Podcast appearances and mentions of justice doj

donald trump news fbi records npr epstein breaking news critics jeffrey epstein pages doj vanishing justice department ghislaine maxwell prince andrew observers withhold peter mandelson justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later May 31, 2026 24:57 Transcription Available

A new NPR investigation has revealed that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appears to have withheld and even removed dozens of pages from the public database of documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act that relate to **sexual abuse allegations involving President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. According to NPR, records tied to FBI interviews and notes from conversations with a woman who claims Trump sexually abused her as a minor are absent from the public archive, even though evidence suggests those pages were catalogued and should have been released. Some materials where Trump's name is mentioned were temporarily taken down and re-uploaded, and others remain unreleased, raising serious questions about whether the DOJ is fully complying with the law requiring transparency about the investigation.Critics argue that this selective release and redaction undermines public trust in the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files and appears to protect Trump from scrutiny despite his extensive mentions in the records — Trump's name appears in tens of thousands of documents in the Epstein archive. Observers say the DOJ's actions, combined with Trump's repeated denials of wrongdoing and claims of “total exoneration,” have shielded him from accountability even as other figures tied to Epstein — such as Peter Mandelson — face arrest and legal exposure abroad. This has fueled criticism that the DOJ is more interested in managing political optics than in complete transparency or justice for survivors, weakening confidence in how elite connections to Epstein are investigated.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ removed, withheld Epstein files related to accusations about Trump : NPRBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Non-technical Features For Assessing Inventive Step – Alternatives to the Problem Solution Approach – Emotional Perception AI Limited Case of the UK Supreme Court – Abbout vs. Sinocare UPC Case – Interview with Bruce Dearling ̵

IP Fridays - your intellectual property podcast about trademarks, patents, designs and much more

