top of page
Search

SATURDAY

New BLOG – Great ARTICLES

SATURDAY 5-[16]-26



SPIRITUAL:

SSPX responds: ‘Excommunicated? But by whom? By those who kneel before Pachamama?’

Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) procession inside St. Peter's BasilicaMaike Hickson

 

The Society of Saint Pius X responds to the Holy See's recent statement regarding excommunication if episcopal consecrations are carried out on July 1.

 

 

Fri May 15, 2026 - 2:54 pm EDT

(Society of Saint Pius X) — “Physician, heal yourself” (Lk 4:23).


1. The Vatican Press Office published, on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, the following statement from Cardinal Fernandez, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith:

Regarding the Society of Saint Pius X, we reiterate what has already been communicated. The episcopal ordinations announced by the Society of Saint Pius X are not accompanied by the corresponding papal mandate. This action constitutes “a schismatic act” (John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei , no. 3) and “formal adherence to schism constitutes a grave offense against God and entails the excommunication prescribed by Church law” (ibid., 5c; cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Explanatory Note, August 24, 1996).

The Holy Father continues, in his prayers, to ask the Holy Spirit to enlighten the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X so that they may reconsider the very serious decision they have made.

From the Vatican, May 13, 2026


2. This therefore involves matters of Canon Law, specifically concerning the penalties imposed for potential offenses. But this is not new. The novelty that appears in this declaration from Rome is that the episcopal consecrations scheduled for July 1st will not be “accompanied by the corresponding papal mandate.” Coming from a Prefect of a Vatican dicastery, this remark is quite clearly an attempt to convey to the Society that Pope Leo XIV will refuse to authorize the consecrations.


3. In a certain way, this too is not new, for it is a repetition of what the Society already experienced in 1988.  In the homily he delivered on the day of the consecrations, June 30, Archbishop Lefebvre already alluded to various canonical studies written by specialists in the field, which could be used to legitimize the act of episcopal consecration on that occasion of June 30. Among these studies, [1] that of Professor Rudolf Kaschewsky [2] was initially published in the March-April 1988 issue of Una Voce-Korrespondenz.


4. This specifically concerns the question of penalties incurred for a potential offense. The New Code of Canon Law of 1983 indicates in canon 1323 the situations in which the act committed will not, from the legal perspective of canon law, constitute an offense. Canon 4 specifies: “A person who, having violated a law or precept: […] acted […] out of necessity, or to avoid serious harm, is not punishable by any penalty, unless, however, the act is intrinsically evil or causes harm to souls.”


Canon 1324 specifies in paragraph 1 that “if the offense is intrinsically evil or if it harms souls,” the one who violates the law “is not exempt from punishment, but the punishment prescribed by law or precept must be mitigated, or a penance must be substituted for it, if the offense was committed by someone who acted […] driven by need or to avoid serious harm.” Paragraph 3 of the same canon further specifies that “in the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1, the guilty party is not subject to a latae sententiae punishment .”


Thus, according to Church law, one who disobeys the law does not commit a punishable offense, provided he is driven to it by necessity and that this disobedience does not amount to an intrinsically evil act or one prejudicial to souls. Even if this equivalence were verified, the act, then considered an offense, could not be sanctioned by a latae sententiae penalty, which is incurred by the very fact of the offense.


5. Canon 1323, paragraph 7, further specifies that the act committed will not, from the legal standpoint of canon law, constitute a crime not only if it was actually committed due to necessity (paragraph 4) but also if the person who committed it “believed that one of the circumstances provided for in paragraph 4 existed”—that is, the circumstance of necessity. In other words, even if one admits that there is no real necessity to justify the act, the mere fact that the perpetrator committed the act driven by what he believed to be a real necessity is sufficient to excuse him from the crime.

Canon 1324, paragraph 1, number 8, also states that someone who, “through an error of which he is guilty, believed that one of the circumstances mentioned in canon 1323, number 4, had occurred,” is not exempt from punishment, but this punishment must be mitigated, or a penance must be substituted for it. And what is stated in paragraph 3 of the same canon 1324 still applies here: in such a case, the penalty of latae sententiae is not incurred.


6. Thus, according to Church law, one who does not respect the law commits no punishable offense provided that he is driven to it by a necessity that is not only real but even putative, that is to say, wrongly assumed due to a subjective error, provided that this error is not culpable but accompanies the most complete good faith. And even if the error were culpable, the then-offense could not be sanctioned with a latae sententiae penalty, incurred by the very fact of the offense.


7. More fundamentally, and as Don Davide Pagliarani, following Archbishop Lefebvre, constantly reiterates, the Society seeks the good of the Church, which is the good of souls. This is why it disregards this application of ecclesiastical law that would accuse it of a crime and impose the corresponding penalty. Why? Simply because ecclesiastical law cannot be applied to the detriment of the salvation of souls. And it is precisely to respond to the grave and urgent need for the salvation of souls that the Society is considering these episcopal consecrations.

In all reality, there is no wrongdoing, no schism on the part of the Fraternity. But only the same zeal which remains unchanged, even if it takes on paradoxical forms in the eyes of the world, for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.


8. Excommunicated? But by whom? By those who receive the blessing of a schismatic woman, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally? By those who authorize the blessing of Fiducia supplicans? And who kneel before Pachamama? … In the Church, punishments are medicinal. But then, shouldn’t the words of Our Lord in the Gospel rise to the lips of the Catholic of good will: “Medice, cura teipsum”  (Lk. 4:23)? [3]

[1] They were published in June 1989 by Editions du Courrier de Rome, in a separate booklet entitled La Tradition excommuniée. The study we are referring to here appears on pages 51-57.

[2] Rudolf Kaschewsky (1939-2020), a Doctor of Theology and renowned sinologist specializing in Buddhism and China, was a lecturer at the University of Bonn from 1974 to 2004. He became interested in the canonical aspects of episcopal consecration due to well-known events that had occurred within the Church in China. See his article: “Zur Frage der Bischofsweihe ohne päpstlichen Auftrag” in  China heute . Informationen über Religion und Christentum im chinesischen Raum. Jahrgang VIII (1989), no. 5 (45), pp. 124-128.

[3] “Physician, heal thyself.”


Life Site News








 

BREAKING NEWS:

Our paper: “Autopsy findings in cases of Fatal COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis” has won an Award as "Top Viewed Article"




Cancer Researcher. Author of 110+ peer-reviewed medical publications.

Largest Ivermectin Cancer Clientele in the world. Top Cancer Coach in the world.

Top 3 medical substack in the world.

 



BREAKING NEWS: 





Our paper: “Autopsy findings in cases of fatal COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis”just won the Award for “Top Viewed Article!”









I am shocked but honored!Congratulations to my amazing co-authors:Dr.Peter McCullough: @P_McCulloughMD



 

Nicolas Hulscher: @NicHulscher

Dr.Roger Hodkinson

LINK TO PAPER  [Read Dr Makis’ Report]

 

 

 

 

 

CANADIAN:

Finally! Bill C9 is meeting! PRAY

And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a three-strand cord is not quickly broken Ecc 4:12

BILL C9 SESSIONS ARE NOW SCHEDULED for May 20th  & 21stYOU have done well!  What we knew to do we have done. Bill C9 is now scheduled for processing and we need prayer!  We are looking for those to jump on zoom  to help pray. Like the church did when Peter was in prison – they prayed fervently and persistently  all night – and a miracle happened! Acts 12

 

The Human Right committee has a full agenda lined up. They are going through everything clause by clause. They also have numerous documents to go through sent by pro and con Bill C9. One document was prepared by a Quebec team who is passionately  promoting Bill C9, its 17 pages long! (PRAY!). There a also witnesses (including a pastor – pray for Phil).   These meeting more than likely will go longer than just these two days, in fact expect them to schedule a few of them. And by God’s grace, we want to be praying the exact same time they are meeting. Praying many will join us.


