09/18/20

Facts on BLM and the Chinese Progressive Association

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

A partial list of the Hall of Shame of corporations that gave financial support to BLM (burning and looting, conspiracy, and now perhaps racketeering) includes Door Dash, Amazon, Gatorade, Microsoft, 23andMe, Airbnb, Unilever, Nabisco, Dropbox, Fitbit, Cisco and Atlantic Records.

Image

Add in that time in the ’60s when Senator Dianne Feinstein was Mayor Feinstein and her association with the Chinese Progressive Association.

Hat tip:

Imagine that far-right demonstrators were laying siege to American cities for months, led by activists explicitly calling for an “ethnostate,” and that one of their groups was funded by an outfit involved with Vladimir Putin’s Russia. It would lead the news every day and there would be congressional hearings, right?

And rightly so. The threat of foreign interference in our domestic affairs is a serious matter, whether the suspects are rivals such as Russia or friendlies such as Mexico. This is especially the case if a foreign power were abetting unrest that aims to topple our constitutional order.

Well, the scenario described above is happening, though not with Russia or the far right, but with China and the leftist disturbances upending America and seeking to transform it.

Yet, there has not been a peep from the media or Congress about China’s support of the riots.

THE INTERACTION BETWEEN SERVICE AND ORGANIZING: TWO HOUSING CAMPAIGNS BY THE CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION (95 page document)

Go to the website for the Black Futures Lab, a venture of Black Lives Matter founder Alicia Garza, and click on the “Donate” button. It will ask you to send your money to an obscure organization, the Chinese Progressive Association, explaining that “Black Futures Lab is a fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association.”

History of the Chinese Progressive Association

The CPA was founded in San Francisco in 1972 during the heady days of the Marxist-oriented Asian American Movement, and today it also has a very active chapter in Boston. From its start, it has been a promoter of the People’s Republic of China.

According to an authoritative 2009 Stanford University paper tracing its early days to the present, and which can be found on Marxist.org, “The CPA began as a Leftist, pro-People’s Republic of China organization, promoting awareness of mainland China’s revolutionary thought and workers’ rights, and dedicated to self-determination, community control, and ‘serving the people.’”

The CPA, continued the paper, “worked with other pro-PRC groups within the U.S. and San Francisco Bay Area … Support for the PRC was based on the inspiration the members drew from what they saw as a successful grassroots model that presented a viable alternative to Western capitalism.”

One of the ways it did this was by holding “film screenings that were open to the public, sometimes showing Chinese films as well to facilitate understanding of the country’s revolutionary ideas. … CPA also took the lead with groups such as the U.S.-China People’s Friendship Organization to celebrate China’s National Day on Oct. 1”.

To this day, the CPA continues to be a partner of the PRC in the United States. Three years ago, the Boston chapter teamed up with China’s Consulate General in New York to offer Chinese nationals the opportunity to renew their passports, getting praise from China’s official mouthpiece, China Daily.

Last year, the CPA sponsored the raising of the PRC’s flag for the first time ever over Boston’s City Hall to honor the takeover of China by the Chinese Communist Party, just as the Stanford paper says has been its practice from the beginning, but this time drawing protesters. The event was organized, again, with the Chinese Consulate. Consul General Sun Guoxiang was on hand to say that, “The common interests are far more important than differences between U.S. and China.”

CPA co-founder Lydia Lowe also spoke at the event, reminding her audience that “McCarthyism is behind us. The Cold War is behind us.” In an essay she authored with other people on the Marxist revolutionary site LeftRoots last year, Lowe sounded as though she wanted to start another Cold War, writing that she wanted Asians to play a role in creating a “revolutionary strategy” that would achieve a “fundamentally different society.”

And CPA drew praise from China’s mouthpiece China Daily just a few weeks ago, for taking part again in Black Lives Matter demonstrations in San Francisco.

Black Lives Matter Opposes Capitalism

It is clear, then, that CPA works with China’s communist government, pushes its agenda here in the United States, and is regularly praised by China’s state-owned mouthpieces. It is clear, too, from, this perspective, why the CPA would sponsor a new enterprise by BLM founder Alicia Garza: they espouse the same desire for world communism.

"WE WANT AN END TO THE POLICE STATE!" Alicia Garza "Black ...

Garza sits atop a worldwide revolutionary empire, starting with the Black Lives Matter Global Network she founded, which now has 15 chapters in the U.S. and several more all over Canada, Australia, and Europe. As Foreign Affairs wrote in its September/October issue, “Today, BLM has a global network of dozens of chapters. This number will likely grow exponentially in the coming years.”

Garza is also behind the Movement for Black Lives, with its 50 domestic organizations. In July she said, “We helped to also pull together an ecosystem that was much broader than the organization that we founded, and that ecosystem is called the Movement for Black Lives and it is taking the world by storm.”

Movement for Black Lives is unabashedly anti-capitalist, saying on its website, “we are anti-capitalist. We believe and understand that Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system.”

So is Garza, and she means to use her international platform to end world capitalism. In 2015, she told an important gathering of global Marxists, “It’s not possible for a world to emerge where black lives matter if it’s under capitalism, and it’s not possible to abolish capitalism without a struggle against national oppression.”

There, she portrayed BLM as an offshoot of the Black Liberation Movement, the Marxist pan-Africanist Movement. “BLM, BLM,” she said coyly.

Last year, Garza told a roomful of Maine progressives, “We’re talking about changing how we’ve organized this country so that we actually can achieve the justice that we are fighting for. I believe we all have work to do to keep dismantling the organizing principle of this society, which creates inequities for everyone.”

The Role of Black Futures Lab

Two years ago, Garza created the Black Futures Lab, the organization that the Chinese Progressive Association funds, as yet another asset in the vast Garza empire. By the looks of it, it acts as a sort of a lobbying arm of this empire.

As Colorlines put it when it was launched on Sept. 26, 2018, Black Futures Lab “seeks to engage advocacy organizations and legislators to advance local-, state- and federal-level policies that make Black communities stronger. It will also craft strategies that harness Black political power to bring those policies to fruition.”

“Today, we are launching the Black Futures Lab as a way to mobilize around our needs, hopes, and dreams,” Garza told Colorlines in an emailed statement. “For too long, people have spoken for us and perpetuated false representations of the issues that drive our votes.”

This legislative clout adds to the organizing muscle that The Black Lives Matters Global Network and Movement for Black Lives organizations already bring.

As I wrote at City Journal last month, the BLM organizations have been the nerve center of this year’s protests: “They have been laying the groundwork for years, carefully cultivating a network of groups that could organize protests when the moment came and amplify the message through social media.”

Communist China has put its vast propaganda apparatus to work in support of the mayhem that has wreaked havoc in American cities this year. China is, after all, a rival of the United States, and would see the weakening of U.S. society and the country in general as advantageous.

The involvement of an outfit as closely associated with the Chinese government in the funding of one of Garza’s ventures is something else entirely, however.

Maybe journalists and congressmen have not seen it till now (I myself hadn’t until Jenny Nguyen, a graduate of The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program, alerted me to it).

But now they have.

More detail here on the founders of BLM.

09/17/20

Obama is the Power Behind the Biden Teleprompter

By: Cliff Kincaid

President Trump was accused of going too slow on a coronavirus response. Now he’s accused of going too fast. “Danger of rushing vaccine” screams the headline over the political gossip publication Axios, designed for elites in the Big Tech industry who don’t read too much but want to know what to say and who to censor. Meanwhile, the liberals in the media are in ecstasy over Barack Hussein’ Obama’s new book, A Promised Land.

Mike Allen of Axios says former Obama aides “tell me it’s worth the wait” and that “Obama is a graceful, thoughtful writer who cares about the words — and has two previous bestsellers, Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope.”

You may remember that Dreams from My Father concealed the identity of Obama’s Marxist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, and was reportedly ghost-written by former communist terrorist and professor Bill Ayers. Jack Cashill tells this story in his new book, Unmasking Obama.