Play Episode Listen Later May 29, 2026 50:04

[powerpresss] My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 175 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Bruce Dearling, patent attorney and partner at Hepworth Browne in the UK, and we talk about how non-technical features must be considered when assessing inventive step of patents at least according to recent decisions of the UK supreme court and the Unified Patent Court. Profile of Bruce Dearling UK Supreme Court Emotional Perception AI Limited UPC Abbot vs Sinocare But before we jump into this interesting interview, I have news for you: On May 20, 2026, the Swiss Federal Council adopted the fully revised Patent Ordinance, which will enter into force on January 1, 2027, together with the revised Patent Act. In the future, the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property will prepare a mandatory search report for each application; applicants can choose between a partially examined version and a full examination that assesses novelty and inventive step. The full examination costs an additional 300 Swiss francs, and renewal fees will increase by a total of eight percent over the 20-year term. On May 19, 2026, Asus entered into a licensing agreement with the Wi-Fi multimode patent pool managed by Sisvel, thereby ending all ongoing infringement proceedings. Sisvel bundles standard-essential patents in the pool from, among others, Atlantia, ETRI, and Mitsubishi Electric. On May 18, 2026, the UPC Local Chamber in Düsseldorf rejected Align Technology's application for a preliminary injunction against its Chinese competitor Angelalign. Angelalign may continue to sell its clear aligners within the UPC jurisdiction. Our partners Dirk Schulz, Ulrich Storz, and Wanze Zhang, together with Arnold Ruess, successfully represented Angelalign. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced midweek that, since October of last year, it has invalidated or is seeking to invalidate approximately 10,500 trademark applications and registrations in eleven administrative orders. Reasons include forged attorney signatures and the fabrication of non-existent filing requirements. This stems from ongoing abuse of the U.S. trademark system, primarily by non-U.S. applicants, which can lead to conflicts with validly registered trademarks for legitimate businesses. On May 12, 2026, the British Court of Appeal overturned a lower court decision that would have required Nokia to grant interim licenses for video coding patents. The court found that Nokia's license offer to the Taiwanese manufacturers Acer and Asus had already been made on RAND terms. In May, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a brief in the ongoing Corteva v. Inari litigation, expressing antitrust concerns regarding certain patent practices in the field of plant breeding. This marks the first time the agency has actively intervened in a biopharmaceutical patent dispute with implications for seed innovations. Episode 175 of the IP Fridays podcast was a conversation I will not forget quickly. My guest Bruce Dearling, partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK and a patent attorney for 36 years, took a case through every level of the British court system up to the Supreme Court and, in doing so, fundamentally changed patent law for AI inventions in the UK. The case is called Emotional Perception, and its effects reach well beyond British borders. Below I summarize the key points from our conversation. The full episode is available at IP Fridays. A. What Is the Emotional Perception Case About? The underlying invention concerns artificial neural networks. Specifically, it relates to a method of closing what is called the semantic gap at the output of a neural network. That sounds abstract, but the idea is straightforward: a neural network always produces an output that does not fully correspond to what a human would actually expect or feel. Closing that gap brings the system closer to human perception and human expectations. Bruce Dearling drafted this application himself and filed it at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). The Office rejected it as excluded subject matter, characterizing it as essentially a computer program as such. The legal basis for that rejection was the Aerotel decision from 2006. The case then went to the High Court, which found in favor of the applicant. The Court of Appeal reversed that decision. Then the UK Supreme Court stepped in and changed everything. B. The Aerotel Test and Its Flaws Since 2006, the Aerotel test had been the standard British method for assessing whether an invention falls within the excluded categories under patent law. It was a four-step approach: construe the claim, identify the actual contribution the invention makes to human knowledge, ask whether that contribution falls solely within excluded subject matter, and finally check whether the contribution is technical in nature. The problem Dearling described in our conversation is that Aerotel reverses the logical order of the analysis. You start with the contribution and only then ask about the exclusions under Article 52 EPC. The UK Supreme Court described Aerotel in its judgment as “unsound law” and overturned it. The EPO’s Technical Boards of Appeal had previously called Aerotel “disingenuous,” which at the time led to a public dispute between the British courts and the Boards. With the Emotional Perception ruling, that conflict has now been resolved in favor of harmonization with the EPO. C. What the UK Supreme Court Decided The Supreme Court made two central findings. First, the exclusion of computer programs “as such” is overcome as soon as a claim includes any piece of hardware. It does not matter whether that is a processor, a memory module, or any other component. The threshold is deliberately low. Dearling described this as the “any hardware” approach, which aligns fully with the EPO’s position following G1/19. Second, and in Dearling’s assessment the more important finding: when assessing inventive step, the invention must be considered as a whole. The Court introduced what it called an “intermediate step,” an analytical stage in which the interactions between all features of a claim are examined before the question of inventive step is addressed. Non-technical features cannot simply be struck out if they contribute to the overall technical effect of the invention. D. Inventive Step: The Intermediate Step This is the heart of the judgment. In EPO practice, Dearling said, it happens regularly that examiners strike through features they consider non-technical and thereby fail to assess the invention’s inventive step correctly. A recent Technical Board of Appeal decision, T 1249/22, already criticized this approach: a claim directed at a technical solution to a problem can be patentable even if the underlying problem is non-technical in nature. Dearling recalled a remark made by a Board of Appeal member at a hearing he attended years ago: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” That quote stayed with him because it names a structural problem that the intermediate step now addresses directly. The British method for assessing inventive step is the Pozzoli test, which differs from the EPO’s problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court explicitly retained Pozzoli because the problem-solution approach, in its view, is structurally infected with hindsight reasoning: you already know the invention, you work backwards to formulate an objective technical problem, and then you ask whether it would have been obvious for the skilled person to arrive at precisely that solution. Dearling sees this as a source of unfairness toward genuine inventions. E. Alignment with the Unified Patent Court In April 2025, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued a decision in Abbott v. Sinocare (APP_000000901/2025, judgment of 17 April 2025). Dearling pointed out that this decision uses language and reasoning strikingly similar to the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling of February 2025. That is significant because the UPC is bound neither by UK courts nor by the EPO. The overlap suggests voluntary convergence. Dearling reported a conversation with a person close to the EPO, whom he did not name, who used the word “permissive” to describe the UK Supreme Court’s approach and indicated that the EPO might move toward it. Whether and how quickly that happens remains to be seen. What is clear is that the UPC, as the new European patent court, is setting its own standards, and the question of how to handle non-technical features in inventive step assessment is now being asked at multiple levels simultaneously. F. Implications for the EPO and Practice The EPO is not directly bound by the ruling. It is an administrative body, not a court. Dearling is nonetheless optimistic that change is coming. On one hand, external pressure is building: when the UK Supreme Court and the UPC articulate similar principles, convergence becomes hard to resist. On the other hand, Article 27.1 TRIPS requires all contracting states to make patents available in all fields of technology. Examiners routinely striking non-technical features from AI claims and rejecting them on that basis sits uncomfortably with that obligation. For the underlying application in the Emotional Perception case, the ruling has a pointed consequence. The Supreme Court did not grant the patent itself; it referred the matter back to the UKIPO for reconsideration under the intermediate step. The Office’s subsequent response was, in Dearling’s words, unconvincing. He suspects the Office is attempting to reintroduce the Aerotel test through the back door. As a last resort, he has not excluded a judicial review, a procedure that does not simply challenge the substantive decision but holds the Comptroller General of Patents to account for whether the Office is deliberately circumventing the Supreme Court’s direction on the intermediate step. That is, as Dearling put it, “a nuclear option,” but one he would not rule out if the evidence in the file already suggests the Office is in contempt of court. There is also an international dimension. Singapore’s Intellectual Property Office launched a public consultation shortly after the ruling, asking whether Singapore should adopt the Emotional Perception approach into national law. That is British soft power operating in real time within the Commonwealth. G. Three Takeaways for Patent Practitioners At the end of our conversation I asked Bruce Dearling to distill the most important practical points. His first takeaway: make sure the claim contains hardware. This applies not only to UK and European applications but is simply good drafting hygiene. Without hardware in the claim, the application remains exposed. The second takeaway concerns the description. Anyone filing an AI invention needs to explain clearly which function is achieved by which piece of hardware, circuit, or software. Not as boilerplate, but as a complete technical account that describes the real-world effects. Dearling’s experience is that practitioners who write the claim first and fill in the description afterward run into trouble. The third takeaway emerged from the conversation itself: how the EPO assesses inventive step for AI inventions is not a settled question. It is worth following the development of UPC case law and any shifts in EPO practice closely. Anyone advising on AI patent applications today needs to know these arguments. H. Conclusion The UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling is not a British footnote. It has declared the Aerotel test dead, introduced the intermediate step that brings non-technical features back into the inventive step analysis, and set off a convergence movement that is already visible at the UPC and still pending at the EPO. For everyone working in AI patent practice, whether in prosecution, examination, or counseling, this ruling is required reading. Rolf Claessen: Our interview guest on IP Fridays podcast is Bruce Dearling. He has been in the IP field and a patent attorney for 36 years and is partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK. Thank you very much for being on the podcast. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure, Rolf. Thank you for inviting me. Rolf Claessen: All right. We just met at the INTA annual meeting in London. And you talked about the UK Supreme Court case where you were involved. And the core questions were whether non-technical features would be considered when assessing inventive step of patents. Can you briefly summarize this case? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit more than that. It started — I actually wrote the case. And I prosecuted it through the patent office. The patent office rejected the case for being excluded subject matter. So pretty much the excluded subject matter provisions in the UK are nearly identical. They’re as near as practical to the language of the EPC, so those of the European Patent Office — Article 52.2. But again, they apply as such. The actual technology relates to artificial neural networks. And the invention related to a very clever way of what is termed closing the semantic gap at the output of the neural network. So that means that in a neural network, there is always a discrepancy between the output of the neural network in terms of what it’s telling you you should be thinking essentially, and what reality is. So if you can close the semantic gap, then you align the neural network or the artificial intelligence system to better reflect human knowledge or human reactions and human expectations. So that’s really what the invention is about. There’s no point in going into too much detail with it — that’s the way it is. It’s very clever. So the UKIPO rejected this because they said it was essentially a computer program excluded from patentability as such. And they used a decision which is called Aerotel, which has been around since 2006. And that decision has caused considerable consternation and tension between the EPO Technical Boards of Appeal and the UK courts. Aerotel was described as being essentially disingenuous by the EPO Technical Board of Appeal. And the UK courts pushed back and said, you don’t know what you’re talking about. So that’s where it fell apart. So that’s where they rejected it for essentially being a computer program as such, possibly with a bit of business methods thrown in as well. But let’s leave that for the time being. So the case then went to the High Court and at the High Court, we won. The judge said, actually, it’s not a computer program. Neural networks aren’t computers. They’re not programs themselves. There’s more to them than that. And the invention as claimed is not excluded from patentability as such. The UKIPO obviously weren’t very happy about that because they liked their Aerotel case and so they appealed it. And they appealed it on several grounds, including a new one, which was that it was a mathematical method. The Court of Appeal decided that the UKIPO was right and that we were wrong, so we lost the case. So we then went to the Supreme Court. Well, actually, they denied us an ability to go to the Supreme Court. The court said no appeal. We went — actually, no, I think there is a bigger issue here — because we realized, or I realized at that point, that the work that we were doing was much broader than this. It requires real consideration of what an invention is at a fundamental level. So not only exclusions, but how inventive step is applied. And these issues were built into the case from the very beginning. And they sort of — I wouldn’t say crept up on the court as we went through — but they became more and more prominent to the extent that ultimately, when we made an application to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court went, yeah, we’ve got some issues here. We want to hear the full arguments on why this is not excluded from patentability, why Aerotel is potentially bad and how we more or less try to align ourselves with the European Patent Office. So that’s essentially what happened. And the Supreme Court hearing was last July. It took them the thick end of eight months to come out with a decision, which was issued in early February, at which point the entire legal landscape in the UK changed because they said we were right. The Patent Office doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Aerotel is bad. It’s unsound. That’s what they described it as — unsound law. It needs to be removed and we’re going to harmonize with the European Patent Office. So before I — I’m just going on a bit of a rant here, standing on my soapbox telling you what you already know. But the Aerotel test essentially was — it was a four-step test, past tense. So you firstly had to construe the claim. That’s pretty straightforward. Then you actually had to identify the actual contribution. This is what they said — identify the contribution. Really in this aspect, you’re asking what, as a matter of substance rather than form, the inventor has added to human knowledge. So that’s what they said the contribution was. And then they said, the next step in Aerotel was to ask, well, does that contribution fall solely within the excluded subject matter field or realm? And then they said, well, if you get through that question, then you check the actual contribution or the alleged contribution to see whether it’s technical in nature. So that’s the Aerotel test as it was. And what the Supreme Court in their unanimous final decision said was that Aerotel at best jumbles up the order. It reverses the logical order of the analysis by starting with the contributions and then addressing the Article 52 exclusions. And then finally it goes back to what the technical nature of the invention is about. So they really went, no, we don’t like any of this stuff. It’s bad, it’s stupid, it puts the cart before the horse. So, in the intervening period between finding the case and actually seeing it progress all the way to the Supreme Court, we obviously had the G1/19 decision from the EPO Enlarged Board. And they basically said that they are going to validate any hardware as the approach. And that’s essentially what the UK also went with. The UK Supreme Court said we’re going to say that the threshold of patentability — or the exclusion to patentability — is simply overcome by the inclusion in a claim of any piece of hardware, whether it’s a processor or a piece of memory or whatever. It doesn’t matter. Any hardware makes the invention a technical invention. So it’s a really low threshold to consider. And they then went, well, actually, if we now align and harmonize with the European Patent Office sensibly, then we need to look at how we assess inventive step, which is the other thing that we raised with the Supreme Court. In fact, we probably raised it at other times and in all the other instances as well, but it came to a head at the Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court then also went a bit further and said, well, actually, whilst we do like the global approach to assessing inventive step for all fields of technology — whether it’s chemistry or biotech or electronics or software or AI — we use a test called Pozzoli. So that isn’t problem-solution. We don’t like problem-solution. We think it’s not codified in the European Patent Office. It’s just a mechanism that the EPO has come up with to try to objectively assess inventive step. We don’t particularly think that’s appropriate. We like our approach called Pozzoli. That’s it. So we’re going to say with Pozzoli, however, in order to actually understand — particularly in the context of mixed inventions having technical and non-technical features — it’s necessary for the examiner to undertake the so-called intermediate step, where you have to look at the interactions between features within a claim. The invention is defined by the claim. That’s what the act says. That’s what everyone understands. It’s the invention defined by the claim. So you look at the claim features and then you have to understand the interactions that take place. And even if they are between technical and non-technical features, if they bring about an overall technical effect when you consider the invention as a whole, then your claim should be good and you can assess it for classical inventive step. So that’s really where we’re at. There’s a lot to unpack there already. It’s probably a podcast in its own right, but that’s the positive history of where we’re at. And I can keep going if you wish me to for a second and talk about why I think this is — we’ll just contrast it quickly with the problem-solution approach at the EPO and COMVIK. So for inventions in the computer-implemented field, they use COMVIK and the problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court said, as I said, they don’t like problem-solution. I think the problem-solution issue is that it is also inherently pre-baked with hindsight because you have to look at the invention and then step back and exclude those features which are common. And then you formulate a problem based on the function that the claim achieves. And then you’re asking whether or not it would be obvious for a skilled person to arrive at the claimed invention, having been given that hindsight-developed problem. So COMVIK is not great by any means. And we know from a practical perspective that examiners are only too willing to look at a claim and simply line through features which they believe are non-technical, whereas they don’t actually look at the interaction of those features in the context of the claim as a whole. There is also a decision — very recent one actually, about a year ago — T 1249/22, where the Technical Board of Appeal told the examiners and the examining division, you cannot do this. It’s okay to have a claim directed towards an invention in a non-technical field, as long as the invention is directed to a technical solution of that problem. I think it’s paragraphs 11 and 12 or 10 of that decision that are worth looking at. But they’re saying that in all fields of technology, it doesn’t matter as long as the technical solution is about technology — therefore, you should be able to obtain a patent as long as there is a realistic and appropriate technical effect. Be careful actually, Bruce — I don’t mean technical contribution, I mean technical effect. There’s a reason for that distinction. Rolf Claessen: The non-technical features are nevertheless used to assess inventive step in the UK now after this decision, right? Bruce Dearling: Yes, that is the intermediate step. The decision says you must look at the invention as a whole. It’s the important thing. There are a couple of issues that arise out of this. The first one is that you have to provide context for the invention. The Supreme Court never provided any specific guidance about how we deal with the intermediate step or what the exact test is, which is in some respects fine. It seems to be fairly clear that you just have to engage your gray matter — your neurons — to work out what is going on in the real world. And once you work out what’s going on in the real world, what the benefits are, then you look at whether or not the actual implementation of the invention fundamentally has a technical flavor to it, which is not just coding, not just simple coding, but it does something smarter. There’s a real technical impetus. There’s a technical effect. Now that actually brings me onto something I’ve postulated or said. I think the intermediate step will follow something like what I’ve termed the holistic character test, which essentially is: work out what’s going on in the real world. Then once you’ve worked out what’s actually being achieved, what the benefits are, what the invention’s concerned with, then you ask the question, how am I achieving it technically? And how is there a technical effect? How does the technical effect arise? That brings out a couple of issues. The first one is that it’s actually about the word “contribution” because it depends on how the word is used. So if you look at head note one in COMVIK, it uses the word “contribute” — how the non-technical feature contributes to the invention. So that’s an additive inclusive concept. The UK IPO historically, and arguably at the moment today whilst they’re trying to retrain their 400 examiners — which this has caused them to have to do — their idea of contribution is this backward-looking concept. So technical contribution and technical effect, I think — although we mix them up and interchange them — are distinct. Technical contribution: you’re looking backwards. Technical effect is what you look at when you look forward into what’s going on. So this is subtle — it’s really subtle, but it’s important. And once you realize that you are actually looking for the technical effects, then you’re on much safer ground. It’s much more objective in terms of the assessment. This might be somewhat contentious, because it’s the way I’m looking at this, but I’ve been working on this a long, long time and thinking about it for probably decades, worryingly so. So technical contribution and technical effects are probably not the same, where they are interchangeably used to mean the same thing within existing decisions. Rolf Claessen: And in the beginning you said, now that Aerotel is dead basically, it’s more harmonized with the EPO’s approach. But what I take from the discussion now is that maybe — especially in view of the problem-solution approach — it’s not fully harmonized with the EPO’s approach at the moment, right? Or did the UK Supreme Court get something wrong, or was that a desired outcome from your point of view that this is not so completely harmonized with the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Well, the EPO — the any-hardware solution is fully harmonized, no doubt. So it’s now a question of inventive step under Article 56 or Section 3 of the Act. The EPC nowhere mandates the use of problem-solution. And we know that there are many different ways of actually assessing inventive step, including the concrete elaboration test from last year and problem-of-invention approaches. So there are numerous ways of assessing inventive step. So the UK says, “Pozzoli — we like Pozzoli.” Interestingly, I had a discussion with someone I probably can’t mention. They’re saying that the UK approach may actually be more permissive now. It might even influence how the EPO operates. So they may move away from COMVIK towards more of a Pozzoli approach, which basically says this: You identify the notion of the skilled person — step one. You identify the common general knowledge of that skilled person — step one B. You identify the inventive concept of the claim in question, where you construe it if you can’t work out what it is. You then identify what the differences are. And then you ask the question, is it obvious to the skilled person, given knowledge of the common general knowledge? This is entirely not artificial because, as I said beforehand, when you look at problem-solution, you are formulating a problem by backtracking from what the claimed invention is to a situation where you say, well, these are the common features and I’m going to project a problem to try and solve. Now that is already tainted with hindsight reasoning. It’s not safe, it’s not thoroughly objective. There is an inherent problem with this which sees good inventions cast by the wayside. Although it’s a preferred mechanism, it’s not fully baked. There are situations where examiners are inherently lazy, or they just simply use something like the requirements specification argument, which is just factual. It just demonstrates that they can’t be bothered to actually argue it properly or think about what the invention is. Sorry to any examiners listening to this, but this is just my personal view, that sometimes there are problems. I’m reminded of a quote from an EPI hearing I was at a long time ago, where the Legal Board of Appeal member said: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” Now that one has stayed with me because you think — did someone just say that? And the answer is yes, they did. But it just goes to show that there is some tension between the TBA and the examining divisions, and they don’t always get it right. Rolf Claessen: So there might be a small difference now between the UKIPO’s future approach of assessing inventive step and the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, it might do. But the other interesting thing here — and thank you for pointing this out, I hadn’t entirely caught up with it, I’ve been traveling beforehand and I missed some of the UPC case law. So the UPC case law — in, was it — yeah, we talked about that. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. There was a decision in April, Abbott versus Sinocare. Bruce Dearling: Yeah, 901 of 2025. So a Court of Appeal decision from the UPC. It was APP_000000901, I believe, 2025. Decision 17th of April, hearing 27th of March. The UPC is not bound by — it’s a court. The European Patent Office is not a court, it’s an agency that administers and looks after the administrative rule of law. So the fact that this decision came out from the UK Supreme Court in February, and you see almost identical language used in the UPC decision, suggests that there is some alignment here, or some convergence in thought. Now, whilst the UPC decision also references G1/19 and uses problem-solution, there is enough — you’ve got to bear in mind that high-level courts do look at each other’s decisions. And this is really a question of influence and the desire to converge. So the fact that they’ve done this at this time is quite interesting. Again, I can’t quote someone directly from the EPO, although I would love to. They were saying — at a very high level — and they used the words “converge UPC practice towards UK Supreme Court practice on interpretation of the law.” So this may actually be happening in real time. Again, it would be wrong to actually refer to anyone by name, but it’s an observation that when I looked at the case, I can see why this is going ahead. And I can see why the judiciaries — they want to maintain independent judicial controls. They won’t reference the UK Supreme Court decision, not least because we’re not in the UPC. But if you look at the arguments in sections 106 and 107 of the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception decision and head note one, you go — wow, this is very close. Rolf Claessen: Very close and nearly identical wording. Yeah. And the UPC also now uses non-technical features for assessing inventive step. Is that a problem for the EPO that has historically been aggressive in throwing out non-technical features for inventive step analysis? Bruce Dearling: Well, I think they really need to get to the situation — I don’t know — this holistic character test that I’m sort of proposing, where you really have to think about what the invention is achieving, and then look at how it’s technically being achieved. And then if you look at that again in the context of that other decision I mentioned — T 1249/22 — it says something like, in the case of an invention that amounts to a technical implementation of a non-technical method, provided the non-technical method does not contribute to the technical character of the invention. The board validated the approach of identifying the non-technical method and then goes through and says it’s patentable. There are decisions like this which suggest that examining divisions have to give it a bit more thought, because the Technical Board will realize that to satisfy the WTO requirements — which pretty much everyone is bound by — Article 27.1 TRIPS, which requires that you protect all fields of technology. And that means whether it’s data processing or business methods, because business methods can be patentable so long as they are implemented on a technical basis. That essentially seems to be what T 1249/22 is saying, although it doesn’t explicitly say “allowing business methods.” The exclusion is only “as such.” So does this decision, in combination with the Supreme Court case and the movement of the UPC, say: well, actually, let’s look at this properly? It requires objective assessments, not just superficial “let’s strike through that feature because I don’t like it, it looks non-technical.” Rolf Claessen: So are you hopeful that the EPO is adjusting and will reshape their case law in view of the UPC decision and the UK Supreme Court decision? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit unfortunate that the corresponding UK case at the EPO was dropped by the applicants, because it was heading towards an examination hearing at the examining division. It would have gone to the TBA, and I’m sure it would then have gone from the TBA to the Enlarged Board. I’m pretty sure that’s the case. There is another case from the same client which will probably argue the same thing because the specs are almost identical. It’s just lagged in time. So is it going to change? I hope so, because I think the EPO have got it wrong — more often than not in this field. Well, maybe not more often than not — they get it wrong more times than they should do. Would I like to see it changed? Yes, I would, because I want the examiners to actually think about the technology as opposed to just — oh, it’s not — I don’t want to engage the gray matter. That serves no one. That doesn’t serve technology. That doesn’t serve industry. These patent rights are there for a reason. They are property rights. I’m referring to the award of the 2025 Nobel Prize for Economics — they are a core driver for society’s development. So the 2025 Nobel Prize was for something called creative destruction — the replacement of old technology with new — and it’s based on the patent paradigm. So all this stuff is coming to a head now. It’s just a question of how quickly the EPO actually catch up, and maybe they have something to catch up on. It’s just understanding that the examiners have to start to think. As I said, we’ve got the issues at the UKIPO where they’re going to have to retrain 400 examiners. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, right. Bruce Dearling: The Emotional Perception case wasn’t granted by the Supreme Court. They referred it back to the patent office for consideration under the intermediate step. So the patent office produced a response that I would describe as — I’d say arguably — not well reasoned, which I’ve filed the response to, which basically says you don’t really know what you’re talking about. What really worries me a bit is that I think they’re trying to introduce the Aerotel case through the back door. It’s backsliding. It’s a mechanism for trying to apply it in a different way or a different context, which would be wrong. I think they believe that the applicant will appeal this if they get a bad decision — they will appeal it back to the courts again via the High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court route. I say maybe not. I say maybe the client will file what they call a judicial review, which is a nuclear option. That’s when you actually hold the Comptroller General of Patents to account and get full discovery of whether or not there’s internal documentation showing that they are deliberately circumventing the direction of the Supreme Court on the intermediate step. This is basically holding them to account and saying: if you’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately, you are in contempt of the law. So judicial review is a really serious thing to do, but it’s certainly something I would not exclude from consideration. We’ll see what happens. It’s not saying we’re just going to go through the courts and make them decide on this. We’re going to say you’re wrong. And there’s already enough evidence in the files to suggest that they are probably in contempt of court and they’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately. They may not know any better at the moment — they need to be guided — but the consequences for them are potentially severe. Rolf Claessen: I have another question for you. You were the instructing attorney — do you think the decision was perfect? What argument that you made was the most underappreciated by the court? And where do you think the judgment got it wrong, or was it all perfect? Bruce Dearling: No, it got 90% or 95% correct. The intermediate step is right. That’s the most important thing in the decision — it’s the intermediate step. The any-hardware thing — that’s logical, that makes some sense — but if people say “if the any-hardware rule is the important bit,” no it isn’t. It’s the intermediate step. That’s the important thing. Where do they go wrong? I think they went wrong because — and you’ve got to bear in mind that unlike German courts, I’ve got to be careful about how I express this — generally, as I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, but the judiciary in Germany on patent cases are generally more technically able. They’re normally technically qualified. I look at the Supreme Court justices and the Court of Appeal justices — we had one who was a humanities undergrad, one was a chemist. Good luck with trying to argue complex artificial neural network technologies, which are difficult even for me to understand. And I’ve been working in the field. They’re hard to understand. They require real understanding, real appreciation. They could say, well, actually we don’t need to look at the technology — but frankly, if you’re looking at the statutes and exclusions to patentability and asking what a computer program is, then you need to understand what these technical terms really are. And if you can’t, then the judgment is potentially flawed. Their finding that the neural network is a computer program is, I think, technically obtuse. You know that the Singaporean government — the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore — released about six weeks ago a consultation note to the Singaporean profession and population, asking: is the Emotional Perception case right, and do we need to adopt it into Singaporean national law? So this is direct soft power from the UK Supreme Court changing Commonwealth legislation and statutes. We’ll see what happens. But from what I’ve seen of a draft response from the attorneys, they’re saying essentially: we agree any hardware is right, the intermediate step is right. The assessment of the neural network as a computer program is wrong, or it just doesn’t make any sense. And I’ve made the same comments before in SIPA, in the relevant round in March. There’s a disconnect. I mean, it’s like they equate a computer program with being able to be run on an analog computer. Now, an analog computer has no central processing unit. An analog computer just has resistors and transistors and capacitors. So if they’re saying that an analog computer can run a program — that’s essentially what they’re saying in part of the judgment. Where is the program in an analog computer? And if they’re saying it’s in the values of the resistors and the capacitors, then that has implications for any circuit we’ve got — it’s potentially a computer program — which is just madness, because it doesn’t sit well with the legislation and decisions we’ve looked at over the last 50 years. This is a real problem. It may be a storm in a teacup because you can overcome the objections by having any hardware, but it’s an argument they shouldn’t have been making. It seems to be abstract legal argumentation which has little credibility in my personal view, although it’s now law. It may be that someone can take that, have an argument with the Supreme Court, get them to fix this. The other thing is the EPO looks at a neural network as a mathematical method, and the UK now says it’s a computer program. Neither is right. The EPO is wrong as well. If you look at the actual decision which they regularly quote — the Vicom case — if you actually read the claim and look at the case, you see that it doesn’t make a huge amount of sense. A neural network has applied mathematics in it. It can be based on a computer program because it’s required to set up the learning objectives and the loss function. Mathematical processes — it tweaks the weighting factors of neurons over the course of the training epochs. But at the end of the day, if the function performed by the neural network is new and it’s directed towards a technical implementation which is technically relevant, then it shouldn’t fail for being a mathematical method. And I think the EPO guidelines actually say that. Even recommendations — the UK court said that a recommendation is not technical. Well, actually it is, because it’s data processing, and you’ve got to work out how does the data processing work to provide an improved recommendation? Again, it goes back to the T 1249/22 decision. There’s a whole raft of these things which are left not entirely resolved. There’s enough here to keep someone busy for a few more years. Rolf Claessen: Right. So I have a question for you now that we’ve talked about the decision of the UK Supreme Court and the UPC — the Unified Patent Court — with very, very similar wording. What do you say are the three most important takeaways for patent practitioners in the US, in Europe, in the UK, before the EPO? Are there any things that you really want patent practitioners to take away from our discussion here? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, okay. So first: make sure the claim has some structure in it. You need to have any hardware. That’s number one — in terms of claim drafting. In terms of the description, you really have to understand what the invention is about. And you’ve got to make sure that you explain what function is achieved by what piece of hardware, kit or software. And if you do that — don’t nickel-and-dime this by writing the claim first — I would suggest that you run into problems. You need to understand what the invention is about. And you need to make sure that the description is complete and full to describe the functionality and the effects that are achieved in the real world. And if you can do that, then you’re on a much sounder basis — much, much stronger. There’s a much stronger foundation for this. So that’s two things. Is there a third one? That’s me being a bit cheeky, but I suppose I know what’s going on. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, but maybe the third takeaway is that maybe the EPO will rethink the way — at least how AI inventions are assessed for inventive step. Bruce Dearling: Well, as I said to you before, it could be that that’s the case. I don’t want to repeat myself again. The word “permissive” was used in a conversation I had with respect to the UK Supreme Court approach. COMVIK fundamentally still breaks with me and has done for years, because the way it’s set up and the way it’s applied distorts fundamentally what the invention is about. And until such time as that distortion is removed, there is a problem of objectivity versus subjectivity. And I think that’s really what the EPO has to grapple with. It’s not an easy thing to deal with, but maybe there are things going on. Bruce Dearling: It’s not an easy thing to deal with. I don’t know who’s going to argue it. It would have been useful for me to still have the original case up and running at the EPO because these arguments would have been fleshed out. I’m pretty sure they would have been referred to the Enlarged Board. We would have got it resolved. So it’s whether or not I can now work this into the existing case to try and get the examining division to — well, they will refuse, I suspect. And then it’ll go to the TBA. And then the TBA will have to look at this, hopefully with the referrals to the Enlarged Board. And then that fixes the problem on a national and international basis. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. Let’s see. [Laughs] Bruce Dearling: No, we don’t know. I mean, you might have a different view. What do you think? Do you think COMVIK is fundamentally right or fundamentally wrong? Rolf Claessen: Well, I’m not so much into AI inventions. I’m a chemist and I usually deal with chemistry inventions. But from the discussion that we had, I think that the EPO might rethink their position. I don’t know. Let’s see. Let’s hope so. Bruce Dearling: Well, they liked it. They liked problem-solution. It’s been with us for 25 years. It suggests that it’s a compromise. It’s not mandated by the European Patent Convention — that’s the point. It’s something they think works. And these things only work until such time as someone comes along and says, actually, you’re wrong, and this is the reason. Rolf Claessen: Let’s see if they choose a different route at least for AI inventions. So Bruce, thank you very much for your insight and for talking about the case that you were involved in with the UK Supreme Court. Where could people reach you if they have more questions about this field — basically patents, AI protection in the UK and Europe — and if they want to ask you more questions about this case? Bruce Dearling: Sure. Through the Hepworth Brown website or my LinkedIn profile, I suppose. The Hepworth Brown website has an email link. I’m trying to post things on it as well to try and provide a bit more context. But if people have fundamental questions on this stuff, then I’m happy to try and answer them. I suppose that I can be considered to be quite knowledgeable in the area. Rolf Claessen: Right. Certainly more than I am. [Laughing] Bruce Dearling: So I was fortunate. As a consequence of the work I’m doing, I was appointed last year to the WIPO Standing Committee on Patents and Privacy. That was discussed for the issues of where WIPO goes and what the direction of the problems are that we have in high-tech areas. So there seems to be some degree of understanding that I might know what I’m talking about. I think I probably do. Rolf Claessen: Thank you, Bruce. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure. Thank you very much, Rolf.

