Author: Jay Syrmopoulos

City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material”

Ontario, Canada – An anarchist group in Hamilton, a city in the Canadian province of Ontario, has been ordered by officials to remove an anarchy symbol from its headquarters. The officials have declared that the symbol is “hate material similar to the swastika” despite police distancing themselves from the city’s position.

“The anarchist symbol is considered hate material by the City of Hamilton and Hamilton Police Services and as such, must be removed,” city spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick wrote in an email to CBC News.

However, despite the claim by city officials that the anarchy symbol represents “hate material,” local police disputed that label. The symbol “does not meet the threshold of a hate crime,” Const. Jerome Stewart of the Hamilton police said according to CBC News.

“To the best of our knowledge, it is classified as an extreme left sign,” Stewart further stated. “So I don’t know where the direction came that Hamilton police have identified it as a hate crime sign, because as per our hate crime co-ordinator, that is not the case.”

According to a CBC News report, the mandate to remove the symbol from The Tower, an anarchist meeting area, was initiated after the group’s headquarters were vandalized:

The issue arose back in early March, after a masked mob that dubbed itself “The Ungovernables” caused $100,000 in damage during a vandalism spree on Locke Street.

Days later, The Tower — the city’s local anarchist social centre at Cannon Street East near Victoria Avenue North — was also vandalized.

The building’s front window was smashed, and afterward, The Tower covered it up with plywood that was painted with the circle A anarchy symbol.

City spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick told CBC News that on March 16, the city started a bylaw investigation into the symbol being displayed on the wood covering the windows.

The city then issued a property standards order to remove it. Fitzpatrick said the building’s tenant confirmed they got the order, which was “complied with” on March 26.

Margaret Kohn, a political science professor and urban social justice specialist at the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus, described the city’s move a “very controversial interpretation of hate speech.”

“This seems like a constitutional lawsuit waiting to happen,” she noted. Kohn explained that for a symbol to be considered hate speech, it has to target an identifiable group. “That seems to not be the case with the anarchist symbol,” she said.

Princewill Ogban, the head of an anti-racism center in Hamilton, told CBC News that “most anarchy groups in the past have been seen as anti-racist or anti-hate” and added that “they are pro-people and anti-government.”

In spite of the city potentially becoming vulnerable to lawsuits, Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger on Wednesday defended the order according to a report from the Hamilton Spectator.

“Certainly the anarchists that have locally presented themselves have done things that would be considered to be inappropriate, so if you tie the two of them together, I would say that’s a symbol of destruction and mayhem and causing a crisis to a particular area. Is that hateful? I think it is,” Eisenberger said.

Editor’s note, Tuesday, May 22nd, 2:21 p.m.: Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger clarified his original comment to the Hamilton Spectator and provided an updated statement which reads:

Hamilton’s Municipal Law Enforcement Division issued the order in March 2018 to have the graffiti removed from the outside of a building on Cannon Street E. The officer who issued the order was acting in accordance with their training. The order was directed at removal of a symbol painted on the exterior and was complied with in the requested timeframe. After reviewing the order, Municipal Law Enforcement has determined the order was improper in terms of exceeding the scope of its by-law, which is intended primarily to address property damage and maintenance and not content of signage.

Stemming from the senseless acts of violence and vandalism in our City, my comments were a reaction that hate speech, and the acts of violence, have no place in the City of Hamilton. Based on actions and initial statements provided by municipal staff,  my earlier comments were based on the belief that City Municipal By-Laws had been applied appropriately. With additional information, it is clear the anarchy symbol is not a hate symbol and efforts are being undertaken to immediately update staff training. Further communication with Hamilton Police Service will also be necessary, in instances where concerns related to potential criminal activity are identified to ensure by-laws are applied properly. Municipal Law Enforcement is committed to ensuring that staff are appropriately trained, and by-laws applied fairly.

The post City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material” appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material”

Ontario, Canada – An anarchist group in Hamilton, a city in the Canadian province of Ontario, has been ordered by officials to remove an anarchy symbol from its headquarters. The officials have declared that the symbol is “hate material similar to the swastika” despite police distancing themselves from the city’s position.

“The anarchist symbol is considered hate material by the City of Hamilton and Hamilton Police Services and as such, must be removed,” city spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick wrote in an email to CBC News.

However, despite the claim by city officials that the anarchy symbol represents “hate material,” local police disputed that label. The symbol “does not meet the threshold of a hate crime,” Const. Jerome Stewart of the Hamilton police said according to CBC News.

“To the best of our knowledge, it is classified as an extreme left sign,” Stewart further stated. “So I don’t know where the direction came that Hamilton police have identified it as a hate crime sign, because as per our hate crime co-ordinator, that is not the case.”

According to a CBC News report, the mandate to remove the symbol from The Tower, an anarchist meeting area, was initiated after the group’s headquarters were vandalized:

The issue arose back in early March, after a masked mob that dubbed itself “The Ungovernables” caused $100,000 in damage during a vandalism spree on Locke Street.

Days later, The Tower — the city’s local anarchist social centre at Cannon Street East near Victoria Avenue North — was also vandalized.

The building’s front window was smashed, and afterward, The Tower covered it up with plywood that was painted with the circle A anarchy symbol.

City spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick told CBC News that on March 16, the city started a bylaw investigation into the symbol being displayed on the wood covering the windows.

The city then issued a property standards order to remove it. Fitzpatrick said the building’s tenant confirmed they got the order, which was “complied with” on March 26.

Margaret Kohn, a political science professor and urban social justice specialist at the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus, described the city’s move a “very controversial interpretation of hate speech.”

“This seems like a constitutional lawsuit waiting to happen,” she noted. Kohn explained that for a symbol to be considered hate speech, it has to target an identifiable group. “That seems to not be the case with the anarchist symbol,” she said.

Princewill Ogban, the head of an anti-racism center in Hamilton, told CBC News that “most anarchy groups in the past have been seen as anti-racist or anti-hate” and added that “they are pro-people and anti-government.”

In spite of the city potentially becoming vulnerable to lawsuits, Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger on Wednesday defended the order according to a report from the Hamilton Spectator.

“Certainly the anarchists that have locally presented themselves have done things that would be considered to be inappropriate, so if you tie the two of them together, I would say that’s a symbol of destruction and mayhem and causing a crisis to a particular area. Is that hateful? I think it is,” Eisenberger said.

Editor’s note, Tuesday, May 22nd, 2:21 p.m.: Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger clarified his original comment to the Hamilton Spectator and provided an updated statement which reads:

Hamilton’s Municipal Law Enforcement Division issued the order in March 2018 to have the graffiti removed from the outside of a building on Cannon Street E. The officer who issued the order was acting in accordance with their training. The order was directed at removal of a symbol painted on the exterior and was complied with in the requested timeframe. After reviewing the order, Municipal Law Enforcement has determined the order was improper in terms of exceeding the scope of its by-law, which is intended primarily to address property damage and maintenance and not content of signage.

Stemming from the senseless acts of violence and vandalism in our City, my comments were a reaction that hate speech, and the acts of violence, have no place in the City of Hamilton. Based on actions and initial statements provided by municipal staff,  my earlier comments were based on the belief that City Municipal By-Laws had been applied appropriately. With additional information, it is clear the anarchy symbol is not a hate symbol and efforts are being undertaken to immediately update staff training. Further communication with Hamilton Police Service will also be necessary, in instances where concerns related to potential criminal activity are identified to ensure by-laws are applied properly. Municipal Law Enforcement is committed to ensuring that staff are appropriately trained, and by-laws applied fairly.

The post City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material” appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material”

Ontario, Canada – An anarchist group in Hamilton, a city in the Canadian province of Ontario, has been ordered by officials to remove an anarchy symbol from its headquarters. The officials have declared that the symbol is “hate material similar to the swastika” despite police distancing themselves from the city’s position.

“The anarchist symbol is considered hate material by the City of Hamilton and Hamilton Police Services and as such, must be removed,” city spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick wrote in an email to CBC News.

However, despite the claim by city officials that the anarchy symbol represents “hate material,” local police disputed that label. The symbol “does not meet the threshold of a hate crime,” Const. Jerome Stewart of the Hamilton police said according to CBC News.

“To the best of our knowledge, it is classified as an extreme left sign,” Stewart further stated. “So I don’t know where the direction came that Hamilton police have identified it as a hate crime sign, because as per our hate crime co-ordinator, that is not the case.”

According to a CBC News report, the mandate to remove the symbol from The Tower, an anarchist meeting area, was initiated after the group’s headquarters were vandalized:

The issue arose back in early March, after a masked mob that dubbed itself “The Ungovernables” caused $100,000 in damage during a vandalism spree on Locke Street.

Days later, The Tower — the city’s local anarchist social centre at Cannon Street East near Victoria Avenue North — was also vandalized.

The building’s front window was smashed, and afterward, The Tower covered it up with plywood that was painted with the circle A anarchy symbol.

City spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick told CBC News that on March 16, the city started a bylaw investigation into the symbol being displayed on the wood covering the windows.

The city then issued a property standards order to remove it. Fitzpatrick said the building’s tenant confirmed they got the order, which was “complied with” on March 26.

Margaret Kohn, a political science professor and urban social justice specialist at the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus, described the city’s move a “very controversial interpretation of hate speech.”

“This seems like a constitutional lawsuit waiting to happen,” she noted. Kohn explained that for a symbol to be considered hate speech, it has to target an identifiable group. “That seems to not be the case with the anarchist symbol,” she said.

Princewill Ogban, the head of an anti-racism center in Hamilton, told CBC News that “most anarchy groups in the past have been seen as anti-racist or anti-hate” and added that “they are pro-people and anti-government.”

In spite of the city potentially becoming vulnerable to lawsuits, Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger on Wednesday defended the order according to a report from the Hamilton Spectator.

“Certainly the anarchists that have locally presented themselves have done things that would be considered to be inappropriate, so if you tie the two of them together, I would say that’s a symbol of destruction and mayhem and causing a crisis to a particular area. Is that hateful? I think it is,” Eisenberger said.

Editor’s note, Tuesday, May 22nd, 2:21 p.m.: Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger clarified his original comment to the Hamilton Spectator and provided an updated statement which reads:

Hamilton’s Municipal Law Enforcement Division issued the order in March 2018 to have the graffiti removed from the outside of a building on Cannon Street E. The officer who issued the order was acting in accordance with their training. The order was directed at removal of a symbol painted on the exterior and was complied with in the requested timeframe. After reviewing the order, Municipal Law Enforcement has determined the order was improper in terms of exceeding the scope of its by-law, which is intended primarily to address property damage and maintenance and not content of signage.

Stemming from the senseless acts of violence and vandalism in our City, my comments were a reaction that hate speech, and the acts of violence, have no place in the City of Hamilton. Based on actions and initial statements provided by municipal staff,  my earlier comments were based on the belief that City Municipal By-Laws had been applied appropriately. With additional information, it is clear the anarchy symbol is not a hate symbol and efforts are being undertaken to immediately update staff training. Further communication with Hamilton Police Service will also be necessary, in instances where concerns related to potential criminal activity are identified to ensure by-laws are applied properly. Municipal Law Enforcement is committed to ensuring that staff are appropriately trained, and by-laws applied fairly.

The post City Forces Group to Remove Anarchy Symbol, Labeling It “Hate Material” appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project

Mountain View, CA — At least a dozen Google employees have resigned in protest over the company collaborating with the Department of Defense by supplying artificial intelligence for a controversial military pilot program for the DoD known as Project Maven, after thousands of employees signed a letter last month asking the company to cancel the Pentagon contract and institute a policy against working for the military.

‘We can no longer ignore our industry’s and our technologies’ harmful biases, large-scale breaches of trust, and lack of ethical safeguards. These are life and death stakes,” the petition read.

[Related: US Army Developing Drones With AI Targeting]

Project Maven, developed to scan images in drone footage and identify targets and classify images of objects and people— was launched in April 2017, and according to a Pentagon memo, aims to “augment or automate Processing, Exploitation and Dissemination (PED) for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in support of the Defeat-ISIS campaign” in order to “reduce the human factors burden of [full motion video] analysis, increase actionable intelligence, and enhance military decision-making.”

More than 1,000 academics and researchers penned an open letter in support of the Google employees and calling on the company to cease work on Project Maven. The letter touches on the implications of Google working with the Pentagon:

With Project Maven, Google becomes implicated in the questionable practice of targeted killings. These include so-called signature strikes and pattern-of-life strikes that target people based not on known activities but on probabilities drawn from long range surveillance footage.

While the reports on Project Maven currently emphasize the role of human analysts, these technologies are poised to become a basis for automated target recognition and autonomous weapon systems. As military commanders come to see the object recognition algorithms as reliable, it will be tempting to attenuate or even remove human review and oversight for these systems. According to Defense One, the DoD already plans to install image analysis technologies on-board the drones themselves, including armed drones. We are then just a short step away from authorizing autonomous drones to kill automatically, without human supervision or meaningful human control. If ethical action on the part of tech companies requires consideration of who might benefit from a technology and who might be harmed, then we can say with certainty that no topic deserves more sober reflection – no technology has higher stakes – than algorithms meant to target and kill at a distance and without public accountability.

The DoD contracts under consideration by Google, and similar contracts already in place at Microsoft and Amazon, signal a dangerous alliance between the private tech industry, currently in possession of vast quantities of sensitive personal data collected from people across the globe, and one country’s military. They also signal a failure to engage with global civil society and diplomatic institutions that have already highlighted the ethical stakes of these technologies.

A few of the Google employees that chose to resign in protest spoke to Gizmodo anonymously about the reasoning behind their decision.

“At some point, I realized I could not in good faith recommend anyone join Google, knowing what I knew. I realized if I can’t recommend people join here, then why am I still here?” one resigning Google employee told Gizmodo.

“I tried to remind myself right that Google’s decisions are not my decisions. I’m not personally responsible for everything they do. But I do feel responsibility when I see something that I should escalate it,” another said.

“Actions speak louder than words, and that’s a standard I hold myself to as well. I wasn’t happy just voicing my concerns internally. The strongest possible statement I could take against this was to leave,” a resigning employee added.

The post Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project

Mountain View, CA — At least a dozen Google employees have resigned in protest over the company collaborating with the Department of Defense by supplying artificial intelligence for a controversial military pilot program for the DoD known as Project Maven, after thousands of employees signed a letter last month asking the company to cancel the Pentagon contract and institute a policy against working for the military.

‘We can no longer ignore our industry’s and our technologies’ harmful biases, large-scale breaches of trust, and lack of ethical safeguards. These are life and death stakes,” the petition read.

[Related: US Army Developing Drones With AI Targeting]

Project Maven, developed to scan images in drone footage and identify targets and classify images of objects and people— was launched in April 2017, and according to a Pentagon memo, aims to “augment or automate Processing, Exploitation and Dissemination (PED) for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in support of the Defeat-ISIS campaign” in order to “reduce the human factors burden of [full motion video] analysis, increase actionable intelligence, and enhance military decision-making.”

More than 1,000 academics and researchers penned an open letter in support of the Google employees and calling on the company to cease work on Project Maven. The letter touches on the implications of Google working with the Pentagon:

With Project Maven, Google becomes implicated in the questionable practice of targeted killings. These include so-called signature strikes and pattern-of-life strikes that target people based not on known activities but on probabilities drawn from long range surveillance footage.

While the reports on Project Maven currently emphasize the role of human analysts, these technologies are poised to become a basis for automated target recognition and autonomous weapon systems. As military commanders come to see the object recognition algorithms as reliable, it will be tempting to attenuate or even remove human review and oversight for these systems. According to Defense One, the DoD already plans to install image analysis technologies on-board the drones themselves, including armed drones. We are then just a short step away from authorizing autonomous drones to kill automatically, without human supervision or meaningful human control. If ethical action on the part of tech companies requires consideration of who might benefit from a technology and who might be harmed, then we can say with certainty that no topic deserves more sober reflection – no technology has higher stakes – than algorithms meant to target and kill at a distance and without public accountability.

The DoD contracts under consideration by Google, and similar contracts already in place at Microsoft and Amazon, signal a dangerous alliance between the private tech industry, currently in possession of vast quantities of sensitive personal data collected from people across the globe, and one country’s military. They also signal a failure to engage with global civil society and diplomatic institutions that have already highlighted the ethical stakes of these technologies.

A few of the Google employees that chose to resign in protest spoke to Gizmodo anonymously about the reasoning behind their decision.

“At some point, I realized I could not in good faith recommend anyone join Google, knowing what I knew. I realized if I can’t recommend people join here, then why am I still here?” one resigning Google employee told Gizmodo.

“I tried to remind myself right that Google’s decisions are not my decisions. I’m not personally responsible for everything they do. But I do feel responsibility when I see something that I should escalate it,” another said.

“Actions speak louder than words, and that’s a standard I hold myself to as well. I wasn’t happy just voicing my concerns internally. The strongest possible statement I could take against this was to leave,” a resigning employee added.

The post Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project

Mountain View, CA — At least a dozen Google employees have resigned in protest over the company collaborating with the Department of Defense by supplying artificial intelligence for a controversial military pilot program for the DoD known as Project Maven, after thousands of employees signed a letter last month asking the company to cancel the Pentagon contract and institute a policy against working for the military.

‘We can no longer ignore our industry’s and our technologies’ harmful biases, large-scale breaches of trust, and lack of ethical safeguards. These are life and death stakes,” the petition read.