BEFORE BILL C9 SESSIONS STARTMay 18th  & May 19th  at 2pmESTWe will gather on zoom to pray, preparing the way!

Zoom Time BC11am/AB-SK 12pm/MB 1pm/ON-QB 2pm/ALT 3pm/NF 3:30pm

 

DURING BILL C9 SESSIONSMay 20th  Bill C9 in Session - with Human Rights CommitteeWednesday May 20th  from 11am EST to 6pm, join zoom call 30 min earlyZoom Time BC 7:30am/AB-SK 8:30am/MB 9:30am/ON-QB 10:30am/ATL 11:30am/NF 12pm

 

May 21st  Bill C9 in Session - with Human Rights CommitteeTuesday May 21st  from 9am EST to 12pm, join zoom call 30 min earlyZoom Time BC 5:30am/AB-SK 6:30am/MB 7:30am/ON-QB 8:30am/ATL 9:30am/NF 10am

 

Zoom link https://zoom.us/j/92542087461Telephone: 1 647 558 0588  ID: 925 4208 7461

 

Continue to…

- Fast & PRAY as the Lord leads (Check attachment let us know what days you are fasting – if you haven’t already)  -  Send postcards,-  Call senators – (check attachment – pray for the by name every day)-  Share info with others. Not everyone knows.

 

To God be all the Glory

 

Stand on Guard PrayerRev Joe CampbellDave & Jan WilkesShirley Hildebrand

Names of Senators in Human Rights Committee Members:

Chair: Salma  Ataullahjan (C - Ontario)

Deputy Chair: Wanda Thomas Bernard  (PSG - Nova Scotia)

David M. Arnot (ISG - Saskatchewan)

Dawn Arnold (ISG - New Brunswick)

Tony Ince (CSG - Nova Scotia)

Nancy Karetak-Lindell (ISG - Nunavut)

Marilou McPhedran (Non-affiliated - Manitoba)

Kristopher Wells (PSG - Alberta)

 

Ex Officio Members:

Pierre Dalphond (ISG - Quebec) …

or Judy A. White (PSG - Newfoundland and Labrador) Marc Gold (Non-affiliated - Quebec) …

or Patti LaBoucane-Benson (GRO - Alberta) Yonah Martin (C - British Columbia) …

or Leo Housakos (C - Quebec) Raymonde Saint-Germain (ISG - Quebec) …

or Bernadette Clement (ISG - Ontario) Scott Tannas (CSG - Alberta) …

or Rebecca Patterson (CSG - Ontario) Caroline Woodward,

Clerk Annie Trudel, Administrative Assistant

Included are the names of senators they substitute sometimes (at the bottom of the list) when a member can’t attend the meeting.

Senator Paulette Senior (Chair) • Province: Ontario • Affiliation:

 

Independent Senators Group

• Telephone: 613-995-8543 Senator Wanda Thomas Bernard (Deputy Chair)

• Province: Nova Scotia (East Preston)

• Affiliation: Progressive Senate Group

• Telephone: 613-996-2090 Senator Dawn Arnold

• Province: New Brunswick

• Affiliation: Independent Senators Group

• Telephone: 343-991-5538 Senator Nancy Karetak-Lindell

• Territory: Nunavut

• Affiliation: Independent Senators Group

• Telephone: 343-991-5530 Senator Marilou McPhedran

• Province: Manitoba • Affiliation: Non-affiliated

• Telephone: 613-996-2106 Senator Kristopher Wells

• Province: Alberta

• Affiliation: Progressive Senate Group

• Telephone: 613-943-8384 Senator David M. Arnot

• Province: Saskatchewan

• Affiliation: Independent Senators Group

• Telephone: 613-943-1568 Senator Tony Ince

• Province: Nova Scotia

• Affiliation: Canadian Senators Group

• Telephone: 343-991-5540 Senator Salma Attaullahjan

• Province: Ontario (Toronto)

• Affiliation: Conservative Party of Canada

• Telephone: 613-947-5906

 

 

TRUMP: 


CNN FAILED

We filed what may be the most consequential brief of this entire case – and the Supreme Court's next move will change everything.


CNN lied. They deliberately twisted what a member of President Trump's legal team argued during his impeachment trial – blasting their fabricated narrative to millions of Americans. Jay and Jordan were on the Senate floor when it happened. They saw it firsthand.


CNN thought they could hide behind a broken legal shield that has protected the mainstream media from accountability for far too long. We refused to let that stand.

We took CNN to the U.S. Supreme Court. CNN ignored us. The Justices made CNN respond. And we’ve filed our final brief.


This is bigger than CNN. This is about whether the media can lie to millions of Americans without consequence. We say no.

Take action with the ACLJ at the U.S. Supreme Court.


Four of our clients sit on death row in Pakistan – imprisoned for years, some even more than a decade – for nothing more than their faith in Christ.

Recently, our team was granted rare permission to sit with them face to face. What we witnessed inside those prison walls broke our hearts – and strengthened our resolve.

Despite years of isolation, suffering, and uncertainty, their faith has not wavered. God is still moving – even there.

Read their full story and stand with these persecuted believers today.


Under Biden, VA hospitals became abortion mills. Our client – a pro-life doctor and Chief of Medicine – stood against it and paid the price.

A pro-life doctor with 17 years of exemplary service was forced out of the VA, blocked from returning, and told, “Get with the program or find another job” – all because he refused to participate in abortions.

We’re about to take major legal action to defend him from this unlawful retaliation. Sign the petition to defend him.


The unconstitutional attempt to gerrymander Virginia's congressional districts is over. The U.S. Supreme Court just issued an order that the application for stay is denied.

Not only that, but there was not a single dissent from the Justices. This is a huge – and FINAL – win for the Constitution and our representative form of government. Stand with us as we continue standing for election integrity.

Antisemitism is no longer fringe on the Left – it's becoming policy. From SS-tattooed Senate candidates to Schumer empowering Hamas supporters, it's alarming.

The Left is making a dangerous bet – and America cannot afford it.


God Bless,The ACLJ Team


 

 

 

 

 

Pirro puts D.C. Parents on notice: enforce your own curfew or face charges over teen takeovers

By 

Washington's top federal prosecutor told parents Friday that if their teenagers keep violating the local curfew, her office will come after the adults. D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced the plan at a news conference, invoking a local statute that makes contributing to the delinquency of a minor a chargeable offense, a direct response to the flash-mob-style "teen takeovers" that have plagued the nation's capital.


Pirro was blunt. As CBS News reported, the U.S. Attorney said her office intends to enforce D.C. statute 22-811 against parents whose children break the curfew. Her office cannot prosecute the minors themselves for curfew violations, that falls to the local attorney general's office. But Pirro made clear the jurisdictional line does not shield the adults responsible for those kids.


"That does not preclude me from bringing charges against the parents."

The target is a real and growing problem. Large groups of teenagers have repeatedly descended on the Navy Yard waterfront, one of the most popular stretches of the city, in chaotic gatherings that residents, workers, and business owners have had to endure. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser responded by imposing a series of juvenile curfews in the Navy Yard area, setting an 11 p.m. cutoff for anyone under 18.


But curfews on paper mean little if nobody enforces them, and if the adults who are supposed to keep minors off the streets at night face no consequences when they don't.