Judicial Watch And The Epstein Related FOIA

The Scoot Show with Scoot

Play Episode Listen Later May 28, 2026 13:32 Transcription Available

Judicial Watch's Epstein-related lawsuit is primarily a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) action filed against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in late 2025, seeking the release of government records related to accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein that the group says have been improperly withheld from the public. The suit, Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-04123), demands all documents that were subpoenaed by the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, including what was provided in response and communications about that response, after the DOJ failed to adequately respond to an August 2025 FOIA request. The records sought include internal DOJ materials and communications with federal officials about the subpoena and the broader Epstein investigation — material that Judicial Watch argues the public has a right to see given the high-profile nature of the case and longstanding questions about transparency.In addition to the DOJ FOIA suit, Judicial Watch has filed related FOIA lawsuits seeking Epstein-related records from other federal agencies. These include a FOIA lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for any records concerning Epstein's possible involvement with intelligence activities, his business dealings and travel, his contacts with influential figures, and documentation about his death, after the CIA failed to respond to a July 2025 FOIA request. Judicial Watch has also pursued DOJ and FBI records on the identities of Epstein's clients or associates and records provided to the FBI by accuser Virginia Giuffre. Through these cases, the group aims to compel the release of materials that could illuminate undisclosed aspects of the Epstein investigation and potentially government handling of related evidence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

freedom news fbi survivors cia epstein jeffrey epstein doj ghislaine maxwell oversight prince andrew house committees foia central intelligence agency virginia giuffre judicial watch justice doj information act foia government reform epsteindidntkillhimself

Hour 2: The Department of Justice (DOJ) established a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" as part of a settlement to resolve President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS

Play Episode Listen Later May 21, 2026 35:35

This hour, Scoot continues the conversation about how the City of New Orleans is working on synchronizing traffic lights. Scoot also talks about the Department of Justice (DOJ) establishing a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" as part of a settlement to resolve President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. Announced on May 18, 2026, the settlement has sparked intense public controversy because Trump administration officials refuse to rule out using the taxpayer-backed fund to issue financial payouts to January 6, 2021, Capitol rioters.

donald trump news new orleans billion fund capitol irs lawsuit established resolve settlement weaponization scoot department of justice justice doj

Hour 3: What are the songs that define America?

The Scoot Show with Scoot

Play Episode Listen Later May 21, 2026 30:40

This hour, Scoot continues the conversation about how the City of New Orleans is working on synchronizing traffic lights. Scoot also talks about the Department of Justice (DOJ) establishing a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" as part of a settlement to resolve President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. Announced on May 18, 2026, the settlement has sparked intense public controversy because Trump administration officials refuse to rule out using the taxpayer-backed fund to issue financial payouts to January 6, 2021, Capitol rioters.

america donald trump news songs new orleans define capitol irs scoot justice doj

The DOJ's anti-weaponization fund.

Tangle

Play Episode Listen Later May 19, 2026 25:49

On Monday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that, as part of the settlement agreement in President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, it would create a new fund that could “issue formal apologies and monetary relief” to individuals and entities who claim to have suffered from lawfare and DOJ weaponization. The anti-weaponization fund will receive $1.776 billion from the federal government's judgment fund used to settle and pay other cases. Five people, appointed by the Attorney General, will oversee the new fund; one of the five must be chosen in consultation with congressional leadership. We want to see you in person soon!Early-bird VIP tickets have sold out for our event in Berkeley Springs, West Virginia, but you can get a few general admission tickets left after early bird sales, which you can find here. If you want to read Isaac's speech in full — and access all future Friday editions, Sunday editions, and ad-free daily newsletters — become a Tangle member today for just $6/month!Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠ and today's “Under the radar” story ⁠here⁠ and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: What do you think about the anti-weaponization fund? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

music founders donald trump diet acast vip fund west virginia executive producer attorney generals doj weaponization internal revenue service tangle justice doj

Surge in False Claims Act Violations Triggers New DOJ Initiative

Monitor Mondays

Play Episode Listen Later May 18, 2026 26:06

Introducing FOCUS (Fraud Oversight through Careful Use of Statistics). The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a new initiative in response to the surge in False Claims Act qui tam filings by data miners.Today, roughly 45 percent of DOJ cases involve FCA data miners. You and your team will learn the inside story of this new initiative along with news of two significant data miner-initiated cases: a $6.73 million settlement against a California vascular physician who billed Medicare for unnecessary stent procedures at 30 times the national average; and a $300,000 settlement against three Illinois skilled nursing facilities that billed Medicare for unnecessary and inflated rehabilitation services.Reporting this dramatic story will be whistleblower attorney and a partner in the New York office of Whistleblower Partners, Hamsa Mahendranathan. Broadcast segments will also include these instantly recognizable features:· Monday Rounds: Ronald Hirsch, MD, vice president of R1 RCM, will be making his Monday Rounds. · The RAC Report: Healthcare attorney Knicole Emanuel, partner at the law firm of Nelson Mullins, will report the latest news about auditors. · Risky Business: Healthcare attorney David Glaser, shareholder in the law offices of Fredrikson & Byron, will join the broadcast with his trademark segment.· Legislative Update: Adam Brenman, senior legislative affairs liaison for Zelis, will report on current healthcare legislation.

new york california illinois md initiative statistics reporting compliance triggers surge medicare doj coding regulatory violations fca justice doj false claims act icd10 fredrikson david glaser

Behind the Seal: Why DOJ Investigations Drag On—and When They Shouldn't

AHLA's Speaking of Health Law

Play Episode Listen Later May 15, 2026 29:09 Transcription Available

Jackie Papish, Partner, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, speaks with Brandon Helms, Shareholder, Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman PC, about issues that arise during delays in Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations under the False Claims Act (FCA). They discuss potential reasons for these delays and what they mean for providers in terms of time and cost; how a 2023 case from the Fifth Circuit, United States ex rel. Aldridge v. Corporate Management, Inc., illustrated excessive DOJ delays; whether Congress intended for these kinds of delays when it passed the modern FCA; and possible ways to improve the system. Brandon recently co-authored an article in Health Law Connections magazine about this topic. From AHLA's Hospitals and Health Systems and Fraud and Abuse Practice Groups.Watch this conversation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuEj2w0wlTsRead the Health Law Connections article: https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/content-library/connections-magazine/article/e157919b-1308-48af-b1a0-d41f1dba2f66/Behind-the-Seal-Why-DOJ-Investigations-Drag-On-and Learn more about AHLA's Hospitals and Health Systems Practice Group: https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/practice-groups/practice-groups/hospitals-and-health-systemsLearn more about AHLA's Fraud and Abuse Practice Group: https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/practice-groups/practice-groups/fraud-and-abuseEssential Legal Updates, Now in AudioAHLA's popular Health Law Daily email newsletter is now a daily podcast, exclusively for AHLA Comprehensive members. Get all your health law news from the major media outlets on this podcast! To subscribe and add this private podcast feed to your podcast app, go to americanhealthlaw.org/dailypodcast.Stay At the Forefront of Health Legal EducationLearn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community at https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/.

united states partner congress hospitals fraud drag barnes seal doj investigations health systems fca shareholder forefront aldridge fifth circuit justice doj false claims act ahla corporate management

Trump Just Prescribed the CURE for TDS and the Internet LOST IT!

#NEZNATION LIVE: Personal Branding 101

Play Episode Listen Later May 13, 2026 16:22

President Trump just delivered one of the funniest and most viral White House moments yet — after saying Trump Derangement Syndrome is “actually a disease,” the White House released a hilarious prescription-style “treatment” for TDS that included trusting Trump, listening to the National Anthem, limiting fake news, and not being a “panican.”In this video, we break down the viral moment, Trump's comments, the White House post, the internet reaction, and why this kind of political trolling continues to dominate the news cycle. Whether you call it satire, strategy, or classic Trump-style messaging, this one instantly lit up social media and gave Trump supporters another viral moment to run with.We'll also look at why the phrase “Trump Derangement Syndrome” keeps returning in American politics, how the White House turned it into a meme-worthy media event, and why the reaction may be exactly what Trump wanted.This is political theater, internet culture, media warfare, and Trump comedy all wrapped into one viral moment.For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (656) 218-0931 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/nez✅ Reach out to me: https://bio.site/professornez✅ ORIGINAL MADE IN U.S.A 250TH AMERICA DESIGNS: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/✅ Check out our Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@professornezclips▶ Support the Channel and Buy us a Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/professornezEducational Commentary & Original AnalysisReporting Framework: This analysis utilizes a Comparative Statutory Model, cross-referencing executive Truth Social communications with established Brandenburg Standard precedents. We prioritize primary source data from Congress.gov, The Department of Justice (DOJ), and Cook County Judicial Records.This channel presents educational, lecture-style analysis created by a university professor and educator. Content focuses on contextual examination, historical background, legal frameworks, and evidence-based analysis of widely reported events, public records, and institutional processes.The approach emphasizes academic methodology, media literacy, and source-driven interpretation rather than advocacy, persuasion, or real-time news reporting. Viewers are encouraged to consult primary sources and form independent conclusions.All content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, medical, or professional advice. Views expressed are solely those of the creator.This channel may include references or links to third-party websites or products for informational purposes. Some links may be affiliate links, which may generate a commission at no additional cost to the viewer.In this video expert Professor Nez analyzes and educates on what happened and why with fact based, data based, verified and researched expertise reporting.All original content is protected by copyright. Fair use applies where permitted by law.Category: News Analysis & Educational CommentaryMethodology: This report utilizes primary source verification and comparative analysis of public records.Subject Matter Expertise: Political Strategy, Regulatory Policy, and Media Literacy.

False Claims, Real Consequences: What Every Importer Needs to Know About Customs' FCA Enforcement

Arent Fox Legal Podcasts

Play Episode Listen Later May 13, 2026 30:41

In the latest episode of Five Questions, Five Answers, host Birgit Matthiesen is joined by ArentFox Schiff colleagues Jackson David Toof and Mario A. Torrico for a conversation on the False Claims Act (FCA), its origins, and its continued importance as a tool to combat fraud against the federal government. The discussion examines how US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) are increasingly using the FCA to pursue customs fraud and trade violations, the significant business and reputational risks companies face, and the compliance missteps that commonly lead to enforcement actions. It also highlights the importance of proactive compliance strategies for managing FCA exposure. Takeaways - The FCA is a long-standing and powerful enforcement tool. - FCA enforcement by CBP and the DOJ is increasing sharply. - FCA violations pose serious financial and reputational risks for importers. - Compliance exposure most often arises from classification, valuation, and country‑of‑origin errors. - Proactive compliance programs offer both risk reduction and competitive advantage.

consequences compliance proactive doj us department customs enforcement fca cbp five questions importers us customs false claims justice doj false claims act border protection cbp

Trump Just Pulled Jeffries Into a Fight He Can't Escape!

#NEZNATION LIVE: Personal Branding 101

Play Episode Listen Later May 11, 2026 18:12

President Trump just ignited a political firestorm in Washington after calling for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to face criminal charges over controversial rhetoric that Trump says crossed the line.In this explosive episode, we break down the escalating battle between Donald Trump and congressional Democrats, the growing accusations surrounding “maximum warfare” language, and why this latest showdown is sending shockwaves through D.C.We analyze:Trump's demand for criminal charges against Hakeem JeffriesThe comments that triggered the backlashMedia and political reaction from both sidesWhether this escalates tensions heading into the election cycleThe broader fight over political rhetoric and accountabilityWhy this moment is going massively viral onlineThis is one of the most intense political confrontations in Washington right now — and the fallout could have major consequences moving forward.Follow the show for fast, direct breakdowns of viral political moments, breaking news, media narratives, and the biggest stories shaping America today.For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (656) 218-0931 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/nez✅ Reach out to me: https://bio.site/professornez✅ ORIGINAL MADE IN U.S.A 250TH AMERICA DESIGNS: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/✅ Check out our Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@professornezclips▶ Support the Channel and Buy us a Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/professornezEducational Commentary & Original AnalysisReporting Framework: This analysis utilizes a Comparative Statutory Model, cross-referencing executive Truth Social communications with established Brandenburg Standard precedents. We prioritize primary source data from Congress.gov, The Department of Justice (DOJ), and Cook County Judicial Records.This channel presents educational, lecture-style analysis created by a university professor and educator. Content focuses on contextual examination, historical background, legal frameworks, and evidence-based analysis of widely reported events, public records, and institutional processes.The approach emphasizes academic methodology, media literacy, and source-driven interpretation rather than advocacy, persuasion, or real-time news reporting. Viewers are encouraged to consult primary sources and form independent conclusions.All content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, medical, or professional advice. Views expressed are solely those of the creator.This channel may include references or links to third-party websites or products for informational purposes. Some links may be affiliate links, which may generate a commission at no additional cost to the viewer.In this video expert Professor Nez analyzes and educates on what happened and why with fact based, data based, verified and researched expertise reporting.All original content is protected by copyright. Fair use applies where permitted by law.Category: News Analysis & Educational CommentaryMethodology: This report utilizes primary source verification and comparative analysis of public records.Subject Matter Expertise: Political Strategy, Regulatory Policy, and Media Literacy.

america donald trump washington reach coffee congress escape democrats views medicare pulled viewers truth social jeffries media literacy justice doj cyclethe house minority leader hakeem jeffries regulatory policy professor nez

#NEZNATION LIVE: Personal Branding 101

Play Episode Listen Later May 8, 2026 43:04

The Trump administration has officially released the first batch of declassified UFO files under the new PURSUE system, marking a historic moment in the government's long-running discussion around UFOs, UAPs, and public transparency.The initial release includes 162 declassified documents, videos, photos, and pilot accounts, with records tied to agencies including the Pentagon, NASA, the FBI, and others. Highlights reportedly include Apollo-era transcripts, lunar-surface imagery, military sightings, international reports, and unresolved UAP cases from locations including Greece, Iraq, Japan, and the United States. But here's the key question: Is this real disclosure — or just the first carefully controlled step?Officials say the files are meant to end decades of speculation surrounding hidden government records, while skeptics argue many cases may have ordinary explanations such as camera artifacts, sensor errors, drones, aircraft, or natural phenomena. The government's own release describes the materials as unresolved cases, meaning officials are not making definitive claims about what the objects are. In this video, we break down what was released, what was not released, why this matters, and whether this historic UFO disclosure raises more questions than it answers.Watch until the end, because the biggest story may not be what's inside this first batch — it may be what's still coming next.GET THE RESEARCH NOTES IN THIS VIDEO FREE: https://professornez.kit.com/ufotrumpFor free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (656) 218-0931 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/nez✅ Reach out to me: https://bio.site/professornez✅ ORIGINAL MADE IN U.S.A 250TH AMERICA DESIGNS: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/✅ Check out our Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@professornezclips▶ Support the Channel and Buy us a Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/professornezEducational Commentary & Original AnalysisReporting Framework: This analysis utilizes a Comparative Statutory Model, cross-referencing executive Truth Social communications with established Brandenburg Standard precedents. We prioritize primary source data from Congress.gov, The Department of Justice (DOJ), and Cook County Judicial Records.This channel presents educational, lecture-style analysis created by a university professor and educator. Content focuses on contextual examination, historical background, legal frameworks, and evidence-based analysis of widely reported events, public records, and institutional processes.The approach emphasizes academic methodology, media literacy, and source-driven interpretation rather than advocacy, persuasion, or real-time news reporting. Viewers are encouraged to consult primary sources and form independent conclusions.All content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, medical, or professional advice. Views expressed are solely those of the creator.This channel may include references or links to third-party websites or products for informational purposes. Some links may be affiliate links, which may generate a commission at no additional cost to the viewer.In this video expert Professor Nez analyzes and educates on what happened and why with fact based, data based, verified and researched expertise reporting.All original content is protected by copyright. Fair use applies where permitted by law.Category: News Analysis & Educational CommentaryMethodology: This report utilizes primary source verification and comparative analysis of public records.Subject Matter Expertise: Political Strategy, Regulatory Policy, and Media Literacy.