You may also remember a column I wrote about Mike Allen’s conservative father, the great Gary Allen, who wrote a series of books exposing communist personalities and plots. Mike turned his back on his father’s work and has pursued a journalistic career of pandering to the rich, famous, and powerful. Gary Allen exposed people like Henry Kissinger. Mike Allen idolizes Obama.

Cashill’s book Unmasking Obama explains how conservative media and public interest groups worked to uncover and expose a series of Obama scandals, especially his communist ties but also his use of government power against his political enemies.  Hence, the subtitle is, “The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency.”

The print edition for the new Obama book, including two 16-page photo inserts, is $45. You can get Cashill’s book for about half the price and it will fill in the gaps in public knowledge of America’s first Marxist president.

Obama is still important, not only because he’s hawking a new book, but because he’s the power behind the Joe Biden candidacy.

While conservatives note the references by Democratic vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris to a planned “Harris Administration,” a Joe Biden victory will in reality be another Obama Administration, a third term for our 44th president. Anybody who gets Democratic Party email messages about the election understands that Obama is the fundraising hook or ploy in most of them. Biden can’t motivate the left, but Obama can.

The latest such message, entitled, “President Obama believes. We do too,” comes from the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State. In effect, Obama is raising funds for a presidency that will feature Obama, rather than Biden, as the president, and Harris will continue to function in a subsidiary role. Obama is not going away and is the real power behind the Biden teleprompter.

In effect, the race is between Trump and Obama – not “Sleepy Joe.” Biden’s foreign policy advisers once worked for Obama and gave us the carnage in places like Syria. They are agitating for another Middle East war.

This is not to say that Kamala Harris doesn’t have a legislative agenda. In fact, she is the sponsor of a Senate marijuana legalization bill, the MORE Act, that has a House counterpart that will be voted on shortly. A coalition of thirty groups has just sent a letter in opposition to the MORE Act to House leadership.

Harris says dope brings joy to people. But studies and experts note its addictive qualities. The drug lowers I.Q. and can reduce young people to the level of Antifa thugs acting like cannon fodder for the revolution. Perhaps this is the plan.

In any case, expect the major media, including the outlets like Axios, to ignore all of this, and cheer for the legalization of the drug. Many probably “enjoy” the drug themselves. Perhaps this addiction helps explain their fawning coverage of Obama.

Many Republicans ignore the damage caused by the pro-marijuana movement, largely funded by George Soros, because one of their own, Senator Cory Gardner, is running for reelection in Colorado. He is what drug expert David Evans calls a “pot whore” for the marijuana industry, which is exporting the drug nationwide. Marijuana smuggling from Colorado has become a national scandal but Gardner continues to promote the deadly business. He should have stepped aside for a more conservative candidate and is going down to defeat, possibly costing the Republicans their Senate majority.

CNBC’s Jim Cramer apologized for calling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “Crazy Nancy,” a nickname from Trump, but Cramer and Pelosi are both crazy because they promote dope as a legitimate business. Pelosi even claimed dope was a treatment for coronavirus. A study found 68 references in a Pelosi coronavirus relief bill to promoting marijuana.

Perhaps Obama’s “Promised Land” is one of free dope. His presidential pro-marijuana policies, carried out by his Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department, may have stemmed from his own history of heavy marijuana and cocaine use. His mentor Communist Frank Marshall Davis used drugs and produced pornography, among other nefarious activities.

Obama prefers Harris over Biden but will campaign for a Biden victory in November because he knows Biden is an empty suit and that Harris will be his puppet. It will be reminiscent of the dark days when Obama became a pawn of Communist Frank Marshall Davis but had to conceal the role of his puppet master, with the support of the media, as he took power.

After his second term was over, he rushed over to Beijing to confer behind closed doors with Chinese dictator Xi, in what the British Guardian called a meeting of “veteran cadres.”

Promised Land, huh?

*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.

09/17/20

The Sinister Billionaire Backers of the Insurrection

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Let’s begin here, shall we? Know who is financing and attempting to control the fate of America.

Dori: Seattle riots a stunning failure of political leadership

In part from the Washington Times:

Billionaire Democratic donor George Soros bankrolled the successful campaigns of a new crop of district attorneys who now preside over big cities with skyrocketing crime and frayed relationships with police departments.

LAWLESS: Philadelphia’s New Soros Backed DA Launches Plan ...

Soros-backed DAs in PhiladelphiaSt. LouisSan Francisco, and other cities have fired scores of experienced prosecutors and, as promised, stopped prosecuting low-level quality-of-life crimes such as disorderly conduct, vagrancy, and loitering.

Their laissez-faire criminal justice philosophy bucks the get-tough “broken windows” approach, made famous by then-New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, which targets minor offenses to cut off the criminal element in the bud. More here.

Now for more from Julie Kelly:

As I reported last week, a cabal of Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans are plotting a post-election civil war of sorts to make sure Joe Biden assumes the presidency even if Donald Trump legitimately wins. “It’s insurrection,” President Trump said on Fox News last week when asked about the widely-circulated plan. “We’ll put them down very quickly if they do that.”

Let’s hope. A document released last month by the Transition Integrity Project, a headfake name to give the depraved group the appearance of decency, is a shocking battle plan that would plunge the country into more chaos. The same agitators on the Left and NeverTrump Right who’ve stoked nonstop political upheaval over the past four years will exploit our current instability to throw the election to the Democrats.

But this is more than the far-fetched hallucinations of political outcasts. The mayhem they’ve been war-gaming will be heavily funded by a number of Trump-hating billionaires, and those people have no intention of losing out on their investment.

The mostly behind-the-scenes attempt between Election Day and Inauguration Day to prevent Donald Trump from taking office the first time—one that miraculously failed despite help from the media and the most powerful government agencies in the world—will go public in 2020. And instead of help from James Comey, Jim Clapper, or John Brennan, the 2020 version will be bolstered by the likes of George Soros, Tom Steyer, Pierre Omidyar, a member of the Rupert Murdoch family, and Big Tech titans among others.

One of the co-founders of the Transition Integrity Project is Rosa Brooks. The Georgetown law professor and Obama Administration alum is a former counsel and board member for the Open Society Foundation, created in 1993 by George Soros. The foundation is a massive donor to hundreds of left-wing causes around the world; in July, Open Society Foundation announced a five-year, $150 million investment in “racial justice” groups including Black Lives Matter.

In 2018, Soros’ two largest foundations reported more than $14 billion in assets.

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Brooks put the country on notice; unless Joe Biden wins in a landslide, we will be sorry. “With the exception of the ‘big Biden win’ scenario, each of our exercises reached the brink of catastrophe, with massive disinformation campaigns, violence in the streets and a constitutional impasse,” she warned. That reaction will occur, according to the simulations, even if Trump wins the Electoral College but loses the popular vote.

But Brooks isn’t the only connection between deep-pocketed foes of Donald Trump and the post-election insurrection.  Another new group, Protect the Results, is working hand-in-hand with Brooks “to mobilize if Donald Trump refuses to accept the results of the 2020 presidential election . . . [and] prepare for a potential post-election crisis.”

Protect the Results lists dozen of sponsors which in reality are mostly funded by only a handful of anti-Trump tycoons.

George Soros: One of Protect the Results main organizers is a nonprofit called Indivisible. Based out of Washington, D.C., Indivisible was founded in 2016 after Trump’s election; according to a political watchdog, Indivisible’s main donor is the Tides Foundation, a Soros-financed pass through organization.

“Started as a Google document detailing techniques for opposing the Republican agenda under Mr. Trump, [Indivisible] now has a mostly Washington-based staff of about 40 people, with more than 6,000 volunteer chapters across the country,” the New York Times reported in 2017. That year, Indivisible raised nearly $8 million, a figure we presume is much higher in 2020. The group’s policy director is a former advisor for an immigration advocacy center partially funded by grants from Soros.

Other Soros-funded entities including MoveOn.org, People for the American Way, 350Action, and Women’s March are listed as Protect the Results partners. In an interview last month, Soros, a longtime Trump nemesis, suggested the president will be indicted if he loses in November “because he has violated the Constitution in many different ways.” One scenario war-gamed out by the post-election plotters is criminal charges brought against Donald Trump and his associates for unspecified crimes.