A federal prosecutor fills the gap

Pirro's announcement signals that the federal government is no longer content to let local D.C. institutions handle the disorder alone. Her office sits at the center of a law enforcement surge launched last summer under President Trump to reduce violent crime in Washington. The curfew-enforcement push extends that effort into the realm of parental accountability.


Pirro framed the issue in terms that taxpayers and law-abiding residents understand immediately:

"Law-abiding taxpayers should no longer have to pay for parental neglect."

She followed with a six-word warning that left no room for ambiguity:

"Parents: Do your job. Or we will do ours."


The approach is straightforward. If a teenager is caught violating the curfew, and the parent knew, or should have known, the child was out, the parent could face charges under the contributing-to-delinquency statute. Pirro's office has not disclosed whether any parents have already been charged, but the public warning itself marks a sharp escalation.


Pirro has shown a willingness to use her office aggressively on multiple fronts. She recently moved to interview accusers in the Swalwell case, signaling a broader prosecutorial posture that extends well beyond routine federal business.


D.C. Council draws Pirro's fire

The U.S. Attorney has not limited her criticism to absent parents. She also turned her attention to the D.C. Council, which she accused of failing to act decisively on the curfew question. Just The News reported that Pirro publicly criticized the council for not extending a youth curfew through the summer months, exactly when teen takeovers are most frequent.


"They're not doing their job," Pirro said of the council.

The council did pass a curfew measure, but it did not receive enough votes to extend the existing emergency curfew. The result: the new measure would not take effect until the fall, assuming it clears congressional review. That leaves a summer-long gap, precisely the window when large groups of minors flood public spaces after dark.


For residents living near the Navy Yard, the timing could not be worse. The waterfront has become a magnet for these gatherings, and a curfew that kicks in after the warm months are over is a curfew that misses the point entirely.


The situation in D.C. reflects a broader pattern of local leadership struggling, or declining, to maintain basic public order. Questions about how the city tracks and reports crime data have surfaced separately, with D.C. police facing scrutiny over alleged manipulation of crime statistics.


Parental accountability as a law enforcement tool

The idea of charging parents for their children's conduct is not new, but it remains controversial. Critics typically argue that holding adults criminally liable for a teenager's decision to sneak out is heavy-handed. Supporters counter that when minors are running through city streets in organized mobs, someone failed, and the law already provides a mechanism to hold that someone accountable.


Pirro's office pointed to statute 22-811 as the legal vehicle. The provision addresses contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a charge that can apply when an adult's negligence or active encouragement leads a child into unlawful conduct. Pirro told reporters that parents of teens involved in the takeovers could face penalties, including possible scrutiny under that statute and through juvenile court authority.

"There can be penalties against the parents who know about the kids' involvement in these teen takeovers," Pirro said.


What the statute's exact penalties look like in practice, fines, jail time, or something else, remains unclear from the public statements so far. Nor is it clear how prosecutors would establish that a parent "knew" a minor was out past curfew in any given case. Those details will matter if and when charges are filed.

Pirro's broader caseload already includes high-profile matters that have drawn national attention. Her office is handling the prosecution tied to the WHCA dinner shooting, where the defense has pushed back hard against her involvement.


A city that can't, or won't, keep order

Washington, D.C., occupies a unique position in American governance. It is the seat of the federal government, yet its local leadership has struggled for years to deliver basic public safety. The teen takeover problem is only the latest symptom.


Mayor Bowser's emergency curfew orders represent an acknowledgment that something has gone wrong. But emergency orders are temporary fixes. They expire. They require renewal. And when the council cannot muster the votes to extend them through the season when they are most needed, the orders become little more than gestures.


Federal prosecutors stepping in to fill that gap is itself a statement about the failure of local governance. Pirro's office should not need to be the backstop for a city council that cannot pass a summer curfew extension. But here we are.


The federal government has pursued accountability on other fronts as well, including recent charges against green card holders for illegal voting, part of a wider pattern of federal prosecutors enforcing laws that local authorities have been slow to act on.


What comes next

Several questions remain unanswered. How many teen takeover incidents have occurred, and over what period? Will the D.C. Council act before fall to close the curfew gap? And will Pirro's office actually bring charges against parents, or will the threat alone change behavior?


The answers will determine whether this announcement amounts to a real shift in enforcement or just another press conference. Pirro's track record suggests she is not in the habit of making idle threats. But the proof will be in the charging documents, not the soundbites.


For the families, workers, and small-business owners near the Navy Yard who have watched their neighborhood get overrun after dark, the message from the U.S. Attorney's office is welcome, and overdue. They have been paying the price for disorder they did not create.


When the city's own leaders cannot keep the peace, someone has to. Pirro is betting that the fastest way to get teenagers off the streets is to remind their parents that the law applies to them, too.

AMERICAN Almanac

 

 

 

 

Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen exits Congress after GOP redistricting dismantles his Memphis seat

By 

Rep. Steve Cohen, the nine-term Tennessee Democrat, announced Friday he will not seek re-election after Republican lawmakers carved his majority-Black Memphis district into three new seats, a move that effectively ended one of the safest Democratic holds in the South. NBC News reported that Cohen's departure marks the 59th retirement by a sitting House member this election cycle, the second-highest total since 1930.


The Republican-led Tennessee state Legislature and Gov. Bill Lee enacted the new district map last week, splitting Cohen's 9th Congressional District three ways. The map arrived just weeks after the Supreme Court's decision in Callais v. Louisiana, which sharply limited the use of race in drawing congressional districts.


For Democrats, the math is brutal. Cohen held the Memphis seat for more than 19 years. Now the district that sent him to Washington no longer exists, and the party's broader losses may be just beginning.


Cohen's statement: 'Republicans silenced the Black vote'

Cohen framed his exit as a forced one. In a statement Friday morning, he laid the blame squarely on Tennessee's Republican majority:

"This morning, I announced my decision not to run in any of the three gerrymandered congressional districts carved out of the 9th District that I have represented for more than 19 years."


He went further, casting the redistricting as a racial power grab:

"Last week Tennessee Republicans silenced the Black vote here in Memphis to make Republican victories likely."


Cohen left himself a narrow escape hatch. He said he would reverse course if pending legal challenges succeed in restoring the original district boundaries.

"We are still fighting, and if we prevail in the courts and the 9th District remains intact, I will remain a candidate and be proud to represent you for another two years."


That conditional language tells you something. Cohen knows the legal odds shifted when the Supreme Court moved the goalposts on race-conscious redistricting. The courts may not save him.


The Supreme Court ruling that opened the door

Tennessee's new map did not materialize in a vacuum. The Supreme Court's decision in Callais v. Louisiana gutted parts of the Voting Rights Act, according to NBC News's framing, and sharply limited the use of race in drawing congressional districts.


That ruling gave Republican-controlled legislatures across the South a green light to redraw maps that had previously been constrained by federal voting-rights protections.

Lawmakers in several Southern states moved forward with redistricting in ways that eliminate some majority-Black, Democratic-held seats in favor of creating GOP-leaning ones. Tennessee acted fast. Within weeks of the ruling, the Legislature had a new map on the governor's desk, and Lee signed it.


Democrats warned this week that a third of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus could be voted out as a result of the redistricting push nationwide. Whether that projection holds or not, the trend line is clear: the legal framework that protected majority-minority districts for decades has changed, and House Republicans are already capitalizing on the shifting landscape.


A historic wave of retirements

Cohen's exit is not an isolated event. NBC News analysis found that 59 sitting House members have now announced retirements this election cycle, the second-highest total since 1930. That number alone signals a Congress in flux. Members on both sides are reading the map and deciding the fight is not worth it.