[Related: US Army Developing Drones With AI Targeting]

Project Maven, developed to scan images in drone footage and identify targets and classify images of objects and people— was launched in April 2017, and according to a Pentagon memo, aims to “augment or automate Processing, Exploitation and Dissemination (PED) for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in support of the Defeat-ISIS campaign” in order to “reduce the human factors burden of [full motion video] analysis, increase actionable intelligence, and enhance military decision-making.”

More than 1,000 academics and researchers penned an open letter in support of the Google employees and calling on the company to cease work on Project Maven. The letter touches on the implications of Google working with the Pentagon:

With Project Maven, Google becomes implicated in the questionable practice of targeted killings. These include so-called signature strikes and pattern-of-life strikes that target people based not on known activities but on probabilities drawn from long range surveillance footage.

While the reports on Project Maven currently emphasize the role of human analysts, these technologies are poised to become a basis for automated target recognition and autonomous weapon systems. As military commanders come to see the object recognition algorithms as reliable, it will be tempting to attenuate or even remove human review and oversight for these systems. According to Defense One, the DoD already plans to install image analysis technologies on-board the drones themselves, including armed drones. We are then just a short step away from authorizing autonomous drones to kill automatically, without human supervision or meaningful human control. If ethical action on the part of tech companies requires consideration of who might benefit from a technology and who might be harmed, then we can say with certainty that no topic deserves more sober reflection – no technology has higher stakes – than algorithms meant to target and kill at a distance and without public accountability.

The DoD contracts under consideration by Google, and similar contracts already in place at Microsoft and Amazon, signal a dangerous alliance between the private tech industry, currently in possession of vast quantities of sensitive personal data collected from people across the globe, and one country’s military. They also signal a failure to engage with global civil society and diplomatic institutions that have already highlighted the ethical stakes of these technologies.

A few of the Google employees that chose to resign in protest spoke to Gizmodo anonymously about the reasoning behind their decision.

“At some point, I realized I could not in good faith recommend anyone join Google, knowing what I knew. I realized if I can’t recommend people join here, then why am I still here?” one resigning Google employee told Gizmodo.

“I tried to remind myself right that Google’s decisions are not my decisions. I’m not personally responsible for everything they do. But I do feel responsibility when I see something that I should escalate it,” another said.

“Actions speak louder than words, and that’s a standard I hold myself to as well. I wasn’t happy just voicing my concerns internally. The strongest possible statement I could take against this was to leave,” a resigning employee added.

The post Google Employees Resign In Protest Of Pentagon AI Project appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court

Santa Fe, TX— A 17-year-old high school student identified as Dimitrios Pagourtzis opened fire at the Houston-area Santa Fe High School with a shotgun and a handgun, killing 10 people and leaving another 14 people wounded – including a school police officer who confronted the suspect during the attack at Santa Fe High School.

The Associated Press reported that local hospitals confirmed a total of 14 people treated for injuries related to the shooting, with two listed in critical condition on Saturday at the University of Texas Medical Branch, according to a tweet from the hospital.

Pagourtzis yelled “surprise” before opening fire, according to Texas Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Authorities said the suspected shooter, who is now in custody on murder charges, had made improvised explosive devices, including pipe bombs, a Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs, found in the school and at the suspect’s home.

Abbot said the alleged shooter obtained a shotgun and a .38-caliber handgun from his father, who legally owned them, to carry out the attack. The AP reported that Pagourtizis’ lawyers said the parents stated that “the guns were locked up and they did not know that their son was capable of violence.”

The AP report further noted:

Pagourtzis played on the junior varsity football team and was a member of a dance squad with a local Greek Orthodox church. Acquaintances described him as quiet and unassuming, an avid video game player who routinely wore a black trench coat and black boots to class.

The assailant’s homemade explosives included pipe bombs, at least one Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs similar to those used in the Boston Marathon attack, authorities said.

Investigators offered no motive. In a probable cause affidavit, however, authorities said the suspect admitted to the shooting.

The governor said the assailant intended to kill himself but gave up and told police that he did not have the courage to take his own life.

The suspect reportedly has no prior arrests or known confrontations with law enforcement. CNN reported that Pagourtzis admitted to authorities that he didn’t shoot people he liked and meant to kill the ones he’d targeted, stating “he did not shoot students he did like so he could have his story told,” according to an affidavit. Sadie Rodriguez, mother of deceased victim Shana Fisher, told the Los Angeles Times that prior to the shooting Fisher “had 4 months of problems from this boy” and that Pagourtzis “kept making advances on her and she repeatedly told him no.” Rodriguez added that after the advances from Pagourtzis became increasingly vigorous, Fisher confronted Pagourtzis, reportedly embarrassing him at school.

Valerie Martin, a teacher who had Pagourtzis in her language arts class in middle school, noted according to the New York Times that Pagourtzis “was quiet, but he wasn’t quiet in a creepy way,” and described him as “an introvert, not an extrovert.”

According to NBC News, fellow student Dustin Severin said that Pagourtzis was subjected to bullying— particularly from adults at the school. “He’s been picked on by coaches before, for smelling bad and stuff like that,” Severin said according to the report. “And he doesn’t really talk to very many people either. He keeps to himself.” The Santa Fe Independent School District argued that claims of Pagourtzis being bullied by coaches are false.

Pagourtzis made his initial court appearance Friday by video link from the Galveston County Jail in frony of Galveston County Magistrate Mark Henry, who said the suspect is cooperating with police. The alleged shooter, who is accused of capital murder of multiple people and aggravated assault on a public servant, was denied bail by Henry. USA Today reported that based upon a 2005 Supreme Court ruling, Pagourtzis will not face the death penalty if convicted.

Gov. Abbott said Pagourtzis wrote in journals of wanting to carry out such an attack and then to end his own life, while other students said that he was quiet and sometimes bullied. CNN reported that a second person was detained at the scene in relation to the shooting, who police had called a “person of interest,” and was being investigated as a possible accomplice. However, a Houston Chronicle report notes that Pagourtzis claimed that he acted alone.

Pagourtzis’ court appearance can be seen below.

The post Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court

Santa Fe, TX— A 17-year-old high school student identified as Dimitrios Pagourtzis opened fire at the Houston-area Santa Fe High School with a shotgun and a handgun, killing 10 people and leaving another 14 people wounded – including a school police officer who confronted the suspect during the attack at Santa Fe High School.

The Associated Press reported that local hospitals confirmed a total of 14 people treated for injuries related to the shooting, with two listed in critical condition on Saturday at the University of Texas Medical Branch, according to a tweet from the hospital.

Pagourtzis yelled “surprise” before opening fire, according to Texas Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Authorities said the suspected shooter, who is now in custody on murder charges, had made improvised explosive devices, including pipe bombs, a Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs, found in the school and at the suspect’s home.

Abbot said the alleged shooter obtained a shotgun and a .38-caliber handgun from his father, who legally owned them, to carry out the attack. The AP reported that Pagourtizis’ lawyers said the parents stated that “the guns were locked up and they did not know that their son was capable of violence.”

The AP report further noted:

Pagourtzis played on the junior varsity football team and was a member of a dance squad with a local Greek Orthodox church. Acquaintances described him as quiet and unassuming, an avid video game player who routinely wore a black trench coat and black boots to class.

The assailant’s homemade explosives included pipe bombs, at least one Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs similar to those used in the Boston Marathon attack, authorities said.

Investigators offered no motive. In a probable cause affidavit, however, authorities said the suspect admitted to the shooting.

The governor said the assailant intended to kill himself but gave up and told police that he did not have the courage to take his own life.

The suspect reportedly has no prior arrests or known confrontations with law enforcement. CNN reported that Pagourtzis admitted to authorities that he didn’t shoot people he liked and meant to kill the ones he’d targeted, stating “he did not shoot students he did like so he could have his story told,” according to an affidavit. Sadie Rodriguez, mother of deceased victim Shana Fisher, told the Los Angeles Times that prior to the shooting Fisher “had 4 months of problems from this boy” and that Pagourtzis “kept making advances on her and she repeatedly told him no.” Rodriguez added that after the advances from Pagourtzis became increasingly vigorous, Fisher confronted Pagourtzis, reportedly embarrassing him at school.

Valerie Martin, a teacher who had Pagourtzis in her language arts class in middle school, noted according to the New York Times that Pagourtzis “was quiet, but he wasn’t quiet in a creepy way,” and described him as “an introvert, not an extrovert.”

According to NBC News, fellow student Dustin Severin said that Pagourtzis was subjected to bullying— particularly from adults at the school. “He’s been picked on by coaches before, for smelling bad and stuff like that,” Severin said according to the report. “And he doesn’t really talk to very many people either. He keeps to himself.” The Santa Fe Independent School District argued that claims of Pagourtzis being bullied by coaches are false.

Pagourtzis made his initial court appearance Friday by video link from the Galveston County Jail in frony of Galveston County Magistrate Mark Henry, who said the suspect is cooperating with police. The alleged shooter, who is accused of capital murder of multiple people and aggravated assault on a public servant, was denied bail by Henry. USA Today reported that based upon a 2005 Supreme Court ruling, Pagourtzis will not face the death penalty if convicted.

