizenship status nonetheless may be registering foreign nationals as voters.
The report cites a controversy in 2017 that took place in Pennsylvania, where it was discovered that 168 foreign nationals in Philadelphia inadvertently registered to vote in the city after applying for driver’s licenses. It also cites a similar controversy in California in 2018, when it was discovered that approximately 1,500 non-citizens had been registered to vote, also through the driver’s license application system.
John Fund, the report’s author, did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

 

[Apollonian]

Democrats’ Operative Got Secret Internet Connection at Wisconsin Election Center, Emails Show​

M.D. Kittle / March 23, 2021

Link: https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/03...ion-at-wisconsin-election-center-emails-show/

A Democratic operative, intricately involved in Green Bay’s November election, was given access to “hidden” identifiers for the internet network at the hotel convention center where ballots were counted. Pictured: Voters choose their candidates at the South Shore Park building on Election Day in Milwaukee. (Photo: Darren Hauck/Getty Images)
Madison, Wis.—A veteran Democratic operative intricately involved in Green Bay’s November election was given access to “hidden” identifiers for the internet network at the hotel convention center where ballots were counted, according to emails obtained by Wisconsin Spotlight.
Green Bay city officials insist the presidential election was “administered exclusively by city staff.” But the emails show that Michael Spitzer-Rubenstein, Wisconsin state lead for the National Vote at Home Institute, had a troubling amount of contact with election administration Nov. 4.
“I’ll have my team create two separate SSID’s for you,” Trent Jameson, director of event technology at Green Bay’s Hyatt Regency and KI Convention Center, where the city’s Central Count was located on Election Day, wrote to Spitzer-Rubenstein.
SSID stands for Service Set Identifier. It’s an internet network’s name. Open up the list of Wi-Fi networks on your laptop or phone, and the list of SSIDs will pop up. Wireless router or access points broadcast SSIDs so nearby devices can find and display any available networks.

Hiding the identifier keeps the network name from being publicly broadcast. The identifier won’t immediately pop up in the display, although the network name remains available for use.
“One SSID will be hidden and it’s: 2020vote. There will be no password or splash page for this one and it should only be used for the sensitive machines that need to be connected to the internet,” Jameson wrote in his Oct. 27 email to Spitzer-Rubenstein.
Spitzer-Rubenstein in turn forwarded the email Oct. 30 to Celestine Jeffreys, Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich’s chief of staff.

>>> Biden Campaign Lawyers, Democrats Advised Green Bay on Election Procedures

Also on the email were Amaad Rivera-Wagner, the mayor’s community liaison; Jaime Fuge, Green Bay’s chief election inspector at the time; Shelby Edlebeck, multimedia communications specialist; and Mike Hronek, the city’s information technology administrator.
“The other SSID will be: gbvote and that one can be seen in the settings app of your phone or laptop under ‘networks’ and should be used for the poll workers who need internet,” Jameson wrote in the email to Spitzer-Rubenstein.
Jameson told Spitzer-Rubenstein there would be a third identifier, which was to be used by media or other guests “not part of your team.”
Why would a guy who has been described as a consultant or adviser to the city need to have hidden SSIDs? Why would the city want him to have knowledge of Service Set Identifers for “sensitive machines”?
Spitzer-Rubenstein was brought in to provide technical support, but why would he receive such sensitive information before the city’s IT director and the clerk’s office did?
Genrich, Green Bay’s mayor, did not return Wisconsin Spotlight’s call seeking comment.
In final official results in Wisconsin, Democrat nominee Joe Biden defeated President Donald Trump by 49.6% to 48.9% of the vote, flipping a state with 10 electoral votes that Trump won in 2016.
As Wisconsin Spotlight first reported, Spitzer-Rubenstein and his National Vote at Home Institute were involved heavily in Green Bay’s election process.
The National Vote at Home Institute is one of several private, left-leaning groups funded largely by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
Spitzer-Rubenstein, with an impressive political resume of working for Democratic politicians and campaigns, had significant influence over the administration of the presidential election in Green Bay and, it appears, in Milwaukee as well.
The Chicago-based Center for Tech and Civic Life received hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from Zuckerberg and his wife, money they pumped out in big grants to cities in the name of “safe elections.”