For Democrats, each retirement in a newly redrawn district is more than a personnel loss. It is a structural concession. Incumbents carry name recognition, fundraising networks, and voter loyalty that no open-seat candidate can replicate overnight. When Cohen walks away, Democrats lose all of that in a region where they can least afford it.

The broader dynamic within the House Democratic caucus has been one of internal tension and shrinking margins. Losing a veteran like Cohen only deepens the bench problem.


Justin Pearson stays in the fight, for now

Not every Democrat in Tennessee's crosshairs is stepping aside. Tennessee state Rep. Justin Pearson, who gained national attention as a member of the "Tennessee Three," had not dropped out of the race as of NBC News's report. Pearson and two fellow Democratic state lawmakers protested gun violence on the state House floor in 2023. The Republican majority expelled them. Pearson was later reinstated to his post as a state representative.


His decision to stay in the race, even after redistricting reshaped the terrain, sets up a contrast with Cohen's exit. Whether Pearson can mount a competitive campaign in a newly drawn district remains to be seen. But his willingness to run where Cohen would not underscores the generational split inside the party.


Cohen, for his part, was already facing a primary challenger before the redistricting push. The new map gave him a reason to leave on his own terms rather than fight a two-front battle, one against his own party, another against a district built to favor Republicans.


What redistricting means for the South

Tennessee is not the only state where Republican-led legislatures are redrawing maps in the wake of the Callais decision. Across the South, the same playbook is in motion: take majority-Black districts that reliably elect Democrats and split them into pieces that dilute that voting power across multiple GOP-leaning seats.


Democrats call it gerrymandering. Republicans call it compliance with a Supreme Court ruling that told states to stop sorting voters by race. The legal and political arguments will play out in courtrooms for months, possibly years. But the practical effect is already visible: a veteran Democratic congressman is out, his district is gone, and the party's hold on Southern seats is weaker than it has been in a generation.


The party's response so far has been to warn about the Congressional Black Caucus and file legal challenges. House Democrats have shown a pattern of dramatic gestures that generate headlines but produce little in the way of durable results. Legal challenges to the Tennessee map may succeed, Cohen himself said he would return if the courts restore his district. But banking on judicial intervention is not a strategy. It is a prayer.


Meanwhile, the retirements keep piling up. Every member who leaves makes the next election harder for the caucus. Every redrawn district tilts the playing field. And every week that passes without a clear legal victory makes Cohen's conditional promise to return look more like a polite goodbye.


The broader question for Democrats is whether they have an answer beyond litigation. Redistricting fights are won in state legislatures, and the party's habit of floating bold talk without committing to action has not served it well at the state level. Republicans control the Tennessee Legislature. They control the governor's mansion. They drew the map. And now they own the result.


The bottom line

Steve Cohen served Memphis for more than 19 years. He leaves not because voters rejected him, but because the district that elected him no longer exists. That is the nature of redistricting, it is the exercise of political power by those who hold it.


Republicans used the tools the Supreme Court handed them. Democrats are left hoping the courts will hand them back. Cohen himself acknowledged as much when he conditioned his return on a legal victory that may never come.


For conservatives, the lesson is straightforward: elections have consequences, and so do the state legislative majorities that flow from them. Republicans won Tennessee's statehouse. They drew the maps. And a Democratic caucus already consumed by internal skirmishes just lost another seat before a single ballot was cast.


If Democrats want to draw the maps, they need to start winning the races that decide who holds the pen.

AMERICAN Almanac

 

Rep. Frederica Wilson misses more than 40 consecutive House votes during weeks-long absence

By 

Democratic Rep. Frederica Wilson of Florida has not cast a single vote on the House floor since April 17, missing more than 40 consecutive roll calls over nearly a month before her office finally offered an explanation: recovery from left eye surgery. The 83-year-old congresswoman's prolonged silence raised questions that neither she nor House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries moved quickly to answer.


Wilson, who has held her seat representing Florida's 24th congressional district since 2013, did not just skip a handful of procedural votes. She missed major legislative action, including a vote on extending FISA surveillance authorities. The Washington Examiner reported the total at 49 missed roll call votes, a number that kept climbing while Wilson stayed in her district and her colleagues in Washington said little.


Her absence also extended beyond the House floor. The New Republic, as cited by the Daily Caller, reported that Wilson did not appear on footage from several hearings conducted by the two committees on which she sits: the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the House Committee on Education and Workforce. For weeks, there was no public statement, no timeline for return, and no clear accounting of what had happened.


A late explanation and recycled photos

Wilson's office finally released a statement on Thursday, more than three weeks into her absence. In it, she framed the situation as a responsible medical recovery, not a disappearance. As the Daily Caller reported, Wilson said:


"Following left eye surgery, my priority has been ensuring a full and responsible recovery. Although I am currently unable to fly under my doctors' orders, my work has not stopped for a single day. While recovering in the district, I have continued carrying out my official duties, meeting with leaders, local organizations, city and county officials, and constituents."


That claim, that her work "has not stopped for a single day", sits uneasily next to 49 missed votes and no visible participation in committee hearings. Voters in Florida's 24th district sent Wilson to Washington to vote on their behalf. District meetings with local officials, however valuable, are not a substitute for showing up on the House floor when legislation is moving.


Adding another layer to the story, Wilson's official social media account reused at least one photo of the congresswoman that was originally uploaded back in October. The recycled image raised its own questions about whether her office was trying to project a sense of normalcy that didn't match reality.


Democrats have shown a willingness to raise fitness concerns about political figures when it suits their purposes. The standard they apply to others ought to apply within their own ranks.


Jeffries offers a brief, vague assurance

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries addressed Wilson's absence on Thursday as well, though his remarks were notably short on detail. As reported on X by Max Cohen, Jeffries said Wilson "is recovering from a procedure and I expect she'll be back shortly."

Breitbart reported that Wilson was expected to return to the Capitol the following week.


But Jeffries did not specify what "a procedure" meant, did not explain why the public had waited weeks for even this bare-bones acknowledgment, and did not address the growing pattern of lawmakers disappearing from their duties for extended periods with little accountability.


That pattern is not hypothetical. Since the 119th Congress began in January 2025, five members of Congress have died in office: Democratic Texas Rep. Sylvester Turner, Democratic Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly, Republican California Rep. Doug LaMalfa, and Democratic Georgia Rep. David Scott. The grim toll has sharpened public attention on the health and attendance of aging lawmakers, and on the transparency their constituents deserve.


It is worth noting that Democrats have floated fitness-related discussions in other political contexts without hesitation. When the subject is one of their own members, the instinct seems to run toward quiet reassurance rather than candor.


The accountability gap

Wilson is running for reelection. Voters evaluating her candidacy now have a concrete data point: their representative missed nearly 50 consecutive votes and was absent from committee hearings for weeks, with no public explanation until media pressure forced the issue.


Her statement frames the absence as a "scheduled" matter, the press release on her official website is titled to that effect. But a scheduled absence that stretches across weeks of consequential floor votes, with no advance notice to the public and no transparency about the timeline, does not look like responsible planning. It looks like an office hoping nobody would notice.


The broader fundraising and political landscape in the House is already shifting. House Republicans posted a record first-quarter fundraising haul earlier this year, widening the gap over Democrats. Against that backdrop, a Democratic incumbent who can't show up to vote for a month is not exactly a picture of a caucus firing on all cylinders.


There are legitimate questions that remain unanswered. What was the exact date of Wilson's surgery? When precisely does she plan to return? Why did it take weeks for her office or Jeffries to say anything publicly? And if her recovery was serious enough to ground her from flying for a month, why was the default response silence rather than a prompt, straightforward disclosure?