Trump 'lawfare' coming for Fulton election works & volunteers now

The Ron Show

Play Episode Listen Later May 7, 2026 44:34

PLUS: Reparations for white voters? Republicans want to draw inner city voters towards their suburban 'white saviors' & Geoff Duncan's new TV ad is outThe Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) has roughly 700 boxes of Fulton County's 2020 general election ballots and now they want names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of all the Fulton County election workers and volunteers from the 2020 cycle, too. Uhm, why? As Rudy Giuliani clings to life, it was just 14 months ago he was done paying two Fulton elections workers upwards of $100 million (or more) and now the DOJ wants to serve up other employees for potential MAGA "retribution? - - -As if that's not enough, MAGA podcasting nutjob Benny Johnson and The Article III Project founder/president Mike Davis are salivating at the prospect of getting white voters in Democratic-led states reparations (yes, reparations) for their being oh-so "wronged" by racially-based gerrymandering. The stones on these two white nationalist gasbags. - - - Remember all that GOP talk about black voters being on the "Democratic plantation?" Yet now they want to redraw maps to have their "white savior" representatives - who've shown no interest in doing right by inner city Americans when not representing city dwellers - represent everyone in these newly drawn districts except us. - - - It's encouraging then, that Georgia Democrats are taking some fight back to the right. Out gay Fulton County prosecutor Will Wooten is featured in a 30-second ad touting his record having helped build the election interference case against Trump as he seeks to challenge Georgia Court of Appeals Judge E. Trenton Brown III.- - - Okay, I have no opinion on cellphone bans in schools, honestly. I believe teachers when they say it makes their jobs easier, so on that front, I'm for the bans; but results show the real sales pitch - improved test scores - doesn't show itself in studies, just yet.- - - Lastly, Geoff Duncan has (finally) interested the TV ad game with a mostly cable and online ad buy, utilizing minority endorsees. The 30-second spot is good. It's effective. But it actually raised questions with me, still. Also, former gubernatorial candidate, Rep. Ruwa Romman, hasn't endorsed in that race since leaving it, but she did share her "sample ballot," with the #anybodybutGeoff hashtag and Mike Thurmond below it.On her personal Facebook, however, she did say of Duncan "I believe he's sincere. I don't think he's just making up that he changed his mind. But he's objectively the weakest candidate. We lose too many of our own for the mythical swing voter."

tv donald trump americans elections republicans democratic volunteers maga gop doj fulton mike davis fulton county justice doj uhm georgia court article iii project

DOJ Insiders Admit That The Contents Of The Epstein Files Are Worse Than Reported

donald trump news congress republicans worse epstein breaking news files gop jeffrey epstein attorney generals admit ghislaine maxwell reported insiders prince andrew contents michael wolff justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later May 4, 2026 14:41 Transcription Available

The Department of Justice (DOJ) reportedly informed congressional Republicans that the files tied to Jeffrey Epstein are “even worse” for Donald Trump than previously publicized, suggesting that evidence of Trump's connection to Epstein is more extensive and potentially more damaging than past reporting indicated. The leaks reflect mounting anxiety among GOP lawmakers, some of whom are reportedly preparing to back efforts to force the release of related investigative records.The piece also notes that the rumor mill—particularly an account from Michael Wolff stating Epstein had shown him photos of Trump with underage girls—has stirred serious concern. The silence and evasive behavior of key figures, such as the Attorney General, have further alarmed members of Congress who fear a cover-up, prompting a growing coalition of over 100 Republicans ready to confront what they anticipate is an escalating exposure of wrongdoing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ Admits to Republicans That Epstein Files Are Even Worse for Trump | The New RepublicBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Feds Reclassify Medical Cannabis: What You Need to Know

GW Integrative Medicine

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2026 104:10

Boy howdy do we have something to talk about with our favorite medical cannabis subject matter expert today! On April 23, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) signed an order reclassifying (rescheduling) state-licensed medical marijuana and FDA-approved marijuana products from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act). Let's get into it with Dr. Mikhail “Misha” Kogan, chief medical officer of the GW Center for Integrative Medicine, associate professor of Medicine at the GW School of Medicine & Health Sciences, and author of the highly acclaimed book “Medical Marijuana: Dr. Kogan's Evidence-Based Guide to the Health Benefits of Cannabis and CBD.” Along with being an internationally recognized expert on medicinal cannabis, Dr. Kogan has extensive training and expertise in internal medicine, geriatrics, palliative care, social and primary care medicine, integrative medicine, herbal medicine, and craniosacral therapy. He specializes in diagnosing and developing treatment plans for the most complex health challenges, offering hope to even the most desperate patients. His specific area of interest is utilizing cannabis as a solution to reduce polypharmacy in the geriatric patient population. He is a renowned international speaker in the field of medical cannabis. ◘ Related Links The Society of Cannabis Clinicians https://bit.ly/48xFsrR Medical Marijuana: Dr. Kogan's Evidence-Based Guide to the Health Benefits of Cannabis and CBD https://bit.ly/4tMfWI1 GW Integrative Medicine Podcast: Medical Cannabis, Psilocybin, & More Playlist https://bit.ly/4n2A325 Science Friday interviews Dr. Kogan (25 min.) https://bit.ly/429HsTE Developing Medical Cannabis Competencies: A Consensus Statement https://bit.ly/4cN9wlK ◘ Transcript bit.ly/3JoA2mz ◘ Disclaimer: The content and information shared in GW Integrative Medicine is for educational purposes only and should not be taken as medical advice. The views and opinions expressed in GW Integrative Medicine represent the opinions of the host(s) and their guest(s). For medical advice, diagnosis, and/or treatment, please consult a medical professional.

medicine boy cannabis cbd fda feds health sciences health benefits integrative medicine psilocybin medical cannabis kogan justice doj controlled substances act drug enforcement administration dea

S05E13 - Oil Shock and Inside Informants

Finding Common Battle Grounds

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2026 77:51

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we tackle two topics. We start with the oil/energy shock that has resulted from the double blockade of the Straight of Hormuz. We talk about the consequences for Americans, for the global economy, for car purchasing decisions in the future, and whether it will affect the mid-term elections in November. We largely agree on this topic. Josh even admits he is going to be going all-electric at some point in the future! We then turn to the recent indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by the Department of Justice (DOJ's). Josh and Tom start by parroting the DOJ talking points that the SPLC was funding racist and terrorist organizations, so they would have a reason to exist. Ryan points out that they funded informants, and they admit that. He also argues that the lawsuit will drag on for years until there is a new administration, and then it will be dropped. In other words, this is a big "Nothingburger." Josh insists this was weird, and Tom seems convinced the SPLC was drumming up a problem. Ryan agrees it was weird, but the question is whether it was illegal.

americans straight shock doj hormuz informants splc justice doj southern poverty law center splc

DOJ Insiders Admit That The Contents Of The Epstein Files Are Worse Than Reported

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 27, 2026 14:41 Transcription Available

The Department of Justice (DOJ) reportedly informed congressional Republicans that the files tied to Jeffrey Epstein are “even worse” for Donald Trump than previously publicized, suggesting that evidence of Trump's connection to Epstein is more extensive and potentially more damaging than past reporting indicated. The leaks reflect mounting anxiety among GOP lawmakers, some of whom are reportedly preparing to back efforts to force the release of related investigative records.The piece also notes that the rumor mill—particularly an account from Michael Wolff stating Epstein had shown him photos of Trump with underage girls—has stirred serious concern. The silence and evasive behavior of key figures, such as the Attorney General, have further alarmed members of Congress who fear a cover-up, prompting a growing coalition of over 100 Republicans ready to confront what they anticipate is an escalating exposure of wrongdoing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ Admits to Republicans That Epstein Files Are Even Worse for Trump | The New Republic

DOJ Insiders Admit That The Contents Of The Epstein Files Are Worse Than Reported

donald trump news congress republicans worse epstein breaking news files gop jeffrey epstein attorney generals admit ghislaine maxwell reported insiders prince andrew contents michael wolff justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 25, 2026 14:41 Transcription Available

The Department of Justice (DOJ) reportedly informed congressional Republicans that the files tied to Jeffrey Epstein are “even worse” for Donald Trump than previously publicized, suggesting that evidence of Trump's connection to Epstein is more extensive and potentially more damaging than past reporting indicated. The leaks reflect mounting anxiety among GOP lawmakers, some of whom are reportedly preparing to back efforts to force the release of related investigative records.The piece also notes that the rumor mill—particularly an account from Michael Wolff stating Epstein had shown him photos of Trump with underage girls—has stirred serious concern. The silence and evasive behavior of key figures, such as the Attorney General, have further alarmed members of Congress who fear a cover-up, prompting a growing coalition of over 100 Republicans ready to confront what they anticipate is an escalating exposure of wrongdoing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ Admits to Republicans That Epstein Files Are Even Worse for Trump | The New RepublicBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The DOJ Asks The Court To Unseal Epstein/Maxwell Grand Jury Exhibits As Well As Testimony

news court testimony true crime bill gates epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew grand jury exhibits justice doj epstein maxwell

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 25, 2026 12:35 Transcription Available

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally asked federal judges to unseal the grand jury exhibits—not just the testimony transcripts—from the investigations into Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The request, filed on August 8, 2025, specifies that any released materials should redact victim identities and sensitive personal information, while notifying individuals named in exhibits not previously admitted during Maxwell's trial. The DOJ has also requested that these materials remain sealed until after August 14 to allow time for notifications to relevant third parties.The move follows mounting pressure from the public, victims, and lawmakers for greater transparency in the Epstein‑Maxwell cases. Victims and their attorneys remain divided: some support unsealing for accountability, while others worry about their safety, privacy, and potential political motivations behind the DOJ's timing. Maxwell's legal team strongly opposes the unsealing, arguing that, unlike Epstein (who is deceased), Maxwell is alive and actively litigating her case. They warn that unsealing grand jury materials could intrude on her due process rights and jeopardize her ongoing appeals and any future retrial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ seeks to unseal Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury recordsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Fed's High-Stakes Power Struggle Affects Much More Than Mortgage Rates

On The Market

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 23, 2026 31:20

Something is brewing at the Federal Reserve, and it's starting to get ugly. For many months, President Trump has been pressuring the Fed to lower the federal funds rate and has since named a new Fed chair nominee to take the reins after Jerome Powell's term ends. But what seemed like a straightforward transition has quickly evolved into a nasty political showdown—a “standoff” between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Senate Banking Committee. The drama could drag out for months, with Powell's investigation being prolonged and nominee Kevin Warsh's confirmation being delayed. But behind all of it, there's a much more serious issue being threatened: Fed independence. The Federal Reserve's ability to act independently of political influences is crucial for creating monetary policy in the best long-term interest of the country, and it's being jeopardized. For investors, this isn't just political theater—it's a signal. If markets lose faith in the Fed's independence, the ripple effect could reshape not just interest rates, mortgage rates, and the housing market, but the entire U.S. economy. And it's unfolding right now. In This Episode We Cover What happens when the Federal Reserve loses its “independence” Why the current Fed power struggle affects much more than mortgage rates The “battle” that is holding up new Fed chairman Kevin Warsh's nomination Why the Federal Reserve's hands are tied when it comes to cutting interest rates Behind the “drama” unfolding between the Senate Banking Committee and the DOJ And So Much More! Links from the Show Join the Future of Real Estate Investing with Fundrise Join BiggerPockets for FREE Join us at the BiggerPockets Conference October 2-4 in Orlando. Buy tickets Sign Up for the On the Market Newsletter Find Investor-Friendly Lenders Dave's BiggerPockets Profile BiggerPockets Real Estate 1266 – The War Has Changed the Housing Market | April 2026 Update Grab the Book, Recession-Proof Real Estate Investing Check out more resources from this show on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BiggerPockets.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and https://www.biggerpockets.com/blog/on-the-market-419. Interested in learning more about today's sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠advertise@biggerpockets.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

donald trump future fed powell federal reserve real estate investing high stakes jerome powell power struggles mortgage rates biggerpockets kevin warsh justice doj senate banking committee

The DOJ Asks The Court To Unseal Epstein/Maxwell Grand Jury Exhibits As Well As Testimony

donald trump news court testimony epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew grand jury exhibits justice doj epstein maxwell

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 23, 2026 12:35 Transcription Available

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally asked federal judges to unseal the grand jury exhibits—not just the testimony transcripts—from the investigations into Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The request, filed on August 8, 2025, specifies that any released materials should redact victim identities and sensitive personal information, while notifying individuals named in exhibits not previously admitted during Maxwell's trial. The DOJ has also requested that these materials remain sealed until after August 14 to allow time for notifications to relevant third parties.The move follows mounting pressure from the public, victims, and lawmakers for greater transparency in the Epstein‑Maxwell cases. Victims and their attorneys remain divided: some support unsealing for accountability, while others worry about their safety, privacy, and potential political motivations behind the DOJ's timing. Maxwell's legal team strongly opposes the unsealing, arguing that, unlike Epstein (who is deceased), Maxwell is alive and actively litigating her case. They warn that unsealing grand jury materials could intrude on her due process rights and jeopardize her ongoing appeals and any future retrial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ seeks to unseal Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury records

False Claims Act Settlements for 2025 (FCA)

Stark Integrity

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 22, 2026 20:40

Send us Fan MailFalse Claims Act settlements (FCA): they just keep getting bigger. In this episode, Captain Integrity Bob Wade details the notable False Claims Act settlements for 2025. Hear how qui tam cases continue to represent the largest source of settlements through the Department of Justice (DOJ) and False Claims Act, what it means if the government declines to intervene, why medical necessity continues to be a very large focus, a shocking settlement involving a physician, and fun examples of things that just keep getting bigger. Learn more at CaptainIntegrity.com

fca settlements justice doj false claims act

The DOJ Asks The Court To Unseal Epstein/Maxwell Grand Jury Exhibits As Well As Testimony

donald trump news court testimony epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew grand jury exhibits justice doj epstein maxwell

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 20, 2026 12:35 Transcription Available

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally asked federal judges to unseal the grand jury exhibits—not just the testimony transcripts—from the investigations into Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The request, filed on August 8, 2025, specifies that any released materials should redact victim identities and sensitive personal information, while notifying individuals named in exhibits not previously admitted during Maxwell's trial. The DOJ has also requested that these materials remain sealed until after August 14 to allow time for notifications to relevant third parties.The move follows mounting pressure from the public, victims, and lawmakers for greater transparency in the Epstein‑Maxwell cases. Victims and their attorneys remain divided: some support unsealing for accountability, while others worry about their safety, privacy, and potential political motivations behind the DOJ's timing. Maxwell's legal team strongly opposes the unsealing, arguing that, unlike Epstein (who is deceased), Maxwell is alive and actively litigating her case. They warn that unsealing grand jury materials could intrude on her due process rights and jeopardize her ongoing appeals and any future retrial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ seeks to unseal Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury recordsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Devil Is Always In The Details: The 'Poison Pill' Inserted Into The Epstein Bill

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 19, 2026 10:08 Transcription Available

In the Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405), the small-print language in Section 2(c)(1)(C) allows the Department of Justice (DOJ) to withhold or redact “segregable portions of records … that would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.” On its face this sounds reasonable, but in practice it gives the DOJ the ability to declare many documents “ongoing investigation” materials and thereby delay or avoid disclosure—even if the broader investigative posture is dormant, tangential or long past its active phase. Because the bill does not define strict deadlines or require the DOJ to demonstrate why the “ongoing investigation” exception remains valid in each case, the phrase becomes a flexible escape hatch for non-release.Additionally, while the Act mandates public availability of all unclassified records within 30 days of enactment (Section 2(a)), the exception language appears to give the Attorney General the power to claim that large swaths of documents remain subject to an active or future proceeding, thereby deferring release indefinitely. Advocacy analyses note this creates a “loophole” enabling executive branch discretion to deny transparency despite the bill's intent.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

news devil act advocacy true crime bill gates epstein breaking news jeffrey epstein pill attorney generals doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj inserted

The Devil Is Always In The Details: The 'Poison Pill' Inserted Into The Epstein Bill

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 15, 2026 10:08 Transcription Available

In the Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405), the small-print language in Section 2(c)(1)(C) allows the Department of Justice (DOJ) to withhold or redact “segregable portions of records … that would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.” On its face this sounds reasonable, but in practice it gives the DOJ the ability to declare many documents “ongoing investigation” materials and thereby delay or avoid disclosure—even if the broader investigative posture is dormant, tangential or long past its active phase. Because the bill does not define strict deadlines or require the DOJ to demonstrate why the “ongoing investigation” exception remains valid in each case, the phrase becomes a flexible escape hatch for non-release.Additionally, while the Act mandates public availability of all unclassified records within 30 days of enactment (Section 2(a)), the exception language appears to give the Attorney General the power to claim that large swaths of documents remain subject to an active or future proceeding, thereby deferring release indefinitely. Advocacy analyses note this creates a “loophole” enabling executive branch discretion to deny transparency despite the bill's intent.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

donald trump news devil act advocacy epstein breaking news jeffrey epstein pill attorney generals doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj inserted