Pierre Omidyar: The founder of eBay has poured tens of millions into projects headed by NeverTrump “conservatives” including former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol since 2017.

Omidyar, whose net worth is around $17 billion, this week issued a blueprint for how to “reimagine capitalism in America” which would “ensure that people who have been historically and systematically marginalized by structural racism, colonialism, paternalism, and indifference will have opportunity, power, and the self determination that comes from economic prosperity and a vibrant, fair, and responsive democracy.”

Most of Omidyar’s largess has been directed to left-wing causes and Democratic candidates over the years but he found political soulmates on the NeverTrump Right. Two NeverTrump outfits—Republicans for the Rule of Law and Stand Up Republic—are Protect the Results partners. Stand Up Republic is fronted by NeverTrumper Evan McMullin; Republicans for the Rule of Law, headed by Kristol, is one of many groups that receives grants from Omidyar’s vast network.

Kristol participated in the post-election tabletop exercises and bragged on Twitter that he had played the role of President Trump.

James and Kathryn Murdoch: The son and daughter-in-law of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch are spending lots of money to separate themselves from the family’s conservative legacy. James resigned from the company’s board in July over disputes with the cable news channel’s “editorial content.”

The Murdochs, worth a reported $2 billion, are donors to Kristol’s Republicans for the Rule of Law and another Kristol-operated group, Defending Democracy Together, which is spending tens of millions on advertisements in swing states featuring purported Republicans planning to vote for Joe Biden. (The Murdochs also support the former vice president.)

Defending Democracy Together publishes The Bulwark, an online magazine that replaced Kristol’s now-defunct Weekly Standard. The blog houses a number of NeverTrumper editors and writers including Charles Sykes and Mona Charen. The Bulwark, like other NeverTrump organs, is pushing the idea that the president, not the Democrats or Joe Biden, won’t accept the results of the election. (Omidyar also supports Defending Democracy Together.)

Tom Steyer: NextGen America, fronted by failed Democratic presidential candidate and multi-billionaire Tom Steyer, is involved in Protect the Results. Steyer spent $123 million in the 2018 election cycle; NextGen America will spend at least $45 million to help elect Joe Biden by persuading young voters to use mail-in ballots. While lamenting out-of-control wildfires in his home state, Steyer told CNN on Monday that the only solution to the alleged climate crisis is “honest to God, Joe Biden.”

While this list covers the anti-Trump vehicles offically bankrolling the post-election revolt, it does not account for the unquantifiable in-kind donations by Big Tech. As I will detail in my next column, Silicon Valley already is seeding the ground for a Biden victory at all costs by using a combination of censorship and intimidation aimed not just at Republican voters but at the president himself—involvement that can justifiably be described as election interference on a scale our foreign adversaries could only dream of.

09/17/20

SecDef Says China, Russia Have ‘Weaponized Space’

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Primer: Now we are beginning to understand the creation of the new military branch known as the Space Force and further it is important to embrace the work of NASA and SpaceX.

Is the Space Force Necessary? If Done Correctly, Yes | CyberDB

A year ago, two intelligence agencies have recently released documents that describe in general terms the nature of the threat. Russia and China are developing kinetic and non-kinetic means designed to disrupt, degrade, and destroy U.S. space systems. Mechanisms being tested include directed energy weapons such as lasers, spacecraft that can physically manipulate satellites, terrestrial anti-satellite munitions, jammers that can disrupt uplinks and downlinks, and cyber tools that can impair satellites, ground stations, and the equipment of warfighters reliant on space-based systems.

For instance, China is believed to possess 120 intelligence and reconnaissance satellites, many of which are operated by the People’s Liberation Army to track the movements of U.S. forces. Russia only possesses about 20 such satellites. And while Russia pioneered development of systems for hacking and attacking U.S. space systems, it is China that is continually increasing its outlays for counterspace technologies. For example, Beijing tested an anti-satellite weapon in 2007 and has continued refining that technology.

With a typical Army combat brigade containing 2,000 pieces of equipment dependent on space systems to function, this is a serious matter. In wartime, counterspace attacks could prevent the joint force from accessing GPS signals vital to the operation of smart bombs, block the transmission of critical intelligence, and even impede the ability of the president to receive timely warning of a nuclear attack. The nation’s entire global military posture could be degraded by disruption of links traveling through orbital assets. More here from Forbes

The U.S. plan for a Space Force risks escalating a 'space arms race'

China and Russia have introduced weapons to space, including killer satellites, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said Wednesday.

“In space, Moscow and Beijing have turned a once peaceful arena into a warfighting domain,” Esper said.

“They have weaponized space through killer satellites, directed energy weapons, and more in an effort to exploit our systems and chip away at our military advantage.”

Directed energy weapons use converted chemical or electrical energy and focus it on a target, resulting in physical damage. Weapons used by the U.S. military include systems that use high energy lasers.

Directed energy weapons can be very effective against swarm attacks, a Pentagon official said in 2018.

“We often think about directed energy as large lasers, and I’ve certainly been involved with some of that for decades, but we also have high power microwaves which can be very effective as what we call an electronics kill,” Dr. Michael D. Griffin, undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, said at the time.

NTD Photo

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson inspects new technologies being developed and tested at the High Energy Laser Systems Test Facility and USS Desert Ship, a land-based launch facility designed to simulate a ship at sea, at White Sands Missile Range, N.M., on Jan. 25, 2017. (Navy photo by Chief Petty Officer Elliott Fabrizio)

“That sort of thing—it’s really hard to envision handling swarming attacks by purely kinetic means—so that’s one of the future threats that I think we face.”

Killer satellites are satellites with the capability to kill and destroy.

***

Esper said America’s competitors and adversaries “exploit cyberspace to undermine our security without confronting our conventional strengths.”

“They do this all in an increasingly gray zone of engagement that keeps us in a perpetual state of competition. The national defense strategy guides us as we adapt the force to this challenging complex security environment by status quo and continue outpacing the competition,” he added.

But strong investment is enabling the military to move forward with developing hypersonic weapons and other modern tools.

“Thanks to our largest research and development budget in the department’s history, we are advancing critical technologies to maintain our military edge in areas such as hypersonic weapons, directed energy and autonomous systems,” Esper said.

Esper was speaking during the Air Force Association’s Virtual Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

Following an increase of $3.6 billion, the Department of Defense’s budget for research and development was $95.3 billion in fiscal year 2019, according to its financial report (pdf).

President Donald Trump’s administration officially launched Space Force late last year, establishing it as a sixth branch of the military.

“Amid grave threats to our national security, American superiority in space is absolutely vital,” Trump said when signing legislation that included funding for the branch.

The Defense Space Strategy, released earlier this year, outlines what the United States needs to do to achieve a “comprehensive military advantage” in space within 10 years.

Three key objectives are identified for the Space Force: to maintain America’s space superiority; to provide space support to all joint military operations; and to “ensure space stability”—or to deter aggression and uphold international agreements in space with a persistent presence, similar to how the Navy polices international waters.

Esper said he’s proud of the progress made in implementing the strategy, which will “ensure our dominance across all domains.”

Esper spoke a day after Gen. John Raymond, who heads Space Force.

Raymond revealed that the force’s Space Based Infrared System satellites were used to detect Iranian missiles aimed at American war planes in January.

Raymond praised the 2nd Space Warning Squadron at Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado.

“They operated the world’s best missile warning capabilities and they did outstanding work, and I’m very very proud of them,” he said at the conference.

Trump had said “an early warning system that worked very well” helped avoid U.S. casualties but didn’t disclose the nature of the system.

09/17/20

The Treatment of Covid in Venezuela, Crimes Against Humanity

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

VP and presidential candidate Biden and Kamala Harris may need to get the memo on governance in Venezuela. Then they can invite blue state governors and mayors in the U.S. to a Zoom call about it… read on.

Note the U.S. is paying some salaries for medical workers.

The illegitimate Maduro regime wants Venezuelans to denounce their neighbors who are sick with COVID-19, calling them “bioterrorists.”