>>> Zuckerberg Grant Allowed Outsider to Infiltrate Presidential Election in Wisconsin

Spitzer-Rubenstein appears to have played point man for the coordinated effort among the “Wisconsin 5” cities: Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, Kenosha, and Racine—which received a combined $6.3 million in Zuckerberg money.
Emails show Spitzer-Rubenstein offered to correct or “cure” ballots in Green Bay, and he told the city clerk that he had come up with a similar process for Milwaukee.
And despite the city’s assertions that Spitzer-Rubenstein did not have the keys to the KI Center where absentee ballots were, a hotel contract obtained by Wisconsin Spotlight shows the keys were to be delivered to the Democratic operative.
“Michael Spitzer-Rubenstein will be the onsite contact for the group,” the hotel’s instructions state.
Emails show him inside the KI Center asking city officials about where ballots would be located.
“Are the ballots going to be in trays/boxes within the bin? I’m at KI now, trying to figure out whether we’ll need to move the bins throughout the day or if we can just stick them along the wall and use trays or something similar to move the ballots between stations,” Spitzer-Rubenstein wrote to city officials two days before the election.
There’s more.
Sandy Juno, former Brown County clerk who has accused Green Bay of going “rogue” in its handling of the election, said she found use of the secretive internet access points “unusual.”
Spitzer-Rubenstein is shown in photos working on a laptop by a printer at Central Count on election night.
“I’m not sure what the need was for all of those different [Service Set] IDs, but the one that bothered me most was for the ‘sensitive machines,’” Juno said.

 

[Apollonian]

NEVER FORGET: From 130,000-280,000 Completed Ballots Were Shipped Across State Lines from NY to PA in 2020 Election – Never Explained (VIDEO)​

By Jim Hoft Nov. 26, 2023 6:20 pm

Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...mpleted-ballots-were-shipped/?utm_source=rss/

[vid at site link, above]

As The Gateway Pundit reported back in 2020, election fraud whistleblowers came forward in December following the controversial election, including one who witnessed the shipping of an estimated 144,000-288,000 completed ballots across three state lines on October 21 2020.
The information was made public at a press conference by the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society, a national constitutional litigation organization.
The Amistad Project said at the time that they had sworn declarations that over 300,000 ballots are at issue in Arizona, 548,000 in Michigan, 204,000 in Georgia, and over 121,000 in Pennsylvania.

They said that their evidence reveals multi-state illegal efforts by USPS workers to influence the election in at least three of six swing states.
Before The Next Crisis Hits – Prepare With A Medical Emergency Kit (Includes Ivermectin and Z-Pak)
The whistleblower statements included potentially hundreds of thousands of completed absentee ballots being transported across three state lines, and a trailer filled with ballots disappearing in Pennsylvania.
Attorney Phil Kline said, “130,000 to 280,000 completed ballots for the 2020 general election were shipped from Bethpage, NY, to Lancaster, PA, where those ballots and the trailer in which they were shipped disappeared.”
Truck driver Jesse Morgan was present at the press conference and spoke for 9 minutes about his unbelievable ordeal. Morgan was tasked with delivering completed ballots to Pennsylvania from New York State.
This was explosive testimony.

Jesse Morgan: In total I saw 24 gaylords, or large cardboard containers of ballots, loaded into my trailer. These gaylords contained plastic trays, I call them totes or trays of ballots stacked on top of each other. All the envelopes were the same size. I saw the envelopes had return addresses… They were complete ballots.”

Jesse went on to say that he sat in Harrisburg for hours, and when he was told to leave, the supervisor at the post office would not give him a slip or an overtime slip so he could get paid. Jesse said the manager-supervisor was “kinda rude.”
Jesse’s testimony revealed that United States Post Office employees were in on the conspiracy to steal the votes.
The Gateway Pundit later discovered that rather than investigate this massive alleged crime, US Attorney General Bill Barr called up investigator Tony Shaffer and KILLED the investigation! He never lifted a finger to investigate this enormous act of election fraud!

In June 2022 The Gateway Pundit reported that the United States Postal Service investigated the allegations by the truck drivers – but they would NOT release their report.
Now this- The American Thinker published a report this weekend. The USPS finally released their report on the accusations of truck drivers hauling completed ballots across state lines into Pennsylvania before election day!
Jesse Morgan was exonerated. No wonder they hid this for a year!
The USPS is running ballots!
In June 2023 RealRobert on Twitter-X reminded the Twitter audience that 180,000-230,000 completed ballots were delivered from New York to Pennsylvania before the 2020 election. And then the trailer disappeared.
This weekend this piece of 2002 voter fraud started making the rounds again online.

