Wikipedia censors are considering deleting the site’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Files_Investigation">entry</a> on The Twitter Files, a trove of internal communications at Twitter released by Elon Musk last week that revealed a deep censorship collusion between previous Twitter management and the Biden team. &nbsp;Perhaps the most well-known and impactful content that was censored by Twitter was the New York Post’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/">exposé</a>&nbsp;on the Biden family’s corruption, which was published in the heat of the presidential election. Then–White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany was suspended from Twitter for sharing the story. Twitter executives also blocked the story being shared via direct message, previously a tool reserved for blocking child pornography.&nbsp;Almost 50 percent of Biden voters knew nothing of the Hunter Biden&nbsp;laptop story at the time of the election and about 16 percent said they would not have voted for Biden had they known,&nbsp;<a href="https://cdn.mrc.org/TPC-MRC+Biden+Voter+Messaging+Survey+Analysis+Nov+2020_final.pdf">according</a>&nbsp;to a survey from&nbsp;The Media Research Center.The Twitter Files scandal is currently the subject of a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Files_Investigation">Wikipedia article</a> titled, “Twitter Files Investigation”. However, as of this report, Wikipedia notes above the entry that “this article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.” It also notes that a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Twitter_Files_Investigation">discussion</a> is taking place among contributors as to whether the article should be deleted. Wikipedia administrators will make a decision based on a “rough consensus”.&nbsp;Some arguments for the page’s deletion are vague and do not appear to offer concrete reasoning. One contributor admitted they can’t explain it. “I don't know where to start explaining why this should be deleted. It's a disaster. Maybe we can have a Twitter Files article, but not this one.”&nbsp;Other contributors argued that because some mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times refused to report on The Twitter Files, as <a href="https://frontline.news/post/major-media-outlets-refuse-to-report-twitter-biden-collusion">detailed</a> by Frontline News, it should not be given credibility. “This ‘event’ was a dud rather than a smoking gun. Many news networks avoided covering this as there is no ‘there’ there. (For instance, the New York Times as of now has published nothing on this.).”&nbsp;Another contributor similarly wrote that “this self-published blogpost (with a grandiose title) lacks significant coverage in reliable sources.”&nbsp;“This was generally ignored by the media (with good reason) and thus failed to establish notability,” wrote another.&nbsp;Other contributors pushed back and argued for keeping the article, pointing out that the very fact the corporate media are conspicuously avoiding the story ties into the censorship exposed by The Twitter Files.&nbsp;Wikipedia censors are a new project of the Biden administration, as <a href="https://frontline.news/post/biden-admin-pays-for-software-to-turn-users-into-government-mouthpieces">reported</a> by Frontline News this week.&nbsp;The Biden administration has commissioned a group of journalists called Hacks/Hackers to organize a group of Wikipedia censors called “Research Coordinators” for a project called NewsQ. These censors will list which sources of vaccine information are “credible sources” and which are “unreliable”.&nbsp;<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220823173618/https:/www.hackshackers.com/hh-is-hiring/">Job applicants</a>&nbsp;need not have a medical background or expertise in a medical field to become a Research Coordinator.&nbsp;&nbsp;“That&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vaccine_safety/Reliable_sources#Perennial_sources">list</a>&nbsp;is already taking shape on Wikipedia, with liberal outlets such as The New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, and The Atlantic all marked ‘reliable,’” reports&nbsp;The Daily Wire.&nbsp;“Conservative sites, including The Daily Wire, Daily Mail, Epoch Times, and The Federalist, are all classified as either ‘unreliable’ or ‘conspiracy'.”&nbsp;

iStock-171320561.jpg

US News

Twitter

'This was generally ignored by the media (with good reason) and thus failed to establish notability'

