thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--Virginia Pro-Rights Rally Pitted Patriots Against Democrats

RICHMOND , Va. — Thousands of pro-gun rights activists converged around the Virginia Capitol on Monday to voice opposition to gun control legislation proposed by the Democratic-held legislature .
Among the vocal critics of the bills were members of law enforcement , who used their official office to advocate against some of the proposals .
The Grayson County Sheriff ’ s Office posted on its Facebook page its support for the protest .
The sheriff ’ s office also posted photos of deputies in uniform holding a sign saying , “ we support the second amendment.
” “ Great turnout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Standing room only !
!
” the post read .
Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins also attended the rally to show his support .
He said he would deputize gun owners if Virginia lawmakers move forward with gun legislation .
It is unclear if said deputies would have arrest power .
“ My intent was to swear in thousands of auxiliary deputy sheriffs and make it legal for them to possess the weapons that they ’ re trying to ban and restrict , ” Jenkins said .
Dozens of sheriffs in Virginia have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun laws they feel are unconstitutional .
Jenkins suggested , but would not directly answer , whether his department would enforce state laws involving gun control if Democrats move forward with legislation .
“ I ’ ll have to make a determination if these laws they pass or a violation of that , ” Jenkins said .
Although thousands gathered in Richmond to protest gun legislation , Gov .
Ralph Northam said there was a reason why Democrats were elected in Virginia .
In his State of the Commonwealth address earlier this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to a mass shooting at a Virginia Beach municipal complex last year as a reason why Democrats gained a majority in the Virginia House for the first time in nearly three decades .
“ Virginians watched .
They saw what happened , and they were appalled .
So they changed the legislature .
And here we are , ” Northam said .
While a bill to ban assault weapons was dropped earlier last week , other bills are still being considered .
One is limiting the purchases of firearms to one a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signed legislation to prohibit firearms inside of the Capitol building and an adjacent legislative office building .
Another one of the more controversial bills is a so-called “ red flag ” law , which would allow for law enforcement to take away firearms from gun owners who are considered a danger to themselves or others .
“ If you have demonstrated extreme risk of violence , or there ’ s a protective order against you , you shouldn ’ t have a firearm .
This means universal background checks .
If there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have nothing to worry about , ” the governor said .
“ Right now , it ’ s hard to say that we ’ re going to disarm our citizens who often have a 10- or 15-minute response time in rural areas for an officer to arrive and say we ’ re going to disarm the homeowner and restrict their rights to defend themselves , ” the sheriff said .
Justin Boggs is a writer for the E.W .
Scripps National Desk .
Follow him on Twitter @ jjboggs or on Facebook .

RICHMOND, Va. — Thousands of pro-gun rights activists converged around the Virginia Capitol on Monday to voice opposition to gun control legislation proposed by the Democratic-held legislature.
Among the vocal critics of the bills were members of law enforcement, who used their official office to advocate against some of the proposals.
The Grayson County Sheriff’s Office posted on its Facebook page its support for the protest. The sheriff’s office also posted photos of deputies in uniform holding a sign saying, “we support the second amendment.”
“Great turnout for 2A rally in Richmond today! Standing room only!!” the post read.
Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins also attended the rally to show his support. He said he would deputize gun owners if Virginia lawmakers move forward with gun legislation. It is unclear if said deputies would have arrest power.
“My intent was to swear in thousands of auxiliary deputy sheriffs and make it legal for them to possess the weapons that they’re trying to ban and restrict,” Jenkins said.
Dozens of sheriffs in Virginia have stated that their departments would not enforce gun laws they feel are unconstitutional. Jenkins suggested, but would not directly answer, whether his department would enforce state laws involving gun control if Democrats move forward with legislation.
“I’ll have to make a determination if these laws they pass or a violation of that,” Jenkins said.
Although thousands gathered in Richmond to protest gun legislation, Gov. Ralph Northam said there was a reason why Democrats were elected in Virginia. In his State of the Commonwealth address earlier this week, Northam referenced the legislature’s response to a mass shooting at a Virginia Beach municipal complex last year as a reason why Democrats gained a majority in the Virginia House for the first time in nearly three decades.
“Virginians watched. They saw what happened, and they were appalled. So they changed the legislature. And here we are,” Northam said.
While a bill to ban assault weapons was dropped earlier last week, other bills are still being considered. One is limiting the purchases of firearms to one a month.
Earlier this month, Northam signed legislation to prohibit firearms inside of the Capitol building and an adjacent legislative office building.
Another one of the more controversial bills is a so-called “red flag” law, which would allow for law enforcement to take away firearms from gun owners who are considered a danger to themselves or others.
Northam defended this legislation as “constitutional.”
“If you have demonstrated extreme risk of violence, or there’s a protective order against you, you shouldn’t have a firearm. This means universal background checks. If there’s nothing in your record, you have nothing to worry about,” the governor said.
Jenkins isn’t convinced.
“Right now, it’s hard to say that we’re going to disarm our citizens who often have a 10- or 15-minute response time in rural areas for an officer to arrive and say we’re going to disarm the homeowner and restrict their rights to defend themselves,” the sheriff said.
Justin Boggs is a writer for the E.W. Scripps National Desk. Follow him on Twitter @jjboggs or on Facebook .


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--Jay Sekulow Demolishes Schiff, Pelosi on Executive Privilege: Remember Eric Holder?

During his opening remarks in the Senate impeachment trial , President Donald Trump 's lawyer Jay Sekulow quoted Democrats ' own words against them .
He condemned the House Democrats ' rush to impeach Trump , adding an article of impeachment for `` Obstruction of Congress '' rather than litigating a matter of executive privilege in court .
He quoted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) , Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) , and Rep. Jerrold Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) , each of whom defended Barack Obama 's Attorney General Eric Holder when he was held in contempt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schiff did say the courts do n't really have a role in this .
Executive privilege ?
Why would that matter ?
It matters because it 's based in the Constitution of the United States , '' Sekulow said .
`` The president 's opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for judicial review . ''
He quoted law professor Jonathan Turley , who warned , `` I ca n't emphasize this enough ... if you impeach a president — if you make a high crime and misdemeanor of going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuse of power .
It 's your abuse of power .
You 're doing precisely what you 're criticizing the president for doing . ''
`` On June 28 , 2012 , Eric Holder became the first attorney general to be held in both civil and criminal contempt .
Why ?
Because President Obama asserted executive privilege , '' Sekulow noted .
Citing a 2012 op-ed Schiff wrote in Politico , Trump 's lawyer said , `` With respect to the Holder contempt proceedings , Mr. [ impeachment ] Manager Schiff wrote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] is backed by decades of precedent that has recognized the need for the president and his senior advisors to receive candid advice and information from their top aides . ''
`` Indeed that 's correct , not because manager Schiff said it , but because the Constitution requires it , '' Sekulow added .
`` Mr .
Manager Nadler said that the effort to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for refusing to comply with various subpoenas was 'politically motivated , ' and Speaker Pelosi called the Holder matter 'little more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` But to say that the courts have no role , the rush to impeachment , to not wait for a decision of the court on an issue as important as executive privilege , as if executive privilege has n't been utilized by presidents since our founding .
This is not some new concept , '' Trump 's lawyer said .
`` The president 's opponents in their rush to impeach and refuse to wait for complete judicial review , that was their choice . ''
Democrats defended Obama 's executive privilege , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exercises his .
Tyler O'Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay : The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center .
Follow him on Twitter at @ Tyler2ONeil .