Gov. Abbott said Pagourtzis wrote in journals of wanting to carry out such an attack and then to end his own life, while other students said that he was quiet and sometimes bullied. CNN reported that a second person was detained at the scene in relation to the shooting, who police had called a “person of interest,” and was being investigated as a possible accomplice. However, a Houston Chronicle report notes that Pagourtzis claimed that he acted alone.

Pagourtzis’ court appearance can be seen below.

The post Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court

Santa Fe, TX— A 17-year-old high school student identified as Dimitrios Pagourtzis opened fire at the Houston-area Santa Fe High School with a shotgun and a handgun, killing 10 people and leaving another 14 people wounded – including a school police officer who confronted the suspect during the attack at Santa Fe High School.

The Associated Press reported that local hospitals confirmed a total of 14 people treated for injuries related to the shooting, with two listed in critical condition on Saturday at the University of Texas Medical Branch, according to a tweet from the hospital.

Pagourtzis yelled “surprise” before opening fire, according to Texas Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Authorities said the suspected shooter, who is now in custody on murder charges, had made improvised explosive devices, including pipe bombs, a Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs, found in the school and at the suspect’s home.

Abbot said the alleged shooter obtained a shotgun and a .38-caliber handgun from his father, who legally owned them, to carry out the attack. The AP reported that Pagourtizis’ lawyers said the parents stated that “the guns were locked up and they did not know that their son was capable of violence.”

The AP report further noted:

Pagourtzis played on the junior varsity football team and was a member of a dance squad with a local Greek Orthodox church. Acquaintances described him as quiet and unassuming, an avid video game player who routinely wore a black trench coat and black boots to class.

The assailant’s homemade explosives included pipe bombs, at least one Molotov cocktail and pressure-cooker bombs similar to those used in the Boston Marathon attack, authorities said.

Investigators offered no motive. In a probable cause affidavit, however, authorities said the suspect admitted to the shooting.

The governor said the assailant intended to kill himself but gave up and told police that he did not have the courage to take his own life.

The suspect reportedly has no prior arrests or known confrontations with law enforcement. CNN reported that Pagourtzis admitted to authorities that he didn’t shoot people he liked and meant to kill the ones he’d targeted, stating “he did not shoot students he did like so he could have his story told,” according to an affidavit. Sadie Rodriguez, mother of deceased victim Shana Fisher, told the Los Angeles Times that prior to the shooting Fisher “had 4 months of problems from this boy” and that Pagourtzis “kept making advances on her and she repeatedly told him no.” Rodriguez added that after the advances from Pagourtzis became increasingly vigorous, Fisher confronted Pagourtzis, reportedly embarrassing him at school.

Valerie Martin, a teacher who had Pagourtzis in her language arts class in middle school, noted according to the New York Times that Pagourtzis “was quiet, but he wasn’t quiet in a creepy way,” and described him as “an introvert, not an extrovert.”

According to NBC News, fellow student Dustin Severin said that Pagourtzis was subjected to bullying— particularly from adults at the school. “He’s been picked on by coaches before, for smelling bad and stuff like that,” Severin said according to the report. “And he doesn’t really talk to very many people either. He keeps to himself.” The Santa Fe Independent School District argued that claims of Pagourtzis being bullied by coaches are false.

Pagourtzis made his initial court appearance Friday by video link from the Galveston County Jail in frony of Galveston County Magistrate Mark Henry, who said the suspect is cooperating with police. The alleged shooter, who is accused of capital murder of multiple people and aggravated assault on a public servant, was denied bail by Henry. USA Today reported that based upon a 2005 Supreme Court ruling, Pagourtzis will not face the death penalty if convicted.

Gov. Abbott said Pagourtzis wrote in journals of wanting to carry out such an attack and then to end his own life, while other students said that he was quiet and sometimes bullied. CNN reported that a second person was detained at the scene in relation to the shooting, who police had called a “person of interest,” and was being investigated as a possible accomplice. However, a Houston Chronicle report notes that Pagourtzis claimed that he acted alone.

Pagourtzis’ court appearance can be seen below.

The post Details Emerge Surrounding Santa Fe High School Shooting; Suspect Appears In Court appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Deputy Who Hid During Parkland School Shooting Gets $8,702 Monthly Pension

Parkland, FL – The Broward County sheriff’s deputy, who resigned in disgrace after failing to enter the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland and engage accused shooter Nikolas Cruz, will receive a pension that pays him more than he made while on the force last year. Surveillance footage and statements by other officers revealed that Peterson took cover outside the school as Cruz killed 17 students and staff inside a building.

Records from the Florida Department of Management Services, obtained by the Sun Sentinel, revealed that Peterson is expected to collect monthly payments of $8,700, which amounts to more than $104,000 per year— slightly more than the $101,879 he was paid last year. Roughly $75,600 was his base salary, with the remainder coming from overtime pay and other forms of compensation.

“The thing he was supposed to do — protect these children — he didn’t do,” Broward County Commissioner Michael Udine told the Miami Herald Tuesday. “Now he’s going to be paid by taxpayers for the rest of his life? It seems disgraceful.”

Incredibly, the Miami Herald reports that Peterson, who is 55, is eligible to collect his pension for the rest of his life, with Broward County tax payers being responsible for paying 50 percent of his health insurance premiums.

Andrew Pollack, whose daughter Meadow Pollack was killed by Cruz, angrily questioned how Peterson could be allowed to receive such a large pension given the allegations of cowardice.

“The coward of broward, Scot Peterson is getting over $8k a month pension! He hid while my daughter and 16 others were slaughtered!” he tweeted Tuesday night. “How in the hell is he getting this?”

Last month, Pollack filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson.

Peterson joined Broward County Sheriff’s Office as a detention deputy in 1985 and became a school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2009.

A report by Reason explained why Peterson will receive such a substantial pension:

Peterson earned more than $101,000 during his final year of service, the Sun Sentinel reports. That includes about $75,600 in base salary, with the rest coming from overtime pay and other forms of compensation. As Reason has previously reported, Peterson had been the school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School since 2009, and he had been an employee of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office since 1985.

That means Peterson put in at least 25 years at the job, an important threshold for accruing pension benefits under state law. The pensions afforded to Florida’s sheriffs are based on a calculation that starts with an average of the employee’s five highest-paid years. That average is then multiplied by a percentage that varies based on how many years an employee has worked and at what job.

Law enforcement employees and other public employees in so-called “high-risk” positions earn a multiplier of 3 percent for every year worked. (Other public workers earn a lower multiplier, usually 2 percent.) After 25 years of service, a law enforcement employee like Peterson would have earned a pension equal to 75 percent of the average of his five highest-paid years during his final 10 years of employment. Under Florida law, pension payouts are capped at 100 percent of this figure, which is known as a “final annual salary.”

The idea is that law enforcement puts their life in jeopardy, thus being handsomely rewarded for the risk. The problem with that premise is that Peterson, in reference to the Parkland school shooting, did exactly the opposite and chose to not risk his own life to save others.

Under Florida law, regardless of an officer’s performance in the line of duty, the pension payouts are nearly guaranteed; stipulating that public pensions are only revocable for felony “breach of the public trust,” including the specific crimes—embezzlement, theft, bribery, and child sexual assault.

The post Deputy Who Hid During Parkland School Shooting Gets $8,702 Monthly Pension appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Sen. Ted Cruz: Social Media Censorship “Real and Present Danger”

Washington, D.C. – In an exclusive radio interview with Breitbart News Sunday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) sounded the alarm over the power wielded by Silicon Valley, describing the growing control information technology companies possess over the flow of information— in particular social media— as a “real and present danger” to American democracy.

“The nexus of power in media has moved from New York City to Silicon Valley,” Cruz told host Breitbart News Deputy Editor Amanda House, as he recommended that America “looks at all the tools we have to protect free speech and prevent[s] the Internet from becoming a vehicle for censorship.”

In a prior interview on Breitbart News Tonight on April 24, Cruz said:

“I think, number one, the growing power of tech to censor speech is a profound threat. We’re seeing now some two-thirds of Americans are getting their news through social media, and these tech companies are hard-left. They are are partisan Democrats, and what we’re seeing is they’re amplifying the views they agree with, those of liberal Democrats, and they are suppressing the views of conservatives. They are blocking conservatives.”

Cruz added, “The scope of the power is truly unprecedented. You think back to the heights of yellow journalism, when publisher William Randolph Hearst controlled much of media and in fact got America into the Spanish-American War. These tech companies have power William Randolph Hearst could never have imagined. The ability, if there’s a view they dislike, simply to silence it so that if you put a post out there, if you put a tweet out there, it simply goes into the void, into oblivion, and no one sees it. Likewise, they have the ability, if there are views they want to promote, to just have everything on your feed be the views they want to promote. That is invidious. It is invisible, and it is profoundly dangerous.”