Wikipedia considers deleting ‘Twitter Files’ page

Internal FBI documents disclosed last week show that the bureau investigated an employee for his stance on COVID-19 vaccines and his support for President Donald Trump.<h2>Clearance&nbsp;revoked, suspended without pay</h2>Empower Oversight, a government watchdog group, included the documents in a&nbsp;<a href="https://empowr.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2024-06-08-TL-to-DOJ-OIG-Protected-Disclosure-FINAL-REDACTED.pdf">letter</a> to Inspector General Michael Horowitz. The letter revealed that the employee, whose name has been redacted, was forced to resign from his post after the FBI Security Division revoked his security clearance and suspended him without pay indefinitely.The basis for the decision by FBI higher-ups appears to have come from an investigation launched against the employee after January 6, 2021. The employee, who worked for the FBI for 12 years, attended the rally at the Capitol that day while he was on personal leave and “observed” the events that unfolded. He then reported himself to the FBI in “good faith” for being present at the Capitol rally. He was subjected to a polygraph test, which showed that he did not knowingly enter any restricted areas.<h2>‘Didn’t buy into vaccine’</h2>Shortly thereafter, the FBI Security Division began investigating the employee. They questioned at least three of his colleagues, who were threatened with having their security clearances revoked if they did not cooperate or answer truthfully. Documents show that the Security Division (SecD) asked them whether they heard the employee “vocalize support for President Trump,” “vocalize objection for COVID-19 vaccination,” or “vocalize intent to attend 01/06/2021.”One colleague wrote that the employee “very significantly supported” Trump and “would listen to talk shows. Trump did not lose. Dems stole it. Militant point of view. Never implied would do anything aggressive/physical.”In response to the question about COVID-19 vaccination, another colleague wrote: “Didn’t buy into vaccine. Did not get vaccine. Anti-vaxxer. Did testing to continue working. Talked about alternatives to stay healthy. No anti-FBI rhetoric. Did not agree but did what was required. Would try to find loop holes to get around mandates. Nothing seemed extreme.”Regarding January 6th, a colleague wrote that he knew the employee “planned to go.”<h2>FBI trying to ‘purge’ employees</h2>“The documents appear to demonstrate SecD's political bias and abuse of the security clearance process to purge the FBI of employees who expressed disfavored political views or concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine requirement,” wrote Empower Oversight in the letter to Inspector General Horowitz.In March 2022, then-FBI Executive Assistant Director Jennifer Leigh Moore revoked the employee’s security clearance. He was then suspended indefinitely without pay. The employee filed an appeal in April this year, which has yet to be granted or denied. Empower Oversight noted that the employee’s clearance revocation affects his efforts to find other employment. The watchdog group also suggested that the FBI may be purposely holding up the appeals process to negatively impact the employee's job hunt.

interrogation polygraph test.jpg

Government harrassment

Bureau asked colleagues about employee's stance on vaccination, support for Trump