 

[Apollonian]

Election Irregularities and Fraud Cause Multiple Elections to be Overturn in 2023​

Published 2 days ago
on December 10, 2023
By LeadingReport

Link: https://theleadingreport.com/election-irregularities-and-fraud-cause-multiple-elections-to-be-overturn-in-2023/

In 2023, voting irregularities and fraud were discovered in at least four U.S. elections, leading to new voting in the majority of those contests. These elections were overturned by courts.
The first a most recent was a Louisiana judge that voided the results of a local sheriff’s race and ordered a runoff election after illegal votes were discovered. The race had been previously determined by ONE vote.
According to the decision, at least five absentee ballots were counted that shouldn’t have been, four invalid votes cast by unqualified voters, and two people voted twice.
Last month in November, a Bridgeport, Connecticut judge overturned the results of the Democrat mayoral primary election and ordered a new election in connection to allegations of absentee ballot abuse after a video was posted online that appeared to show a supporter of incumbent Democrat Mayor Joe Ganim stuffing stacks of papers into a ballot drop box.
Additionally in November, the Texas Fourth Court of Appeals upheld the decision of a lower court to change Daisy Campos-Rodriguez’s declaration of victory in the 2022 District II Laredo City Council election to Ricardo Rangel Jr.
A Texas district court judge declared earlier this year that 11 votes cast for Campos-Rodriguez in the general election of November 2022 were fraudulent. Several Laredo Police Department officers cast votes, leading to the suspension of three of them and the retirement of another. At first, Campos-Rodriguez was deemed the victor by six votes.
The last ruling was by a Vilas County Circuit Court judge in Wisconsin that found that the results of a town board election in April had votes that were illegally cast. The election was decided by a one-vote margin.
The judge set aside the results and ordered a new election be held Nov. 14. and in the new election, MacLean (who originally lost and filed the lawsuit) won by 29 votes.

 

[Apollonian]

Oh, how democratic! Democrats generously considering a nationwide initiative to make elections more exclusive. How inclusive of them!​

January 4, 2024 8:31 am by CWR

Link: https://citizenwatchreport.com/oh-h...ections-more-exclusive-how-inclusive-of-them/

It’s Not Just Trump: Democrats Are Moving to Bar Republicans From Ballots Nationwide

As the decisions disqualifying former President Donald Trump from the 2024 election work their way through the courts, a new filing in Pennsylvania seeks the same “ballot cleansing” by barring Rep. Scott Perry.
It’s only the latest effort targeting congressional candidates as Democrats seek to bar opponents as “insurrectionists” for questioning the election of President Biden.

We have become a nation of Madame Defarges — eagerly knitting names of those to be subject to arbitrary justice.
Former congressional candidate Gene Stilp, who’s made headlines by burning MAGA flags with swastikas outside courthouses, filed the challenge.

Using the 14th Amendment to disqualify candidates like Perry is consistent with Stilp’s signature flag-burning stunts.

See also Biden calls out Moderate democrats for believing "abunch of lies" before storming off from a press event...

But what’s chilling is how many support such efforts, including Democratic officeholders from Maine’s secretary of state to dozens of members of Congress.

New Jersey Rep. Bill Pascrell sought to bar 126 members of Congress under the same theory for challenging the election before Jan. 6, 2021.

RFK Jr: Trump Ballot Removal ‘Makes Us Look Like a Banana Republic‘

“I think it’s wrongheaded,” Kennedy replied. “I think it’s counterproductive. I’m not a fan of President Trump that’s why I’m running against him. But I don’t want — and I’m confident that I’m going to beat him. I don’t want to beat him on a slanted playing field. I think the American people want to see a fair fight. They want debates, they want real democracy. They want to be able to choose their candidate, their president not have a court choose it. And as you point out, I’ve read the decision and it makes no sense to me that you can deprive an American citizen of this right? We’re unprecedent without ever charging him with a much less convicting him of insurrection. He is not even charged with it.”