During his most recent interview on Sunday, Cruz explained that the power wielded by tech giants such as Google, Facebook and Twitter allow for a level of power that is “staggering” in terms of being able to control societal discourse.

“At this point, a handful of companies enjoy power that famed publisher William Randolph Hearst, at the height of yellow journalism, could never have imagined.”

“We’ve heard reports from whistleblowers of ‘shadowbanning’, where you simply tweet or post something and nobody sees it, it just goes into the void, goes into the ether.”

“Likewise, if there are views that a handful of tech companies like, they can favor those views and direct them to your feed so everything you see is the information they want you to see.”

“That is a level of power that is staggering, and I think it poses a real and present danger to our democratic system, particularly given the extreme left-wing bias of Silicon Valley. What we’ve seen over and over again, they’re acting to muzzle and silence conservative views, views they disagree with. That’s frightening.”

In both interviews Cruz warned that while social media companies currently enjoy protection under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which grants them immunity from liability for content posted by their users, if they choose to no longer operate as a neutral public forum they should lose their legal protection.

“It’s a special immunity from liability that nobody else gets,” said Cruz. “The basis for that immunity from liability was that they were neutral public forums, that they were not the ones speaking but rather it was the people speaking and posting on them.”

“Well, if they’re not going to be neutral public forums, if they’re going to be active political speakers, favoring one point of view and disfavoring another, they have a first amendment right to do that, but they have no entitlement to a special congressionally-created immunity from liability that nobody else enjoys.”

The post Sen. Ted Cruz: Social Media Censorship “Real and Present Danger” appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Open Society Foundations Ceases Operations in Hungary in Response to “Stop Soros Act”

Budapest, Hungary – Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has succeeded in forcing George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) to cease operations in Hungary, as the group confirmed on Tuesday that it would be ending operations in the country. OSF previously said it would move its Budapest operations to Berlin if necessary.

“Faced with an increasingly repressive political and legal environment in Hungary, the Open Society Foundations are moving their Budapest-based international operations and staff to the German capital, Berlin,” OSF announced on Tuesday.

Orbán and the Fidesz party had targeted OSF for “meddling” in the political affairs of Hungary, primarily in the funding of opposition groups that allegedly supported immigration.

Open Society Foundations President Patrick Gaspard refuted Orbán’s characterization of the group, saying the Hungarian leader has “denigrated and misrepresented our work” while repressing civil society “for the sake of political gain.”

Orbán is widely known as a staunch opponent of immigration. “We will never allow Hungary to become a target country for immigrants. We do not want to see significantly sized minorities with different cultural characteristics and backgrounds among us. We want to keep Hungary as Hungary,” Orbán declared in 2015 following the murders in Paris at the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo.

OSF noted that the impetus for the move comes as Hungary “prepares to impose further restrictions on nongovernmental organizations through what it has branded its ‘Stop Soros’ package of legislation.”

The Fidesz party submitted legislation to parliament in February known as the “Stop Soros Act” that aimed to limit immigration and intensify restrictions on the activities of foreign-funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs). According to Reuters:

The bill, submitted to parliament late on Tuesday, is a key part of Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s anti-immigration campaign targeting U.S. financier George Soros whose philanthropy aims to bolster liberal and open-border values in eastern Europe.

The government says the bill, which would also impose a 25 percent tax on foreign donations to NGOs that back migration in Hungary, is meant to deter illegal immigration Orban says is eroding European stability and has been stoked in part by Soros.

Hungary and Poland are both under nationalist governments that have clashed with the European Union leadership in Brussels over their perceived authoritarian drift deviating from EU standards on democracy and rule of law.

“If Soros is found to have engaged in such activity, meaning he organizes illegal immigration, then the rules will apply to him,” Hungarian government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs said.

After Orbán’s recent landslide election victory in April, he said, in reference to Soros and the OSF, “I know they won’t accept the result of the election, they will organize all sorts of things, they have unlimited financial resources.”

When news subsequently broke in April that OSF was planning on moving from Budapest to Berlin, Orbán quipped, “You might understand if I don’t cry my eyes out.”

Soros-affiliated organizations, such as OSF, have reportedly been connected to various color revolutions, the Arab Spring, and a number of other political uprisings across the globe.

According to a report in New Eastern Outlook:

The totality of what is revealed in the three hacked documents show that Soros is effectively the puppet-master pulling most of the strings in Kiev. Soros Foundation’s Ukraine branch, International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) has been involved in Ukraine since 1989. His IRF doled out more than $100 million to Ukrainian NGOs two years before the fall of the Soviet Union, creating the preconditions for Ukraine’s independence from Russia in 1991. Soros also admitted to financing the 2013-2014 Maidan Square protests that brought the current government into power.

Soros’ foundations were also deeply involved in the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought the corrupt but pro-NATO Viktor Yushchenko into power with his American wife who had been in the US State Department.

Zero Hedge reports that Open Society, which was launched in 1979, currently spends more than $940 million a year to support 26 regional and national offices. Last year, Soros announced that he was dedicating the majority of his $18 billion fortune to funding the Open Society Foundations.

The post Open Society Foundations Ceases Operations in Hungary in Response to “Stop Soros Act” appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Watchdog Group: Emails Reveal FBI Advised Comey to Coordinate with Mueller on Congressional Testimony

Washington, D.C. – Emails obtained by government watchdog group Judicial Watch indicate that senior FBI officials advised former FBI Director James Comey to seek the advice of Special Counsel Robert Mueller prior to giving testimony to “any congressional committee” regarding alleged collusion between the Trump presidential campaign and Russia.

The emails appear to be the first evidence of reported coordination between Comey and Mueller, and reveal that Comey was advised by the FBI to consult with Mueller regarding the circumstances surrounding his firing prior to giving congressional testimony.

According to Judicial Watch in a Facebook post:

Judicial Watch released new emails from the Department of Justice showing that former FBI Director James Comey was advised by FBI officials in May 2017 to consult with Special Counsel Robert Mueller prior to testifying before any congressional committees regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and his firing as FBI director.

According to numerous news reports, Comey met directly with Mueller previous to his June 8, 2017, testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Sources said that Comey’s opening statement and subsequent testimony were coordinated with Mueller. At the hearing, Comey revealed that he had intentionally leaked material from a memo allegedly documenting a meeting with President Trump in order to help assure the appointment of a special counsel.

These documents show that James Comey, who was fired by the president, nevertheless had easy, friendly access to the FBI as he prepped his infamous anti-Trump testimony to the Senate. This collusion led to Comey’s attacking President Trump and misusing FBI records as part of a vendetta against the president.

The Department of Justice emails obtained by Judicial Watch appear to bolster previous reports that some of Comey’s testimony given to the Senate Intelligence Committee, including his opening statement, may have been coordinated at least partially with Mueller.

Appearing on Fox Business, Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said that “it’s further confirmation that both the FBI and Mueller had coordinated on Mr. Comey’s anti-Trump, Russia testimony from last year.”

Comey admitted during his June 8, 2017 testimony that he had leaked information from memos about his meetings with President Trump while director of the FBI. Comey provided the memos, some of which reportedly contained classified information, to his associate Daniel Richman, who then leaked them to the New York Times. Comey admitted that he leaked the memos with the assumption that they would be strategically leaked to the news organization to spark a special counsel investigation of President Trump.

“I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons,” Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee. “But I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

Fitton said the fact that Comey was allowed to even discuss his conversations with President Trump was anomalous.

“Typically, former government officials or current government officials aren’t allowed to testify about communications they had with the president directly,” Fitton said on “Lou Dobbs Tonight.”

The Judicial Watch president directly questioned whether the emails revealed improper collusion between former FBI Director Comey and Special Counsel Mueller.

“You have to wonder why the FBI and Mueller allowed Comey to come out there and attack the president,” he said.

The post Watchdog Group: Emails Reveal FBI Advised Comey to Coordinate with Mueller on Congressional Testimony appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Man Reports Police Visitation After Posting Pictures of Morel Mushrooms on Facebook

Darlington, MD— On May 11, a man named John Garrison posted a public photo on Facebook showing morel mushrooms he had gathered while foraging with his girlfriend Hope Deery, and wrote of his plans to “sautee them with brown sugar and cinnamon and see how that turns out.”

Garrison went on to claim that his original Facebook post about morel mushrooms, which are a legal and sought-after delicacy, led to a visit to his home hours later from law enforcement apparently investigating possible use of psychedelic mushrooms commonly referred to as “magic mushrooms.”

Photography is Not a Crime reported that police appeared at his house less than 24 hours later, questioning Garrison and Deery about why they were “eating mushrooms and posting about it online.”

“We had just finished eating the Morels we found today and heard a knock on the door. A police officer and an RA were standing outside. We let them in and as soon as the police officer walked in he asked us why we were eating mushrooms and posting about it online. He thought he was on the biggest bust of his career thinking we were having a magic mushroom party before I explained to him that Morels are a native choice edible mushroom similar to truffles,” Garrison wrote in an additional Facebook post.