Memo: FBI investigated employee for views on COVID vaccines, Trump

<h2>New bill paves way for AG's office to be “arbiter of truth?”</h2>Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed into law a bill that ostensibly delegates to the Attorney General’s office the powers of “arbiters of truth,” or as the Denver Gazette wondered in its headline: “<a href="https://gazette.com/denver-gazette/is-colorado-approaching-a-ministry-of-truth-jimmy-sengenberger/article_72896576-2760-11ef-afa7-c79a1de6f6ea.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Is Colorado approaching a ‘Ministry of Truth’?</a>” &nbsp;Senate Bill 24-084 aims to stop the spread of&nbsp;misinformation&nbsp;and disinformation by establishing a partnership between the state Attorney General's office (AG) and the state's education department to, somehow, diminish “the proliferation of factually inaccurate data” and “encourage respectful discourse.”The bill <a href="https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB24-084">introduced</a> on January 24, 2024, and signed into law by the governor on June 5, 2024, seems particularly aimed at influencing the way children think since it instructs the attorney general’s office to “coordinate with the Department of Education in an effort to prevent the proliferation of factually inaccurate data by sharing resources to encourage respectful discourse.”<blockquote>CONCERNING A REQUIREMENT THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL COORDINATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN AN EFFORT TO PREVENT THE PROLIFERATION OF FACTUALLY INACCURATE DATA BY SHARING RESOURCES TO ENCOURAGE RESPECTFUL DISCOURSE.</blockquote>Specifically, the AG’s office is to:1. Establish an initiative that would “encourage respectful engagement and discourse,”2. Develop and share resources that schools, organizations, and community leaders can use to enable “productive and honest conversations” and “help people find common ground” regarding state and national issues, and3. Collaborate with organizations across the state to develop and update the materials used in connection with the resources and coordinate with the Department of Education to make the resources available to schools and school districts in the state.&nbsp;The bill, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20240611205645/https:/leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB24-084">revised</a> several times since its introduction, initially included a paragraph requiring the AG’s office to look into the internet and other media channels for sources of misinformation and disinformation, and other requirements of the AG. &nbsp;An appropriation of $150,000 was included for the 2024-2025 fiscal year to finance the endeavor. The AG’s DOL (Department of Law) responded that they <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20240609030724/https:/leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2024A/bills/fn/2024a_sb084_r2.pdf">don’t need</a> the funding and can execute those obligations with the resources they currently have.&nbsp;<h2>Deciding misinformation not role of government</h2>Representative Anthony Hartsook voted against the legislation, tweeting that it is not the government's role to take over its citizens' responsibility for critical thinking and analysis.&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I debated and voted against SB24-084, Attorney General Undertake Measures to Prevent Misinformation and Disinformation. Individuals are responsible for the discernment of information using their own critical thinking and analysis, not the government. It is also the…— Representative Anthony Hartsook (@RepHartsook) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepHartsook/status/1788016822702285227?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;Free State Colorado tweeted that it is not the role of government to determine what is and isn’t misinformation and criticized Lisa Cusseer and Lorena Garcia, the authors of the bill:&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Lisa Cutter and Lorena Garcia want The State to determine what is "misinformation" These politicians are WRONG to think that is the proper role of Government! bill info: <a href="https://t.co/ljM6pvrqB1">https://t.co/ljM6pvrqB1</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/copolitics?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#copolitics</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/coleg?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#coleg</a> <a href="https://t.co/2QrN1jiWjX">https://t.co/2QrN1jiWjX</a> <a href="https://t.co/TG6aMn8vpz">pic.twitter.com/TG6aMn8vpz</a>— FreeStateColorado (@FreeStateColor1) <a href="https://twitter.com/FreeStateColor1/status/1788033809906065885?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;The Denver Gazette's Jimmy Sengenberger wrote that one can't trust politicians with fact and fiction. Truth and falsehood should be up to people to determine through free and open debate.<blockquote>Objective truth and fact exist, but they’re often up for interpretation and debate — especially in politics. People must be able to discern truth and falsehood through free and open debate, not governmental declarations.</blockquote>&nbsp;<h2>Does Colorado legislation make facts?</h2>One has to wonder what will be presented to students as fact, especially when the state has passed legislation on a particular issue. Will students be given both sides of the argument or will the government position be considered fact, while those who voice objections to a law will be accused of misinformation?