Nicolás Maduro’s National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela encouraged citizens to look for sick Venezuelans, saying a returning migrant “is a bioterrorist who puts everyone’s health at risk.” They also provided an email address and asked anyone with information to send them “the information of the person and their exact location” so the Maduro regime could detain them.

“They told us we’re contaminated, that we’re guilty of infecting the country,” Javier Aristizabal, a nurse from Caracas, told the New York Times. He said he spent 70 days in detention centers after he returned from Colombia in March.

Once these Venezuelans are detained, they are placed in unsafe containment conditions even if they do not display symptoms of COVID-19.

“In commandeered hotels, disused schools and cordoned-off bus stations, Venezuelans returning home from other countries in Latin America are being forced into crowded rooms with limited food, water or masks,” the New York Times reported.

Venezuelans are placed in the middle of the street by security forces as punishment for disobeying social distancing measures August 5 in Caracas, Venezuela. (© Manaure Quintero/Reuters)

While the illegitimate regime continues to create more problems for Venezuelans during the pandemic, legitimate interim president Juan Guaidó and the legitimate government developed a program to help deliver better medical care to all.

The Héroes de la Salud program helps frontline health workers save lives by giving them the funds and resources they need to fight the virus, according to the National Assembly.

The interim Guaidó government recently accessed frozen funds with the support of the U.S. Treasury Department to pay the salaries of health care workers, providing close to $20 million for the program. Over 60,000 frontline doctors and nurses in Venezuela will receive $100 a month, considerably more than their pay under the Maduro regime.

The program is a recognition of the “men and women who save lives in the middle of an emergency, a pandemic and a dictatorship,” Guaidó said on Twitter, “so that we can continue fighting for the freedom of Venezuela. In the face of challenges, we are going to triumph.”

***

Meanwhile:

(AP) — Independent experts commissioned by the U.N.’s top human rights body have alleged the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro committed crimes against humanity.

The experts issued a scathing, in-depth report on Wednesday that said the people responsible for crimes that include extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and torture must be held to account, in part to ensure they don’t happen again.

The report was commissioned last year by the 47-member-state Human Rights Council, which has the backing of the United Nations,

The findings, based on nearly 3,000 cases that were investigated or examined, concluded that Maduro and his defense and interior ministers were aware of crimes committed by security forces and intelligence agencies. It further alleged that high-level authorities had both power and oversight over the forces and agencies, making the top officials responsible.

The report appeared likely to fan international and domestic criticism of Maduro’s government, which has overseen a country in tatters with runaway inflation, a violent crackdown and an exodus of millions of Venezuelans who have fled to neighboring countries to escape the turmoil since he took power in 2013.

Maduro’s government has come under increasing political pressure from the United States and dozens of other countries which consider politician Juan Guaidó the legitimate leader of Venezuela. Maduro has called this a plot to overthrow him so the U.S. can exploit Venezuela’s vast oil wealth.

Critics in other countries have already accused Maduro’s government of crimes against humanity. The 411-page report for the Human Rights Council represents an extensive look at rights violations in Venezuela and was based on interviews with victims, relatives, witnesses, police, government officials and judges, as well as videos, satellite imagery and social media content.

The authors said they did not receive responses from the government itself.

The experts — Marta Valinas of Portugal, Francisco Cox Vial of Chile, and Paul Seils of Britain — worked under a fact-finding mission the Geneva-based rights council set up last September to investigate alleged cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment and other human rights violations in Venezuela over the past five years

“These acts were committed pursuant to two state policies, one to quash opposition to the government and another to combat crime, including by eliminating individuals perceived as criminals,” Valinas told reporters. “We also consider that the documented crimes were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population.”

“For these reasons, the mission has reasonable grounds to believe that they amount to crimes against humanity,” she said, noting the alleged arbitrary killings and systematic use of torture, in particular. “Far from being isolated acts, these crimes were coordinated and committed pursuant to state policies, with the knowledge or direct support of commanding officers and senior government officials.”

In the report, the experts said the violations took place amid a breakdown of democratic institutions, rule of law and judicial independence in Venezuela. They said the great majority of unlawful killings by security forces have not resulted in prosecutions and “at no stage have officials with command responsibility been brought to justice,” according to a summary of the findings.

A report that the U.N.’s human rights chief, former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, issued last year after a visit to Venezuela that included meeting Maduro said the government had registered nearly 5,300 killings in security operations linked to cases of “resistance to authority.” Bachelet also decried a “shockingly high” number of extrajudicial killings.

Under Article 7 of the U.N. treaty establishing the International Criminal Court, a crime against humanity is defined as an act committed as part of a “widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population.”

09/16/20

White House Historic Abraham Accords Declaration Signing

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Yes indeed, a new dawn beginning in the Middle East as stated by President Trump. The signing of the Abraham Declaration by the United States, Israel, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates is now official. Discussions with other countries in the region includes: Oman, Morocco, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and possibly Lebanon.

WATCH: ‘Six more Arab states ready to make peace’ as ...

The text is as follows:

We, the undersigned, recognize the importance of maintaining and strengthening peace in the Middle East and around the world based on mutual understanding and coexistence, as well as respect for human dignity and freedom, including religious freedom.

We encourage efforts to promote interfaith and intercultural dialogue to advance a culture of peace among the three Abrahamic religions and all humanity.

We believe that the best way to address challenges is through cooperation and dialogue and that developing friendly relations among States advances the interests of lasting peace in the Middle East and around the world.

We seek tolerance and respect for every person in order to make this world a place where all can enjoy a life of dignity and hope, no matter their race, faith or ethnicity.

We support science, art, medicine, and commerce to inspire humankind, maximize human potential and bring nations closer together.

We seek to end radicalization and conflict to provide all children a better future.

The peace treaty text reads as follows:

The Government of the United Arab Emirates and the Government of the State of Israel (hereinafter, the “Parties”)

Aspiring to realize the vision of a Middle East region that is stable, peaceful and prosperous, for the benefit of all States and peoples in the region;

Desiring to establish peace, diplomatic and friendly relations, co-operation and full normalization of ties between them and their peoples, in accordance with this Treaty, and to chart together a new path to unlock the vast potential of their countries and of the region;

Reaffirming the “Joint Statement of the United States, the State of Israel, and the United Arab Emirates” (the “Abraham Accords”), dated 13 August 2020;

Believing that the further development of friendly relations meets the interests of lasting peace in the Middle East and that challenges can only be effectively addressed by cooperation and not by conflict;

Determined to ensure lasting peace, stability, security and prosperity for both their States and to develop and enhance their dynamic and innovative economies;

Reaffirming their shared commitment to normalize relations and promote stability through diplomatic engagement, increased economic cooperation and other close coordination;

Reaffirming also their shared belief that the establishment of peace and full normalization between them can help transform the Middle East by spurring economic growth, enhancing technological innovation and forging closer people-to-people relations;

Recognizing that the Arab and Jewish peoples are descendants of a common ancestor, Abraham, and inspired, in that spirit, to foster in the Middle East a reality in which Muslims, Jews, Christians and peoples of all faiths, denominations, beliefs and nationalities live in, and are committed to, a spirit of coexistence, mutual understanding and mutual respect;

Recalling the reception held on January 28, 2020, at which President Trump presented his Vision for Peace, and committing to continuing their efforts to achieve a just, comprehensive, realistic and enduring solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict;

Recalling the Treaties of Peace between the State of Israel and the Arab Republic of Egypt and between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and committed to working together to realize a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that meets the legitimate needs and aspirations of both peoples, and to advance comprehensive Middle East peace, stability and prosperity;

Emphasizing the belief that the normalization of Israeli and Emirati relations is in the interest of both peoples and contributes to the cause of peace in the Middle East and the world;

Expressing deep appreciation to the United States for its profound contribution to this historic achievement;

Have agreed as follows:

1, Establishment of Peace, Diplomatic Relations and Normalization: Peace, diplomatic relations and full normalization of bilateral ties are hereby established between the United Arab Emirates and the State of Israel.