During his opening remarks in the Senate impeachment trial, President Donald Trump’s lawyer Jay Sekulow quoted Democrats’ own words against them. He condemned the House Democrats’ rush to impeach Trump, adding an article of impeachment for “Obstruction of Congress” rather than litigating a matter of executive privilege in court. He quoted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), each of whom defended Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder when he was held in contempt of Congress in 2012.
“Mr. Schiff did say the courts don’t really have a role in this. Executive privilege? Why would that matter? It matters because it’s based in the Constitution of the United States,” Sekulow said. “The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for judicial review.”
He quoted law professor Jonathan Turley, who warned, “I can’t emphasize this enough…if you impeach a president — if you make a high crime and misdemeanor of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It’s your abuse of power. You’re doing precisely what you’re criticizing the president for doing.”
“On June 28, 2012, Eric Holder became the first attorney general to be held in both civil and criminal contempt. Why? Because President Obama asserted executive privilege,” Sekulow noted.
Citing a 2012 op-ed Schiff wrote in Politico, Trump’s lawyer said, “With respect to the Holder contempt proceedings, Mr. [impeachment] Manager Schiff wrote, ‘the White House assertion [of privilege] is backed by decades of precedent that has recognized the need for the president and his senior advisors to receive candid advice and information from their top aides.”
“Indeed that’s correct, not because manager Schiff said it, but because the Constitution requires it,” Sekulow added. “Mr. Manager Nadler said that the effort to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for refusing to comply with various subpoenas was ‘politically motivated,’ and Speaker Pelosi called the Holder matter ‘little more than a witch hunt.'”
“But to say that the courts have no role, the rush to impeachment, to not wait for a decision of the court on an issue as important as executive privilege, as if executive privilege hasn’t been utilized by presidents since our founding. This is not some new concept,” Trump’s lawyer said. “The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach and refuse to wait for complete judicial review, that was their choice.”
Democrats defended Obama’s executive privilege, but they’re impeaching Trump when he exercises his.
Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--This Is Rich: House Democrat Jason Crow Pretends Trump 4 Week Delay Delivery of Javelin Missiles Was

This Is Rich: House Democrat Jason Crow Pretends Trump 4 Week Delay Delivery of Javelin Missiles Was a Crime(?) When Obama Sent Blankets

This Is Rich : House Democrat Jason Crow Pretends Trump 4 Week Delay Delivery of Javelin Missiles Was a Crime @ @ @ @ @ Sent Blankets ( VIDEO ) The Democrats sent their brain trust to the Senate Floor @ @ @ @ @ against President Donald Trump .
Brain-child Rep. Jason Crow argued that President Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ to Ukraine was a high crime or misdemeanor .
Trump sent JAVELIN MISSILES to the @ @ @ @ @ sent BLANKETS !

The Democrats sent their brain trust to the Senate Floor to push their sham impeachment against President Donald Trump.
Brain-child Rep. Jason Crow argued that President Trump’s delay in sending Javelin missiles to Ukraine was a high crime or misdemeanor.
Trump sent JAVELIN MISSILES to the Ukrainian military.
Barack Obama sent BLANKETS!
This entire argument is complete nonsense!


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--VIDEO: Geraldo Rivera Shakes Hands With Alex Jones, Says ‘You’ve Been Demonized Enough’ — ‘There’s a

VIDEO: Geraldo Rivera Shakes Hands With Alex Jones, Says ‘You’ve Been Demonized Enough’ — ‘There’s a Good Side to You’

The Democrat-led Senate advanced the highly controversial legislation on Tuesday

Last Updated on January 21, 2020
Reporter and author Geraldo Rivera ran into Infowars’ Alex Jones earlier this week on the streets of Washington, D.C.
Rivera shook hands with Jones during an early morning run, and was asked by Jones to do a two minute interview.
“Geraldo Rivera, you’ve been on the show years ago,” Jones noted.
“Yes, and you were on my show,” Rivera said.
Jones asked Rivera about the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.
“I think impeachment is a totally partisan exercise,” Rivera said, “as witnessed by the fact that not a single republican joined in it.
Rivera also voiced his concerns about the precedent of the House being able to impeach a sitting President over purely partisan differences.
Jones shook Rivera’s hand again at the end of the interview.
“I think you’ve been demonized enough, you know, I think there’s a good side to you,” Rivera told Jones before resuming his morning jog.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--Homosexual Lutheran “Pastor” Who was Kicked Out of the Clergy in the ’80s For Coming Out has Been Re

Homosexual Lutheran “Pastor” Who was Kicked Out of the Clergy in the ’80s For Coming Out has Been Reinstated

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America ( ELCA ) is an apostate denomination that affirms homosexuals as well as female clergy .
Often , you can see them with booths set up at various gay pride marches around the country denying Christ and giving people a false hope in a false gospel .
The ELCA has become the most anti-Christian “ denomination ” in all of Christendom .
In November of last year , one church ordained a Latino transgender pastor and boasted about being the first to do so .
Others deny the existence of Hell .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allows children to create and marry LGBTQ characters .
Worse , one of its sister churches in Sweden actually placed a blasphemous scene of homosexuals in the Garden of Eden on stage behind the altar .
In short , the denomination has long been given over to Satan .
Now , the denomination has reinstated a 66-year-old homosexual who was kicked out of the clergy in 1984 after he “ came out ” of the closet and has become the new “ pastor ” of First Evangelical Lutheran Church in Toronto .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ fast-track ” the reinstatement of homosexuals who were forced out of the clergy back then , Ralph Carl Wushke says , Of course , one can not “ serve faithfully ” while practicing homosexuality — the Scriptures clearly say that these will not receive the Kingdom of God .
The Evangelical Lutheran Church is not a Christian denomination — it is a social club for Satan .
They do not worship the risen Lord Jesus Christ , they are idolaters of a false religion that seeks to destroy Christianity and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those who continue to refer to these charlatans as “ pastors ” and these hell-holes as “ churches ” are only serving to advance their cause .
They serve their father the devil only .
If you were to die today , where would you go ?
Heaven ?
Hell ?
Not sure ?