How the FBI Spent Nearly a Million Dollars to “Accidentally” Expose Epstein's Victims

law news survivors true crime million dollars bill gates epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein spent doj expose accidentally ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 14, 2026 18:12 Transcription Available

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein — through their lawyers — have strongly condemned the recent release of documents by U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that left dozens of their names unredacted. Their attorneys argue that this is not just negligence, but a gross violation of their dignity and privacy: “These women are not political pawns,” the filing reads, emphasizing that many of the victims are “mothers, wives, and daughters,” and that exposing their identities without consent — especially when some were minors at the time of abuse — re-victimizes them and undermines any promise of protection.Moreover, the lawyers warn that the scope of the oversight failure suggests the DOJ “either does not know the identities of all the victims … and thus cannot apply proper redactions,” or is “intentionally failing to protect victims from public exposure.” They're pressing a federal judge to demand a more robust redaction process — including asking the DOJ for a full list of known victims so they can ensure no one else is inadvertently exposed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Law firm representing alleged Epstein victims sends scathing letter over DOJ document release - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Devil Is Always In The Details: The 'Poison Pill' Inserted Into The Epstein Bill

The Weekly Reload Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 13, 2026 10:08 Transcription Available

In the Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405), the small-print language in Section 2(c)(1)(C) allows the Department of Justice (DOJ) to withhold or redact “segregable portions of records … that would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.” On its face this sounds reasonable, but in practice it gives the DOJ the ability to declare many documents “ongoing investigation” materials and thereby delay or avoid disclosure—even if the broader investigative posture is dormant, tangential or long past its active phase. Because the bill does not define strict deadlines or require the DOJ to demonstrate why the “ongoing investigation” exception remains valid in each case, the phrase becomes a flexible escape hatch for non-release.Additionally, while the Act mandates public availability of all unclassified records within 30 days of enactment (Section 2(a)), the exception language appears to give the Attorney General the power to claim that large swaths of documents remain subject to an active or future proceeding, thereby deferring release indefinitely. Advocacy analyses note this creates a “loophole” enabling executive branch discretion to deny transparency despite the bill's intent.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

news devil act advocacy true crime bill gates epstein breaking news jeffrey epstein pill attorney generals doj ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj inserted

How Jeanine Pirro's Latest Move Risks DOJ's Reputation With Gun-Rights Activists (Ft. Kostas Moros)

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 13, 2026 47:40

This week, we're looking at how the Department of Justice (DOJ) has performed on gun policy during the second Trump Administration and why Jeanine Pirro's newest legal filing could change the review. To examine the DOJ's track record, we have the Second Amendment Foundation's Kostas Moros on the show. He has been willing to defend the administration's overall approach to gun policy and to criticize moves he believes are likely to produce significant setbacks. He argued that the DOJ has actually been as pro-gun as any in modern history. In fact, he said a lot of the disappointment from online gun activists stems from bad expectation setting. He argued the DOJ was never likely to stop defending all federal gun laws, nor would that move guarantee the kind of gun-rights wins some believe it would. He also said the administration's moves to sue localities over alleged violations of the Second Amendment, as well as their efforts to back gun-rights challenges, even up to the Supreme Court, create a positive case for why it has been a good ally to gun-rights activists. Still, Moros admitted the DOJ has been pretty all over the place in its arguments at times. And he further criticized a new legal filing that stands to undermine a serious breakthrough in the gun-rights movement's fight against magazine bans. He said Jeanine Pirro, who Donald Trump appointed as US Attorney for Washington, DC, and who he is reportedly considering making the Attorney General, intervened to ask a DC court to reconsider its ruling against the city's magazine ban. Moros argued Pirro didn't need to say anything at all, given that she isn't actively defending the law, and that her filing makes it more likely the case will be reheard. That, he noted, could undermine the all-important circuit split on the question of magazine bans. Ultimately, Moros argued, that could keep the Supreme Court from settling the question and further sour gun activists' view of the administration.Special Guest: Kostas Moros.

How the FBI Spent Nearly a Million Dollars to “Accidentally” Expose Epstein's Victims

law news survivors true crime million dollars bill gates epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein spent abc news doj expose accidentally ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 12, 2026 18:12 Transcription Available

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein — through their lawyers — have strongly condemned the recent release of documents by U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that left dozens of their names unredacted. Their attorneys argue that this is not just negligence, but a gross violation of their dignity and privacy: “These women are not political pawns,” the filing reads, emphasizing that many of the victims are “mothers, wives, and daughters,” and that exposing their identities without consent — especially when some were minors at the time of abuse — re-victimizes them and undermines any promise of protection.Moreover, the lawyers warn that the scope of the oversight failure suggests the DOJ “either does not know the identities of all the victims … and thus cannot apply proper redactions,” or is “intentionally failing to protect victims from public exposure.” They're pressing a federal judge to demand a more robust redaction process — including asking the DOJ for a full list of known victims so they can ensure no one else is inadvertently exposed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Law firm representing alleged Epstein victims sends scathing letter over DOJ document release - ABC News

How the FBI Spent Nearly a Million Dollars to “Accidentally” Expose Epstein's Victims

donald trump law news survivors million dollars epstein breaking news victims jeffrey epstein spent doj expose accidentally ghislaine maxwell prince andrew justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 10, 2026 18:12 Transcription Available

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein — through their lawyers — have strongly condemned the recent release of documents by U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that left dozens of their names unredacted. Their attorneys argue that this is not just negligence, but a gross violation of their dignity and privacy: “These women are not political pawns,” the filing reads, emphasizing that many of the victims are “mothers, wives, and daughters,” and that exposing their identities without consent — especially when some were minors at the time of abuse — re-victimizes them and undermines any promise of protection.Moreover, the lawyers warn that the scope of the oversight failure suggests the DOJ “either does not know the identities of all the victims … and thus cannot apply proper redactions,” or is “intentionally failing to protect victims from public exposure.” They're pressing a federal judge to demand a more robust redaction process — including asking the DOJ for a full list of known victims so they can ensure no one else is inadvertently exposed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Law firm representing alleged Epstein victims sends scathing letter over DOJ document release - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Aetna Latest to Acquiesce Amid FCA Allegations

Monitor Mondays

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 23, 2026 30:40

Aetna is just the latest in a long list of healthcare entities to settle False Claims Act (FCA) allegations with a massive settlement.The insurer, one of the nation's largest, recently agreed to pay $117.7 million to resolve a case involving purportedly inaccurate and untruthful diagnosis codes to increase payments. That and other recent U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) actions will take center stage during the next edition of Monitor Mondays, when featured speakers will weigh in on striking recent trends related to such developments. Settlements and judgments under the FCA totaled $6.8 billion in the most recent full fiscal yar, an all-time record, with 84 percent of the recoveries related to matters involving the healthcare industry. Broadcast segments will also include these instantly recognizable features:•Monday Rounds: Ronald Hirsch, MD, vice president of R1 RCM, will be making his Monday Rounds. •The RAC Report: Healthcare attorney Knicole Emanuel, partner at the law firm of Nelson Mullins, will report the latest news about auditors. •Risky Business: Healthcare attorney David Glaser, shareholder in the law offices of Fredrikson & Byron, will join the broadcast with his trademark segment.•Legislative Update: Matthew Albright, chief legislative affairs liaison for Zelis, will report on current healthcare legislation.

md amid broadcast compliance allegations coding regulatory fca settlements aetna justice doj false claims act icd10 acquiesce fredrikson david glaser

One Year into a New FTC: Enforcement Trends and Practical Takeaways

In the Public Interest

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 16, 2026 16:46

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)'s respective approaches to handling antitrust enforcement matters can go through notable changes in the transition between presidential administrations, creating uncertainty in how antitrust functions in service of shifting priorities. In this episode of In the Public Interest, co-host Jekkie Kim speaks with WilmerHale Partner Susan Musser, who recently joined the firm's Antitrust Practice after serving as the Acting Bureau Director and Chief Trial Counsel of the FTC's Bureau of Competition. Drawing from her experiences under both the Biden and second Trump administrations, Musser discusses the key similarities and differences in their approaches to antitrust enforcement, highlighting how it is used as a tool in both instances but for differing purposes. She also examines the impact this approach to enforcement is currently having and will continue to have on technology and AI companies' ability to innovate.

ai donald trump joe biden drawing practical competition takeaways one year bureau ftc enforcement federal trade commission public interest justice doj musser

Are your concert tickets about to get cheaper?

Tangle

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 12, 2026 33:05

On Monday, Live Nation Entertainment Inc. reached a settlement with the Department of Justice (DOJ) a week into its antitrust trial. The government had argued that the company's subsidiary Ticketmaster constituted an illegal monopoly over the ticketing industry. As conditions for the settlement, Ticketmaster agreed to provide a standalone ticketing system for third-party use, divest from exclusive arrangements with up to 13 amphitheaters, reserve 50% of tickets for nonexclusive venues, and cap ticketing service fees at 15% for events in amphitheaters it owns. Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: What do you think of the settlement? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Will Kaback and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

music founders diet tickets concerts acast executive producer radar cheaper ticketmaster tangle justice doj

ICE, ICE, Baby: Securing the Border

The Sweet Tea Series

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 10, 2026 39:35

In this special "Iced Tea" episode of The Sweet Tea Series, host Ariana Guajardo sits down with Luisa Deason, former public affairs officer for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). They explore the rising violence against ICE agents in blue cities, immigration enforcement, and cartel exploitation. Plus, advice for women on understanding our nation's security, raising aware kids, and fostering civil conversations.

The Vanishing Pages: Did the DOJ Withhold Trump-Linked Epstein Records? (2/25/26)

donald trump news fbi records npr epstein breaking news critics jeffrey epstein pages doj vanishing justice department ghislaine maxwell prince andrew observers withhold peter mandelson justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 25, 2026 24:57 Transcription Available

A new NPR investigation has revealed that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appears to have withheld and even removed dozens of pages from the public database of documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act that relate to **sexual abuse allegations involving President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. According to NPR, records tied to FBI interviews and notes from conversations with a woman who claims Trump sexually abused her as a minor are absent from the public archive, even though evidence suggests those pages were catalogued and should have been released. Some materials where Trump's name is mentioned were temporarily taken down and re-uploaded, and others remain unreleased, raising serious questions about whether the DOJ is fully complying with the law requiring transparency about the investigation.Critics argue that this selective release and redaction undermines public trust in the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files and appears to protect Trump from scrutiny despite his extensive mentions in the records — Trump's name appears in tens of thousands of documents in the Epstein archive. Observers say the DOJ's actions, combined with Trump's repeated denials of wrongdoing and claims of “total exoneration,” have shielded him from accountability even as other figures tied to Epstein — such as Peter Mandelson — face arrest and legal exposure abroad. This has fueled criticism that the DOJ is more interested in managing political optics than in complete transparency or justice for survivors, weakening confidence in how elite connections to Epstein are investigated.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ removed, withheld Epstein files related to accusations about Trump : NPR

The Vanishing Pages: Did the DOJ Withhold Trump-Linked Epstein Records? (2/24/26)

donald trump news fbi records npr epstein breaking news critics jeffrey epstein pages doj vanishing justice department ghislaine maxwell prince andrew observers withhold peter mandelson justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 24, 2026 24:57 Transcription Available

A new NPR investigation has revealed that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appears to have withheld and even removed dozens of pages from the public database of documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act that relate to **sexual abuse allegations involving President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. According to NPR, records tied to FBI interviews and notes from conversations with a woman who claims Trump sexually abused her as a minor are absent from the public archive, even though evidence suggests those pages were catalogued and should have been released. Some materials where Trump's name is mentioned were temporarily taken down and re-uploaded, and others remain unreleased, raising serious questions about whether the DOJ is fully complying with the law requiring transparency about the investigation.Critics argue that this selective release and redaction undermines public trust in the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files and appears to protect Trump from scrutiny despite his extensive mentions in the records — Trump's name appears in tens of thousands of documents in the Epstein archive. Observers say the DOJ's actions, combined with Trump's repeated denials of wrongdoing and claims of “total exoneration,” have shielded him from accountability even as other figures tied to Epstein — such as Peter Mandelson — face arrest and legal exposure abroad. This has fueled criticism that the DOJ is more interested in managing political optics than in complete transparency or justice for survivors, weakening confidence in how elite connections to Epstein are investigated.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ removed, withheld Epstein files related to accusations about Trump : NPRBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's NPA And The True Powers Behind It

donald trump washington news attorney powers epstein breaking news jeffrey epstein documents doj ghislaine maxwell acosta prince andrew southern district justice doj

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 15, 2026 16:22 Transcription Available

When Alex Acosta, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, agreed in 2008 to a plea deal that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to serve just 13 months in county jail despite federal sex-trafficking allegations, the agreement was widely criticized as outrageously lenient. But deeper reviews and federal court filings since have shown Acosta was not acting alone — the controversial non-prosecution agreement was effectively drafted and backed by officials in the main Department of Justice (DOJ), not just his local office. Documents and internal DOJ statements reveal that senior career prosecutors in Washington had negotiated the framework of the agreement, signed off on its unusually broad protections for Epstein and his associates, and limited the scope of charges in a way that prevented future federal prosecution. In this telling, Acosta served more as the frontman implementing a policy shaped and approved at the highest levels — including language that immunized unnamed co-conspirators and blocked state or federal prosecutors from bringing additional charges related to Epstein's trafficking network.Further underscoring that Acosta was not solely responsible, later Department of Justice reviews found that career prosecutors and supervisors in Washington had actively steered the deal's terms, and that many within the DOJ were aware of its extraordinary concessions. Rather than acting on his own judgment, Acosta was executing an agreement that DOJ leadership championed as the best way at the time to secure some form of accountability — a defense that has since been widely rejected. This perspective reframes the narrative: Acosta becomes a middleman who carried out a controversial deal designed, negotiated, and authorized by senior DOJ officials, rather than the lone architect of a lenient settlement that spared Epstein from the full weight of federal prosecution.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lawmakers Demand Answers From The DOJ About Why The Epstein Investigation Was Shut Down

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 11, 2026 17:35 Transcription Available

Lawmakers led by Jamie Raskin are demanding full transparency from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) over the abrupt termination of the investigation into alleged co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. According to the letter from Raskin, nearly fifty survivors supplied detailed testimony identifying at least twenty individuals as part of a sophisticated trafficking ring, yet the probe—originally active under the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York—was transferred to DOJ headquarters and effectively halted in January 2025. Investigators then issued a memo stating they had found no evidence warranting further charges, a conclusion Raskin faulted as ignoring the victims' credible disclosures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:House Democrats press DOJ for details on Epstein co-conspirators probe that was "inexplicably killed" - CBS News

Epstein abuse survivors set to press Congress for law change

Newshour

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 10, 2026 47:24

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse, campaigners, and politicians are heading to Washington today to press for a change in law around time limits on seeking compensation.This comes after US lawmakers say files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were improperly redacted ahead of their release by the Department of Justice (DOJ).Also in the programme: The UN warns that Tigray in northern Ethiopia may be about to tip back into all-out conflict; we'll hear why the French president is concerned about whether Europe can stand up to American and Chinese muscle; and we'll look at what nature can do for a person's state of mind.(Photo shows a file photo of the House Chamber of the US Capitol in Washington DC, USA on 4 March 2025. Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA)

united states american europe washington french chinese washington dc congress press survivors epstein ethiopia jeffrey epstein us capitol tigray abuse survivors justice doj house chamber

Lawmakers Demand Answers From The DOJ About Why The Epstein Investigation Was Shut Down

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 3, 2026 17:35 Transcription Available

Lawmakers led by Jamie Raskin are demanding full transparency from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) over the abrupt termination of the investigation into alleged co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. According to the letter from Raskin, nearly fifty survivors supplied detailed testimony identifying at least twenty individuals as part of a sophisticated trafficking ring, yet the probe—originally active under the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York—was transferred to DOJ headquarters and effectively halted in January 2025. Investigators then issued a memo stating they had found no evidence warranting further charges, a conclusion Raskin faulted as ignoring the victims' credible disclosures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:House Democrats press DOJ for details on Epstein co-conspirators probe that was "inexplicably killed" - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Justice Department Won't Release the Epstein Files — So What Now? (1/27/26)

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 27, 2026 14:40 Transcription Available

Despite the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) requiring the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all unclassified investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein by the legal deadline of 19 December 2025, only a tiny portion has been made public, triggering frustration among victims' advocates and lawmakers. Legal experts told the Guardian that efforts to compel full disclosure have been stymied; an attempt to appoint an independent monitor (a special master) to oversee the release failed, and the DOJ has shown little willingness to comply voluntarily. Attorneys representing survivors argued that transparency is essential for healing, accountability, and justice, and urged continued legal pressure through litigation, congressional oversight, Freedom of Information Act enforcement and sustained public scrutiny to force compliance.Experts also highlighted structural weaknesses in the current law — particularly that it lacks clear enforcement mechanisms or judicial oversight — which have allowed the DOJ to delay and limit disclosures with few consequences. Congressional leaders like Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, who co-sponsored the EFTA, said they will pursue every available legal avenue to ensure the files are released, including potential lawsuits or legislative fixes. Observers warned that without stronger enforcement tools, truth and closure for Epstein's survivors may remain elusive, as the agency charged with upholding the law is perceived to be flouting it.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:What else can be done to force Trump's DoJ to release all the Epstein files? Legal experts weigh in | Jeffrey Epstein | The Guardian

JUSTICE! DOJ Arrests Mob That Stormed Church

ToddCast Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 22, 2026 113:20

The DOJ announced today that they are beginning to make arrests after a mob stormed a Baptist church in Minnesota.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

church minnesota baptist doj arrests justice doj todd starnes todd starnes radio show

Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department with Investigative Reporters Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis.