  1. General Principles: The Parties shall be guided in their relations by the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law governing relations among States. In particular, they shall recognize and respect each other’s sovereignty and right to live in peace and security, develop friendly relations of cooperation between them and their peoples, and settle all disputes between them by peaceful means.
  2. Establishment of Embassies: The Parties shall exchange resident ambassadors as soon as practicable after the signing of this Treaty, and shall conduct diplomatic and consular relations in accordance with the applicable rules of international law.
  3. Peace and Stability: The Parties shall attach profound importance to mutual understanding, cooperation and coordination between them in the spheres of peace and stability, as a fundamental pillar of their relations and as a means for enhancing those spheres in the Middle East as a whole.

They undertake to take the necessary steps to prevent any terrorist or hostile activities against each other on or from their respective territories, as well as deny any support for such activities abroad or allowing such support on or from their respective territories. Recognizing the new era of peace and friendly relations between them, as well as the centrality of stability to the well-being of their respective peoples and of the region, the Parties undertake to consider and discuss these matters regularly, and to conclude detailed agreements and arrangements on coordination and cooperation.

  1. Cooperation and Agreements in Other Spheres: As an integral part of their commitment to peace, prosperity, diplomatic and friendly relations, cooperation and full normalization, the Parties shall work to advance the cause of peace, stability and prosperity throughout the Middle East, and to unlock the great potential of their countries and of the region. For such purposes, the Parties shall conclude bilateral agreements in the following spheres at the earliest practicable date, as well as in other spheres of mutual interest as may be agreed:- Finance and Investment- Civil Aviation- Visas and Consular Services- Innovation, Trade and Economic Relations

– Healthcare

– Science, Technology and Peaceful Uses of Outer-Space

– Tourism, Culture and Sport

– Energy

– Environment

– Education

– Maritime Arrangements

– Telecommunications and Post

– Agriculture and Food Security

– Water

– Legal Cooperation

Any such agreements concluded before the entry into force of this Treaty shall enter into effect with the entry into force of this Treaty unless otherwise stipulated therein. Agreed principles for cooperation in specific spheres are annexed to this Treaty and form an integral part thereof.

  1. Mutual Understanding and Co-existence: The Parties undertake to foster mutual understanding, respect, co-existence and a culture of peace between their societies in the spirit of their common ancestor, Abraham, and the new era of peace and friendly relations ushered in by this Treaty, including by cultivating people-to-people programs, interfaith dialogue and cultural, academic, youth, scientific, and other exchanges between their peoples. They shall conclude and implement the necessary visa and consular services agreements and arrangements so as to facilitate efficient and secure travel for their respective nationals to the territory of each other. The Parties shall work together to counter extremism, which promotes hatred and division, and terrorism and its justifications, including by preventing radicalization and recruitment and by combating incitement and discrimination. They shall work towards establishing a High-Level Joint Forum for Peace and Co-Existence dedicated to advancing these goals.
  2. Strategic Agenda for the Middle East: Further to the Abraham Accords, the Parties stand ready to join with the United States to develop and launch a “Strategic Agenda for the Middle East” in order to expand regional diplomatic, trade, stability and other cooperation. They are committed to work together, and with the United States and others, as appropriate, in order to advance the cause of peace, stability and prosperity in the relations between them and for the Middle East as a whole, including by seeking to advance regional security and stability; pursue regional economic opportunities; promote a culture of peace across the region; and consider joint aid and development programs.
  3. Other Rights and Obligations: This Treaty does not affect and shall not be interpreted as affecting, in any way, the rights and obligations of the Parties under the Charter of the United Nations. The Parties shall take all necessary measures for the application in their bilateral relations of the provisions of the multilateral conventions of which they are both parties, including the submission of appropriate notification to the depositaries of such conventions.
  4. Respect for Obligations: The Parties undertake to fulfill in good faith their obligations under this Treaty, without regard to action or inaction of any other party and independently of any instrument inconsistent with this Treaty. For the purposes of this paragraph each Party represents to the other that in its opinion and interpretation there is no inconsistency between their existing treaty obligations and this Treaty. The Parties undertake not to enter into any obligation in conflict with this Treaty.

Subject to Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations, in the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Parties under the present Treaty and any of their other obligations, the obligations under this Treaty shall be binding and implemented. The Parties further undertake to adopt any legislation or other internal legal procedure necessary in order to implement this Treaty, and to repeal any national legislation or official publications inconsistent with this Treaty.

  1. Ratification and Entry into Force: This Treaty shall be ratified by both Parties as soon as practicable in conformity with their respective national procedures and will enter into force following the exchange of instruments of ratification.
  2. Settlement of Disputes: Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Treaty shall be resolved by negotiation. Any such dispute which cannot be settled by negotiation may be referred to conciliation or arbitration subject to the agreement of the Parties.
  3. Registration: This Treaty shall be transmitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration in accordance with the provisions of Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

Done at Washington, DC, this day Elul 26th, 5780, Muharram 27th, 1442, which corresponds to 15 September 2020, in the Hebrew, Arabic and English languages, all texts being equally authentic. In case of divergence of interpretation, the English text shall prevail.

For the State of Israel: H.E. Benjamin, Netanyahu, Prime Minister

For the United Arab Emirates: H.H. Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation

Witnessed by: H.E. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America

ANNEX

Pursuant to Article 5 of the Treaty of Peace, Diplomatic Relations and Full Normalization between the United Arab Emirates and the State of Israel, the Parties shall conclude bilateral agreements in spheres of mutual interest, in furtherance of which they have agreed to the following provisions. Such provisions are annexed to the Treaty and form an integral part thereof.

Finance and Investment

Further to the Agreed Protocol signed between the Parties on September 1, 2020, in Abu Dhabi, the Parties shall cooperate to expeditiously deepen and broaden bilateral investment relations, and give high priority to concluding agreements in the sphere of finance and investment, recognizing the key role of these agreements in the economic development of the Parties and the Middle East as a whole. The Parties reaffirm their commitment to protecting investors, consumers, market integrity and financial stability, as well as maintaining all applicable regulatory standards. Recognizing also their shared goal to advance regional economic development and the flow of goods and services, the Parties shall endeavor to promote collaborations on strategic regional infrastructure projects and shall explore the establishment of a multilateral working group for the “Tracks for Regional Peace” project.

Civil Aviation

The Parties acknowledge the importance of ensuring regular direct flights between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, for passengers and cargo, as an essential means for developing and promoting their relations. They recognize as applicable to each other the rights, privileges and obligations provided for by the multilateral aviation agreements to which they are both a party, their annexes and any amendments thereof applicable to both Parties, particularly the 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation, opened for signature at Chicago on the seventh day of December 1944, and the 1944 International Air Services Transit Agreement. Accordingly, the Parties shall as soon as practicable conclude all the necessary agreements and arrangements governing civil aviation, and consequently work towards establishing an international air corridor between their two States in accordance with international law. They shall also reach and implement the necessary agreements and arrangements with respect to visas and consular services to facilitate travel for the citizens of both States.

Tourism

The Parties affirm their mutual desire to promote tourism cooperation between them as a key component of economic development and of developing closer people-to-people and cultural ties. To this end, the Parties shall facilitate the exchange of information through advertisement spots, published and audiovisual promotional materials, and participation in tourist fairs. They shall also work together to promote joint tourism projects and packages between tourist operators so as to enhance tourism from third States. They shall work towards carrying out reciprocal study tours in order to increase knowledge in the development, management and marketing of heritage, cultural and rural tourism with a view to diversifying and deepening touristic links between them; and endeavor to utilize national marketing budgets to promote mutual tourism between the States.

Innovation, Trade and Economic Relations

The Parties shall enhance and expand their cooperation in innovation, trade and economic relations, so that the dividends of peace are felt across their societies. Recognizing that the principle of the free and unimpeded flow of goods and services should guide their relations, as well as the potential for diversification of bilateral trade opportunities, the Parties shall cooperate in order to enable favorable conditions for trade, and the reduction of trade barriers.

Science, Technology and Peaceful Uses of Outer-Space

The Parties acknowledge the important role of science, technology and innovation in the growth of multiple key sectors and shall strengthen joint action and mutual cooperation in scientific and technological advancement.