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA) is an apostate denomination that affirms homosexuals as well as female clergy. Often, you can see them with booths set up at various gay pride marches around the country denying Christ and giving people a false hope in a false gospel.
The ELCA has become the most anti-Christian “denomination” in all of Christendom. In November of last year, one church ordained a Latino transgender pastor and boasted about being the first to do so. Others deny the existence of Hell. And the denomination actually created an iPhone app that allows children to create and marry LGBTQ characters. Worse, one of its sister churches in Sweden actually placed a blasphemous scene of homosexuals in the Garden of Eden on stage behind the altar. In short, the denomination has long been given over to Satan.
Now, the denomination has reinstated a 66-year-old homosexual who was kicked out of the clergy in 1984 after he “came out” of the closet and has become the new “pastor” of First Evangelical Lutheran Church in Toronto.
After the denomination implemented a policy last year to “fast-track” the reinstatement of homosexuals who were forced out of the clergy back then, Ralph Carl Wushke says,
ad-free articles, exclusive content, and access to our podcast archive by becoming a member. ►
If you appreciate our work, you can enjoyby becoming a member. ► Join Now
I’ll try to serve faithfully. Our congregation is in the heart of the city, surrounded by Ryerson University. There are no end of possibilities. There is a safe-injection site around the corner. There’s poverty
Of course, one cannot “serve faithfully” while practicing homosexuality — the Scriptures clearly say that these will not receive the Kingdom of God.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church is not a Christian denomination — it is a social club for Satan. They do not worship the risen Lord Jesus Christ, they are idolaters of a false religion that seeks to destroy Christianity and the denomination should be regarded as such. Those who continue to refer to these charlatans as “pastors” and these hell-holes as “churches” are only serving to advance their cause. They serve their father the devil only.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--Report: Federal Asset Ordered Terror Attack by Group Allegedly Conspiring to Storm Virginia Capitol

One of the things focused on excessively by the fake news media during the build up to today ’ s peaceful gun rally in Virginia has been the supposed plotting of neo-Nazis and armed militia groups to storm the Capitol .
Although none of those hysterical fears came to fruition , there were three men accused of being involved with the neo-nazi group The Base that were arrested last week .
They were arrested on weapons ’ charges as well as the bizarre charge of harboring an illegal immigrant from Canada .
It was claimed by authorities without any evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were planning a violent display at the Capitol rally .
While this news has been used to demonize all gun owners , startling details have emerged showing that The Base may in fact be a group run by the feds .
Another Base member Yousef O. Barasneh , 22 , was arrested and charged on Friday with vandalizing a Racine , WI synagogue last year .
Court records show that a federal informant had been giving orders to members of the hate group to commit acts of anti-Semitic terror .
Latest : President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Davos Globalist Gathering : Reject 'Perennial Prophets of Doom' The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported last week that a key leader within “ The Base ” was a federal informant responsible ordering anti-Semitic terror attacks : take our poll - story continues below Should Democrats be charged with TREASON for the impeachment scam ?
• None Should Democrats be charged with TREASON for the impeachment scam ?
• None Should Democrats be charged with TREASON for the impeachment scam ?
• None Yes , Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff should be held responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ok with me .
• None This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged .
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge .
You may opt out at anytime .
You also agree to this site 's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use .
One of the group ’ s ringleaders became an informant and gave investigators details over the past several months .
The documents in Barasneh ’ s case do not name the person but note he has been federally charged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The man admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties , calling it “ Operation Kristallnacht , ” a reference to Nazi Germany and the night Jewish homes , hospitals and other properties were ransacked and destroyed .
The man told investigators he said : “ If there ’ s a window that wants to be broken , don ’ t be shy.
” This would not be the first time that the federal government has infiltrated extremist right-wing groups and made domestic terrorists into intelligence assets .
The FBI infamously paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Greensboro , NC for years while he was still burning crosses and fomenting the hatred of minorities .
“ So sure , he ’ d made some fiery speeches , there ’ s no question about it .
But if he hadn ’ t , he would have been worthless , ” said FBI agent Dargan Frierson , who served as Dorsett ’ s handler , essentially laughing off Dorsett ’ s role in the terror group while working for the FBI .
Notorious hate monger Hal Turner was on the federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threats on his radio show and blog page for many years : A notorious New Jersey hate blogger charged in June with threatening to kill judges and lawmakers was secretly an FBI “ agent provocateur ” paid to disseminate right-wing rhetoric , his attorney said Wednesday… “ Almost everything was at the behest of the Federal Bureau of Investigation , ” Orozco said in a 45-minute telephone interview from New Jersey .
“ Their job was to pick up information on the responses of what he was saying and see where that led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on what he was being asked to do.
” “ He ’ s a devoted American , ” added the lawyer , who claims Turner was paid “ tens of thousands of dollars ” for his service… The FBI approached Turner , now 47 , in 2002 , and he spewed rhetoric about politics , white supremacy , immigration , abortion and other hot-button issues for years in exchange for government cash .
Turner was arrested in June at his apartment in suburban New Jersey .
According to court documents , ( .pdf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chicago-based 7th U.S .
Circuit of Appeals upheld a Chicago handgun ban , he blogged that the judges should be “ killed.
” “ Let me be the first to say this plainly : These judges deserve to be killed .
Their blood will replenish the tree of liberty .
A small price to pay to assure freedom for millions , ” he wrote .
The deep state will stoop to any level to keep their unconstitutional power and demonize right-wing patriots who aim to clean up their corrupt operation .
Their infiltration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dirty trick concocted by these disreputable federal spooks .

Report: Federal Asset Ordered Terror Attack by Group Allegedly Conspiring to Storm Virginia Capitol
One of the things focused on excessively by the fake news media during the build up to today’s peaceful gun rally in Virginia has been the supposed plotting of neo-Nazis and armed militia groups to storm the Capitol.
Although none of those hysterical fears came to fruition, there were three men accused of being involved with the neo-nazi group The Base that were arrested last week. They were arrested on weapons’ charges as well as the bizarre charge of harboring an illegal immigrant from Canada. It was claimed by authorities without any evidence being provided to the public that they were planning a violent display at the Capitol rally.
While this news has been used to demonize all gun owners, startling details have emerged showing that The Base may in fact be a group run by the feds. Another Base member Yousef O. Barasneh, 22, was arrested and charged on Friday with vandalizing a Racine, WI synagogue last year. Court records show that a federal informant had been giving orders to members of the hate group to commit acts of anti-Semitic terror.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported last week that a key leader within “The Base” was a federal informant responsible ordering anti-Semitic terror attacks:
One of the group’s ringleaders became an informant and gave investigators details over the past several months. The documents in Barasneh’s case do not name the person but note he has been federally charged in another state for his role. The man admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties, calling it “Operation Kristallnacht,” a reference to Nazi Germany and the night Jewish homes, hospitals and other properties were ransacked and destroyed. The man told investigators he said: “If there’s a window that wants to be broken, don’t be shy.”
This would not be the first time that the federal government has infiltrated extremist right-wing groups and made domestic terrorists into intelligence assets. The FBI infamously paid off Ku Klux Klan leader George Dorsett of Greensboro, NC for years while he was still burning crosses and fomenting the hatred of minorities.
“So sure, he’d made some fiery speeches, there’s no question about it. But if he hadn’t, he would have been worthless,” said FBI agent Dargan Frierson, who served as Dorsett’s handler, essentially laughing off Dorsett’s role in the terror group while working for the FBI.
Notorious hate monger Hal Turner was on the federal payroll as well while he issued terrorist threats on his radio show and blog page for many years:
A notorious New Jersey hate blogger charged in June with threatening to kill judges and lawmakers was secretly an FBI “agent provocateur” paid to disseminate right-wing rhetoric, his attorney said Wednesday… “Almost everything was at the behest of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” Orozco said in a 45-minute telephone interview from New Jersey. “Their job was to pick up information on the responses of what he was saying and see where that led them. It was an interesting dynamic on what he was being asked to do.” “He’s a devoted American,” added the lawyer, who claims Turner was paid “tens of thousands of dollars” for his service… The FBI approached Turner, now 47, in 2002, and he spewed rhetoric about politics, white supremacy, immigration, abortion and other hot-button issues for years in exchange for government cash. Turner was arrested in June at his apartment in suburban New Jersey. According to court documents, (.pdf) after a three-judge panel of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit of Appeals upheld a Chicago handgun ban, he blogged that the judges should be “killed.” “Let me be the first to say this plainly: These judges deserve to be killed. Their blood will replenish the tree of liberty. A small price to pay to assure freedom for millions,” he wrote.
The deep state will stoop to any level to keep their unconstitutional power and demonize right-wing patriots who aim to clean up their corrupt operation. Their infiltration of The Base is just the latest dirty trick concocted by these disreputable federal spooks.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--New Reports Reveal That The Companies Of Biden’s Brother Received $54 MILLION In Taxpayer-Funded Loa