See also Liberal Billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya Abandons Democrats, Cites Disenchantment with Biden – A Growing Trend?

 

[Apollonian]

This discussion on FOX News w. the shyster/Prof. goes to show the NEW development in Jew S A electioneering, suckers--what's going on? Well, the globalist-satanists (CFR, Trilateralists, WEF, and Bilderbergers), who run the legalized counterfeiting scam, the US Federal Reserve, which puts out all the currency (not REAL money--see Mises.org for best expo; use their site search-engine for particular terms, like "fiat-currency"), and who thus OWN EVERYTHING, practically, are yet scared they could lose control of things political and cultural, the Christians striking back w. such as Trump, and lately w. Ramaswamy (who's actually a Hindu, ho ho ho), who stand for "America-first" (though the Jews fm Israel, allied w. the "Judeo-Christian" hereticalist scum, run Trump who does whatever Israel Jews tell him). That's why globalist-satanists have now manipulated Demon-rats to arbitrarily removing Trump fm ballots in Colo. and Maine WITHOUT ANY DUE PROCESS over "insurrection" lies. Pretended, fake "insurrection" of Jan 6 2021 was actually a false-flag done by globalist-satanists, fairly proven by their deliberate manipulations of the Congressional inquiry kangaroo ct. the Demon-rats ran, AND THEN DESTROYED THE FRAUDULENT EVIDENCE (for obvious reasons)--which is obstruction of justice, etc., actual criminal conduct. But globalist-satanists own everything and everybody, esp. the judges (many if not most) and practically entire Jews-media. So we're really, literally in a veritable CIVIL WAR (as in Spain during the mid 1930s--look it up) which the stupid, ignorant goons of Jew S A, called, "the people," barely know is taking place--a sad, sad joke--esp. when u realize the whole economy of Jew S A is about to collapse, huge (at least $34 trillion) debt, for which the int. payment is over a trillion dollars a yr now, the largest item in the US gov. budget and rapidly growing, w. wars now in Ukraine and Israel, the border situation worsening, etc. Stupid puke, called "the people," hardly grasping the horrific consequences (namely that they're going to be terribly POOR soon, the dumb, ignorant, scummy puke). "Chickens" now, finally, coming home to "roost" which economists warned would happen w. the decades of huge budget deficits, year after year, after year.

 

[Apollonian]

Demon-rats, globalist-satanist behind them, try to legally force RFK off ballots in several states

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Democrats file FEC complaint against Robert Kennedy Jr. and allied super PAC​

Story by Michael Scherer • 4d

Link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-file-fec-complaint-against-robert-kennedy-jr-and-allied-srfk jr antivaxper-pac/ar-BB1i2WcS/

[see vid(s) at site link, above]

Democrats file FEC complaint against Robert Kennedy Jr. and allied super PAC© Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post
The Democratic National Committee accused third-party candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Friday of violating federal election law by unlawfully coordinating with a supportive super PAC in a $15 million effort to collect signatures for state ballot access.
“Put simply, to qualify for the ballot under state law, American Values 2024 must coordinate its activity with Mr. Kennedy and his campaign in a way that violates federal campaign finance laws,” attorneys for the Democratic National Committee wrote in a complaint to the Federal Election Commission.

The complaint follows an announced effort by American Values 2024 that it will spend $15 million to collect signatures in 15 states so Kennedy can appear on the ballot. In a call with reporters Friday, DNC legal counsel Bob Lenhard argued that “state law presumes and in some cases requests that the candidate committee or candidate” is involved in the petition process, making the super PAC spending an illegal in-kind donation.
Democrats sound alarm, take action against Biden’s third-party threats

Super PACs, unlike campaigns, are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from campaigns and corporations, but they are not allowed to coordinate most spending with campaigns.
“The DNC wants to deny millions of people their basic constitutional voting rights in a relentless onslaught against democracy,” Tony Lyons, the founder of American Values, said in a statement responding to the complaint. “The FEC complaint is just another desperate DNC tactic to defame Kennedy, vilify him and drain his campaign funds.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/new...this-bill-would-be-an-improvement/vi-BB1hWdLQ

• 
  NBC NewsRobert F. Kennedy, Jr. says he hopes ‘to draw equal numbers from both’ Trump and Biden: Full interview
  https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/new...tial-run-as-libertarian-candidate/vi-BB1hv9Iu