<h3>Abortion and gender legislation</h3>Consider recent legislation that was passed in the state regarding abortion and gender identity, as <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2024/03/02/colorado-transgender-name-laws-advance/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">detailed</a> by the Colorado Sun. These are topics with which many people would take issue and would consider accepting the mainstream narrative as misinformation or disinformation, or just plain wrong. If it's protected under the law does it make it right and therefore unarguable?The first bill would protect people who assist in abortions or “gender-affirming care” in Colorado from prosecution in states that don't permit it.<blockquote>Senate Bill 188 aims to shield people who receive, provide or assist in legal abortions or gender-affirming care in Colorado from being subjected to criminal prosecution or lawsuits initiated in other states.&nbsp;</blockquote>The second bill would require large employers' health plans to cover abortions without any deductibles or copayments.&nbsp;<blockquote>Senate Bill 189 . . . &nbsp;requires large employer plans to cover the cost of abortions without policy deductibles, copayments or coinsurance starting on Jan. 1, 2025. There is an exception for government employers, because the state is prohibited from spending taxpayer dollars on abortions, as well as for employers for whom abortion is against their “sincerely held religious beliefs.”</blockquote>The third bill would make it illegal for anti-abortion centers to offer a hormonal pill to reverse abortions, unless the state's medical, pharmacy, and nursing boards all decide together that it is an accepted standard of practice by October 1, 2024.&nbsp;<blockquote>Senate Bill 190 is targeted toward anti-abortion pregnancy centers, but would apply to any organization purporting to offer pregnancy services.Under the law, it would immediately also be considered deceptive advertising to falsely purport to offer abortion services or Plan B, the emergency contraceptive.Finally, prescribing, offering or facilitating abortion pill reversal will be considered “unprofessional conduct for licensed, registered or certified health care providers” unless by Oct. 1 the Colorado Medical Board, State Board of Pharmacy and the State Board of Nursing, in consultation with each other, find that it’s a “generally accepted standard of practice” to engage in abortion pill reversal.</blockquote><h3>Preferred names for felons and students</h3>Senate Democrats in Colorado are working to push through two bills regarding preferred names for individuals who would want to identify as a gender other than their biological one, as <a href="https://kdvr.com/news/politics/colorado-lawmakers-clash-over-bills-to-protect-transgender-use-of-chosen-name/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reported</a> by the Associated Press. The first, House Bill 24-1071, would allow felons to use their chosen name based on their sexual preference, rather than objective gender. Republican opponents argued, “that it would allow those who committed future crimes to hide behind a new name.”&nbsp;The second, House Bill 24-1039, would make it a form of discrimination for school staff not to call their students by a name of the student's choosing when that name doesn't match their biological sex.&nbsp;<h3>Can the attorney general be objective?</h3>The Colorado attorney general, as the New American <a href="https://thenewamerican.com/news/colorado-governor-signs-bill-to-censor-factually-inaccurate-data/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reported</a>, stated in a tweet, that setting a Pride flag on fire can in some circumstances be considered a crime even though “the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. Johnson that burning the U.S. flag is protected speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">In Colorado, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WeThePeople?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WeThePeople</a> means everyone and there is no place for hate. That’s a core message of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Pride?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Pride</a>, where we celebrate everyone’s right to live as their best authentic self. <a href="https://t.co/4hplHSg91O">https://t.co/4hplHSg91O</a>— Phil Weiser (@pweiser) <a href="https://twitter.com/pweiser/status/1798547562389205308?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 6, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;<h2>Public schools institutions for government propaganda</h2>Colorado State Chairman for Young Americans for Liberty, Josh Metzel, interviewed by Brandon Wark of Free State Colorado about his activities, complained that students do not learn about liberty; public schools are just institutions for government propaganda, he contends.&nbsp;&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">"A lot of people have not been exposed to the ideas of Liberty... because going to a public school, it's just government propaganda, that's what it is..." Josh and the <a href="https://twitter.com/YALiberty?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@YALiberty</a> chapter at School of Mines are making a positive impact! Video: <a href="https://t.co/opxhBdsAum">https://t.co/opxhBdsAum</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/copolitics?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#copolitics</a> <a href="https://t.co/iR0EJPR3gQ">pic.twitter.com/iR0EJPR3gQ</a>— FreeStateColorado (@FreeStateColor1) <a href="https://twitter.com/FreeStateColor1/status/1800691787012694515?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 12, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;The passage of Senate Bill 24-084, aimed primarily at children, seems to affirm his contention.&nbsp;