New Reports Reveal That The Companies Of Biden’s Brother Received $54 MILLION In Taxpayer-Funded Loans To Finance Energy Projects In Central America

President Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani taunted the Deep State on Sunday morning and said he will be sharing evidence he “ has garnered through hundreds of hours of research.
” He tweeted : In my next thread of tweets , I will be sharing some of the evidence I have garnered through hundreds of hours of research .
Turn notifications on & stay tuned .
And he did provide some huge bombshell reports .
He revealed a huge money-laundering operation involving the Bidens and Burisma Holdings .
Money was flowing through Latvia and Cyprus disguised as loans to various tech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fees ’ to Hunter Biden .
Giuliani said , “ Now you don ’ t make two loans to make board fees unless you ’ re laundering the money .
$ 3 million gets to Hunter Biden in that way.
” “ That is a straight out violation of a money laundering statute , ” he said .
Today new reports emerged and suggested that Frank Biden ’ s companies received $ 54 MILLION in taxpayer-funded loans to finance energy projects in Central America Just like his son—Biden ’ s brother also had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” author Peter Schweizer makes the case for Biden family corruption in his new book “ Profiles in Corruption : Abuse of Power by America ’ s Progressive Elite.
” In Profiles in Corruption , Schweizer offers a deep-dive investigation into the private finances , and secrets deals of some of America ’ s top political leaders .
And , as usual , he doesn ’ t disappoint , with never-before-reported revelations that uncover corruption and abuse of power—all backed up by a mountain of corporate documents and legal filings from around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making sweetheart deals , generating side income , bending the law to their own benefits , using legislation to advance their own interests , and much more .
Breitbart reports Frank Biden , the youngest brother of former Vice President Joe Biden , saw his business interests benefit from millions of dollars in taxpayer loans to Caribbean nations during the Obama years .
The extensive overlap in Frank Biden ’ s dealings and Obama-Biden foreign policy in Central America is exposed in Peter Schweizer ’ s new book—Profiles in Corruption : Abuse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Frank Biden first set his sights on the region in 2009 , as the Obama administration began to repair the U.S. relationship with Costa Rica .
Tensions between the two countries flared under President George W. Bush , most notably on how to deal with drug trafficking .
When President Barack Obama entered the White House , he set out to mend fences in the region in hopes of inaugurating a new era of global cooperation .
Leading the charge on that front was Joe Biden , who had long standing ties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate Foreign Relations Committee .
Shortly after the new administration took office , Frank Biden began scouting real estate opportunities in Costa Rica .
A lawyer by training , Frank was undeterred by his lack of background in international development and decades old legal troubles at home .
As Schweizer notes , despite the professional and personal handicaps , business opportunities were plentiful for Frank , especially after his brother paid a visit to the country .
“ Just months after Vice President [ Joe ] Biden ’ s visit , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new multilateral partnership “ to reform Real Estate in Latin America ” between Frank Biden , a developer named Craig Williamson , and the Guanacaste Country Club , a newly planned resort , ” Schweizer writes in his book , a copy of which was exclusively obtained by Breitbart News .
The venture—officially sold to investors and the public as an opportunity to protect Costa Rica ’ s “ breathtaking beauty ” —amounted to little more than decimating the country ’ s natural wilderness to build a luxurious resort for wealthy foreigners .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s dream was to build in the jungles of Costa Rica thousands of homes , a world-class golf course , casinos , and an anti-aging center , ” Schweizer notes .
“ The Costa Rican government was eager to cooperate with the vice president ’ s brother.
” The project , which is still in the development phase , has made Frank Biden a well connected figure in Costa Rica ’ s political landscape .
A letter the country ’ s president , Luis Guillermo Solis Rivera , penned praising the project even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what appears to have been a botched attempt to solicit further investors .
In order to execute a project of such scale , however , Costa Rica would need to update and expand its electrical grid .
Located on the Central American Isthmus , more than 51 percent of the country ’ s landscape is forested , with nearly half of that being land that has not been disturbed by human activity .
As such , much of the area suitable for the type of resort Frank Biden wanted to build lacked access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a chance to make even more money , entered into a partnership with the Costa Rican National Power and Light Company ( CNFL ) to build a solar power complex in the country ’ s northwest region .
The new facility would provide enough electricity to Frank ’ s resort , which was to be built in the vicinity .
The partnership with CNFL was secured even though Frank and his company , Sun Fund Americas , had no experience in the energy sector .
Will the Mainstream Media cover this ?
Please @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is the only way we can work around their censorship and ensure people receive news about issues that Democrats and the mainstream media suppress .

President Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani taunted the Deep State on Sunday morning and said he will be sharing evidence he “has garnered through hundreds of hours of research.”
He tweeted:
In my next thread of tweets, I will be sharing some of the evidence I have garnered through hundreds of hours of research. Turn notifications on & stay tuned.
In my next thread of tweets I will be sharing some of the evidence I have garnered through hundreds of hours of research. Turn notifications on & stay tuned. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) December 15, 2019
And he did provide some huge bombshell reports.
He revealed a huge money-laundering operation involving the Bidens and Burisma Holdings. Money was flowing through Latvia and Cyprus disguised as loans to various tech companies then paid out as ‘board fees’ to Hunter Biden.
Giuliani said, “Now you don’t make two loans to make board fees unless you’re laundering the money. $3 million gets to Hunter Biden in that way.”
“That is a straight out violation of a money laundering statute,” he said.
Today new reports emerged and suggested that Frank Biden’s companies received $54 MILLION in taxpayer-funded loans to finance energy projects in Central America
Just like his son—Biden’s brother also had no energy experience.
“Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer makes the case for Biden family corruption in his new book “Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite.”
The book teaser reads:
In Profiles in Corruption, Schweizer offers a deep-dive investigation into the private finances, and secrets deals of some of America’s top political leaders.
And, as usual, he doesn’t disappoint, with never-before-reported revelations that uncover corruption and abuse of power—all backed up by a mountain of corporate documents and legal filings from around the globe.
Learn about how they are making sweetheart deals, generating side income, bending the law to their own benefits, using legislation to advance their own interests, and much more.
Breitbart reports Frank Biden, the youngest brother of former Vice President Joe Biden, saw his business interests benefit from millions of dollars in taxpayer loans to Caribbean nations during the Obama years.
The extensive overlap in Frank Biden’s dealings and Obama-Biden foreign policy in Central America is exposed in Peter Schweizer’s new book—Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite.
Frank Biden first set his sights on the region in 2009, as the Obama administration began to repair the U.S. relationship with Costa Rica. Tensions between the two countries flared under President George W. Bush, most notably on how to deal with drug trafficking.
When President Barack Obama entered the White House, he set out to mend fences in the region in hopes of inaugurating a new era of global cooperation. Leading the charge on that front was Joe Biden, who had long standing ties to the region from his tenure leading the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Shortly after the new administration took office, Frank Biden began scouting real estate opportunities in Costa Rica. A lawyer by training, Frank was undeterred by his lack of background in international development and decades old legal troubles at home.
As Schweizer notes, despite the professional and personal handicaps, business opportunities were plentiful for Frank, especially after his brother paid a visit to the country.
“Just months after Vice President [Joe] Biden’s visit, in August, Costa Rica News announced a new multilateral partnership “to reform Real Estate in Latin America” between Frank Biden, a developer named Craig Williamson, and the Guanacaste Country Club, a newly planned resort,” Schweizer writes in his book, a copy of which was exclusively obtained by Breitbart News.
The venture—officially sold to investors and the public as an opportunity to protect Costa Rica’s “breathtaking beauty”—amounted to little more than decimating the country’s natural wilderness to build a luxurious resort for wealthy foreigners.
“In real terms, Frank’s dream was to build in the jungles of Costa Rica thousands of homes, a world-class golf course, casinos, and an anti-aging center,” Schweizer notes. “The Costa Rican government was eager to cooperate with the vice president’s brother.”
The project, which is still in the development phase, has made Frank Biden a well connected figure in Costa Rica’s political landscape. A letter the country’s president, Luis Guillermo Solis Rivera, penned praising the project even made its way on the internet in what appears to have been a botched attempt to solicit further investors.
In order to execute a project of such scale, however, Costa Rica would need to update and expand its electrical grid. Located on the Central American Isthmus, more than 51 percent of the country’s landscape is forested, with nearly half of that being land that has not been disturbed by human activity. As such, much of the area suitable for the type of resort Frank Biden wanted to build lacked access to electricity.
Frank, perhaps sensing a chance to make even more money, entered into a partnership with the Costa Rican National Power and Light Company (CNFL) to build a solar power complex in the country’s northwest region. The new facility would provide enough electricity to Frank’s resort, which was to be built in the vicinity.
The partnership with CNFL was secured even though Frank and his company, Sun Fund Americas, had no experience in the energy sector.
This is a disgrace
Will the Mainstream Media cover this?
Please share this article wherever you can. It is the only way we can work around their censorship and ensure people receive news about issues that Democrats and the mainstream media suppress.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--He Can’t Stop Lying: Bug-Eyed Burbank Bolshevik Adam Schiff Tells Senate he Gave Republicans Equal T

He Can’t Stop Lying: Bug-Eyed Burbank Bolshevik Adam Schiff Tells Senate he Gave Republicans Equal Time During Slap-Dash Schiff Sham — When He Blocked their Witnesses and Questions

He Can ’ t Stop Lying : Schiff Tells Senate he Gave Republicans Equal Time During Slap-Dash Schiff Sham — @ @ @ @ @ and Questions ( VIDEO ) We know Adam Schiff has repeatedly lied on the House @ @ @ @ @ well established .
But will Adam Schiff be able to lie at will on the @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday during the first day of the impeachment proceedings , Rep. Adam Schiff told the @ @ @ @ @ equal time during the House slap-dash impeachment proceedings .
Of course , this is another @ @ @ @ @ administration was not allowed to participate for the first 71 of 78 days ** Republicans @ @ @ @ @ questions ** ‘ Witnesses ’ were blocked from answering questions ** Republicans were blocked from @ @ @ @ @ Schiff has refused to release all testimony including ICIG Atkisson ’ s testimony that shows @ @ @ @ @ ’ lied

We know Adam Schiff has repeatedly lied on the House floor.
That has been well established.
But will Adam Schiff be able to lie at will on the Senate floor too?
On Tuesday during the first day of the impeachment proceedings, Rep. Adam Schiff told the senators that he gave Republicans equal time during the House slap-dash impeachment proceedings.
Of course, this is another whopper.
** The Trump administration was not allowed to participate for the first 71 of 78 days
** Republicans were blocked from asking difficult questions
** ‘Witnesses’ were blocked from answering questions
** Republicans were blocked from holding their witness day
** Schiff has refused to release all testimony including ICIG Atkisson’s testimony that shows that the alleged ‘whistleblower’ lied
Here’s Schiff this afternoon:


thelibertydaily--2020-01-21--SECOND Bolshevik Bernie Sanders Field Organizer Caught on Video Calling for Stalinist Gulag Re-Educa

SECOND Bolshevik Bernie Sanders Field Organizer Caught on Video Calling for Stalinist Gulag Re-Education Camps for Republicans: ‘I’ll Straight Up Get Armed . . . I’m Ready for the F**king [Communist] Revolution’

On Tuesday morning , Project Veritas exposed Martin Weissgerber , a second Bernie Sanders field organizer who has been recorded calling for extremist left-wing violence and a communist revolution .
Martin Weissgerber was recorded in the sting drinking craft beer and saying , “ I ’ ll straight up get armed … I ’ m ready for the f—ing revolution.
” He proudly proclaimed his support for violent class warfare and said , “ what will help is when we send all of the Republicans to the re-education camps.
” He praised gulags and said that the “ Soviet Union @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in history for women ’ s rights .
The Post Millennial has independently verified that Weissgerber has expressed disdain for police officers , Israel , women , and more on social media—all the while enjoying an opulent lifestyle where he sips champagne , goes sailing and holidaying in Europe .
The former Boston University student has a social media rife with disturbing statements praising Marxism and antifa .
He retweeted a post last week critical of Project Veritas ’ sting on his colleague Kyle Jurek , an Iowa Sanders field organizer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders campaign , Weissgerber also has a fledgling career as a Soundcloud rapper , under the name King Manic .
This is the second Sanders staffer exposed by Project Veritas in their “ # Expose2020 ” project .
Last week , video showed Kyle Jurek similarly speaking favourably of Soviet gulags and urging similar punishments in the U.S. for counter-revolutionaries .
He also expressed support for antifa extremism and advocated for political violence on the street .
The Sanders campaign has not responded to the videos .