This shall include furthering scientific cooperation and exchange, including between scientists, research and academic institutions, pursuing the establishment of joint research and development centers, and exploring the possibility of joint funding of research and scientific projects in select fields of mutual interest.

The Parties further express their common interest in establishing and developing mutually beneficial cooperation in the field of exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes, in a manner consistent with each Party’s respective applicable national laws and international obligations.

Such cooperation may include implementation of joint programs, projects and activities in the fields of science, space exploration, space related technologies and education, exchange of experts, information and best practices, and the promotion of cooperation between their respective space industries.

Environment

The Parties acknowledge the importance of protecting, preserving and improving the environment, and shall promote environmental innovation for the sustainable development of the region and beyond. The Parties shall endeavor to cooperate to develop environmental protection strategies on priority issues, including on biodiversity conservation, marine environment protection and climate change mitigation and adaptation, and on the possible establishment of a center for developing pioneering solutions to climate challenges in arid and semi-arid environments.

Telecommunications and Post

The Parties recognize the necessity of mutually beneficial cooperation for the continued development of telecommunications, information technologies and postal services. They take note of the establishment between them of direct communications services, including telephone lines, and agree to promote, in accordance with relevant international conventions and regulations, direct postal exchange, submarine cables and e-commerce solutions, as well as utilize available satellite systems, fiber optical communication, and broadcasting services. The Parties will strive to develop frameworks for innovation in ICT, including advanced fixed and wireless communications, collaboration on 5G networks, smart cities, and use of ICT solutions to foster innovation and the creation of best services.

Healthcare

The Parties welcome progress made in cooperation between them regarding the treatment of, and the development of a vaccine for, the Covid-19 virus, as a sign of the tremendous potential for cooperation between them in the healthcare sphere. Recognizing the importance of building ties in the fields of health and medicine, the Parties shall cooperate, inter alia, on: medical education, training and simulations, digital health and artificial intelligence innovation in the health sector, and emergency management and preparedness.

Agriculture and Food Security

The Parties recognize the great importance of sustainable agricultural development, recognizing its vital role in addressing food security concerns, as well as in the preservation of the environment. They shall cooperate to harness and maximize existing technologies, actively facilitate new collaborations, and share and develop knowledge, technologies and innovative approaches in the field of arid agriculture, irrigation technologies, mariculture techniques in shallow sea water, sustainable nutritious fish feed production, and seed enhancement in hot and humid climates.

Water

The Parties recognize the critical importance of sustainable water use and shall cooperate for their mutual benefit to address issues of water supply, water treatment and management, water security, efficiency, wastewater management and re-use, as well as water conservation and desalination.

Energy

The Parties take note of the strategic importance of the energy sector and in particular of their need to promote renewable energy, cooperation in the natural gas field, regional grids, alternative energy and energy security.

They shall advance and develop mutual cooperation in energy projects, share best practices and discuss policies in energy forums that will help to promote and unlock the energy potential of the region, coordinating where appropriate with the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), headquartered in Abu Dhabi.

Maritime Arrangements

Each Party shall recognize the right of vessels of the other Party to innocent passage through its territorial waters in accordance with international law. Each Party will grant normal access to its ports for vessels and cargoes of the other Party, as well as vessels and cargoes destined for or coming from the other Party. Such access shall be granted on the same terms as generally applicable to vessels and cargoes of other nations. The Parties shall conclude agreements and arrangements in maritime affairs, as may be required.

Legal Cooperation

Recognizing the importance of a supporting legal framework for the movement of people and goods and for fostering a continuous business friendly environment between them, the Parties shall make best efforts to grant each other the widest measure of legal cooperation, including, inter alia, in respect of mutual legal assistance in civil and commercial matters, in accordance with their national laws and shall endeavor to conclude specific agreements and arrangements in this sphere.

We pursue a vision of peace, security, and prosperity in the Middle East and around the world.

In this spirit, we warmly welcome and are encouraged by the progress already made in establishing diplomatic relations between Israel and its neighbors in the region under the principles of the Abraham Accords.  We are encouraged by the ongoing efforts to consolidate and expand such friendly relations based on shared interests and a shared commitment to a better future.

09/16/20

Fed Judge Rules Pennsylvania’s Shutdown Order Unconstitutional

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Primer: This decision has far-reaching consequences including other states with the same shutdown orders. Further, it makes those states vulnerable to class action lawsuits by business owners, churches, schools, and public gatherings of various sorts over revenue/economic loss.

***

Source:

In today’s decision in County of Butler v. Wolf (W.D. Pa.), Judge William S. Stickman IV broadly struck down the Pennsylvania shutdown orders, reasoning:

[1.] The court held that Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), which ruled in favor of broad government power in an epidemic, should not be applied, and instead the government’s heightened interests in public health should be considered within the normal framework of constitutional scrutiny (e.g., in deciding whether a law is narrowly tailored to an important government interest):

Jacobson was decided over a century ago. Since that time, there has been substantial development of federal constitutional law in the area of civil liberties. As a general matter, this development has seen a jurisprudential shift whereby federal courts have given greater deference to considerations of individual liberties, as weighed against the exercise of state police powers. That century of development has seen the creation of tiered levels of scrutiny for constitutional claims. They did not exist when Jacobson was decided. While Jacobson has been cited by some modern courts as ongoing support for a broad, hands-off deference to state authorities in matters of health and safety, other courts and commentators have questioned whether it remains instructive in light of the intervening jurisprudential developments….

The Court has reviewed {Lindsay F. Wiley & Stephen I. Vladeck, Coronavirus, Civil Liberties, and the Courts: the Case Against “Suspending“ Judicial Review, 133 Harv. L. Rev. F. 179 (2020)} … and finds it both instructive and persuasive. There, the learned professors argue that Jacobson should not be interpreted as permitting the “suspension” of traditional levels of constitutional scrutiny in reviewing challenges to COVID- 19 mitigation measures…. The Court shares [these concerns] …. The Court will apply “regular” constitutional scrutiny to the issues in this case. Two considerations inform this decision—the ongoing and open-ended nature of the restrictions and the need for an independent judiciary to serve as a check on the exercise of emergency government power….

The Court closes this Opinion as it began, by recognizing that Defendants’ actions at issue here were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency. But even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered. The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms—in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble.

There is no question that this Country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment. The Constitution cannot accept the concept of a “new normal” where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures. Rather, the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency. Actions taken by Defendants crossed those lines. It is the duty of the Court to declare those actions unconstitutional. Thus, consistent with the reasons set forth above, the Court will enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs.

[2.] The court then concluded that the limits on nonreligious gatherings (“25 persons for indoor gatherings and 250 persons for outdoor gatherings,” “specifically exempt[ing] religious gatherings and certain commercial operations”) violate the Assembly Clause. The court concluded the restrictions were content-neutral, and therefore applied intermediate scrutiny—but held that the restrictions failed this scrutiny:

Defendants’ congregate limits are not narrowly tailored. Rather, they place substantially more burdens on gatherings than needed to achieve their own stated purpose. This is not a mere supposition of the Court, but rather, is highlighted by Defendants’ own actions. While permitting commercial gatherings at a percentage of occupancy may not render the restrictions on other gatherings content-based, they do highlight the lack of narrow tailoring.

Indeed, hundreds of people may congregate in stores, malls, large restaurants and other businesses based only on the occupancy limit of the building. Up to 20,000 people may attend the gathering in Carlisle (almost 100 times the approved outdoor limit!)- with Defendants’ blessing. Ostensibly, the occupancy restriction limits in Defendants’ orders for those commercial purposes operate to the same end as the congregate gathering limits-to combat the spread of COVID-19. However, they do so in a manner that is far less restrictive of the First Amendment right of assembly than the orders permit for activities that are more traditionally covered within the ambit of the Amendment­ political, social, cultural, educational and other expressive gatherings.