The officer allegedly refused to believe that the couple ingested legal mushrooms. Garrison, in an effort to prove that they were simply morel mushrooms, said that he retrieved a piece of the mushroom from the trash— but the officer still refused to believe they hadn’t broken the law until a second officer arrived on the scene and confirmed it was a legal mushroom. Before the officers left, Garrison said his ID was processed.

“He wasn’t convinced. So I rummaged through the trash to find a peice of a Morel so that he would have evidence that we weren’t taking psychedelic mushrooms. I showed him and he still wasn’t convinced that they weren’t magic mushrooms, Which was shocking to me because morels look nothing like a psychedelic psilocybin mushrooms and I figured a police officer would know what illegal drugs looked like. A second police officer showed up and I showed her the Morel and she immediately knew it was a Morel which was a relief. They processed our ID’s and eventually left. What an experience,” Garrison wrote.

The post Man Reports Police Visitation After Posting Pictures of Morel Mushrooms on Facebook appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

20,000 NJ DWI Cases In Question Following Judicial Review

Trenton, NJ – Upwards of 20,000 DWI cases in New Jersey are potentially tainted after a judicial review found “substantial doubts” about the reliability of breathalyzer tests due to the alleged misconduct of a state trooper whose job included assuring the accuracy of Alcotest devices used in five counties over an eight-year period.

A 200-page report released by the state judiciary, written by Judge Joseph Lisa, explained that the actions of Sgt. Marc Dennis created a “reasonably plausible” likelihood that the convictions were not legitimate.

In total, some 20,667 DWI cases could potentially be affected.

The judicial report was focused on the actions of Dennis, a coordinator in the State Police Alcohol Drug Testing Unit whose responsibilities included verifying the accuracy of breath-tests that gauge the blood-alcohol level of accused drunken drivers, in relation to accusations of lying about performing required procedures while calibrating the machines.

A report from NJ.com explains:

In 2016, Dennis was accused of lying on official documents about performing a legally required temperature check while calibrating just three machines, known as Alcotest devices, which gauge the blood-alcohol level of accused drunken drivers.

The accusations called into question any test result involving a machine the sergeant handled, including devices used by local police in Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Somerset, and Union counties between 2008 and 2016. 

State prosecutors notified the judiciary in September 2016 of the accusations and requested a special judge be appointed to review the tens of thousands of cases involved.

County prosecutors began notifying defendants in October that their cases could be tossed because of the scandal. 

The State Attorney General’s Office took the position that although the temperature check Dennis was accused of skipping and falsifying was part of the rules for use of breath-testing devices— as required by the state Supreme Court— there was no scientific necessity to do so. However, the judicial report by Judge Lisa maintained that the state “failed to clearly and convincingly prove” that the failure to perform the required step didn’t taint the results.

Peter Aseltine, a spokesman for the AG’s Office, said that his office was “reviewing the report and will be preparing to address this before the Supreme Court.”

The Tormey Law Firm noted:

New Jersey has stringent requirements when it comes to proper calibration and maintenance of all Alcotest 7110 devices. This is essential because the results of the Alcotest reading in a DWI case are typically used as evidence to establish that the driver was, in fact, intoxicated. A breath test result at 0.08 or above can land you in serious trouble. You could lose your license for up to 1 year for a first DWI offense and the penalties worsen from there if you have any prior DWI convictions.

The purpose of the Alcotest is to provide an accurate reading of the driver’s blood alcohol content. This requires extreme precision, as the difference between a 0.07 and a 0.08 BAC can mean being charged with DWI or not. Based on the necessity for accuracy in DWI breath test readings, failure to properly calibrate an Alcotest machine can be used as an argument to get the breath test results thrown out and ultimately, to get DWI charges dismissed. In this case, Judge Lisa’s review of Sergeant Dennis’s conduct left “substantial doubts” about the reliability of breath test results in the thousands of DWI cases that used Alcotest machines he was responsible for maintaining.

A report by News 12 notes that Dennis faces charges of third-degree tampering for his alleged falsification of official documents. The state Supreme Court will hold formal proceedings in the case, according to NJ.com.

The post 20,000 NJ DWI Cases In Question Following Judicial Review appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Young Mother Claims Jailer Raped Her Following Arrest For Half-Gram of Pot

Katy, Texas – A woman is seeking justice after allegedly being raped by a jailer after being arrested for possession of less than a half a gram of cannabis she claims to use medicinally for her epilepsy.

Emma Lopez said that the ordeal began while driving home on March 1 when she was pulled over for suspected speeding by a Katy ISD police officer a few blocks away from her home.

Police bodycam footage of the stop obtained by ABC 13 Eyewitness News showed Lopez complying with the stop and the officer. Within minutes the officer asked her to step out of her vehicle, and stated, “The minute I stopped you, I could smell marijuana on your car.”

Lopez admitted that she uses marijuana to control her seizures and pointed out the small amount in her vehicle to the officer.

“I have seizures and I don’t even smoke very much,” Lopez said in the footage.

At this point the officer informed her that she was going to be arrested and taken to jail for the miniscule amount of marijuana, despite the fact that the Harris County District Attorney’s Office has ceased prosecuting people for possession of small amounts of marijuana. “Unfortunately, you’re going to jail today,” the officer told Lopez.

Katy ISD police claim that Lopez was initially stopped in a school zone, thus making possession of any amount of marijuana an arrestable offense. However, according to ABC 13, Lopez’s lawyers claim that she should not have been arrested in the first place.

In an exclusive interview with ABC 13, Lopez said that after being taken to the Harris County Jail she was moved into a holding cell by herself. Lopez alleges that only a few hours later a male guard entered the holding cell, handcuffed her, and raped her.

After he asked me to get up and put me up against the wall and handcuffed me, he pulled my pants down and pulled his pants down and I froze,” Lopez said. “I asked him not to do it. He said, ‘If I say anything, he would do it again, and I wouldn’t be able to say anything.’

I’m working on this #exclusive story for #abc13 at 6. A young woman, (questionably) arrested for having a tiny amount of pot while driving near a school, is allegedly raped in the Harris County Jail. As of tonight, the jailer has not yet been identified.My story—>> http://abc13.com/3425908/

Posted by ABC13-Miya Shay on Thursday, May 3, 2018

Lopez says she attempted to alert female guards to the sexual assault that had just taken place, but she was told to sit down and stay quiet while being processed.

After she was finally released from jail the next day, Lopez said she went directly to the hospital where a rape kit was collected. Lopez’s attorney, Michael Edwards, says there is evidence that proves Lopez was sexually assaulted while in the Harris County jail.

“There’s surveillance, there’s jail calls, there’s a number of elements that support Mrs. Lopez in her outcry in what happened to her,” Edwards told ABC 13.

A statement was released by the Harris County Jail confirming that there is an active investigation of the incident underway:

The Harris County Sheriff’s Office is investigating an allegation that a female jail inmate was sexually assaulted by an employee inside the Harris County Jail in early March. Investigators have interviewed the victim, reviewed video recordings from inside the jail, and are taking all other necessary steps to ensure a thorough investigation is conducted. The investigation is ongoing, and no charges have been filed at this time. The Harris County Sheriff’s Office takes these allegations seriously, and we are committed to ensuring the safety and well-being of all inmates entrusted in our care.

Lopez, a mother of two, has since filed a lawsuit against the City of Katy and the Harris County Sheriff’s Office, as well as Sheriff Ed Gonzales, the officer who arrested her, and the unidentified jail guard who allegedly raped her.

The post Young Mother Claims Jailer Raped Her Following Arrest For Half-Gram of Pot appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey

Washington, D.C. – Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) reportedly confirmed in his forthcoming book, “The Restless Wave,” (set to be released in May 22), that he personally handed then-FBI Director James Comey a copy of the now infamous dossier of opposition research on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, but defends his actions as those of a patriotic American.

“I agreed to receive a copy of what is now referred to as ‘the dossier,’” McCain wrote in his upcoming book. “I reviewed its contents. The allegations were disturbing, but I had no idea which if any were true. I could not independently verify any of it, and so I did what any American who cares about our nation’s security should have done.”

[Related: Nunes Memo Released]

According to a report by the Daily Beast, which obtained an advance copy of the book, McCain wrote that he spoke to Sir Andrew Wood, a former British diplomat, in November 2016 at the Halifax International Security Forum. Wood reportedly made McCain aware of Steele’s dossier, which subsequently resulted in David Kramer, senior director for Human Rights and Human Freedoms at the McCain Institute, traveling to London to meet with Steele. This was not Steele’s first contact with US officials, as prior to this meeting he had already met with US officials in Rome to discuss his research, according to The Washington Post.

McCain reportedly recalled that once he had procured a copy of the dossier, he put it into a safe in his office and called Comey’s office to request a meeting with the FBI director.

“I went to see him at his earliest convenience, handed him the dossier, explained how it had come into my possession,” said McCain. “I said I didn’t know what to make of it, and I trusted the FBI would examine it carefully and investigate its claims. With that, I thanked the director and left. The entire meeting had probably not lasted longer than ten minutes. I did what duty demanded I do.”