On Tuesday morning, Project Veritas exposed Martin Weissgerber, a second Bernie Sanders field organizer who has been recorded calling for extremist left-wing violence and a communist revolution.
Martin Weissgerber was recorded in the sting drinking craft beer and saying, “I’ll straight up get armed … I’m ready for the f—ing revolution.”
BREAKING: 2ND PAID STAFFER PRAISES GULAGS
South Carolina @BernieSanders Field Organizer @martinthemanic: "I'll straight up get armed…I'm ready for the "f**king revolution"; "Guillotine the rich"; 'send Republicans to re-education camps'
FULL RELEASE 12:00PM#Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/tUCeKEY6aM — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 21, 2020
He proudly proclaimed his support for violent class warfare and said, “what will help is when we send all of the Republicans to the re-education camps.” He praised gulags and said that the “Soviet Union was one of the most progressive places” in history for women’s rights.
The Post Millennial has independently verified that Weissgerber has expressed disdain for police officers, Israel, women, and more on social media—all the while enjoying an opulent lifestyle where he sips champagne, goes sailing and holidaying in Europe.
The former Boston University student has a social media rife with disturbing statements praising Marxism and antifa. He retweeted a post last week critical of Project Veritas’ sting on his colleague Kyle Jurek, an Iowa Sanders field organizer.
In addition to his work on the Sanders campaign, Weissgerber also has a fledgling career as a Soundcloud rapper, under the name King Manic.
This is the second Sanders staffer exposed by Project Veritas in their “#Expose2020” project. Last week, video showed Kyle Jurek similarly speaking favourably of Soviet gulags and urging similar punishments in the U.S. for counter-revolutionaries. He also expressed support for antifa extremism and advocated for political violence on the street. The Sanders campaign has not responded to the videos.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--Democrats in Virginia Push Tyrannical Laws to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offe

Democrats in Virginia Push Tyrannical Laws to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense

In the wake of the Virginia gun rights rally on Monday , Democrats in the Capitol are not slowing down their push for tyranny .
They are moving a bill through the legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against Governor Blackface Northam and other state government officials .
House Bill 1627 was introduced by Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne last week .
The legislation “ provides that certain crimes relating to threats and harassment may be prosecuted in the City of Richmond if the victim is the Governor , Governor-elect , Lieutenant Governor , Lieutenant Governor-elect , Attorney General , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the General Assembly , a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia , or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
” Language in the bill explicitly criminalizes free speech , in what would constitute a blatant attack on the 1st Amendment of the Constitution .
“ If any person , with the intent to coerce , intimidate , or harass any person , shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene , vulgar , profane , lewd , lascivious , or indecent language , or make any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or threaten any illegal or immoral act , he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor , ” the legislation reads .
take our poll - story continues below The legislation makes it clear that the above provision applies directly to “ the Governor , Governor-elect , Lieutenant Governor , Lieutenant Governor-elect , Attorney General , or Attorney General-elect , a member or employee of the General Assembly , a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia , or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia , ” which means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials .
Tina Freitas , wife of Republican Delegate Nick Freitas , called attention to this intolerable act in a Facebook post on Tuesday night .
“ Wow on cue , now they are after the 1A !
Dems are trying to set up special rules exclusive to the Elite ruling class , to protect themselves from criticism !
” Freitas wrote .
“ What is considered harassment ?
Is Governor Infanticide/KKK Hood trying to avoid being held accountable ?
Are we no longer allowed to demand justice for the alleged rape victims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ straight up communist censorship !
” she added .
Virginia Democrats were not detracted by the gun rights rally on Monday in the slightest .
They moved red flag laws through the legislature just a day later , and subsequently killed pro-gun bills that were introduced by Republicans .
“ The governor and the leadership of the democrats have declared war on law-abiding citizens and gun owners and their votes today just confirmed that that ’ s where we ’ re going , ” said Philip Van Cleave , President of Virginia Citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to continue organizing locally , with Sheriffs deputizing local patriots and constitutional militias being trained , as a bulwark against the treasonous usurpers leading the state legislature .

Virginia Democrats Push Legislation to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense
In the wake of the Virginia gun rights rally on Monday, Democrats in the Capitol are not slowing down their push for tyranny. They are moving a bill through the legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against Governor Blackface Northam and other state government officials.
House Bill 1627 was introduced by Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne last week. The legislation “provides that certain crimes relating to threats and harassment may be prosecuted in the City of Richmond if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Language in the bill explicitly criminalizes free speech, in what would constitute a blatant attack on the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.
“If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor,” the legislation reads.
The legislation makes it clear that the above provision applies directly to “the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia,” which means this legislation effectively criminalizes dissent against public officials.
Tina Freitas, wife of Republican Delegate Nick Freitas, called attention to this intolerable act in a Facebook post on Tuesday night.
“Wow on cue, now they are after the 1A! Dems are trying to set up special rules exclusive to the Elite ruling class, to protect themselves from criticism!” Freitas wrote.
“What is considered harassment? Is Governor Infanticide/KKK Hood trying to avoid being held accountable? Are we no longer allowed to demand justice for the alleged rape victims of LG Fairfax? This is some straight up communist censorship!” she added.
Virginia Democrats were not detracted by the gun rights rally on Monday in the slightest. They moved red flag laws through the legislature just a day later, and subsequently killed pro-gun bills that were introduced by Republicans.
“The governor and the leadership of the democrats have declared war on law-abiding citizens and gun owners and their votes today just confirmed that that’s where we’re going,” said Philip Van Cleave, President of Virginia Citizens Defense League.
Virginia patriots may have to continue organizing locally, with Sheriffs deputizing local patriots and constitutional militias being trained, as a bulwark against the treasonous usurpers leading the state legislature.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--Robert Kraft Gives Hope To Patriots Nation, ‘We Plan To’ Bring Back Tom!

Here 's the Patriots owner out in NYC on Tuesday ... giving Pats fans hope Tom Brady ai n't done @ @ @ @ @ all while piling himself into the back of his chauffeured ride on a busy street @ @ @ @ @ , not exactly Zapruder footage -- but the exchange is DEFINITELY gon na make Pats @ @ @ @ @ TMZ Sports : `` Are we going to keep Tom in New England , Bob @ @ @ @ @ course , Tom 's been rumored to be a goner in New England for the @ @ @ @ @ 's a free agent for the first time in his career and he reportedly cleaned @ @ @ @ @ Gillette Stadium earlier this month .
Plus , when we got his good pal and @ @ @ @ @ , out in L.A. last week ... he did n't exactly sound like a man @ @ @ @ @ be back .
But , if you 're listening to Kraft ... it sure seems @ @ @ @ @ him .
For now .