censorship.jpg

Censorship

Will opposition to state laws be called misinformation? 

Colorado governor signs off on bill establishing state 'ministry of truth'? Students a target of new law

Ultra-processed foods such as plant-based meat alternatives are associated with an increase in heart attacks and strokes, according to a new&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(24)00115-7/fulltext">study</a>.<h2>What the study found</h2>Researchers at Imperial College London and Sao Paulo University looked at 118,000 Brits aged 40-69 and reviewed their diets. They found that ultra-processed, plant-based foods increased the risk of cardiovascular disease by 5% and early death by 12%.Ultra-processed foods are the least natural. They are industrially produced and usually synthesized from different compounds. Examples include snacks, sweetened drinks, and products containing artificial additives. They also include plant-based meat and dairy alternatives, which are heavily promoted as being environmentally friendly.&nbsp;<a href="https://jn.nutrition.org/article/S0022-3166(22)00003-7/fulltext">Studies</a> show that vegans and vegetarians consume more ultra-processed foods than meat eaters.“These findings advance current knowledge by highlighting that a higher intake of plant-sourced foods may only bring about better cardiovascular health outcomes when largely based on minimally processed foods while a higher intake of plant-sourced UPF may have detrimental effects on health,” wrote the study’s authors.<h2>Plant-based ultra-processed foods lead to health conditions</h2>The researchers also noted that plant-based, non-ultra-processed foods like legumes, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables are associated with decreased cardiovascular disease. But once they are ultra-processed, they can lead to a host of health conditions.“Despite being plant-based, these foods may contribute to risk factors such as dyslipidemia and hypertension due to their composition and processing methods,”&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13513957/Plant-based-ultra-processed-foods-heart-death.html">said</a> Dr. Fernanda Rauber, the study’s lead researcher. “Food additives and industrial contaminants present in these foods might cause oxidative stress and inflammation, further aggravating the risks.&nbsp;Rauber, specializing in preventative medicine at&nbsp;the University of São Paulo in Brazil, concluded that, “our results support the shift towards plant-based food choices that consider the degree of processing to improve cardiovascular health outcomes.”<h2>Plant-based meat often loaded with ‘anti-nutrients’</h2>Nutrition experts have been warning against fake meat. Nutritionist and&nbsp;Sacred Cow: The Case for (Better Meat)&nbsp;author Diana Rodgers&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/biden-administration-approves-fake-meat-for-sale-to-consumers">says</a> lab-grown meat, such as that sold by Upside Foods, is still not as healthy as McDonalds.“I’d rather eat my shoe than lab-grown meat,” Rodgers stated.British investigative food journalist Joanna Blythman has also warned against plant-based meat, which she says sometimes contain up to 30 artificial ingredients.&nbsp;“Artificial plant-based proteins tend to be loaded with 'anti-nutrients' - compounds that make it harder for our guts to absorb beneficial macro and micronutrients,” Blythman&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12390969/No-wonder-people-turning-noses-fake-meat-not-healthy-wont-save-planet-tastes-like-burnt-dog-food-says-JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-sales-plant-based-burgers-collapse.html">wrote</a> in an article for the&nbsp;Daily Mail. “Essentially, it's less digestible than real meat, and certainly less nutritious.”