The Bill Press Pod

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 20, 2026 41:03

In this episode of the Bill Press Pod, Bill speaks with Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis about their new book, Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department. They discuss the transformation of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Trump administration, highlighting how it shifted focus to serve Trump's political and personal agendas. The conversation covers significant actions taken by the DOJ, such as targeting political adversaries, unprecedented raids on journalists, and the controversial handling of the FBI's investigation into Trump's classified documents. They also delve into how the Biden administration's DOJ, led by Merrick Garland, hesitated in taking swift action against Trump after January 6th and their overall cautious approach to investigating Trump, which may have impacted public trust. The discussion explores the lasting damage to the DOJ's credibility and the challenges of restoring public confidence in the face of a divided nation. You can get a copy of their great book here, Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department. Today's Bill Press Pod is supported by The Ironworkers Union. More information at Ironworkers.org. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

america fear donald trump politics joe biden fbi cnn bernie sanders fox news progressive injustice hillary clinton liberal msnbc doj justice department merrick garland investigative reporters young turks justice doj thom hartmann stephanie miller carol leonnig aaron c bill press progressive talk jamie benson

Is [DS] Planning An Armed Civil War? Muslim Brotherhood Comes Into Focus, Clean & Swift – Ep. 3817

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 13, 2026 78:53

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureConspiracy no more, the D’s in Mass want to limit miles people can drive because of climate change. Biden/Obama forces electrical prices higher, Trump is now bringing the prices down and AI datacenters will be powered separately. The [CB] awakening has begun. Sometime you need to show the people the truth. The world is changing, Trump has shutdown the money supply around the world, the [DS] is in a deep panic and soon the people of Iran will take back their own country. As the [DS] criminal syndicate falls apart are they planning an armed civil war? Trump admin designates the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, other chapters to follow. In the end the Patriots have full control, once the chaos begins the partios will round them all up, it will be clean and swift. Economy https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2010831605430976627?s=20 Telecommunications, Utilities, & Energy and now heads to the Senate Ways and Means Committee (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); major changes beginning this week to ensure that Americans don't “pick up the tab” for their POWER consumption, in the form of paying higher Utility bills. We are the “HOTTEST” Country in the World, and Number One in AI. Data Centers are key to that boom, and keeping Americans FREE and SECURE but, the big Technology Companies who build them must “pay their own way.” Thank you, and congratulations to Microsoft. More to come soon! President DJT Trump Will Request to Limit Credit Card Interest Rates to 10% for One Year to Combat the Scams of the Big Financial Companies Trump Administration. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP This initiative is a great for reversing the damage caused by leftist policies that prioritized uncontrolled spending and galloping inflation over the well-being of the working people. Under the Biden administration, credit card interest rates skyrocketed, reaching an average of 21.5 % in 2024, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank, exacerbated by inflation that reached peaks of 9 % in 2022. This escalation was not an accident, but the direct result of Democratic policies that injected trillions in unnecessary stimuli, increasing the national debt and forcing the Fed to raise base rates to contain the crisis. Source: gatewayhispanic.com https://twitter.com/truflation/status/2011071380175860037?s=20 price data has been showing https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/2010924086981984640?s=20 https://twitter.com/DrJStrategy/status/2011032604313518251?s=20 a hoax. What Powell actually did •Powell chose to go public with a dramatic video statement saying DOJ subpoenas “threatened a criminal indictment” over his testimony on the Fed's multibillion‑dollar building renovations. •He explicitly framed the subpoenas as “pretexts” and cast them as retaliation for the Fed setting rates independently of the president, elevating a renovation/cost‑overrun inquiry into an existential attack on central bank independence. The framing of criminal indictment came from Powell! In what look liked a scripted response, all of the Fed acolytes on Wall St cried foul, they bought in hook line and sinker!!! What the U.S. Attorney is saying •The U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C. has stated they contacted the Fed “on multiple occasions” about cost overruns and Powell's congressional testimony, were ignored, and therefore resorted to formal legal process, which they stress “is not a threat.” •Jeanine Pirro has been explicit that “the word ‘indictment' has come out of Mr. Powell's mouth, no one else's,” and that “none of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach.” “Above the law” behaviour. •Powell now publicly insists “no one is above the law,” even as the record shows the Fed disregarded informal outreach and only engaged once grand jury subpoenas landed, which is the opposite of transparent cooperation. Recall Choke Point 2.0 and the unbanking of individuals. •By recasting a straightforward question of cost overruns and possible misstatements to Congress as an illegitimate “criminal indictment threat,” Powell is effectively demanding a special zone of immunity wrapped in the rhetoric of independence. Why central bankers are “charging the hill” •Former Fed chairs and global monetary grandees have rushed out statements condemning the probe as an attack on Fed independence, treating any prosecutorial look at a central banker as inherently out of bounds. The former Fed officials' statement is doing exactly what the “51 intel officials” letter did on the Hunter Biden laptop: using elite signatures to launder a political narrative into institutional dogma and declare scrutiny itself illegitimate. Powell and his allies are recasting a narrow DOJ inquiry into cost overruns and testimony accuracy as an existential assault on “independence,” and an all‑too‑willing media is once again treating the letter as revealed truth instead of asking hard questions This closes ranks around the idea that central banks sit on a higher plane than normal agencies, immune not only from political pressure on rates, which is legitimate, but also from standard legal and fiscal oversight, which is not. MSM and the death of the 4th estate •Much of legacy media has adopted Powell's framing almost verbatim: “unprecedented attack on independence,” “monetary policy under assault,” while relegating the core factual dispute,ignored outreach, cost overruns, accuracy of testimony, to secondary status. Powell and the central banking crowd are behaving in a way that is frankly odd: they stonewall basic oversight, scream “independence” the moment anyone reaches for legal tools, and act as though they stand above the law—while a compliant MSM gladly carries their narrative, proof the fourth estate has checked out. All of this does not meet the smell test. Is the Fed above the US Constitution? Why did Powell go public and choose the framing that he did? Why did MSM and so called objective pundits not do any objective analysis. Smells like elements of a Russia Russia Russia hoax strategy to me. https://twitter.com/MetaLawMan/status/2010816276508082343?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2010816276508082343%7Ctwgr%5E6585e9ff019ea8191354a3bf06c918cdfd10f00c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fjoehoft.com%2Fcorrupt-fed-head-jerome-powell-added-trillions-in-unnecessary-us-debt%2F service of a subpoena on the Fed is not a threat to indict him. Subpoenas are investigative tools. It's possible that the government separately advised Powell that he was a “target” of the investigation, but he didn't say that. 3. Nowhere in the statement does Powell say his testimony to Congress about the Fed construction project was truthful and accurate. https://twitter.com/USAttyPirro/status/2010886969518170452?s=20 Powell's mouth, no one else's. None of this would have happened if they had just responded to our outreach. This office makes decisions based on the merits, nothing more and nothing less. We agree with the chairman of the Federal Reserve that no one is above the law, and that is why we expect his full cooperation. Political/Rights https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/2011107269585616922?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2011108530842108290?s=20 https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2010742739562901678?s=20 Procedure is same used in any location, such as hospital etc. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2011067479603257616?s=20 https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2011085032606102012?s=20 American law and the accompanying reduction in crime. However, there are a few certain locations where law enforcement refuses to assist in law enforcement, and the local politicians and a base of Marxist-organized civilians actively oppose (sometimes violently) ICE’s lawful operations. It’s those latter locations, few in number but outsized in media reporting–all run by Democrats–that give a false impression as to how much Americans appreciate getting what they voted for. https://twitter.com/KCPayTreeIt/status/2010475982038147336?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/2010965644867485898?s=20 Tehran, according to the Wall Street Journal https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2011029585161568307?s=20 lowballing. In 2019 they said 230 died, Reuters reported 1,500. Iran International estimated 2,000+ last week based on hospital reports and morgue footage. Now the regime’s confirming it. But they’re framing it as “terrorists killed these people” not “we shot 2,000 protesters.” That’s the setup for mass trials and executions. 2,000 dead in 2 weeks. That’s 140+ per day. During a communications blackout. In a country claiming it has “total control.” Source: Reuters, Iranian official https://twitter.com/IranIntl_En/status/2011018647255322754?s=20 a coordinated blackout aimed not only at security control but at concealing the truth, reflected in internet cuts, crippled communications, media shutdowns, and the intimidation of journalists and witnesses. Publication was delayed until the evidence converged. The assessment is based on a multi-stage review of information from a source close to the Supreme National Security Council; two sources in the presidential office; accounts from several sources within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Mashhad, Kermanshah and Isfahan; testimonies from eyewitnesses and families of those killed; field reports; data linked to medical centers; and information provided by doctors and nurses in multiple cities. Trump administration designates 3 Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organizations The Trump administration labeled three Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organizations on Tuesday, imposing sanctions on them and their members. The Lebanese, Jordanian and Egyptian chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood pose a risk to the United States and American interests, according to the Treasury and State departments. “These designations reflect the opening actions of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood chapters' violence and destabilization wherever it occurs,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement obtained by The Associated Press. “The United States will use all available tools to deprive these Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism.” The Jordanian and Egyptian branches were designated by the Treasury as specifically designated global terrorists for providing support to Hamas. The Lebanese branch was labeled a foreign terrorist organization, which is the most severe, meaning it is a criminal offense to provide material support to the group. Source; wsbt.com Rubio Designates Egyptian, Jordanian and Lebanese Chapters of Muslim Brotherhood as Foreign Terrorist Organizations Keep in mind the Muslim Brotherhood is the fabric on the umbrella of political Islam. Each faction represents and individual spline on the umbrella construct, but the Muslim Brotherhood overall is a political extremist system for various levels of authentic Islam. The regional chapters that really matter, the difficult ones to navigate will be in Qatar, Syria and especially the Turkish factions. These are more politically connected to the home government interests. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com 1237 Apr 22, 2018 1:31:31 AM EDT Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 3e4934 No. 1141069 “The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan [MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…” https://clarionproject.org/muslim_brotherhood_explanatory_memorandum/ Q 3881 Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: b03e04 No.8238822 Feb 24 2020 20:36:43 (EST) EMHyS2xXkAA8JrB.png https://twitter.com/cain_nate/status/1231066589996318720 Listen carefully. Think: re: why [no] arrests (justice) yet? What if (almost) every critical position [sr] within the US GOV apparatus was infiltrated? WHAT MUST BE DONE FIRST? THE SWAMP RUNS DEEP. +Sleepers Backgrounds are important. Muslim Brotherhood List of ‘in the news now [names]‘ w/ known ties to Islam? THIS IS NOT ANOTHER 4-YEAR ELECTION. [assumptions correct – package well rec [known]] Q https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/2010902536757162398?s=20 765 Feb 15, 2018 1:08:41 AM EST Q !UW.yye1fxo ID: 276796 No. 382161 WATCH THE WATER. Q War/Peace Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2010746570853990773?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2010419447987937370?s=20 Antifa TikTok Agitator Urges Armed Leftist Militias to ‘Fight' ICE Agents Radical TikTok agitator Danesh Noshirvan has crossed a dangerous line. The Antifa-aligned mega influencer is now openly calling for organized, armed left-wing militias to confront ICE agents and federal law enforcement in America's largest cities. Danesh Noshirvan is directly linked to Scott Dworkin, founder of the Democratic Coalition Against Donald Trump. According to reports, Dworkin and even foreign interests bankroll Noshirvan's activities. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2010988104853659986?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2010833162151346316?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2010833162151346316%7Ctwgr%5Ec535903544267d9392f4466181097498d09593a1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fnew-minnesota-ag-keith-ellison-minneapolis-mayor-jacob%2F should be in JAIL. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Says There Are “DISTURBING TAPES” of Minnesota AG Keith Ellison Taking Money to Stop Investigations Into Somali Fraud the U.S. Treasury Secretary confirmed that federal authorities are aggressively “following the money” amid explosive fraud investigations tied to Minnesota's sprawling Somali-linked financial networks. According to Bessent, the Treasury Department has launched multiple enforcement actions focused on suspicious financial flows between Minnesota residents and businesses and overseas destinations, including East Africa, as the federal government intensifies its immigration and fraud crackdown in the state. But the real bombshell dropped during an interview with Blaze: Scott Bessent:“It's hard to follow the money. There are evidently some disturbing tapes of AG Ellison in meetings with people who donated to him—calling for political favors to stop the investigations. We'll see. I don't want to get out ahead of the investigation. It's going to be very methodical. But I can guarantee you—when the bear trap snaps, we're going to get these folks. We're going to follow the money, whether it's here in Minneapolis and St. Paul or over in East Africa. There are tons of luxury properties and cars that have been bought over there.” WATCH: Source: thegatewaypundit.com Countries who illegally entered the USA though Sleepy Joe Biden's HORRIBLE Open Border's Policy. Every place we go, crime comes down. In Chicago, despite a weak and incompetent Governor and Mayor fighting us all the way, a big improvement was made. Thousands of Criminals were removed! Minnesota Democrats love the unrest that anarchists and professional agitators are causing because it gets the spotlight off of the 19 Billion Dollars that was stolen by really bad and deranged people. FEAR NOT, GREAT PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA, THE DAY OF RECKONING & RETRIBUTION IS COMING! Minnesota’s total population as of July 1, 2024, is estimated at 5,793,151. Approximately 8% of the state’s population is foreign-born, meaning about 463,452 individuals, while 92% (around 5,329,699) are native-born (U.S.-born). Minnesota is home to the largest Somali-American population in the United States, with people of Somali descent making up a notable ethnic group. Recent estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) for 2024 put the number of individuals of Somali descent in Minnesota at around 107,000 to 108,000, representing about 1.85% of the state’s total population. (Note: Some sources provide slightly varying figures, such as 76,000 as a lower estimate, but the ACS data consistently points to the higher range. )Breakdown Within the Somali Population in MinnesotaThe Somali community in Minnesota includes both U.S.-born individuals and foreign-born immigrants or refugees. Here’s a detailed split based on nativity and citizenship status: https://twitter.com/DataRepublican/status/1919002207896174765?s=20 or his NGOs appeared in the Journal of Democracy. It’s the flagship journal of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the same organization featured prominently in that widely circulated “Uniparty NGO” network diagrams below. NED is a U.S. government-funded outfit. It includes currently sitting members of Congress on its board… from both parties, not just former officials. Soros's involvement is deep. He has co-chaired NED conferences abroad and his Open Society NGOs regularly partner with NED operations, especially in countries undergoing “transitions” (read: regime change or soft power penetration). Together, Soros and US-backed NGOs have shaped funding pipelines, media narratives, and even foreign electoral strategies. So when people ask, “Why isn't Soros banned?” … they need to understand: he’s not an outsider. He’s part of our government. The Uniparty protects and partners with him, because he helps carry out a shared foreign policy vision… the same one that labels President Trump as a threat to democracy. NED members include: Victoria Nuland – Director of the National Endowment for Democracy; Acting United States Deputy Secretary of State under Biden (served in both parties). Karen Bass – Vice Chair of the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Representative and current Mayor of Los Angeles (Democrat). Todd Young – Honorary at the National Endowment for Democracy; U.S. Senator from Indiana (Republican). Elise Stefanik – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; U.S. Representative from New York and House GOP Conference Chair (Republican). Mel Martinez – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Senator from Florida (Republican). Steve Biegun – Director at the National Endowment for Democracy; former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State (Republican). Todd Young – Honorary at the National Endowment for Democracy; US Senator from Indiana (Republican). https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2011165232815882294?s=20 Just In: Bill and Hillary Clinton Refuse To Testify in Front of House Oversight Committee, Daring Chairman Comer To Hold Them in Contempt of Congress After months of dispute against House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Bill and Hillary Clinton have today (13) REFUSED to testify in the House's Jeffrey Epstein investigation. This escalates the battle with Comer, Republican of Kentucky, and the former U.S. President and Secretary of State are effectively daring him to hold them in contempt of Congress. The New York Times reported: Source: thegatewaypundit.com President Trump's Plan Lefty DOJ Lawyers Rage-Quit After Harmeet Dhillon Blocks ICE Witch Hunt A group of lawyers in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) have reportedly resigned after Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon declined to investigate the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer involved in last week’s shooting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The group had apparently pushed Dhillon to let a DOJ delegation fly to Minneapolis to investigate the January 7 shooting death of far-left agitator Renee Nicole Good, who was shot after she used her two-ton Honda Pilot as a weapon against the officer. Despite pressure from the lefty lawyers – described as “career prosecutors” – to initiate a witch hunt against the officer, Dhillon put a kibosh on their plans. They were apparently informed of the decision not to move forward with an investigation of the ICE agent last Friday. After being told “no,” a group of “top leaders” in the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division “have left their jobs to register their frustration with the department.” Shock, horror. Sounds like the DOJ is well rid of this cabal, and these departures could be part of a trend of mass resignations amongst the old guard. This, of course, also saves Dhillon the trouble of having to draw up their pink slips. Source: redstate.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2010791586980933826?s=20 later. This is a system built for abuse by design https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2010886531838595278?s=20 https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2010777023673999531?s=20 https://twitter.com/USDOL/status/2010771852696617401?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