Play video content JANUARY 2020 TMZSports.com
And now, TMZ Sports Presents: Terrible Clip, Great Soundbite ... starring Robert Kraft!!!
Here's the Patriots owner out in NYC on Tuesday ... giving Pats fans hope Tom Brady ain't done in New England yet -- all while piling himself into the back of his chauffeured ride on a busy street!!!
We know, not exactly Zapruder footage -- but the exchange is DEFINITELY gonna make Pats nation happy!!!
TMZ Sports: "Are we going to keep Tom in New England, Bob?!?"
Kraft: "We plan to!"
BOOOOOOOM!!!
Of course, Tom's been rumored to be a goner in New England for the last several weeks ... he's a free agent for the first time in his career and he reportedly cleaned out his family suite at Gillette Stadium earlier this month.
Plus, when we got his good pal and former teammate, Willie McGinest, out in L.A. last week ... he didn't exactly sound like a man who was convinced Tom would be back.
Play video content TMZSports.com


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--Sean Hannity: Democrats’ Weak Articles of Impeachment ‘Are an Affront to the US Constitution’

Speaking during his opening monologue on ‘ Hannity ’ Monday night , Sean weighed-in on the Democrats ’ never-ending impeachment @ @ @ @ @ obsession is an “ affront to the US Constitution.
” “ The Democrats impeachment fantasy @ @ @ @ @ .
The President ’ s legal team calling it a perversion of the US Constitution… @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 election now just months away , ” said Hannity .
“ They are @ @ @ @ @ Republican Senator should give this one iota of legitimacy , ” he added .
“ @ @ @ @ @ know it ’ s not your Republican Senator ’ s job to bolster these pathetically @ @ @ @ @ the House .
”

'DISASTROUS DAY': Trump Says Democratic Party Has 'Less Than Nothing' After Mueller Testimony
posted by Hannity Staff - 7.25.19
President Trump responded to Robert Mueller’s disastrous testimony Wednesday afternoon; saying the Democratic Party “lost big” and now have “less than nothing” heading into the 2020 election.
The Democrats lost so BIG today. Their Party is in shambles right now…pic.twitter.com/WDnGSOFzZU — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 24, 2019
The Democrats had nothing…pic.twitter.com/VUIMndS4lZ — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 24, 2019
“The Democrats lost so big today. Their party is in shambles right now. They’ve got the Squad leading their party, they are a mess. This was a devastating day for the Democrats. This was a devastating day,” said the President on the White House lawn.
“The Democrats had nothing, and now they have less than nothing,” he added.
Trey Gowdy unloaded on leading Democrats and their handling of Robert Mueller’s Congressional testimony Wednesday; saying the person who “learned the most” about the Mueller Report was -in fact- Robert Mueller.
WATCH: Trey Gowdy (@TGowdySC) says that "the person who learned the most about the Mueller Report today… was Bob Mueller," calls the hearings an "abject, miserable failure" for Democrats. #MuellerHearings #MuellerTestifies pic.twitter.com/ifdDShElcc — MediaResearchCenter (@theMRC) July 24, 2019
“They’re not closer to anything other than wishing this had never happened. Bad facts make for bad witnesses, bad witnesses make for bad hearings, and this one was an abject, miserable failure. The person who learned the most about the Mueller Report today was Robert Mueller,” Gowdy told Fox News.
“He was not engaged, he didn’t interview the witnesses, he clearly didn’t write the report, which means those under him did, which means the issue of bias is all the more important. It was a terrible day if you are a Democrat,” he added.
President Trump weighed-in Wednesday on Robert Mueller’s disastrous Congressional testimony; thanking the Democratic Party “for holding this morning’s hearings” and calling Rep. Adam Schiff an “embarrassment to our country.”
“I would like to thank the Democrats for holding this morning’s hearing. Now, after 3 hours, Robert Mueller has to subject himself to #ShiftySchiff – an Embarrassment to our Country!” tweeted Trump.
I would like to thank the Democrats for holding this morning’s hearing. Now, after 3 hours, Robert Mueller has to subject himself to #ShiftySchiff – an Embarrassment to our Country! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 24, 2019
The New York Post Editorial Board blasted Rep. Jerrold Nadler’s Mueller hearing Wednesday; calling the entire spectacle a “waste of everyone’s time.”
“By all accounts, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hoped that dragging in former special counsel Bob Mueller for a hearing would jump-start his drive to get going on impeachment. Oops: It was a total waste of time,” writes the Editorial Board. “Mueller made it clear long in advance that he didn’t want to testify, and wouldn’t talk about anything except what was in his report. He even got the Justice Department to issue a guidance instructing him to keep to his preferred limits.”
“What did we learn? Nothing. What’s the impact? Nothing. If Nadler was hoping to get Democrats and their voters energized about impeachment, he’ll surely be disappointed. And we’re no closer to knowing how much this long investigation relied on opposition research by Hillary Clinton and dirty tricks by intelligence operatives appalled by Donald Trump,” adds the Post.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--What You Need to Know About Religious School Case at the Supreme Court