plant-based meat package.jpg

Nutrition

World News

Vegans, vegetarians consume more ultra-processed foods than meat-eaters

Study: Plant-based fake meat linked to heart disease

The Biden administration has been turning a blind eye to domestic terrorists who attack pro-life Americans and centers even as the Department of Justice (DOJ) cracks down on taxpayers who protest abortion.<h2>A feticidal intifada</h2>Pro-abortion groups launched a wave of violence immediately after a draft of the US Supreme Court’s decision in&nbsp;Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization&nbsp;was leaked on May 2, 2022. The court ruled that states, not the federal government, should have the power to permit or prohibit abortions. The ruling effectively overturned&nbsp;Roe v. Wade.Within 24 hours of the draft being leaked, pro-abortion domestic terror groups like Jane’s Revenge and Ruth Sent Us declared “war” on pro-life Americans. They began attacking pregnancy centers — facilities which help women give birth instead of committing feticide — and demanded that all pro-life groups disband within 30 days. Ruth Sent Us instructed activists to storm Catholic churches during Mass and vowed to”burn the Eucharist.” Jane’s Revenge&nbsp;<a href="https://archive.is/20220510173306/https://madison.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/group-claims-responsibility-for-attack-on-anti-abortion-organization-in-madison-warns-of-more-violence/article_c56741e2-05fe-551f-ada9-078bf58db076.html">claimed</a> credit for setting fire to Wisconsin Family Action, a pro-life center in Madison, Wisconsin.&nbsp;<h2>Five arrests for 90 violent attacks</h2>Since then, there have been at least 90 such attacks on pro-life Americans, according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://catholicvote.org/pregnancy-center-attack-tracker/">report</a> by&nbsp;Catholic Vote.&nbsp;These have included firebombings, arson, destruction, and vandalism. Some pregnancy centers had their locks glued so that staff could not enter the premises. Employees at other centers had their cars keyed. In one instance, an 84-year-old woman was&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/pro-life-woman-shot-after-sen-hirono-s-call-to-arms-against-pro-life-americans">shot</a> while distributing pro-life materials. Two elderly men were badly&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/elderly-pro-life-advocates-beaten-amid-calls-for-violence">beaten</a> while protesting outside an abortion facility.There have only been about five reported arrests made in connection with those attacks and the FBI did not issue a public request for information until six months into the wave of violence.<h2>DOJ continues major crackdown on pro-life Americans</h2>In the meantime, the DOJ has launched a frenzied crackdown on pro-life taxpayers.&nbsp;In one instance, over 15 FBI agents converged on the house of Mark Houck, a pro-life father of seven, in an early morning in September 2021. They pounded on the door with their guns drawn and shouted for him to come out. He was&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/activist-raided-by-fbi-says-government-aims-to-instill-fear-in-pro-life-america">arrested</a> for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which makes it a felony “to use force with the intent to injure, intimidate and interfere with anyone” who provides abortion services. Houck’s wife and children suffered severe trauma from the event.Last month, 75-year-old Paulette Harlow was sentenced to two years in prison, also for violating the FACE Act, after she participated in a protest at an abortion center in Washington, DC in 2020. After the sentencing, federal judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/judge-taunts-elderly-pro-life-woman-after-prison-sentence">taunted</a> Harlow, who suffers from health issues. The judge told her to “make an effort to remain alive” in prison because that is a “tenet of [Harlow’s] religion.”Harlow was one of 11 others who were recently sentenced to prison for violating the FACE Act by protesting at an abortion center. Harlow’s co-defendant, Lauren Handy, was sentenced to nearly five years in prison and three years of supervised release.Last month, the DOJ brought a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/d9/2024-05/complaint_and_jury_demand_pro-life_society.pdf">lawsuit</a> against seven pro-life taxpayers and their organizations, Red Rose Rescue and Citizens for a Pro-Life Society. The complaint accused the defendants of violating the FACE Act.<h2>‘A literal call to arms’</h2>The DOJ’s campaign against pro-lifers has support in Congress from Democrat lawmakers. In September 2022, for instance, Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI)&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/media-silent-as-senator-openly-calls-for-violence-against-pro-life-americans">issued</a> a “literal call to arms” against pro-life Americans.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Sen. <a href="https://twitter.com/maziehirono?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@maziehirono</a>: Fighting the pro-life movement "is literally a call to arms in our country." <a href="https://t.co/JCtAwMpzE1">pic.twitter.com/JCtAwMpzE1</a>— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1570131713703006215?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 14, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div>

justice scale finger.jpg

FBI makes few arrests after major wave of violence by pro-abortion domestic terror groups

DOJ turns blind eye to attacks on pro-lifers

Wikipedia considers deleting ‘Twitter Files’ page

'This was generally ignored by the media (with good reason) and thus failed to establish notability'

Related Articles

Why claim birds crossed Atlantic the wrong way, when nearby labs played with bird flu for years?

Voters in UK city push back against harsh climate mandate

Study provides more evidence COVID shots harmed male fertility

A welcome change: new medical journal commits to values of Honest Medicine™

Latest Articles

Memo: FBI investigated employee for views on COVID vaccines, Trump

Colorado governor signs off on bill establishing state 'ministry of truth'? Students a target of new law

Study: Plant-based fake meat linked to heart disease

DOJ turns blind eye to attacks on pro-lifers