Democrats will 'break all the rules' to keep RFK Jr. off 2024 ballot: Mark Gorton

Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, the candidate’s campaign manager and daughter-in-law, said in a statement that the FEC complaint was a “nonissue.”
The campaign, she explained, has created a structure that allows any volunteer to download signature forms for the various states and then mail them in for verification by a campaign vendor.
“We receive parcels of signatures from our volunteer groups all over the United States,” she said. “To my knowledge, we have yet to receive any signatures from American Values PAC or any PAC, nor have we provided any information that is not available to every volunteer and media outlet on our public website.”

Teacher sued over accusations he tried to sell junior high students’ art

‘Neuter your ex’ sounds like revenge. Shelters say it’s an act of love.

In Valentine’s story at the zoo, beaver courtship began with a bite

 

[Apollonian]

RFK Jr. Scores Big Win In Lawsuit Accusing Biden Admin Of Censoring COVID Vaccine Info​

BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, FEB 17, 2024 - 02:10 PM
Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/f...-biden-admin-censoring-covid-19-vaccine-info/

Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has notched a victory in his legal battle against alleged government censorship of statements he made on social media that were critical of the COVID-19 vaccines.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attends the season 12 premiere of HBO's "Curb Your Enthusiasm" at Directors Guild Of America in Los Angeles on Jan. 30, 2024. (Frazer Harrison/Getty Images)

A federal court has granted a preliminary injunction against the White House and other federal defendants in a lawsuit brought by Mr. Kennedy Jr. that accuses the Biden administration of orchestrating a campaign to pressure social media platforms to censor vaccine criticism.
Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued the ruling on Feb. 14, stating that Mr. Kennedy Jr. has demonstrated a strong likelihood of success in proving government infringement on his free speech rights.
The injunction prevents the defendants—which include the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the FBI—from taking any actions to coerce social media companies to remove or suppress content containing protected free speech.
The injunction remains on hold for the time being, however, as the proceeding in Mr. Kennedy Jr.’s lawsuit has been consolidated with the case of Missouri v. Biden, which is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The freeze will be in place for 10 days after the Supreme Court rules in Missouri v. Biden, which is based on the same evidence.
The defendants have, in prior public statements, denied illegally leaning on social media companies to stifle protected free speech.
Rather, they have said they only ever flagged objectionable content, such as that they claimed was “misinformation” and “disinformation” and that it violated the companies’ own terms of use.

‘Destructive, Coercive Threats’​

Mr. Kennedy Jr., along with plaintiffs Children’s Health Defense and Connie Sampognaro, a health professional who says she was harmed by the government’s censorship campaign, have alleged in their class action complaint that the Biden administration violated their right to free speech.
They accuse President Joe Biden and other federal defendants of systematically and repeatedly using “destructive, coercive threats” to force social media platforms to censor protected speech.
The Biden administration is also accused of entering into “collusive partnerships” with social media companies and working with them to censor constitutionally protected expression.
Mr. Kennedy has argued that the defendants harmed him by censoring him on social media—in some cases deplatforming him entirely—and so preventing him from gathering vaccine-related news and passing it along to his hundreds of thousands of followers.
Children’s Health Defense has also made the same argument but, additionally, it claims that its many members were deprived of information and ideas about the safety and efficacy of alternative COVID-19 treatments.
Ms. Sampognaro has alleged that the Biden administration’s actions have harmed her as a health care policy advocate by depriving her of complete, accurate information about COVID-19 and possible treatments.
The complaint also asked the court to certify the case a class action to cover all people who consumed news related to COVID-19 or U.S. elections on Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube, at anytime from January 2020 to the present, and so who would have been harmed by government censorship of related facts.