Members of Congress hold positions of public trust. When they cannot fulfill the basic duties of that trust, casting votes, attending hearings, being present for the work they were elected to do, the public deserves a timely, honest explanation. Not a belated press release issued only after reporters started asking uncomfortable questions.


Congressional Democrats have not been shy about pressing officials on their fitness and conduct when it serves a political objective. The same energy is conspicuously absent when the spotlight falls on their own caucus.


A pattern voters should watch

Wilson's case is not unique. It fits a recurring pattern in which aging lawmakers, from both parties, though the recent deaths have skewed heavily Democratic, cling to their seats while their capacity to serve comes into question. The institution itself has no meaningful mechanism to force transparency. Voters are left to piece together the truth from missed roll calls, recycled social media photos, and vague statements from party leaders.


Wilson says her work never stopped. The House roll call says otherwise. Forty-nine votes is not a brief absence. It is a month of representation that the people of Florida's 24th district simply did not receive.

Constituents deserve a representative who shows up, or, at minimum, one whose office tells them the truth before the press has to drag it out.

AMERICAN Almanac

 

 

 

Reports: Suspected Iranian Hackers Target US Gas Station Fuel Systems

By Newsmax Wires    

Hackers believed to be linked to Iran may have breached computerized fuel monitoring systems used at gas stations across the United States, according to a CNN report published Friday and cited by Newsweek.


CNN reported the suspected attacks involved "automatic tank gauge" systems, known as ATGs, which monitor fuel levels and leak detection in underground gas station tanks.

U.S. officials told CNN some of the systems were exposed online without password protection, allowing intruders in some cases to manipulate digital readings and system displays.


Officials told CNN investigators found no evidence the hackers altered actual fuel supplies, but warned manipulated readings could hide leaks or create broader infrastructure safety risks.


CNN reported federal investigators suspect Iranian-linked actors were behind the intrusions, though officials had not publicly attributed the activity to a specific Iranian government entity.


The reported breaches add to years of U.S. warnings that Iran has built one of the world’s most aggressive state-backed cyber programs, frequently targeting energy infrastructure, industrial control systems, financial institutions, and transportation networks.


The U.S. Justice Department announced in 2016 that seven Iranian hackers tied to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps were charged over cyberattacks targeting dozens of American banks between 2011 and 2013.


Federal prosecutors said the same group also infiltrated the Bowman Avenue Dam control system in Rye Brook, New York, in what officials described as one of the first known Iranian intrusions into U.S. industrial infrastructure.


Cybersecurity firm Dragos warned in 2019 that Iranian hacking groups had increasingly focused on operational technology systems used in utilities, oil facilities, pipelines, and manufacturing plants.


The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI issued joint advisories in multiple years warning that Iranian hackers routinely scan for poorly secured industrial control devices connected directly to the internet.


Cybersecurity firm Mandiant reported in 2022 that Iranian state-linked hacking groups increasingly targeted U.S. critical infrastructure organizations using ransomware, destructive malware, and credential theft campaigns.


The Treasury Department said in late 2023 that hackers affiliated with the IRGC targeted water utilities and other infrastructure operators using internet-connected industrial devices manufactured by Unitronics.


Federal agencies warned at the time that Iranian actors were exploiting default passwords and weak cybersecurity protections in operational technology systems.


The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has repeatedly warned that many fuel, water, and utility systems across the United States remain vulnerable because operators continue using legacy industrial equipment with outdated software and inadequate network protections.


Iranian-linked cyber operations have also repeatedly targeted energy infrastructure in the Middle East.

Cybersecurity researchers and Western officials blamed Iranian actors for the 2012 Shamoon malware attack that wiped data from roughly 30,000 computers at Saudi Aramco, one of the largest oil companies in the world.


Saudi officials later described the Shamoon attack as one of the most destructive cyberattacks ever carried out against the global energy sector.

Iran has denied involvement in many cyberattacks attributed to it by Western governments and cybersecurity researchers.


The latest reported intrusions come amid heightened tensions between Iran, Israel, and the United States, with American officials repeatedly warning Tehran could use cyberattacks as an asymmetric response to military or economic pressure.

© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Special Links:

 

News MAX


GLOBAL:

Judicial Watch Asks Court to Unseal Royalty Payments to NIH Employees

As they say, follow the money. That’s what we’re doing with government employees making decisions about your health. We want to see how much private companies pay federal health bureaucrats, but they’re fighting back.


We filed a post-hearing brief in a lawsuit on behalf of Open the Books urging a federal court to compel the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to release unredacted records showing royalty-related payments to government scientists, including former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Our October 2021Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeks full disclosure of NIH “Inventor Award” payments—compensation issued to federal employees for taxpayer-funded inventions licensed to private companies.


We argue that the NIH has improperly withheld these records based on speculative claims that disclosure could allow outsiders to “back-calculate” confidential royalty payments made by private industry to the government.


In a March evidentiary hearing before US District Court Judge Amit Mehta, NIH witnesses attempted to justify redactions by arguing that releasing inventor payment amounts could reveal private-sector royalty rates.

We contend that the government’s argument is based on unrealistic hypotheticals rather than actual data:


The evidentiary hearing was Defendant’s opportunity to prove that Inventor Awards could be used to back calculate royalty amounts. Of the 59,000 instances in which NIH redacted Inventor Awards … it did not back calculate a royalty payment from a single award. Instead, it offered on direct examination what appeared to be actual examples from 1985.… It became clear on cross examination, however, that the examples were not real instances of Inventor Awards and a royalty amount … but only hypotheticals.


Dr. Kirby testified on cross examination that she “made up” the numbers … She also testified that the numbers were “all arbitrary numbers that [she] selected.” … Because it was only a hypothetical based on arbitrary numbers, Dr. Kirby did not have a real-life royalty amount against which to check her work.


In our brief, we argue that there are too many unknowns and moving parts for anyone to reliably “work backwards” to those private payments. The system is too complicated to figure out how much private companies paid the government just by looking at what scientists were later paid – or to guess:


[National Institutes of Health] witnesses failed to establish that back calculation is possible for any of the withheld Inventor Awards. Cross examination made clear that the agency’s witnesses offered only grossly simplified hypotheticals, not actual royalty amounts back calculated from actual Inventor Awards paid to real NIH employees and withheld from Plaintiff. These hypotheticals were devoid of the many variables—known only to NIH and perhaps the relevant licensee …


We are asking the court to order the release of the responsive, unredacted NIH “Inventor Award” records, arguing they are being unlawfully withheld.

Taxpayers have a right to see how money from taxpayer-funded inventions is distributed. Judicial Watch and Open the Books already forced disclosure of more than $1 billion in NIH royalty payments marked to inventors, like Fauci. It is head-scratching that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would allow this stubborn and unlawful secrecy to continue about payments to Fauci and others.


“Americans have a dual interest in the disclosure of these payments,” said Open the Books CEO John Hart. “Every taxpayer deserves to understand how private payments may impact decision making among public scientists and agency directors. Equally important, they are patients making some of life’s most personal decisions when it comes to health care. They are entitled to understand all the financial stakes in play as they receive guidance from public health officials.”


In earlier rulings in the case, Mehta rejected the NIH’s effort to broadly shield the royalty program using employee privacy claims, writing that “federal government employees have a limited privacy interest in information concerning their compensation.”


The court also emphasized the strong public interest in disclosure, noting that transparency regarding royalty payments could help the public assess whether inventors’ financial interests in licensed technologies “could potentially bias the design, conduct, or reporting of clinical research.” Mehta further concluded that the public interest in understanding these financial arrangements is significant, particularly where government scientists involved in taxpayer-funded biomedical research may receive payments tied to the commercialization of those technologies.