Former FBI Director Comey, during a promotional tour for his own new book, admitted that upon briefing President Trump on the existence of the dossier, he failed to mention that the document was a product of opposition research funded in part by his political enemies.

In an episode of Reality Check in February, Ben Swann examined the claim that the dossier had played a significant role in the acquisition of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application to authorize the surveillance of Carter Page, President Trump’s former campaign foreign policy adviser.

The post John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey

Washington, D.C. – Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) reportedly confirmed in his forthcoming book, “The Restless Wave,” (set to be released in May 22), that he personally handed then-FBI Director James Comey a copy of the now infamous dossier of opposition research on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, but defends his actions as those of a patriotic American.

“I agreed to receive a copy of what is now referred to as ‘the dossier,’” McCain wrote in his upcoming book. “I reviewed its contents. The allegations were disturbing, but I had no idea which if any were true. I could not independently verify any of it, and so I did what any American who cares about our nation’s security should have done.”

[Related: Nunes Memo Released]

According to a report by the Daily Beast, which obtained an advance copy of the book, McCain wrote that he spoke to Sir Andrew Wood, a former British diplomat, in November 2016 at the Halifax International Security Forum. Wood reportedly made McCain aware of Steele’s dossier, which subsequently resulted in David Kramer, senior director for Human Rights and Human Freedoms at the McCain Institute, traveling to London to meet with Steele. This was not Steele’s first contact with US officials, as prior to this meeting he had already met with US officials in Rome to discuss his research, according to The Washington Post.

McCain reportedly recalled that once he had procured a copy of the dossier, he put it into a safe in his office and called Comey’s office to request a meeting with the FBI director.

“I went to see him at his earliest convenience, handed him the dossier, explained how it had come into my possession,” said McCain. “I said I didn’t know what to make of it, and I trusted the FBI would examine it carefully and investigate its claims. With that, I thanked the director and left. The entire meeting had probably not lasted longer than ten minutes. I did what duty demanded I do.”

Former FBI Director Comey, during a promotional tour for his own new book, admitted that upon briefing President Trump on the existence of the dossier, he failed to mention that the document was a product of opposition research funded in part by his political enemies.

In an episode of Reality Check in February, Ben Swann examined the claim that the dossier had played a significant role in the acquisition of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application to authorize the surveillance of Carter Page, President Trump’s former campaign foreign policy adviser.

The post John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey

Washington, D.C. – Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) reportedly confirmed in his forthcoming book, “The Restless Wave,” (set to be released in May 22), that he personally handed then-FBI Director James Comey a copy of the now infamous dossier of opposition research on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, but defends his actions as those of a patriotic American.

“I agreed to receive a copy of what is now referred to as ‘the dossier,’” McCain wrote in his upcoming book. “I reviewed its contents. The allegations were disturbing, but I had no idea which if any were true. I could not independently verify any of it, and so I did what any American who cares about our nation’s security should have done.”

[Related: Nunes Memo Released]

According to a report by the Daily Beast, which obtained an advance copy of the book, McCain wrote that he spoke to Sir Andrew Wood, a former British diplomat, in November 2016 at the Halifax International Security Forum. Wood reportedly made McCain aware of Steele’s dossier, which subsequently resulted in David Kramer, senior director for Human Rights and Human Freedoms at the McCain Institute, traveling to London to meet with Steele. This was not Steele’s first contact with US officials, as prior to this meeting he had already met with US officials in Rome to discuss his research, according to The Washington Post.

McCain reportedly recalled that once he had procured a copy of the dossier, he put it into a safe in his office and called Comey’s office to request a meeting with the FBI director.

“I went to see him at his earliest convenience, handed him the dossier, explained how it had come into my possession,” said McCain. “I said I didn’t know what to make of it, and I trusted the FBI would examine it carefully and investigate its claims. With that, I thanked the director and left. The entire meeting had probably not lasted longer than ten minutes. I did what duty demanded I do.”

Former FBI Director Comey, during a promotional tour for his own new book, admitted that upon briefing President Trump on the existence of the dossier, he failed to mention that the document was a product of opposition research funded in part by his political enemies.

In an episode of Reality Check in February, Ben Swann examined the claim that the dossier had played a significant role in the acquisition of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application to authorize the surveillance of Carter Page, President Trump’s former campaign foreign policy adviser.

The post John McCain Defends Giving Trump Dossier to Comey appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill

Oklahoma City, OK – The Oklahoma Senate passed concealed carry, or “constitutional carry,” legislation that would allow Oklahoma residents who are 21 and older, as well as military personnel 18 and older and legally eligible to own a firearm, to concealed carry their gun. The passage of Senate Bill 1212 would remove the current requirement of obtaining a concealed carry permit in order to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense and follows the Oklahoma House approving the legislation in a 59-28 vote on April 25.

The Senate passed the legislation by a 33-9 vote, according to a report by The Hill. Tulsa World reported that state Sen. Nathan Dahm (R), the author of the bill, said the legislation would have no effect on locations that have banned firearms such as governmental buildings and schools, and that “the bill would still require a background check currently required to purchase a firearm.” The Norman Transcript notes that “under current law, Oklahomans who are legally able to purchase a firearm are required to attend an eight-hour training course, undergo an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) background check, and be fingerprinted and photographed if they’re not already in the state system.”

A report from the Associated Press noted that “A background check would still be required before a person could purchase a firearm and handguns would remain prohibited in places where they are currently banned, including elementary schools, colleges, universities and government buildings. The bill also excludes anyone prohibited by state or federal law from owning a weapon as well as those convicted of assault and battery, domestic abuse, violating a protective order or drug crimes.” The AP also referred to a statement from Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation that announced the bill would remove “the training requirement for carrying a firearm as well as an extensive background check process that includes mental health and court records.”

Breitbart reported that “State Sen. Kevin Matthews (D-11) opposed the legislation, arguing that people should be required to obtain a permit for a gun, similar to obtaining a license to drive a car. Dahm refuted Matthews “by pointing out that the Second Amendment protects a constitutional right to bear arms, not a constitutional right to drive cars.”

Currently, there are twelve states that have passed legislation to abolish permitting requirements to concealed carry a firearm, including Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia. Breitbart reports that the majority of Montana and Arkansas recognize constitutional carry as well.

According to a report by Breitbart News:

FBI figures published by the NRA show that Alaska’s handgun murder rate “declined after the state enacted permitless carry in 2003.” Moreover, in the years since Alaska’s permit requirement was abolished “handgun murders have declined as a percentage of the total number of murders.”

A drop in handgun murders also took place in Arizona after that state abolished its concealed carry permit requirement in 2010. And in Wyoming–which abolished its permit requirement in 2011–handgun murders have declined as well.

The bill to eliminate carry permits is now at the desk of Republican Gov. Mary Fallin. Tulsa World reported that “Fallin, a Second Amendment supporter, signed legislation to allow open carry of firearms but has previously vetoed gun bills.”

The post Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill

Oklahoma City, OK – The Oklahoma Senate passed concealed carry, or “constitutional carry,” legislation that would allow Oklahoma residents who are 21 and older, as well as military personnel 18 and older and legally eligible to own a firearm, to concealed carry their gun. The passage of Senate Bill 1212 would remove the current requirement of obtaining a concealed carry permit in order to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense and follows the Oklahoma House approving the legislation in a 59-28 vote on April 25.

The Senate passed the legislation by a 33-9 vote, according to a report by The Hill. Tulsa World reported that state Sen. Nathan Dahm (R), the author of the bill, said the legislation would have no effect on locations that have banned firearms such as governmental buildings and schools, and that “the bill would still require a background check currently required to purchase a firearm.” The Norman Transcript notes that “under current law, Oklahomans who are legally able to purchase a firearm are required to attend an eight-hour training course, undergo an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) background check, and be fingerprinted and photographed if they’re not already in the state system.”

A report from the Associated Press noted that “A background check would still be required before a person could purchase a firearm and handguns would remain prohibited in places where they are currently banned, including elementary schools, colleges, universities and government buildings. The bill also excludes anyone prohibited by state or federal law from owning a weapon as well as those convicted of assault and battery, domestic abuse, violating a protective order or drug crimes.” The AP also referred to a statement from Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation that announced the bill would remove “the training requirement for carrying a firearm as well as an extensive background check process that includes mental health and court records.”

Breitbart reported that “State Sen. Kevin Matthews (D-11) opposed the legislation, arguing that people should be required to obtain a permit for a gun, similar to obtaining a license to drive a car. Dahm refuted Matthews “by pointing out that the Second Amendment protects a constitutional right to bear arms, not a constitutional right to drive cars.”

Currently, there are twelve states that have passed legislation to abolish permitting requirements to concealed carry a firearm, including Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia. Breitbart reports that the majority of Montana and Arkansas recognize constitutional carry as well.