‘Willingness to Coerce’​

The lawsuit singled out several of the “countless examples” of the Biden administration’s alleged censorship campaign.
One was the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story on social media ahead of the 2020 presidential election, with the complaint calling it “an act of censorship that deprived Americans of information of the highest public interest” and that “may even have swung the outcome of that election.” Polling has indicated that many voters would have picked a different candidate had they been aware of the laptop’s contents, which included information suggesting President Biden was involved in his son’s overseas business dealings, contrary to his repeated denials.
Another was suppression of reporting or expression of opinion that COVID-19 originated in a Chinese regime lab in Wuhan.
Workers are seen next to a cage with mice (R) inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan, capital of China's Hubei Province, on Feb. 23, 2017. (Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images)
The third example was online suppression of facts and opinions about COVID-19 vaccines “that might lead people to become ‘hesitant’ about COVID vaccine mandates, again depriving Americans of information and opinions on matters of the highest public importance.”
In his order, Judge Doughty found that Mr. Kennedy and the other plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits that the defendants colluded to influence the actions of private social media companies “by ‘insinuating’ themselves into the social-media companies’ private affairs and blurring the line between public and private action.”
He also sided with the complaint in determining that the Biden administration’s actions represented a “substantial risk of harm” to Mr. Kennedy and the other plaintiffs.
“And it is certainly likely that Defendants could use their power over millions of people to suppress alternative views or moderate content that they do not agree with in the upcoming 2024 national election,” Judge Doughty wrote.
He said that Mr. Kennedy has proven that the Biden administration has shown “willingness to coerce” or at least give significant encouragement to social media companies to suppress free speech with regard to COVID-19 vaccines, national elections, gas prices, climate change, gender, and abortion.
In July 2023, Judge Doughty also granted an injunction in the Missouri v. Biden case, which is now pending before the Supreme Court.
More than 50 officials in the Biden administration across a dozen agencies were involved in efforts to pressure big tech companies to censor alleged misinformation, according to documents released in 2022.

MORE MARKETS STORIES ON ZEROHEDGE​

"F**k Around & Find Out": Truckers Warn Loads To NYC Will Be Rejected Starting Monday​

Lawless America: Truck Hauling Corvettes Hijacked In 'Grand Theft Auto'-Like Robbery​

Chinese Stocks Set To Soar​

​

 

[Apollonian]

Demon-rats terrified by the RFK candidacy, suckers--will take lots of votes fm brain-dead vegetable & Demon-rats

 

[Apollonian]

Judge Merchan’s Gag Order Against President Trump Is The Textbook Case Of An Unconstitutional Prior Restraint On His First Amendment Rights: A Legal Commentary On Why It Must Be Removed​

By Paul Ingrassia Apr. 22, 2024 7:30 am

Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...r-against-president-trump-is/?utm_source=rss/

Judge Merchan’s emotionally deranged and irresponsibly overbroad gag order, issued in two separate installments, the second building off the first, is both dangerous and unprecedented for its sweeping scope. It severely infringes on President Trump’s fundamental rights protected under the First Amendment to speak, and, wherever appropriate, criticize the trial proceeding as he sees fit. It is well-settled law that prior restraints on speech, of which gag orders are the textbook example, are – in the overwhelming majority of cases – unconstitutional as a form of government censorship.
Only in the rarest of cases has the Supreme Court upheld prior restraints on speech. In the few cases where the Court has upheld gag orders, a form of prior restraint, the order was necessary to achieve a compelling state interest. In other words, the Supreme Court has only permitted gag orders that satisfied the extremely high burden of strict scrutiny analysis. Where gag orders are at issue, strict scrutiny compels courts to limit the scope of the order to an articulable set of facts – the facts encompassing the order must be extremely particularized and limited in scope, and only considered as a final option if and when all other alternatives to help ensure a fair trial have been totally exhausted.
Thus, gag orders are only ever to be used as a last resort option, and only in the most exceptional cases when the right to a fair trial would otherwise be severely jeopardized without it. In the rare cases where a gag order would be appropriate, again the court must take great pains to ensure that it is structured in such a way as to be particularized to a highly limited set of facts that have a direct bearing on the integrity of the proceeding – and go no further. The gag order should always be temporary, with a definitive start time and expiration date, terminating whenever the danger that resulted in its issuance in the first place subsides, or immediately once alternative, less constraining methods that would ensure a fair proceeding become available, whichever comes first.

Regrettably, Judge Merchan has run roughshod over those fundamental principles that would otherwise prevent gag orders from unduly violating the speech rights of the defendant, Donald Trump. To reiterate, gag orders are the archetypal example of a prior restraint on speech. The general rule is that prior restraints on speech are presumptively unconstitutional. Courts only uphold them in the rarest of cases where all other options are unavailable to ensure a fair trial, and only after assurances that the order has been narrowly tailored in its scope — and necessary to achieve — a compelling state interest – that is to say, an interest of monumental urgency that would imperil the proceeding without it.