Over $2.685 billion was paid to NIH institutes or scientists – of which more than $1 billion was marked for inventors – between 2010-2023 from pharmaceutical companies and other private entities licensing government-owned patents. Those payments were obtained only after Judicial Watch and Open the Books forced the NIH to release previously hidden royalty payment records through FOIA litigation.


The disclosures include royalty payments connected to inventions developed across multiple NIH institutes, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which was led for decades by Fauci and played a central role in federally funded biomedical research.


In February, we filed a separate FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Open the Books seeking records concerning whether statutory limits on royalty payments to federal employees are being effectively bypassed (American Transparency v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:26-cv-00432)).

 

That lawsuit seeks records including:

  • · Emails referencing royalty payments that may exceed the statutory cap

  • · Records concerning royalty payments placed in reserve when payments exceed statutory limits

  • · Internal guidance and procedures governing the NIH Public Health Service Technology Transfer Policy Manual


The records requested cover the period January 2020 through December 2025.

Federal law limits the amount individual government employee-inventors may receive in royalty payments to $150,000 per year. NIH scientists may receive royalty payments when inventions developed with taxpayer funding are licensed to private companies. These payments originate from license fees paid by pharmaceutical companies and other entities seeking to commercialize government-developed biomedical technologies.


OpenTheBooks.com, operated by American Transparency, maintains one of the largest independent databases of public-sector spending in the United States, promoting transparency by putting government spending records online for public review.

Judicial Watch Sues EPA Over Biden’s $2 Billion Grant to Stacey Abrams

As the Biden administration was collapsing in 2024, it lawlessly rushed out billions in cash to left-wing interest groups in a way that encouraged fraud and abuse. We’re suing to help expose this.


We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for records of the Biden administration’s $2 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grant to the nonprofit Power Forward Communities, which is tied to failed Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (No. 1:26-cv-01638)).


The taxpayer funds, awarded in April 2024, were from the $14 billion National Clean Investment Fund program established under the Biden administration’s massive Inflation Reduction Act. The grant was awarded to finance so-called “residential decarbonization.”

Power Forward Communities, which was established in 2023, is a coalition of nonprofits which includes partners like Rewiring America, Enterprise Community Partners, and Habitat for Humanity. Abrams reportedly "played a pivotal role" in establishing the group, which in its first few months of operation reported just $100 in revenue.


In early 2025, following the start of the second Trump administration, the EPA under Administrator Lee Zeldin ordered grants made via the National Clean Investment Fund be frozen due to an ongoing investigation into what the agency under Zeldin said were “serious concerns” that were raised “regarding self-dealing and conflicts of interest, unqualified recipients, and reduced government oversight.”


In February 2025, the Trump administration's EPA announced it would take steps to get the money back. Zeldin cited comments from a former Biden EPA political appointee, who described disbursements made through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund as akin to "tossing gold bars off the Titanic," because Biden officials were allegedly trying to get money out the door before Trump took over.


In March 2025, the grant payments were halted, while Citibank, the banking entity used to help move or transfer the grants, froze the payments after recommendation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).


Power Forward Communities was one of several nonprofits that filed a lawsuit against the EPA and Citibank to prevent the termination of the grants and have restored access to the funds. In March 2025, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a temporary restraining order blocking the EPA from canceling the grants. The judge also blocked Citibank, which holds the money on behalf of EPA, from transferring it to the government or anyone else.


On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in September 2025, found that the District Court had abused its discretion in issuing the injunction while ruling jurisdiction for such claims lay with the Court of Federal Claims and not the district court. The appeals court rescinded Judge Chutkan’s injunction and the funds remain frozen as the case is ongoing.


We sued after the EPA failed to respond to a February 20, 2025, FOIA request for all documents and communications regarding the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grant to Power Forward Communities.


The Trump EPA team should disclose and expose every single document about this massive Biden corruption scandal.

 

Judicial Watch Sues for FDA Commissioner's Communications on Abortion Drug 

Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records of communications and meetings of the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner involving the abortion drug Mifepristone (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1:26-cv-01546)).


We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the FDA failed to respond to a February 25, 2026 FOIA request for:


1.    All communications sent to, received by, or copied to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, or to the Commissioner’s immediate office, that concern, refer to, or discuss mifepristone, RU-486, or any generic or branded form of mifepristone approved, regulated, or reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration.


2.    All documents related to any meeting with the Commissioner of Food Drugs where mifepristone, RU-486,or any generic or branded form of mifepristone approved, regulated, or reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration was discussed, including, but not limited to calendar events, calendar invitations, talking points, PowerPoint presentations, written or audio recordings, and post-meeting summaries


The request asked that records be provided for the period April 1, 2025, to the present.

In response to pressure from pro-abortion activists, the Clinton Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval of the abortion pill in September 2000. Similarly, the Obama and Biden administrations took steps to make the controversial abortion pill more widely available in a way that undermined its “safe” use.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary resigned earlier this month amid friction with the administration.


Pro-life advocates had called for his ouster. Makary reportedly slow-walked a safety review of the pill, which can be mailed to states that have limited abortion. Makary’s successor will inherit that review and the tricky politics associated with abortion.


For decades, Judicial Watch has investigated and exposed the dangers of the abortion pill pushed on pregnant mothers by the Clinton/Obama/Biden operations. The new FDA leadership needs to get its act together quickly, stop providing special treatment for the abortion pill, and ensure transparency to preserve the rule of law and the public health.


We have been instrumental in bringing the controversies surrounding the abortion drug to the public’s attention.


In October 2024, wet filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Advancing American Freedom Foundation against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for FDA records concerning approval of the abortion drug Mifeprex (Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486) and meetings between senior FDA officials, White House counsel, and foreign actors.


In March 2024, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in which it argued “the FDA violated its own unambiguous regulation and relied on pretext…. The FDA’s actions in 2016 and 2021 were arbitrary and capricious and violated the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”).” And, in 2021, using the Covid-19 pandemic as a tool, abortion proponents “sued the FDA to dispense with the REMS [risk evaluation and mitigation strategy] in-person medical visits as a prerequisite for obtaining Mifeprex and permit the drug to be mailed.”


Through a FOIA lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2023 uncovered at least six Mifeprex-related deaths between 2000 to 2002 that were detailed in Health and Human Services records.


Records produced to us in September 2023 included an “Annual Report for Mifepristone,” covering the period September 28, 2000, to September 27, 2001, produced by the Population Council/Danco Laboratories, LLC. The summary indicated that during the testing period 32 “adverse events were reported to Danco and reported by Danco to FDA in periodic reports.” (The existence of adverse event reports does not necessarily establish causation.)


Of the 32 reported adverse events, two were 15-day reports (the others were not serious and/or not unexpected). One of the 15-day reports was reported as “hemorrhage due to a ruptured ectopic pregnancy and death.” [Emphasis added] The other was reported as “post-abortal parametritis/endometritis, adult respiratory distress syndrome and bilateral pneumonia.”


This latter 15-day report and one case where fever was reported represent the total reports on the marketed drug suggesting infection. In addition, one infection was reported in the Population Council’s 200 mifepristone study and one death [Emphasis added] due to clostridium sordelli infection was reported in the Canadian study.

 

Judicial Watch Africa Aid Agency Whistleblower Faces Retaliation Lawsuit

Rooting out government corruption often requires brave federal employees to take a stand when they discover it. It’s not easy for them, as the experience of one of our whistleblowers illustrates.


The U.S. Department of Justice confirmed in a federal court hearing that its investigation of senior officials at the U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) continues.

But one of our whistleblower clients faces a retaliatory lawsuit brought by the agency’s former president.