united states america american new york world president ai donald trump power chicago house energy state americans new york times office joe biden planning western minnesota microsoft white house congress iran kentucky journal mayors wall street policy fight republicans muslims ice minneapolis democrats front id civil war islam mass scams democracy immigration criminals governor patriots secure attorney combat secretary egyptian democratic thousands syria jail qatar senators shock one year armed hamas iranians fed powell hillary clinton swift countries turkish jeffrey epstein federal reserve number one treasury ngos doj reuters comer procedures smells representative hunter biden associated press antifa ned utility marxist cb tehran ds data centers george soros east africa approximately lebanese contempt somali publication refused national endowment utilities us constitution msm billion dollars uw telecommunications federal reserve bank us senators treasury department acs census bureau fear not subpoenas make america great again deputy secretary house oversight committee jordanian treasury secretary muslim brotherhood daily caller means committee day of reckoning customs enforcement ice assistant attorney general dhillon technology companies isfahan justice doj us gov civil rights division jeanine pirro uniparty florida republicans createelement islamic revolutionary guard corps somali americans russia russia russia dworkin parentnode getelementbyid biden obama mashhad honda pilot former fed watch the water democracy ned mrandyngo scott dworkin endwokeness

The U.S. captures Maduro.

Tangle

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 5, 2026 34:18

Early Saturday morning, the United States military conducted air strikes in Venezuela and carried out an operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Shortly thereafter, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, had been indicted in the Southern District of New York and charged with “Narco-Terrorism Conspiracy, Cocaine Importation Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns and Destructive Devices, and Conspiracy to Possess Machineguns and Destructive Devices against the United States.” In a press conference later in the day, President Donald Trump said that the United States will assume control of Venezuela “until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition.” Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: What do you think of the U.S. operation in Venezuela? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

united states music new york founders donald trump conspiracies diet venezuela acast executive producer radar possession nicholas maduro captures southern district tangle justice doj cilia flores early saturday

People Must See It To Believe It, 2026 Trump Is Ready To Unleash Hell On The [DS] – Ep. 3808

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 31, 2025 85:05

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureCanada is having problems, they are following the green new scam, since Trump placed tariffs on Canada they are desperately trying to find trading partners.Trump shows how windmills kill birds, where are all the environmentalist. The EU is now pushing the CBDC, Trump’s economy will overshadow the rest of the world. The people of this country and others must see the criminal syndicate. Without seeing it they people would have never believed there was a criminal syndicate. Trump has the leverage, more is coming in 2026 and after the midterms Trump is going to unleash hell on the [DS]. Every crime, scam and violation of the Constitution will be exposed. Justice is coming. Economy Canada Trying to Find Trade Partners Prime Minister Mark Carney reflects a particular reality of the problem their economy will face in 2026. It appears that Canadian government officials have finally recognized the Trump administration plans to dissolve the USMCA or what Canada calls CUSMA next year. With that reality they have a big problem. Mexico has been working throughout the year to initiate economic policies in alignment with the United States. However, structurally and politically this is an alignment that is impossible for Canada to do. Like many contracting European countries, the economic policies of Canada are centered around their climate change agenda and green energy goals. In order for Canada to position their economy to be in alignment with the rest of North America (USA and Mexico), Carney would have to reverse years of legislated rules and regulations. That is not going to happen, and Canada will always be at a disadvantage because of it. With three quarters of their economic production tied to exports into the USA, and with the USMCA likely to be dissolved in favor of a bilateral trade agreement, Canada now has to find other markets for its products or lower all the trade barriers currently in place. Prime Minister Mark Carney is trying to find alternative markets. Carney has looked toward Europe, but that is a closed trade bloc difficult to engage. Carney has looked to southeast Asia, but that is an export driven market with limited capabilities to import costly western products. Carney has looked to Japan and China, but on scale there's little to be gained. The question is, where can Canada send its products if not to the USA. The brutally honest answer is nowhere. There just isn't any other market, or combination of markets, who could replace the consumer base of the USA. Canada is refusing to admit this reality and 2026 is going to be a harsh awakening for the Canadian people. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/2006140340068291046?s=20 – A 2025 Trump administration initiative aims to enforce $1 million fines per bald eagle death. (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Initial Jobless Claims End 2025 Near Record Lows The number of Americans filing for jobless claims for the first time plummeted last week to 199k – the lowest since the Thanksgiving week plunge and pretty much the lowest since Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2006392860006846799?s=20 to give them a shot at winning the midterms. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006141249045291038?s=20 went to the liquor store again and tried to buy €100 worth of booze using the government-run digital currency on your iPhone, but your transaction gets rejected. Why? Because some Eurotrash EU bureaucrat decided that it’s unhealthy for you to buy so much liquor in such a short period of time, so you gets nothing. And you have no recourse, because you have become a serf whose life is at the discretion of the government. (As an aside, single-payer, government-funded healthcare will work in synchronicity with this, deciding what is best for you health-wise, because after all it’s not fair that other citizens must pay for your cirrhosis and bad judgment.) You have been warned, Europe. Political/Rights https://twitter.com/SecDuffy/status/2006203195165462545?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2006203195165462545%7Ctwgr%5Ebc322e2414802c704b50bc3c2955bae6d38269c1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Frusty-weiss%2F2025%2F12%2F31%2Fgavin-newsom-tries-to-keep-illegals-on-the-road-a-little-longer-sean-duffy-immediately-cuts-him-off-n2197630 including cutting nearly $160 million in federal funding. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2006168699502215508?s=20 The Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General can get involved in any DOJ matter they choose. It'a not a judge's job to get in the middle of those internal deliberations. That's a serious violation of the separation of powers. The American voters want violent illegals out of our country. Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., a Nashville Obama judge, needs to get back in his lane. https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2006046386190422054?s=20 on taxpayers, should not exploit welfare systems built by the native population, should speak the language, assimilate into the host society, respect its laws and norms, and should not receive special carve-outs like separate schools, parallel institutions or different rules. If even these minimal basics can no longer gain agreement, then there is no realistic path to fixing the system at all. DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2005795643126595959?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2005795643126595959%7Ctwgr%5E813dbbc99cf3dee762087820edf11e55af9622ca%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fjenniferoo%2F2025%2F12%2F30%2Fisis-in-texas-fbi-arrests-man-who-helped-fund-global-terrorist-organizations-n2197594 propaganda, sent cryptocurrency believing it would fund terrorist activity, and attempted to deliver materials intended for explosive devices. This is radical Islamic terrorism, and it was identified and stopped. Great work by our FBI teams @FBIDallas and great law enforcement partners. https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006157155666182556?s=20 https://twitter.com/AAbsaroka/status/2005723457997484150?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2006176939854196897?s=20 https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2005961263419883887?s=20 https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2006095673423179995?s=20 https://twitter.com/USABehFarsi/status/2005874044319436965?s=20 Courage if it were a picture…This is a black-and-white aerial photo depicting a scene from protests in Iran (likely Tehran, based on the post’s hashtags). It shows a lone individual standing defiantly in the street, holding a long pole or banner horizontally, facing a group of about a dozen uniformed security forces or riot police on motorcycles. The image symbolizes courage in the context of human rights and anti-regime demonstrations. War/Peace https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006367551878844863?s=20 https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/2006295058492882982?s=20 https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006107978504524105?s=20 Zelenskyy Urges Trump to Visit Ukraine to Seal Russia Peace Deal Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested that President Donald Trump should visit Ukraine to help close a peace deal with Russia. Zelenskyy specifically urged Trump to travel directly into Ukraine rather than entering through Poland, arguing that such a visit would demonstrate confidence that a ceasefire is within reach. Source: newsmax.com Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda Biden Housing Scandal EXPLODES: HUD Report Reveals Over $5 Billion in Questionable Rental Aid, Including Payments to Dead People and Non-Citizens A bombshell federal report has blown the lid off yet another massive Biden-era taxpayer scandal — this time inside the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. According to HUD's own Fiscal Year 2025 Agency Financial Report, more than $5 billion in rental assistance payments during the final year of the Biden regime were flagged as “questionable” or improper, exposing systemic failures, nonexistent oversight, and breathtaking incompetence at the federal level. Among the most jaw-dropping revelations: tens of thousands of payments were made to people who were already DEAD, and thousands more went to recipients who may not have even been eligible to receive taxpayer-funded housing assistance at all, the New York Post first reported. Buried in the HUD report is a stunning admission that federal systems failed to stop payments to 30,054 deceased individuals who were either still listed as active tenants or continued receiving rental assistance after their deaths. HUD officials acknowledged that only after cross-checking Treasury databases did they finally identify the scope of the problem — meaning for years, taxpayers were unknowingly footing the bill for people who no longer exist. “[Over] 30,000 dead people receiving housing isn't an accident — it was systematic fraud by Biden and the left. HUD will hold those who defrauded the American taxpayers accountable,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner wrote on X. According to the report: “large concentration” of these questionable rental assistance funds flowed to Democrat-run strongholds, including: New York California Washington, D.C. Yet payments to deceased recipients were found in all 50 states, proving the rot was nationwide. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006068825272508679?s=20 to U.S. citizens. See 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a). There are no exceptions. Virginia violates it nonetheless. This court should put an end to this and permanently enjoin the enforcement of provisions of the Virginia Education Code that directly conflict with federal immigration law. Virginia Code §§ 23.1-502 and 23.505.1 explicitly classify illegal aliens as Virginia residents based on certain conditions. That classification makes illegal aliens eligible for reduced in-state tuition and state-administered financial assistance for public state colleges and universities while U.S. citizens from other states are ineligible for the reduced tuition and must pay higher out-of-state tuition rates. This is not only wrong but illegal. The challenged act's discriminatory treatment in favor of illegal aliens over U.S. citizens is squarely prohibited and preempted by federal law, which provides that “an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State . . . for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit . . . without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.” 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a) (emphasis added). The challenged act, as applied to illegal aliens, is thus unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. This Court should declare Virginia's law, as applied to illegal aliens, preempted and permanently enjoin its enforcement.” https://twitter.com/jonesville/status/2006273719602475506?s=20 https://twitter.com/thehoffather/status/2006240702213099815?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2006327355166589007?s=20 https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/2006031707724546400?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2006038706893836481?s=20 https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2006393802714439774?s=20 https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2006028437899862286?s=20 Patronage System here in America AND help them successfully assimilate. https://twitter.com/HHS_Jim/status/2006136004294664464?s=20 against the blatant fraud that appears to be rampant in Minnesota and across the country: 1. I have activated our defend the spend system for all ACF payments. Starting today, all ACF payments across America will require a justification and a receipt or photo evidence before we send money to a state. 2. Alex Adams and I have identified the individuals in @nickshirleyy ‘s excellent work. I have demanded from @GovTimWalz a comprehensive audit of these centers. This includes attendance records, licenses, complaints, investigations, and inspections. 3. We have launched a dedicated fraud-reporting hotline and email address at https://childcare.gov Whether you are a parent, provider, or member of the general public, we want to hear from you. We have turned off the money spigot and we are finding the fraud. @ACFHHS @HHSGov https://twitter.com/DOGE_HHS/status/2006145075315929532?s=20 will expand the system to support itemized receipts and photographic evidence, and make all data/receipts, where possible, available to the public. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006120694497857977?s=20 move to another state that is honest. Make sense? https://twitter.com/C__Herridge/status/2006091693259636775?s=20 alleges the probes were “buried” because it potentially implicated Biden Administration allies •Between late May 2025 and December 2025 FBI had 16 open investigations into approximately 32 healthcare and homecare providers accused of fraud •Described as massive, joint investigations including HHS Inspector General, Medicaid Fraud Unit, IRS, Postal Inspectors, MN Attorney General, MN Department of Education, and others Probes Now Expanding In Minnesota, Investigators Are Exploring Nation-wide Fraud Schemes •FBI Surging forensic accountants and data analytics teams to MN •Identifying fraud, then “following the money” to see the “entire web” •Investigating potential links to elected officials and terrorist financing •Potential criminal violations include public corruption, fraud, cyber fraud, healthcare fraud, homecare fraud, money-laundering Investigations Include Federal Nutrition Programs •These investigations including day care facilities are exploring links to alleged fraud involving federal nutrition programs •The Feeding our Future probe exposed an alleged $250m fraud scheme that obtained federal funding during COVID for nutrition programs but almost NO meals were provided to children •It's alleged the monies were laundered through multiple entities to enrich the participants •78 have been indicted, 57 convicted, two found not guilty among the group. Just a heads up that Patel and Trump's FBI have been all over the Minnesota fraud thing for months, 78 people have already been indicted, and Kash is openly admitting that this was buried by the Biden admin. That’s not how FBI & DOJ work. Criminal investigations take months. Trials take years. No one knows yet if Bondi & Kash will measure up. It’s too early to tell. WATCH: Karoline Leavitt Says Trump “Not Afraid to Use Denaturalization” Against Somali Fraudsters — Search Warrants Being Executed and “People Will be in Handcuffs” Denaturalization, also known as revocation of naturalization, is the legal process by which the U.S. government revokes the citizenship of a naturalized U.S. citizen, effectively stripping them of their citizenship status. This is not a process that private individuals can initiate or “do” themselves; it is exclusively handled by the federal government through judicial proceedings in U.S. district court. It cannot be done administratively by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) alone, following a court ruling in 2000 that limited such authority. Grounds for DenaturalizationUnder the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), denaturalization can only occur based on specific legal grounds. These include: The individual did not meet statutory requirements for naturalization at the time, such as lawful permanent residence, good moral character, required periods of residence or physical presence, or attachment to the principles of the U.S. Constitution (INA 316 and INA 340(a)). The person hid key information or lied during the naturalization process (e.g., on Form N-400 or in interviews), and this directly led to approval. The fact must be “material,” meaning it could have influenced the decision (INA 340(a); see Supreme Court case Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988)). Within five years after naturalization, the person joins or affiliates with the Communist Party, a totalitarian party, or a terrorist organization, which is seen as evidence of lacking attachment to the U.S. Constitution (INA 313, INA 340(c), and INA 316(a)(3)). For those who naturalized based on U.S. military service, revocation can occur if they receive a discharge under other-than-honorable conditions before completing at least five years of honorable service (INA 328(f) and INA 329(c)). These grounds apply only to naturalized citizens (those who went through the full process, including application, interview, approval, and oath). U.S.-born citizens cannot be denaturalized under these provisions. The process is initiated and pursued by the government, not individuals. Here’s a high-level overview: USCIS or other agencies (like the Department of Homeland Security) identify potential cases through audits, investigations, or tips about fraud or ineligibility. If there’s sufficient evidence, USCIS refers the case to the Department of Justice (DOJ) via the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Coordination happens through USCIS’s Office of the Chief Counsel. Judicial Proceedings: The DOJ files a complaint in federal district court under INA 340(a). The government must prove its case by “clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence” that leaves no doubt. This is a high standard, and the process can take years. Criminal Revocation: If the case involves fraud, the DOJ may pursue criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. 1425 (unlawful procurement of citizenship). A conviction automatically revokes naturalization under INA 340(e), with proof required beyond a reasonable doubt. If the court rules in favor of revocation, it issues an order canceling the Certificate of Naturalization, which the person must surrender. Citizenship is revoked retroactively to the original naturalization date, reverting the individual to their prior immigration status (often lawful permanent resident, but this could lead to deportation proceedings under INA 237). USCIS updates records and notifies the Department of State. Denaturalization is rare—historically, around 22,000 cases occurred in the 20th century, often tied to wartime or political contexts—but it has been used more in recent years for fraud cases. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2006013185355112758?s=20 fraud in a ginormous scale. Minnesota also lets one person vouch for 8 migrant voters’ eligibility to vote WITHOUT them having to prove it! Minnesota needs to clean house, NOW. https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/2006079447922008292?s=20 President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/FBIDDBongino/status/2006087308404314365?s=20 disrupted (210% increase) -2,000+ kilos of Fentanyl seized (up 31%), enough to kill 130 million Americans -Nihilistic Violent Extremism arrests up 490% -Over 6,000 child victims located (up 22%) -Historic drop in U.S. murder rate. Please read the post from Director Patel for more details on the progress that has been made, and is ongoing. https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2006091717074903047?s=20 https://twitter.com/Kimberlyrja8/status/2006193599365423586?s=20 LISTEN (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

covid-19 united states america american canada thanksgiving donald trump europe starting china education japan future hell mexico state americans canadian russia office european joe biden ukraine european union minnesota iphone plan dead iran fbi supreme court trials democrats billion poland immigration criminals attorney housing constitution feeding historic irs islamic unleash buried patel treasury citizenship homeland security certificates attorney generals doj biden administration investigating new york post fentanyl tehran ds grounds carney bondi hud coordination must see communist party central bank digital currency zelenskyy dead people urban development united states constitution usmca fiscal year chief counsel justice doj uscis acf naturalization deputy attorney general createelement parentnode getelementbyid supremacy clause alex adams dc draino immigration services uscis this court mn department people will endwokeness nationality act ina