In a criminal proceeding involving a President of the United States, the normal checks that create a presumption against issuance of a gag order should receive heightened scrutiny. Indeed, because of the political notoriety of the defendant, in addition to the well-established list of factors that create a reasonable presumption against Judge Merchan’s trial being anything but fair, the normal strict scrutiny analysis applicable should be counterbalanced by the overriding public interests at play here that strongly disfavor any sort of infringement on speech and press rights whatsoever.
These precautions should even be observed if strict scrutiny analysis would, under normal circumstances, dictate permitting a limited gag order. This is because the case involves the leading presidential candidate, just months before what many pundits believe will be one of the most hotly contested presidential elections in American history, where the stakes of the election could not possibly be higher. Moreover, no fair-minded observer would say that Donald Trump could possibly get a fair trial in lower Manhattan, before a Democratic judge, wherein a jury pool was drawn from a borough of which nearly 90% of residents voted for Joe Biden over Donald Trump in 2020.
Accordingly, based on an objective assessment of all the facts here, if the court is to consider issuing any encroachments on anybody’s First Amendment rights, the operative principle must be that such limitations be subject to the highest possible scrutiny. Normal strict scrutiny analysis should set the floor, and really, the court should be held to a theoretically higher level of scrutiny for imposing any limitations in light of additional factors at play here that make this proceeding extraordinary: 1) the defendant is the frontrunner to be the next president; 2) the public has a strong political interest in the outcome of the case because a criminal conviction would deny tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Americans their voting rights; and 3) the trial itself is already compromised by the myriad conflicts of interest, detailed throughout this article, and the lack of transparency in the process – both of which facially pose serious due process problems.

In a normal criminal trial, typically the defendant receives certain constitutional protections, including an implicit right to anonymity, that mitigate against creating unfair prejudices in the minds of jurors. These guardrails, which are patently missing in President Trump’s case, are of critical importance to preserving the integrity and fairness of a proper criminal proceeding overall.
In a criminal trial especially, courts have traditionally taken great pains to ensure the jury pool does not bring their preconceived biases about the defendant that could prejudicially color the ultimate verdict. Usually if a juror even knows anything about a criminal defendant – good, bad, or indifferent – before the trial, that juror is struck. This is especially true for a highly publicized trial because those preconceived biases are rightly seen as compromising to the defendant’s presumption of innocence. No matter how impartial a juror might insist he or she is, as a practical matter it is virtually impossible to set aside the impressions one might already have about the defendant from one’s judgment about the defendant’s guilt or innocence.
In a case involving Donald Trump, arguably the most famous individual in the world, of which nearly all Americans have an opinion, the baked-in protections that generally help foster a presumption of innocence for ordinary criminal defendants are entirely absent here. The court, in short, cannot pretend to be agnostic to the stark political realities of this case, which necessarily redound to – and are inextricably linked with – the defendant’s identity. There is no possible way to divorce the defendant from the political passions of the jury pool – to pretend otherwise, as Alvin Bragg and Judge Merchan do, poses a grave injustice to both Donald Trump’s rights and to the public interest.

This injustice encompasses President Trump’s tens (if not hundreds) of millions of would-be voters, who are also deeply affected – both politically and emotionally – by this criminal proceeding and have an indispensable interest in its outcome. The public has an overriding interest in this case – and the public interest necessarily entails maximum transparency on part of the court. Furthermore, because cameras are not permitted in Judge Merchan’s courtroom, the judge has an additional responsibility to ensure that both the defendant and the public’s constitutional rights and interests are not anymore unduly limited via issuance of unconstitutional prior constraints like gag orders, or anything of that sort, over the course of the proceeding.
Alas, the public has great cause for concern to believe that Judge Merchan has so far ignored their interest (to say nothing of brazenly ignoring President Trump’s constitutional rights), completely disregarding constitutional considerations of the highest importance in the process. For one, the fact that Merchan issued a first gag order on March 26th, with no stated end date, and with only sporadic citations to law, was bad enough. Even worse, however, was that Merchan went so far as to issue a second order, fewer than one week later, on April 1st, expanding the already overbroad March 26th gag order to also capture any speech by the defendant directed at the family of Judge Merchan or Alvin Bragg, is multiple bridges too far.
Judge Merchan’s second gag order reads like a child throwing a temper tantrum, an emotionally charged rant that somehow manages to insult President Trump, his supporters, and the entire public, in the process. At its most histrionic point, Judge Merchan’s emotively rages “It is no longer just a mere possibility or a reasonable likelihood that there exists a threat to the integrity of the judicial proceedings. The threat is very real. Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well.” [Emphasis in the original.]