Moreover, the record in this case failed to establish any evidence that the specific numeric congregate limits were necessary to achieve Defendants’ ends, much less that “[they] target and eliminate no more than the exact source of the ‘ evil’ [they] seek to remedy.” [Sam Robinson, a Deputy Chief of Staff to the Governor] testified that the congregate limits were designed to prevent “mega-spreading events.” However, when asked whether, for example, the large protests—often featuring numbers far in excess of the outdoor limit and without social distancing or masks—led to any known mega-spreading event, he was unable to point to a single mega-spreading instance. (ECF No. 75, p. 155) (“I am not aware specifically. I have not seen any sort of press coverage or, you know, CDC information about that. I have not seen information linking a spread to protests.”).

Further, the limitations are not narrowly tailored in that they do not address the specific experience of the virus across the Commonwealth. Because all of Pennsylvania’ s counties are currently in the “green phase,” the same restrictions apply to all. Pennsylvania has nearly fourteen million residents across sixty-seven counties. Pennsylvania has dense urban areas, commuter communities servicing the New York metropolitan area, small towns and vast expanses of rural communities. The virus’ s prevalence varies greatly over the vast diversity of the Commonwealth—as do the resources of the various regions to combat a population proportionate outbreak. Despite this diversity, Defendants’ orders take a one-size fits all approach. The same limits apply in counties with a history of hundreds or thousands of cases as those with only a handful. The statewide approach is broadly, rather than narrowly, tailored.

The imposition of a cap on the number of people that may gather for political, social, cultural, educational and other expressive gatherings, while permitting a larger number for commercial gatherings limited only by a percentage of the occupancy capacity of the facility is not narrowly tailored and does not pass constitutional muster. Moreover, it creates a topsy-turvy world where Plaintiffs are more restricted in areas traditionally protected by the First Amendment than in areas which usually receive far less, if any, protection. This inconsistency has been aptly noted in other COVID-19 cases….

This is a plausible argument, given that the law seems to treat constitutionally protected activity worse than other activity. But I’m far from certain that it will be upheld on appeal, given courts’ general (and likely correct) tendency to give the government considerable latitude in trying to contain the disease while minimizing the economic devastation of the shutdowns.

I also think a stronger argument would have been that the restrictions don’t leave open “ample alternative channels” for expression—a separate prong of the content-neutral restriction test—especially given that the First Amendment singles out peaceable assembly as a separately protected right: other channels would be more expensive, or wouldn’t reach the same audience, or wouldn’t convey the same message. (See City of Ladue v. Gilleo (1994).) I expect the challengers will make that argument on appeal, as they are entitled to do: A judgment can be defended on appeal on any basis fairly presented by the record, including one on which the trial court didn’t rely.

09/16/20

When We Had a CIA That Worked for America

By: Cliff Kincaid

The left-wing Soros-funded National Security Archive has released some documents about the CIA’s good old days when the agency had anti-communists on its staff and they responded to the orders of a duly elected resident. The documents concern the overthrow of the communist president of Chile in 1973.

Chile was once run by an associate of Fidel Castro. Today, there is a narco-terrorist communist regime in Venezuela and the CIA can’t seem to do anything about it.

The National Security Archive is outraged, of course, by the documents it highlighted on the 50th anniversary of President Richard Nixon’s September 15, 1970, order to overthrow the communist Chilean President Salvador Allende. But I find this document refreshing. “1 in 10 chance, perhaps, but save Chile,” ordered Nixon.

In this case, officials did the right thing, carrying out the president’s orders to thwart the communist advance in South America.  “Not concerned [about] risks involved,” wrote CIA director Richard Helms about the president’s orders and policy. It was successful.

The National Security Archive receives millions of dollars from left-wing foundations, including the Soros-funded Open Society Institute, but also gets money from Dow Jones and the New York Times. It frets that Nixon had “demanded regime change in the South American nation that had become the first in the world to freely elect a Socialist candidate.”

Socialist? He was a Castro puppet. And he seized power with only 36 percent of the vote.

It’s a “Full-time job — best men we have,” Nixon had said, arguing for a sustained effort to stop communism in Chile. “Make the economy scream.”  The CIA didn’t have to work too hard. The people didn’t want communism and turned out in the streets to protest. The military responded with a coup against Allende and General Augusto Pinochet took power.

Faced with a popular rebellion against his communist policies, Allende shot himself with an AK-47 assault rifle given to him by Castro.

Pinochet saved Chile from communism and presided over a transition to a free-market economy that produced the greatest prosperity in Chilean history. He led a revolution in Chile that by communist standards was virtually bloodless. Some 3,000 people were killed by the military when they overthrew Salvador Allende. By contrast, in Russia and China, millions were slaughtered.

Pinochet stepped down from power voluntarily and preserved freedom in Chile.

But the Communists and their friends could not forgive Pinochet for saving Chile from communism. A renegade left-wing Spanish prosecutor tried to have Pinochet prosecuted for human rights violations when he visited London for medical treatment.

Consider the CIA today, in regard to Venezuela’s Allende, the late Hugo Chavez, who was succeeded by Nicolás Maduro. President Trump’s proposed replacement, Venezuelan National Assembly President Juan Guaido, is another socialist. His Popular Will party is a “progressive” party and a member of the Socialist International. He doesn’t inspire much confidence.

With years to plan Maduro’s demise, but crippled under Barack Hussein Obama, the CIA is in such bad shape they can’t or won’t replace one socialist with another. Guaido, the speaker of the National Assembly, is still on the outside looking in, wondering why the CIA is so incompetent and clamoring for more economic sanctions on the regime. But they haven’t been enough to generate “regime change.”

If any country was ripe for an anti-communist revolution, it is Venezuela. But the CIA can’t pull it off. President Trump should find out why.

Venezuela was once a major oil-exporting nation but became an economic basket case under Chavez and Maduro. The regime is more of a national security problem than Iran and is believed to be running guns to terrorists and trafficking cocaine. Indeed,  the Department of Justice in March indicted Maduro and other officials, along with two Colombia terrorist leaders, on drug and other charges.

U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said Maduro and the other defendants “expressly intended to flood the United States with cocaine in order to undermine the health and wellbeing of our nation.”

It’s great for President Trump to be presiding over peace in the Middle East, but what about the security threat a few thousand miles south of our border in Venezuela?

Former CIA officer Brian Latell, the author of Castro’s Secrets, once revealed that Hugo Chavez and/or his brother Adan were likely recruited by Castro’s intelligence service and that the Venezuelan intelligence service operates as an “adjunct” of the Cuban DGI.

Yet, current and former CIA officials seem more concerned about Trump. Former CIA officials Michael Morell, Michael Hayden, and Philip Mudd all denounced Trump before he took office. Former CIA operations officer Evan McMullin ran against him as an independent presidential candidate.

Obama’s director of the CIA was John Brennan, who voted for the Communist Party (CPUSA) ticket when he was in college but was hired by the CIA anyway and quickly rose through the ranks. He is implicated in the Deep State effort to destroy the Trump presidency.

The disclosures from the National Security Archive remind us of the days when the CIA destabilized communist regimes. Our own anti-communist Trump presidency seems to be their number one target these days. They seem to want to install a socialist regime in Washington, D.C.

*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.

09/15/20

Leaked DHS Email Explains ANTIFA Portland Is Organized

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Primer: Rose City Antifa (RCA) was founded in Portland, Oregon in October of 2007. RCA was formed after a coalition of local people and organizations formed the ‘Ad-Hoc Coalition Against Racism and Fascism.’

Portland & Antifa: National Review Cover Story — Kevin ...

Source:

An internal email from the Department of Homeland Security leaked to CBS Catherine Herridge late Monday detailing that the violence in Portland was not “opportunistic,” but rather “organized”—confirming long-suspected details about the Antifa movement.

The email explains that Antifa is organized and runs contrary to reports in the mainstream media that Antifa was not responsible for anti-police violence, but an impromptu movement spurred on by anti-fascist sentiments held by most of the American public.

recent article in the Washington Post by Mark Bray, author of Antifa: Anti-Fascist Handbook, attempted to dispel “myths” about Antifa, claims that the group is not an organization, but rather a “tradition of militant antifascism.” The article disputed claims that Antifa “masterminds violence at Black Lives Matter protests.”

An internal email from the Department of Homeland Security leaked to CBS Catherine Herridge late Monday detailing that the violence in Portland was not “opportunistic,” but rather “organized”—confirming long-suspected details about the Antifa movement.