Our whistleblower clients have spent years courageously reporting corruption and misconduct at USADF, sharing information with the USAID Office of Inspector General (OIG), members of Congress, and the Department of Justice. That information has since been borne out by federal criminal charges and damning reports from the Office of Inspector General for U.S. Agency for International Development and the Government Accountability Office.


We have been advancing its whistleblower clients’ work through multiple vehicles, including a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking USADF records related to those allegations. (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. African Development Foundation (No. 1:25-cv-02623)).


In an earlier hearing in that case, the DOJ stated publicly for the first time that it and the USAID OIG were investigating possible crimes committed by senior USADF officials. Shortly thereafter, the Justice Department charged Mathieu Zahui, the USADF’s chief financial officer, based in significant part on information from our whistleblower clients.

Zahui subsequently pleaded guilty to accepting illegal gratuities and making false statements to federal investigators.


During a status conference on March 30, 2026 before Judge Reggie B. Walton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Justice Department confirmed that its investigation of USADF has not ended.


Our whistleblower clients continue to work with members of Congress to demand accountability. Senator Mike Lee recently led a coalition of senators urging the Department of Justice to expand its investigation and pursue additional prosecutions arising from USADF’s corruption.


Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna has also taken up the cause, writing to Attorney General Todd Blanche to request a broader review of fraud, corruption, and whistleblower retaliation involving senior USADF leadership. Congresswoman Luna specifically highlighted the firsthand account of our client, Jasmine Battle, noting that after Ms. Battle raised concerns about misconduct, she was terminated — and now faces civil litigation by former USADF President Travis Adkins in an effort to silence her.

That litigation is itself a form of retaliation. As we stated in its motion to dismiss filed on Battle’s behalf:


Travis Adkins presided over one of the most corrupt federal agencies in recent memory. During his tenure as president of the United States African Development Foundation, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee named him personally as potentially ‘complicit in, corrupt and potentially unlawful practices’ and placed a congressional hold on the agency’s funding. His own chief financial officer pleaded guilty to public corruption for acts that ran through every year of [Adkins’] leadership.


Jasmine Battle, a seasoned and well-respected administrative professional, whose career included working with former cabinet-level officials, witnessed this dysfunction firsthand, served as [Adkins’] assistant for seven months in 2022. What she saw troubled her, and she did what conscientious public servants are supposed to do. She reported it to Plaintiff, to the EEOC, and to oversight bodies like Congress. [Adkins], now under a microscope for what occurred during his tenure as president, is seeking to silence her. And now Battle finds herself in a seemingly partisan crossfire because she had the courage to be a whistleblower.”


Jasmine Battle did exactly what a public servant should do — she reported corruption and refused to stay silent. Judicial Watch is proud to stand with her and our other whistleblower clients as we continue to pursue full accountability at the US African Development Foundation.

 

Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter Among Biden’s Anti-Christian Policies

This summer the celebration of America’s 250th birthday will recognize the importance of religious freedom. Joe Biden would not have done this, as our Corruption Chronicles blog illustrates.


A government wide anti-Christian effort launched under the Biden administration was much worse than previously imagined, and a new report published by a Department of Justice (DOJ) task force documents the alarming details of woke measures adopted by most federal agencies to conduct the mission that clearly targeted conservatives. This includes the Biden DOJ mandating the adoption of gender ideology throughout the federal government, illegally weaponizing a landmark civil rights law prohibiting sex-based discrimination to allow men into women’s sports and intimate facilities, punishing faith-based homeless service providers who raised concerns about biological men entering women-only shelters and allowing federally-funded schools to facilitate “gender transitions” without disclosing education records to parents. In 2024 the Biden administration delivered a sucker punch on Good Friday, a solemn and sacred day for Christians, by announcing that Easter Sunday, a Christian holiday celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ, would be officially recognized by the government as Transgender Day of Visibility.


The flagrant examples go on and on with an extensive list of anti-Christian measures that even President Trump probably could not imagine when he signed an executive order in early 2025 to right the wrong. The order created a special Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias within the DOJ to protect the religious freedoms of Americans by ending the anti-Christian weaponization of the government. “The Founders established a Nation in which people were free to practice their faith without fear of discrimination or retaliation by their government,” Trump’s order states, adding that the previous administration engaged in an egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses.


The task force uncovered the Biden administration’s radical policy agenda and documented cases in detail in the recently issued 200-page report, which includes over 300 pages of exhibits and evidence illustrating how individual federal agencies discriminated against Christians. Besides the DOJ, they include key agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Health, and Human Services (HHS) as well as Homeland Security.

Examples of the “systemic culture” of anti-Christian bias include the FBI collaborating with the leftwing extremist group Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to investigate, track and scrutinize Catholics who were wrongly labelled “potential violent extremists or domestic terrorists” based on their views on abortion, immigration, human sexuality and their preferred popes.


A 2023 FBI memorandum included in the report asserts that “radical-traditionalist” Catholics are domestic-terrorism threats and suggests infiltrating Catholic churches as “threat mitigation.” The DOJ criminally charged numerous peaceful pro-life Christians for praying and demonstrating outside abortion facilities. Among those charged and slapped with multi-year prison sentences was a Catholic priest, an 87-year-old woman, a 75-year-old grandmother and a father of 11 arrested after praying and singing hymns outside an abortion facility in Tennessee as part of a politically motivated persecution campaign by the Biden administration.


HHS, which is responsible for enhancing the health and well-being of all Americans, took multiple steps to discriminate against Christian families over their religious beliefs because Biden officials viewed their values as harmful to children with gender dysphoria or same-sex attraction.


The agency prevented foster children from being placed with Christian families or Christian foster agencies that did not affirm the Biden administration’s policies on sexual orientation and gender ideology. The Department of Education issued excessive fines against Christian universities, pushed policies in which men were allowed into girls’ locker rooms and promoted ideological materials about gender identity to young children that fundamentally conflict with Christian tenets.


The agency also allowed federally funded schools to facilitate gender transitions without disclosing education records to their parents. HUD made participation in its housing programs conditioned on compliance with the administration’s woke gender identity nondiscrimination requirements even if they conflicted with a provider’s religious beliefs.


Federally managed museums on the National Mall forced pro-life students participating in a peaceful demonstration to remove religious and pro-life attire or leave the premises and the National Park Service twice denied a Catholic organization access to a national cemetery where it planned to hold a quiet Memorial Day mass to honor fallen soldiers. “As our report lays out, the Biden Administration’s actions devastated the lives of many Christian Americans,” acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Chair of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias, said in a statement.


“The Department of Justice will continue to expose bad actors who targeted Christians and work tirelessly to restore religious liberty for all Americans of faith.” Blanche confirms that no American should live in fear of being punished by their government for their faith.

 

Until next week,

Judicial Watch

 


Patrick Bestall’s INPUT:

NCI here in London June 11-13

Special event, "Are Farmers Safe In Canada" - just like the Kelowna event, but with Ontario participants included.  

 

 

----- Forwarded Message -----

Sent: Friday, May 8, 2026 at 09:35:45 p.m. EDT

Subject: NCI here in London!

 

Hello everyone,

I just learned that the next National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) hearings will be here in London on Jun 11-13, 2026.

This is the third in the series, and the first location in Ontario, titled Are Farmers Safe in Canada. (That is, is our food supply safe?)

 

These hearings are amazing opportunities to meet like-minded people wanting to make a difference for our children’s future.

 

Here is your opportunity to help!

 

Might you be interested in speaking?  Or offering a spare bedroom for billeting?  Help with publicity?  Donate to cover costs?

 

If so, please reach out to Chad here.