Judge Merchan’s theatrical diatribe – notably heavy on emotion, light on substance – was so clearly issued as a desperate, last-ditch act to prevent President Trump from exposing the very grave conflicts of interest implicating the judge and his immediate family members, including Merchan’s own daughter and wife, that make virtually impossible a fair trial from the start.
Judge Merchan is a known Democratic donor. For years, he has been a serial contributor to Democratic politicians, including, as recently as 2020, a direct contributor to Joe Biden, Donald Trump’s likely opponent in the 2020 general election. He has also made contributions through various political action committees that support Democratic politicians in general. Maybe even more damning, Judge Merchan’s daughter, Loren, serves as President of a political advocacy group, Authentic, whose clients include none other than the Biden-Harris campaign, Adam Schiff, Kathy Hochul, Gavin Newsom, Ilhan Omar, and many other high-profile, far left progressive Democratic politicians. Finally, Judge Merchan’s own wife reportedly works directly for New York State Attorney General Letitia James, who made the central point of her campaign for AG to “get” Donald Trump. Of course, when she was on the campaign trail James could not cite any legitimate legal rationale to “get” her biggest political adversary in Trump, other than being obviously driven by envy and spite, the ugly sentiments that seem to animate her entire career in public office.
Judge Merchan’s claim that issuance of the gag order was necessary to prevent “attacks” on his family are utterly groundless. President Trump never “attacked” Judge Merchan or any of his relatives. The definition of attack is to take “an aggressive and violent action against a person or place.” Under the law, attacks are equivalent to threats. In First Amendment jurisprudence, under the well-settled precedent from Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), speech may be prohibited only if it is (1) “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” and (2) such speech is “likely to incite or produce such action.” The classic example: a party that raises his fist and says, “I’m going to punch you in the nose” will likely have engaged in punishable speech under Brandenburg; a party that says, “I am going to punch you in the nose the next time I see you,” has not.

A party that says, “You should be recused because your daughter has, as a client to her firm, the man I am going to likely face in the upcoming presidential election,” is neither inciting nor threatening nor imminent nor lawless. That is constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment; not an “attack,” as Judge Merchan complains, and surely, not grounds for a gag order – which, here, applying this analysis, renders it as an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech.
Even if President Trump had called upon his supporters – which, let me be emphatically clear, he never did nor would do – to verbally harass Loren Merchan, Judge Merchan’s daughter, via a phone call or letter or email-writing campaign, that speech would still pass muster as constitutionally protected under a faithful application of the Brandenburg precedent, which establishes the rule for lawfully prohibiting speech. What President Trump did, via his Truth Social platform, comes nowhere close to even the latter hypothetical. Thus, the Judge’s knee jerk reaction to impede the President’s First Amendment right to criticize the unfairness of his trial, and point out what many legal commentators, experienced political experts, and observers have called a judicially disqualifying conflict of interest – under both New York’s Rules Governing Judicial Conflict as well as the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct – flagrantly violates the Constitution, makes a mockery of the rule of law, and should not stand.

Trending: Biden Regime Sues Sheetz Convenience Stores for Discrimination ONE DAY After Old Joe’s Embarrassing Botched Photo Op at a Sheetz Gas Station

Under no circumstances should this trial be allowed to carry on without, at the bare, bare minimum, Judge Merchan’s recusal. President Trump’s lawyers have every right in the world to call for a mistrial. Any court worth its salt – and committed to the Constitution – would grant a mistrial without second thought because there is no possible way President Trump’s fundamental rights can be preserved, as a criminal defendant, in Judge Merchan’s proceeding, where conflicts, venue, and grievous First Amendment rights violations, in addition to a litany of other factors, have already prejudiced this trial beyond repair.