The email explains that Antifa is organized and runs contrary to reports in the mainstream media that Antifa was not responsible for anti-police violence, but an impromptu movement spurred on by anti-fascist sentiments held by most of the American public.

A recent article in the Washington Post by Mark Bray, author of Antifa: Anti-Fascist Handbook, attempted to dispel “myths” about Antifa, claims that the group is not an organization, but rather a “tradition of militant antifascism.” The article disputed claims that Antifa “masterminds violence at Black Lives Matter protests.”

***

“Threat actors who are motivated by Anarchist or ANTIFA (or a combination of both) ideologies to carry out acts of violence against State, Local, and Federal authorities and infrastructure they believe represent authority or represent political and social ideas they reject,” Murphy concluded.

Phrases like “Every city, every town. Burn the precincts to the ground” are a common refrain at Black Lives Matter rallies, and have been chanted during arson attacks on the Portland Police Bureau, the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse in Portland, and other facilities where Antifa and Black Lives Matter militants were present.

The intelligence provided by the DHS validates claims by conservative voices who have long identified Antifa as an organized movement and flies in the face of claims that the group was not intent on committing violence or conducting an insurgency against the United States government.

09/15/20

‘Transition Integrity’ Group is Tied to Hunter

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

The National Pulse can reveal the oft-described “non-partisan” Transition Integrity Project – an organization claiming to work to defend the integrity of America’s November elections – has links to former President Barack Obama, being funded by an organization led by Obama-era lawyers and over 20 Obama White House staff.

NP: The critical connection comes through President Obama’s former associate White House Counsel, Ian Bassin, who heads the anti-Trump litigation efforts Protect Democracy Project and United to Protect Democracy.

Bassin previously headed the far-left Avaaz network, founded in turn by the leftist MoveOn.org group, as well as the Truman National Security Project, which has featured lead Joe Biden policy advisor Jake Sullivan and Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden on its board.

The revelations destroy the Transition Integrity Project’s central tenet: that it is a non-partisan and independent organization that simply seeks to secure the fair results of the upcoming election.

The group has previously attempted to claim that it “takes no position on how Americans should cast their votes, or on the likely winner of the upcoming election.”

TRANSITION INTEGRITY PROJECT.

The Transition Integrity Project (TIP) was first accurately reported on by The National Pulse in early August, after a slew of fawning media articles about a group which performed “war games” to predict what would happen in the case of a disputed election in November.

Despite claims of being non- or bi-partisan, The National Pulse exposed the group as a host of NeverTrump activists, partnered with Open Society Foundation staffers, and partnered in turn with Chinese Communist Party officials.

Now, following a trail of evidence left by the TIP’s new website, The National Pulse can report that the falsely labelled “non-partisan” project is in-turn financed by a group that was founded explicitly to oppose President Trump using false allegations of Russian interference, headed by President Obama’s former Associate White House Counsel.

PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT.

TIP’s website revealed the group is “funded by United to Protect Democracy,” a branch of the broader Protect Democracy Project (PDP).

The only other prior mention of the connection between the two groups came from former Michigan Governor turned CNN commentator Jennifer Granholm, who told anchors Jim Sciutto and Alisyn Camerota in July:

“…it’s called the Transition Integrity Project. There were 100 participants and, as you say, it was bipartisan, it’s sponsored by a non-partisan entity called Protect Democracy. And, honestly, Jim, it was — it was a real eye opener to many of us. It was pretty scary.”

***

CNN Puff Piece on Transition Integrity Project

Despite being a participant in the highly-partisan endeavor, CNN allowed Granholm to report, unchallenged, on the group wherein she falsely made the claim that Protect Democracy is “non-partisan.”

THE LINK TO OBAMA.

The Protect Democracy Project’s inception coincided with Donald Trump’s first election victory.

It was born in “early 2017” by “a group of former high-level executive branch officials who served in the White House Counsel’s Office and upper echelons of the Department of Justice” from the Obama administration.

The group boasts of the inclusion of marginal Republicans – all “Never Trumpers” including Mona Charen who was notoriously booed off of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) stage for attacking President Trump. But these former Republicans are window dressing for the organization which features a whopping 22 former Obama administration officials amongst its ranks.

PDP’s founder is Ian Bassin, President Obama’s Deputy Associate Counsel from 2009 to 2011.

***

bassin

Prior to his stint in the White House, he was a member of the administration’s transition team and a Director of Florida Policy for President Obama’s 2008 campaign.

Bassin is a prolific critic of President Trump, comparing his supporters to neo-Nazis and demanding the federal government unduly “remove Trump from office.”

Indeed, PDP’s mission statement vows that President Trump “must be blunted.” Hardly a “non-partisan” approach to election integrity.

In addition to Bassin, the group counts 21 more individuals who worked in the Obama administration as staff, board members, or advisors.

Among the cohort are high-ranking officials such as Special Assistant to the President and Associate White House Counsel Michael Gottlieb, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, and Senior Deputy Director of Operations and Director for Finance Beau Wright.

GLOBALIST BIGWIGS.

The group’s anti-Trump links, however, transcend affiliation with the Obama administration alone.

Instead, key figures in the globalist movement appear to be connected with PDP and therefore TIP.

Advisors to the group include a bevy of vocal Trump critics such as failed presidential candidate Evan McMullin and Anne Applebaum, who frequently decries the Republican party’s Trump-catalyzed shift towards populism and extols globalism.

Another globalist on the advisory board, Jerry Taylor, serves as President of the Niskanen Center, which has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Niskanen often masquerades as a libertarian for the sake of media coverage, but has opposed the Trump presidency which has done more for libertarian anti-war causes than any President in four decades.

RUSSIAGATE.

PDP’s sister organization “United to Protect Democracy” – which files its reports together with PDP – was first reported on by Politico following the Trump inauguration.

PDP’s financial filings show a rapid increase in resources.

Reporter Edward-Isaac Dovere – who recently threw a soft ball question to candidate Joe Biden – lauded the arrival of the group, claiming it drew its name “from a line in President Barack Obama’s farewell address that urged his supporters to pick up where he was leaving off.”

The organization’s recently filed 990 forms reveal Bassin and other staff making six-figure salaries as a result of their efforts which appear to amount to filing Freedom of Information Act requests, and supporting entities like TIP.

Bassin himself appears to have made nearly $300,000 in 2018 from the project.

Bassin enriches himself at a cost of dividing America.

On the same day as the Politico article, the Daily Mail published a story linking the PDP’s operations to another ex-Obama official refuge known as The Moscow Project. The Moscow Project would go on to promote the false Russia hoax with the assistance of the establishment press.

The article by Francesca Chambers – now a board member at the White House Correspondents’ Association – reads like a PDP press release, stating: “Bassin’s organization is also preparing for the ‘worst-case scenario’ – that Trump would deny a judge’s order and create a constitutional crisis.

“The White House has not suggested that it intends to override the judicial branch, despite Trump’s smackdown of a so-called judge who rule [sic] against him, but should it move in that direction, United to Protect Democracy will be ready.”

ROSA BROOKS AND GEORGE SOROS.

The uncovered money trail is yet another blow to the group’s facade of bipartisanship and neutrality in addition to its founder Rosa Brooks vowing she’d do “every legal and ethical thing within her power” to elect Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

The bottom of the group’s website, which was quickly pulled down after it went up last week, reads “Transition Integrity Project is funded by United to Protect Democracy.”

Insistent American democracy is “in danger,” left-wing United to Protect Democracy insists “Trump is a symptom, not a cause” of the phenomenon before branding him an “autocratic” leader.

“Donald Trump poses an immediate, acute, and extreme threat to our democracy that must be blunted,” the group, named after a phrase from Obama’s farewell address, promises.

The Transition Integrity Project has previously been exposed for its links to George Soros’s Open Society Institute, as well as the Chinese Communist Party-linked Berggruen Institute.

Rosa Brooks, the ex-Soros lawyer ostensibly in charge of TIP, once offered “substantive help” to the Hillary Clinton campaign, as well as liaising with John Podesta and Biden advisor Jake Sullivan.