I had the opportunity to attend hearings in Edmonton and Kitchener so if you have some questions I might be able to answer, please hit reply.

 

These hearings will examine questions surrounding:

• Food safety and food security• Farmer and harvester viability• Hunting, fisheries, and wildlife management• Government regulation and oversight• Fertilizer, fuel, and energy pressures• Transparency and accountability in public decision-making

The National Citizens Inquiry is a citizens-led and citizens-funded initiative committed to respectful, evidence-based public dialogue. Witnesses and subject-matter experts from across Canada are invited to participate.  The NCI is unique and has been receiving international attention with several countries wanting to reproduce the hearings in their own countries. 

I look forward to seeing you at the NCI in London on Jun 11-13!

Best regards,

Gisele Baribeau

 

Freedom rests, and always will, on individual responsibility, individual integrity, individual effort, individual courage, and individual religious faith…  Author Unknown

 

Freedom is not the right to do as I please, but the liberty to do as I ought. Lord Acton

 

“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”

 CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 PART I CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

.PB



War on cows (5 min)


 

Not much dif between globalists and Hindus.  In India they won't kill cows, they embrace every religion as equal, and still feel comfortable with a class system.  The globalists, of course, are the ruling class.  











.PB



"Bye bye trucker"







.PB



Canada deeply infiltrated by China Communists



 


He said that Canada needs to “move past the irritation and remember who the people are that share your values.”

.PB



Ex-Soldier Explains Why Canada's Military is Collapsing From Within


Recruitment collapse, mobilization fantasy, fentanyl deaths, and a synthetic public square. Brian Isted helps us make sense of it all.


.PB



Redacted Reports on Data Center project




Utah officials just approved a massive military-affiliated data center project, and residents who voiced concerns were shut down and told to "grow up".





The $100 billion, 40,000-acre project called "Stratos" is being developed through a partnership with Shark Tank investor Kevin O'Leary and Utah's Military Installation Development Authority in Box Elder County. It's reported that the facility would support the Pentagon, the Department of Defense, and the U.S. Air Force.


The center will require 9 gigawatts of energy to operate once in full swing, which is double the state's current electricity usage. Scientists warn the facility could generate enough concentrated heat to alter local climate patterns and accelerate the collapse of the Great Salt Lake ecosystem. One professor compared the thermal output to the equivalent of 23 atomic bombs' worth of heat released every single day.


One concern is that nobody seems to know exactly how the project will operate. Key details remain hidden behind non-disclosure agreements and "proprietary technology" claims.

Despite the massive scale of this project and the significant risks involved, there was no environmental impact review or public input taken into consideration; instead, a quick, easy approval was given.


This isn't an isolated incident. Data centers are setting up camp across the country, with farmland as their main target. Officials have offered farm owners upward of $26 million to sell. Some farmers are even forced to give up their land.

 

The pitch seems to always include jobs, innovation, and national security.

But no matter how they pitch it, two things stand out:

First, the data centers that are popping up across the nation consume enormous amounts of energy, while we're personally pressured to conserve. So do they really care about energy use and the environment, or are they just fitting us into some type of box? And second, when farms are replaced, they're destroying America's food supply. It's obvious this would lead to a manufactured food insecurity crisis, so why is this allowed, and why isn't a moratorium put in place?

Something to think about.

REDACTED TODAY

 


 

 

RUMOUR:

 

RUMOURS Circulating out there...:

Disclaimer: All articles, videos, and images posted on Operation Disclosure were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes. All statements, claims, views, and opinions that appear on this site are always presented as unverified and should be discerned by the reader. We do not endorse any opinions expressed on this website, and we do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content posted on this website.

 

I may not agree with everything from the content-producers that I share.

Apply critical thinking and use discernment to

Come to your own conclusions regarding the content!

 

You need to MAKE UP Your own MIND!

 

What we think that we now know...

 

REPORT Today

 

The world keeps spinning, and now you’re caught up.

 

2026 is the Year of Sovereignty Maxing

2026 is the year of sovereignty maxing.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on Taiwan for chip manufacturing.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on China for rare earth elements and critical mineral processing.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on the Strait of Hormuz for oil.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on the Strait of Malacca for energy and trade flows to East Asia.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on the Red Sea corridor (Bab el-Mandeb Strait and Suez Canal) for shipping between Asia and Europe.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on the Panama Canal for efficient Atlantic-Pacific trade.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on the U.S. military to be the world police.

  • ·      The world cannot rely on cheap capital from the BOJ.

  • ·      The world is about to learn: sink or swim.

  •  


==========

 

Hammer Time, Now Comes the Real Pain, China Alliance, Maine

In an era defined by rapid change and often bewildering headlines, understanding the intricate web of global and domestic affairs can feel like a monumental task. A recent video from “And We Know Official” offers a comprehensive, politically charged deep dive into the issues shaping our world and our nation, from U.S.-China relations to unsettling domestic policy failures and the ongoing fight against fraud.


The discussion kicks off by dissecting U.S.-China relations, particularly under President Trump’s diplomatic engagement. The video highlights a significant jet order from Boeing as more than just a trade deal; it’s framed as a symbol of revitalized business ties and a direct win for American jobs. A stark contrast is drawn with former President Obama’s reception in China, emphasizing a perceived improvement in U.S. global stature and respect under Trump’s leadership.


Beyond bilateral ties, the video broadens its lens to the shifting global landscape. It delves into international security matters, focusing on Iran’s hostile actions and the geopolitical implications of U.S.-China cooperation to maintain open shipping lanes and energy security. The narrative also touches on broader global realignments involving Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the growing influence of BRICS nations, suggesting a systematic shift away from older global power structures towards new alliances and negotiations.


Domestically, the narrative pulls no punches. It zeroes in on alleged widespread Medicaid fraud, particularly highlighting Vice President JD Vance’s exposure of significant financial abuses in Maine. The video critiques local government inaction and the systemic nature of these financial wrongdoings, raising serious questions about accountability and oversight.


Equally concerning are the prosecutorial policies under scrutiny in places like Fairfax County, Virginia. The video alleges a disturbing trend where illegal immigrants receive preferential treatment, with claims that prosecutorial discretion often discriminates against American citizens in favor of non-citizens. This perceived double standard is linked to increased crime rates and escalating public safety concerns, painting a picture of a justice system that is failing its own citizens.


The discussion then navigates into the often-contentious waters of our cultural and educational institutions. A spotlight is shone on perceived ideological biases and double standards within U.S. public schools – specifically, the alleged presence of Islamic literature while Christian texts are reportedly excluded. This raises fundamental questions about religious freedom, curriculum integrity, and the values being instilled in the next generation.


Amidst these challenges, there’s a recurring theme of a fight for national renewal, even in unexpected places. The political landscape of California is explored, particularly with the emergence of Spencer Pratt as a challenger to entrenched Democratic leadership. His rise is presented as a response to pressing issues like homelessness and corruption, signaling a growing desire among citizens for fresh perspectives and real solutions.


The video concludes on a powerful note, weaving together religious and patriotic themes. It invokes prayer and faith as guiding forces in the ongoing fight against corruption and for national renewal. It’s a rallying cry for viewers to stay informed, engaged, and to believe in the possibility of a brighter future for the nation.


From the intricate dance of international diplomacy to the fundamental questions of justice and cultural integrity at home, the insights shared in this video from “And We Know Official” paint a vivid picture of a nation at a critical juncture. It urges viewers not just to observe but to engage, to be informed, and to critically assess the narratives shaping our world.


For a deeper dive into these crucial insights and a call to national renewal, watch the full video from And We Know Official.


==========

THE END

 


 
 
 

Comments

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

©2020 by The Brooks Truth. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page