[DS] Wants War, Trump Wants Elections In Ukraine, SC Destroys The [DS] Power Structure – Ep. 3792

covid-19 america american death president ai donald trump europe washington mexico americans phd russia ukraine elections innovation elon musk cost dc european union new jersey write berlin black lives matter illinois white house congress fbi republicans ice vladimir putin farmers democrats crypto senate commerce active criminals attorney customers ukrainian nato corruption gas intel presidents expected houses tariffs hungary nvidia federal reserve patel social security willis macron doj 10k national security destroys zelensky cb ds rubin volodymyr zelenskyy amd documentation adp 2b america first blackwell bondi ketanji brown jackson hhs verification merz imo government accountability office starmer thanksgiving week make america great again wiles fani willis us attorneys trump wants executive branch grassley ssn american workers justice doj power structures gasbuddy too long article ii hatch act createelement american jobs burgum georgia supreme court parentnode getelementbyid doj fbi 21b

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 9, 2025 87:25

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe [CB][DS] are trying to convince the world high electricity costs are coming from AI and Crypto mining, it is not, its coming from the green new scam. Gas prices are coming way down. The new system Trump is building is getting stronger and stronger. The [CB] will fight back against Trump’s tariff system. The [DS] is pushing back, they want war and they do not want the peace deal. Corruption is being exposed in Ukraine which is putting a lot of pressure on Zelensky, the EU is now funding Ukraine. Soon he will be pushed out or he will sign the peace deal. Trump says its time for election in Ukraine. The [DS] criminal syndicate that they setup in DC under threat by the SC. They will rule that Trump as the right to remove the agencies and people, they are not independent of the Executive Branch, game over. Economy https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1997946755116359938?s=20 thanks to bad energy policy, not data centers. He slammed subsidies for unreliable sources like offshore wind, saying some projects cost $11B for 1GW of intermittent power, versus $1–2B for 24/7 reliable supply. Burgum laid into what he called “climate extremists,” accusing them of prioritizing flashy green experiments over building energy systems that actually work. The result is sky-high bills for electricity that cuts out when the weather does, while lawmakers pat themselves on the back for feel-good “net zero” policies that don't add up. Burgum: “A lot of the higher prices that you’re seeing are not related to the AI data centers. The policy choices of the last 5 years, driven by sometimes climate extremists, were the ones that are driving up the prices you’re seeing.” (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); That is why I have authorized documentation to impose a 5% Tariff on Mexico if this water isn't released, IMMEDIATELY. The longer Mexico takes to release the water, the more our Farmers are hurt. Mexico has an obligation to FIX THIS NOW. Thank you for your attention to this matter! Gas Prices Drop To Lowest Level In Nearly 5 Years Across US Gasoline prices have dropped to their lowest levels in nearly five years and stand at around $2.90 per gallon on average as of Monday, according to data from GasBuddy, a company that tracks gas prices. “The national average has just slipped below $2.90 per gallon for the first time since May 2, 2021,” GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan wrote in a Sunday post on X. Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1998037849539846303?s=20 ADP Weekly Employment Report Signals Rebound In Labor Market the US labor market turned up for the four weeks ending Nov. 22, 2025, private employers added an average of 4,750 jobs a week., according to ADP’s new weekly employment data This week's positive number hints at an upswing in the labor market after four straight weeks of negative pulse estimates, after four straight weeks of losing jobs. This follows the almost unprecedented decline in initial jobless claims last week (which some have argued was impacted by Thanksgiving Week irregularities). Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/1998369537851346975?s=20 “degraded” products that nobody wanted, a terrible idea that slowed Innovation, and hurt the American Worker. That Era is OVER! We will protect National Security, create American Jobs, and keep America's lead in AI. NVIDIA's U.S. Customers are already moving forward with their incredible, highly advanced Blackwell chips, and soon, Rubin, neither of which are part of this deal. My Administration will always put America FIRST. The Department of Commerce is finalizing the details, and the same approach will apply to AMD, Intel, and other GREAT American Companies. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Political/Rights https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/1998069235734520159?s=20 putting American lives at risk. There are another 4,015 aliens in the custody of an Illinois jurisdiction that ICE is seeking to arrest. Criminal illegal aliens should not be released back onto our streets to terrorize more innocent Americans. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998407499884511706?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/1998416601050161442?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDDBongino/status/1998135848546746381?s=20 daily to dismantle the network and all those criminal actors associated with it. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998400657217257829?s=20 DOGE https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998127452195852468?s=20 don’t see how they can do that!” “I’ll speak about it later. I’ll get a FULL report on it.” “Europe has to be VERY careful…Europe is going in some BAD directions.” @ElonMusk will win this! Geopolitical https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1998044051203928212?s=20 Hungary will not implement the measures of the Migration Pact. The rebellion begins! War/Peace https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1998163342465306883?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1998082649425125715?s=20 amid uncertainty about future U.S. involvement. Zelensky met with Macron, Merz, and Starmer to align Europe's position on Ukraine peace talks. The message? If the U.S. steps back, Europe is ready to step up. Macron spoke of “convergence” between Europe, Ukraine, and the U.S., code for: we're not waiting for Trump. Starmer promised “a just and lasting settlement.” Merz framed Ukraine's future as “the destiny of Europe.” This isn't just about Ukraine anymore, it's about Europe's ability to act without Washington.aa the subtext is clear: Europe knows Trump may walk away, and they're preparing for it. Ukraine is only part of the equation, the real test is whether Europe can act without Washington. For the first time since 2022, the center of gravity on Ukraine is shifting eastward, to Paris, Berlin, and London. If Trump wins, the burden of leadership falls on Europe. Today may have been the first test of whether it’s ready https://twitter.com/BRICSinfo/status/1998299398456131611?s=20 What’s The Likelihood Of A NATO-Russian Non-Aggression Pact? Putin recently proposed providing Europe, the majority of whose countries are part of NATO, with formal guarantees that it won't attack. In connection with this, he also assessed that those who fearmonger about Russia are serving the interests of the military-industrial complex and/or trying to bolster their domestic image, which exposed their ulterior motives. In any case, his proposal could hypothetically lead to a NATO-Russian Non-Aggression Pact (NRNAP), but only if the political will exists on both sides Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/TheOtherSideRu/status/1998356606119981155?s=20 it's not a democracy anymore” https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1998356214384611652?s=20 hold an election, but I would think the Ukrainian people should have that choice. And maybe Zelensky would win. But they haven't had an election in a long time. They talk about a democracy, but it gets to a point where it's not a democracy anymore,” Donald Trump said. As of December 2025, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s approval (or trust) rating in Ukraine has reportedly plummeted due to a major corruption scandal involving leaked “Mindich tapes” tied to his inner circle and energy sector graft. Multiple sources, including Ukrainian media and lawmakers, indicate the rating has dropped by about 40 percentage points in a single week, now sitting at or below 20-25%. Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1998187351026348280?s=20 WATCH: Crockett Launches Senate Campaign By Posting Bizarre Compilation of Trump Repeatedly Calling Her ‘Low IQ' FBI Agents Sue Kash Patel After Being Fired Over BLM Support — Claim Kneeling ‘Saved American Lives' The FBI agents who kneeled during the George Floyd BLM riots were fired on Friday by the FBI. A group of former FBI agents has filed a lawsuit against Director Kash Patel and the federal government after being fired for supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. The dozen agents complained that almost immediately upon becoming director of the bureau, Patel began working to terminate all agents who had kneeled in support of the movement. The lawsuit also claims the agents would not have been fired had they had the same perceived political affiliations as those involved in the January 6th protests. Source: thegatewaypundit.com The FBI, as a U.S. federal law enforcement agency under the Department of Justice (DOJ), is required to maintain political neutrality and impartiality in its operations and public actions. It does not take official political stands or engage in activism, as its mission focuses on enforcing federal laws without partisan bias. Individual FBI employees (including agents) are subject to strict restrictions under the Hatch Act, which prohibits most forms of partisan political activity to ensure a neutral federal workforce. FBI personnel are classified as “further restricted” employees, meaning they face additional limitations compared to most other federal workers. Key Prohibitions for FBI EmployeesThese apply at all times (on or off duty) unless otherwise noted, with the goal of preventing any appearance of political influence or coercion: Taking a partisan political stand: They may not endorse or oppose candidates for partisan office or political parties in advertisements, broadcasts, campaign literature, speeches at partisan events, or similar materials if done in coordination with a candidate, party, or partisan group. Pushing partisan activism: Active participation in partisan political management or campaigns is banned, including organizing rallies/caucuses, promoting/selling tickets to fundraising events, addressing partisan gatherings in support of/opposition to candidates, or driving voters to polls in coordination with partisan entities. They cannot use their official authority to interfere with elections or solicit/discourage political activity from individuals with business before the DOJ/FBI. Permitted Activities for FBI EmployeesWhile heavily restricted, some non-active or non-partisan actions are allowed, primarily off-duty: . https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1998131089542713808?s=20 million in fees from Fani Willis's office after she was disqualified for an improper relationship with a special prosecutor. The Georgia Supreme Court removed her permanently in September, opening the door for all 19 defendants to file similar reimbursement claims. The total cost could dwarf Trump's alone and stands as a humiliating rebuke of Willis's partisan prosecution. The blowback is now financial as well as legal. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1998354564790284308?s=20 notice. 18 of them are still actively covered. September 2025. Monthly payout: over $10,000. GAO’s just…monitoring them. Because apparently nobody at HHS has. No SSN? Fine. No proof of citizenship? Whatever. No income documentation? Come on in. GAO literally wrote in their report: “[We] did not provide documentation yet received coverage.” They’re not even hiding it – they got benefits with nothing. The system just said yes. Now check the real-world damage. In 2023, 29,000 Social Security numbers somehow got used for multiple full-year coverage plans. By 2024? That jumped to 68,000. Someone’s running the same number through the machine twice, three times, however many times it takes, and the alarms aren’t going off. Then there’s the $94 million that went to dead people in 2023. Not “accounts tied to people who died recently and the paperwork hasn’t caught up” – straight up deceased recipients. Death certificates filed, funerals held, checks still clearing. But here’s the really wild part: GAO tried to track $21 billion in subsidies from 2023 back to actual Social Security numbers. Couldn’t do it. 21 billion dollars just floating out there with no clear connection to who’s supposed to be getting it. The system allows multiple enrollments per SSN “to help ensure actual SSN-holder can enroll in cases of identity theft or data entry errors.” In other words: we built in workarounds so generous that fraud looks identical to legitimate use. Now Congress is fighting over whether to extend these enhanced COVID subsidies past December 31. Cost to keep them? $30 billion annually. 24 million people enrolled, over 90% getting subsidies. Without extension, premiums spike overnight and 22 million people might lose coverage. Republicans looking at GAO’s findings saying: this is exactly why we shouldn’t pour another $30B into a system that can’t tell fake accounts from real ones. Democrats saying: you’re going to kick 22 million people off insurance because less than 1% is fraud? Both sides kinda have a point. Yeah, the fraud’s under 1% of total enrollees. But when you’re burning $30B yearly and literally cannot verify where $21B went, “less than 1%” stops sounding so minor. Senate vote coming this week. Expected to fail. Which means scramble for short-term extension, fight continues into 2026 budget battles, and absolutely nothing changes about fraud controls. Because here’s what nobody wants to say out loud: the system isn’t designed to catch fraud. It’s designed to maximize enrollment. When your mandate is “get people covered,” asking too many questions becomes the enemy. Verification slows things down. Documentation creates barriers. Better to let a few fake accounts slip through than risk denying real people who need coverage. So GAO’s 18 fictional enrollees will keep collecting their $10K monthly until someone at HHS manually shuts them down. Which requires someone at HHS to actually read GAO reports. Which requires someone at HHS to care more about fraud than enrollment numbers. Don’t hold your breath. By next year, GAO will run the same test. Find the same results. Write the same warnings. And Congress will have the same fight about whether feeding money into a system that can’t track where it goes is compassionate policy or expensive theater. Meanwhile, somewhere in America, a completely imaginary person just got their subsidized premium renewed for 2026. https://twitter.com/chad_mizelle/status/1998194850324222006?s=20 clown show. Ignore him. In the meantime, Congress needs to start acting like a co-equal branch and initiate its own inquiry into Boasberg. President Trump's Plan Alina Habba Resigns as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey After Courts Rule Against Her Appointment Alina Habba, President Donald Trump's pick to serve as U.S. attorney for New Jersey, has resigned from her role following a federal court's ruling to uphold a lower court's decision that she was not “lawfully” appointed to the office. The news was announced Monday by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who said she was “saddened to accept Alina's resignation”: https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi/status/1998102734680318084?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1998102734680318084%7Ctwgr%5E61a3e334e8e6099ea26f7cf5005134be5bf746cd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html1998102734680318084 Habba intends to return to the U.S. attorney's office if that occurs, Bondi added, noting that she will be continuing with the DOJ as a senior advisor. Source: breitbart.com Do Not Mistake Compliance For Surrender” – Alina Habba Steps Down As Acting US Attorney For New Jersey Habba's statement Monday said “do not mistake compliance for surrender”. https://twitter.com/AlinaHabba/status/1998101999024550125?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1998101999024550125%7Ctwgr%5Ec3b83e0f57525961eabb9975a6e4dab69d0d73c0%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fdo-not-mistake-compliance-surrender-alina-habba-steps-down-acting-us-attorney-new-jersey Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/JoeLang51440671/status/1998202248636072142?s=20 Ketanji Brown Jackson claimed the president should have no power to fire expert bureaucrats. She said economists, PhDs, scientists, & transportation officials should operate beyond presidential reach. Such a view would carve the heart out of Article II & cement rule by permanent insiders rather than elected leadership. Jackson's theory elevates the deep state over the voters who choose a president. That is a constitutional revolution in plain sight. https://twitter.com/AwakenedOutlaw/status/1998116399190036973?s=20 Furthermore, the same logic would apply to the Federal Reserve, IMO. In fact, that’s almost certainly where this is going. Justice Kavanaugh: “I want to give you a chance to deal with the hard hypothetical. When both Houses of Congress and the President are controlled by the same party, they create a lot of these independent agencies or extend some of the current independent agencies into these kinds of situations so as to thwart future Presidents of the opposite party https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1894547479367938142?s=20 https://twitter.com/Rothbard1776/status/1998162884455522528?s=20 https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1998149963835191541?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998129151857848575?s=20 where you have Dem Senators, they won’t approve him! This gentlemen’s agreement [blue slip] has lasted TOO LONG. It means you can’t appoint a GOP US Attorney!” “In VA, NJ, CA, a US Attorney or judge…the only people you can get by are Democrats because they put a HOLD ON IT!” “It only takes one senator! If they are Democrat, they won’t approve it.” “All because GRASSLEY with his BLUE SLIP stuff won’t let anybody go by! And by the way, Democrats have violated blue slip!” Susie Wiles: Trump Will Campaign for 2026 Midterms ‘Like It's 2024 Again' White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles revealed that President Donald Trump will get out and “campaign like it's 2024 again” for the 2026 midterm elections. Wiles went on to explain that “in the midterms, it's not about who's sitting at the White House,” but about localizing the election and keeping “the federal officials out of it.” “We're actually going to turn that on its head,” Wiles shared. “And, put him on the ballot because so many of those low propensity voters are Trump voters. And, we saw, a week ago Tuesday, what happens when he's not on the ballot and not active. So, I haven't quite broken it to him yet, but he's going to campaign like it's 2024 again.” Source: breitbart.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

[DS] Is Going All Out To Divide The Movement,They Know What Is Coming,Nothing Can Stop It – Ep. 3783