According to a report by Breitbart News:

FBI figures published by the NRA show that Alaska’s handgun murder rate “declined after the state enacted permitless carry in 2003.” Moreover, in the years since Alaska’s permit requirement was abolished “handgun murders have declined as a percentage of the total number of murders.”

A drop in handgun murders also took place in Arizona after that state abolished its concealed carry permit requirement in 2010. And in Wyoming–which abolished its permit requirement in 2011–handgun murders have declined as well.

The bill to eliminate carry permits is now at the desk of Republican Gov. Mary Fallin. Tulsa World reported that “Fallin, a Second Amendment supporter, signed legislation to allow open carry of firearms but has previously vetoed gun bills.”

The post Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill

Oklahoma City, OK – The Oklahoma Senate passed concealed carry, or “constitutional carry,” legislation that would allow Oklahoma residents who are 21 and older, as well as military personnel 18 and older and legally eligible to own a firearm, to concealed carry their gun. The passage of Senate Bill 1212 would remove the current requirement of obtaining a concealed carry permit in order to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense and follows the Oklahoma House approving the legislation in a 59-28 vote on April 25.

The Senate passed the legislation by a 33-9 vote, according to a report by The Hill. Tulsa World reported that state Sen. Nathan Dahm (R), the author of the bill, said the legislation would have no effect on locations that have banned firearms such as governmental buildings and schools, and that “the bill would still require a background check currently required to purchase a firearm.” The Norman Transcript notes that “under current law, Oklahomans who are legally able to purchase a firearm are required to attend an eight-hour training course, undergo an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) background check, and be fingerprinted and photographed if they’re not already in the state system.”

A report from the Associated Press noted that “A background check would still be required before a person could purchase a firearm and handguns would remain prohibited in places where they are currently banned, including elementary schools, colleges, universities and government buildings. The bill also excludes anyone prohibited by state or federal law from owning a weapon as well as those convicted of assault and battery, domestic abuse, violating a protective order or drug crimes.” The AP also referred to a statement from Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation that announced the bill would remove “the training requirement for carrying a firearm as well as an extensive background check process that includes mental health and court records.”

Breitbart reported that “State Sen. Kevin Matthews (D-11) opposed the legislation, arguing that people should be required to obtain a permit for a gun, similar to obtaining a license to drive a car. Dahm refuted Matthews “by pointing out that the Second Amendment protects a constitutional right to bear arms, not a constitutional right to drive cars.”

Currently, there are twelve states that have passed legislation to abolish permitting requirements to concealed carry a firearm, including Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia. Breitbart reports that the majority of Montana and Arkansas recognize constitutional carry as well.

According to a report by Breitbart News:

FBI figures published by the NRA show that Alaska’s handgun murder rate “declined after the state enacted permitless carry in 2003.” Moreover, in the years since Alaska’s permit requirement was abolished “handgun murders have declined as a percentage of the total number of murders.”

A drop in handgun murders also took place in Arizona after that state abolished its concealed carry permit requirement in 2010. And in Wyoming–which abolished its permit requirement in 2011–handgun murders have declined as well.

The bill to eliminate carry permits is now at the desk of Republican Gov. Mary Fallin. Tulsa World reported that “Fallin, a Second Amendment supporter, signed legislation to allow open carry of firearms but has previously vetoed gun bills.”

The post Oklahoma Senate Passes Constitutional Carry Bill appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers

Washington, D.C. – Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) publicly rebuked the recently-proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), warning about the bill’s potential dangers and how its passage could further codify war-making powers in the hands of the executive branch. In an op-ed published Monday, Paul explained how passage of the AUMF, Congress is abdicating authority to prevent unlimited war, and is instead going to codify the “unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.”

“It is clear upon reading the AUMF, put forward by Senators Tim Kaine and Bob Corker, that it gives nearly unlimited power to this or any other president to be at war whenever he or she wants, with minimal justification and no prior specific authority,” Paul wrote in an op-ed in the American Conservative.

“Under this bill, Congress could only disapprove of war, turning the Constitution on its head,” Paul claimed. “Even worse, any resolution of disapproval could be vetoed, meaning two thirds of Congress would need to disapprove of a war, rather than a majority to approve of one. That’s a huge, unwise, and unconstitutional change.”

[Related: Civil Liberties Advocates: Proposed AUMF Gives President “Blank Check” War Powers]

Sen. Paul declared that passage of a proposed new AUMF would serve to further remove Congress from the equation in terms of declaring war, and that this combats the checks and balances put in place by the Founding Fathers to prevent consolidation of power within the executive branch.

“That isn’t an AUMF. That isn’t Congress reclaiming its constitutional duties. That’s a complete rewriting of the role of the executive and of the constitutional separation of powers.”

The Kentucky senator noted that the Founding Fathers knew of the tendency of the executive branch to launch wars, so they built in checks to prevent it. Currently, the War Powers Act is supposed to limit the use of force by the executive, with the exception of a national emergency or an imminent attack, but rarely does so in the modern era. As Paul wrote, “For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.”

Paul warned that “If this AUMF is passed, Congress will have chosen to make itself irrelevant on the issue of war.”

Read the full op-ed by Sen. Rand Paul here.

The post Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers

Washington, D.C. – Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) publicly rebuked the recently-proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), warning about the bill’s potential dangers and how its passage could further codify war-making powers in the hands of the executive branch. In an op-ed published Monday, Paul explained how passage of the AUMF, Congress is abdicating authority to prevent unlimited war, and is instead going to codify the “unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.”

“It is clear upon reading the AUMF, put forward by Senators Tim Kaine and Bob Corker, that it gives nearly unlimited power to this or any other president to be at war whenever he or she wants, with minimal justification and no prior specific authority,” Paul wrote in an op-ed in the American Conservative.

“Under this bill, Congress could only disapprove of war, turning the Constitution on its head,” Paul claimed. “Even worse, any resolution of disapproval could be vetoed, meaning two thirds of Congress would need to disapprove of a war, rather than a majority to approve of one. That’s a huge, unwise, and unconstitutional change.”

[Related: Civil Liberties Advocates: Proposed AUMF Gives President “Blank Check” War Powers]

Sen. Paul declared that passage of a proposed new AUMF would serve to further remove Congress from the equation in terms of declaring war, and that this combats the checks and balances put in place by the Founding Fathers to prevent consolidation of power within the executive branch.

“That isn’t an AUMF. That isn’t Congress reclaiming its constitutional duties. That’s a complete rewriting of the role of the executive and of the constitutional separation of powers.”

The Kentucky senator noted that the Founding Fathers knew of the tendency of the executive branch to launch wars, so they built in checks to prevent it. Currently, the War Powers Act is supposed to limit the use of force by the executive, with the exception of a national emergency or an imminent attack, but rarely does so in the modern era. As Paul wrote, “For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.”

Paul warned that “If this AUMF is passed, Congress will have chosen to make itself irrelevant on the issue of war.”

Read the full op-ed by Sen. Rand Paul here.

The post Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers

Washington, D.C. – Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) publicly rebuked the recently-proposed Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), warning about the bill’s potential dangers and how its passage could further codify war-making powers in the hands of the executive branch. In an op-ed published Monday, Paul explained how passage of the AUMF, Congress is abdicating authority to prevent unlimited war, and is instead going to codify the “unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.”

“It is clear upon reading the AUMF, put forward by Senators Tim Kaine and Bob Corker, that it gives nearly unlimited power to this or any other president to be at war whenever he or she wants, with minimal justification and no prior specific authority,” Paul wrote in an op-ed in the American Conservative.

“Under this bill, Congress could only disapprove of war, turning the Constitution on its head,” Paul claimed. “Even worse, any resolution of disapproval could be vetoed, meaning two thirds of Congress would need to disapprove of a war, rather than a majority to approve of one. That’s a huge, unwise, and unconstitutional change.”

[Related: Civil Liberties Advocates: Proposed AUMF Gives President “Blank Check” War Powers]

Sen. Paul declared that passage of a proposed new AUMF would serve to further remove Congress from the equation in terms of declaring war, and that this combats the checks and balances put in place by the Founding Fathers to prevent consolidation of power within the executive branch.

“That isn’t an AUMF. That isn’t Congress reclaiming its constitutional duties. That’s a complete rewriting of the role of the executive and of the constitutional separation of powers.”

The Kentucky senator noted that the Founding Fathers knew of the tendency of the executive branch to launch wars, so they built in checks to prevent it. Currently, the War Powers Act is supposed to limit the use of force by the executive, with the exception of a national emergency or an imminent attack, but rarely does so in the modern era. As Paul wrote, “For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.”

Paul warned that “If this AUMF is passed, Congress will have chosen to make itself irrelevant on the issue of war.”

Read the full op-ed by Sen. Rand Paul here.

The post Rand Paul Warns AUMF Gives the President Unlimited War Powers appeared first on Ben Swann’s Truth In Media.

We Are Change TV.US