Should families be able to use school choice tax credits on religious schools ?
That ’ s the question that ’ s at the heart of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which the Supreme Court is hearing Wednesday .
Heritage Foundation legal scholar and host of the podcast “ SCOTUS 101 ” Elizabeth Slattery breaks down the case for us .
Read a lightly edited transcript of her interview , or listen on the podcast : We also cover the following stories : • A columnist claims his belief in only two sexes got him fired .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dueling speeches on climate and environment .
• Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. , targets the wealthy in new remarks .
The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet , Apple Podcasts , Pippa , Google Play , or Stitcher .
All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts .
If you like what you hear , please leave a review .
You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at [ email protected ] .
Enjoy the show !
Daniel Davis : Well , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where the justices are hearing arguments in a case involving religious schools .
The case is Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue .
Joining me to break it down is Elizabeth Slattery , a legal fellow here at The Heritage Foundation .
Elizabeth , thanks for coming in .
Elizabeth Slattery : Thanks for having me .
Davis : So this case is out of Montana .
What exactly is the dispute over ?
Slattery : Back in 2015 , the Montana Legislature set up this tax-credit scholarship program that would provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ qualified schools , private schools .
Initially , recipients could use the scholarship funds at any qualified school , including religious ones .
But then the Montana Department of Revenue implemented a rule to exclude religious schools , citing a provision in the Montana Constitution that bars state funds from aiding religious organizations .
Parents were relying on these funds to send their children to religious schools and they sued in state court .
And that is the case that ’ s up at the Supreme Court .
Davis : So , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state Constitution , but I ’ m assuming the Supreme Court is going to have something to say about the U.S. Constitution .
Do you think the two might be in conflict here ?
Slattery : Yeah .
So , the parents raised federal constitutional claims in addition to some state law issues .
And what the Montana Supreme Court ended up ruling was , it struck down the tax-credit program in its entirety .
It said that , “ Look , when the Legislature set this up , they were allowing funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution says that you can ’ t do that.
” And so they struck down the program in its entirety .
So no children can use the scholarship program right now .
Davis : You ’ ve written that the Supreme court ’ s recent ruling in the Trinity Lutheran case from 2017 might be relevant here as a precedent to maybe correct this ruling or overturn it .
Can you explain that ?
Slattery : Sure .
Trinity Lutheran was a case out of Missouri from back in 2017 .
And that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was run by a church .
And they wanted to apply for this state-funded grant to help them resurface the playground at the day care center .
But they were denied the grant solely because it was brought by a religious institution .
Missouri , likewise , has what ’ s called a no-aid [ amendment ] or a Blaine Amendment .
Some people call them that in their state constitution .
And this case went all the way to the Supreme Court .
And the court held that Missouri had violated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solely on the basis of religion .
Davis : So the parents in this Montana case , they ’ re going to argue the same thing .
They ’ re going to say that this tax credit is a generally available public benefit and that , therefore , they should be able to use it to go toward religious schools ?
Slattery : Yeah .
And there ’ s an additional wrinkle here , particularly with regard to the no-aid provision because what we ’ re talking about here is a tax credit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state money that ’ s flowing to the schools .
It ’ s people giving money to a scholarship-granting organization and then the money goes into the hands of a private actor or the parents to decide where to use that money .
And the Supreme Court , the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that there ’ s a distinction between direct government funding of religion and indirect funding such as a tax credit , in this case .
Davis : Zooming out , big picture , what ’ s really at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who aren ’ t involved in this particular case ?
Slattery : Between 37 and 38 states have similar no-aid provisions in their constitutions .
And many of these states enacted these no-aid provisions .
They ’ re also called Blaine Amendments … named for Sen. James Blaine , who tried to get the federal Constitution amended to prevent funds from going to what he called “ sectarian ” schools .
And this was a code word for Catholic schools because he didn ’ t want funding of Catholic institutions or Catholic schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amendments .
So you can see … in the Montana case how they can conflict with school choice efforts .
And really this case is about just trying to allow parents to decide what the best educational opportunity is for their children and using programs like this tax-credit program to give their kids the best education that they can .
Davis : Right now the court is considered conservative by a 5-4 majority .
What outcome should we expect from this case ?
Slattery : Well , if we look at the Trinity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago , that ’ s when Justice [ Neil ] Gorsuch had just joined the Supreme Court .
Justice [ Anthony ] Kennedy was still on the bench .
So we have switched Kennedy for [ Justice Brett ] Kavanaugh .
But that was a 7-2 ruling .
So Justices [ Elena ] Kagan and [ Justice Stephen ] Breyer joined with the so-called conservative members of the court to uphold the First Amendment and to find that what the state of Missouri had been doing was religious discrimination .
So we could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Justice [ Sonia ] Sotomayor wrote a dissent back in Trinity Lutheran and Justice [ Ruth Bader ] Ginsburg joined her saying that they thought that the Trinity Lutheran case weaken the separation of church and state .
But we ’ ll see what happens in this one .
Davis : And then with Kavanaugh , I would assume he ’ s even more likely to go conservative in this case ?
Slattery : Based on his jurisprudence from the D.C .
Circuit and the limited jurisprudence we have from the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ line with the conservatives when it comes to establishment clause and other First Amendment cases .
So it ’ s hard to predict how cases are going to turn out because you never know what might happen .
But I think that there is affirm majority that will rule to side with the parents in this case .
Davis : If that happens , does that automatically amend the other state constitutions that currently ban this practice ?
Slattery : Not necessarily .
So , the parents in the Montana case have argued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutional provision , it violates the federal Constitution .
But they can see that there could be other applications of this provision that are in line with the federal Constitution .
Now , interestingly enough , the Trump administration filed a “ friend of the court ” brief supporting the parents in the Montana case .
And they say that these no-aid provisions should be struck entirely , but the parents who are the litigants in the case didn ’ t go quite that far in what they were asking the Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we expect the ruling ?
Slattery : It ’ ll be by the end of June most likely .
That ’ s when the court will wrap up for this term .
And they have been issuing opinions , some of the ones from the fall setting .
I think since this is going to be argued in January , we may not see an opinion until maybe April at the earliest .
But it may not be until the very end , which is the last week of June .
Davis : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll wait to see how the arguments go .
If you want to listen to more of Elizabeth ’ s analysis of cases like this , check out her podcast “ SCOTUS 101.
” Elizabeth , thanks for your time today .
Slattery : Great to be here .

Should families be able to use school choice tax credits on religious schools? That’s the question that’s at the heart of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, which the Supreme Court is hearing Wednesday. Heritage Foundation legal scholar and host of the podcast “SCOTUS 101” Elizabeth Slattery breaks down the case for us. Read a lightly edited transcript of her interview, or listen on the podcast:
We also cover the following stories:
A columnist claims his belief in only two sexes got him fired.
President Donald Trump and Greta Thunberg deliver dueling speeches on climate and environment.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., targets the wealthy in new remarks.
The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!
Daniel Davis: Well, it’s a big day at the Supreme Court, where the justices are hearing arguments in a case involving religious schools. The case is Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. Joining me to break it down is Elizabeth Slattery, a legal fellow here at The Heritage Foundation. Elizabeth, thanks for coming in.
Elizabeth Slattery: Thanks for having me.
Davis: So this case is out of Montana. What exactly is the dispute over?
Slattery: Back in 2015, the Montana Legislature set up this tax-credit scholarship program that would provide scholarships for income-eligible children to use at qualified schools, private schools.
Initially, recipients could use the scholarship funds at any qualified school, including religious ones. But then the Montana Department of Revenue implemented a rule to exclude religious schools, citing a provision in the Montana Constitution that bars state funds from aiding religious organizations.
Parents were relying on these funds to send their children to religious schools and they sued in state court. And that is the case that’s up at the Supreme Court.
Davis: So, the state Supreme Court ruled according to the state Constitution, but I’m assuming the Supreme Court is going to have something to say about the U.S. Constitution. Do you think the two might be in conflict here?
Slattery: Yeah. So, the parents raised federal constitutional claims in addition to some state law issues. And what the Montana Supreme Court ended up ruling was, it struck down the tax-credit program in its entirety.
It said that, “Look, when the Legislature set this up, they were allowing funds to go to religious schools and our Constitution says that you can’t do that.” And so they struck down the program in its entirety. So no children can use the scholarship program right now.
Davis: You’ve written that the Supreme court’s recent ruling in the Trinity Lutheran case from 2017 might be relevant here as a precedent to maybe correct this ruling or overturn it. Can you explain that?
Slattery: Sure. Trinity Lutheran was a case out of Missouri from back in 2017. And that case involved a day care center that was run by a church. And they wanted to apply for this state-funded grant to help them resurface the playground at the day care center. But they were denied the grant solely because it was brought by a religious institution.
Missouri, likewise, has what’s called a no-aid [amendment] or a Blaine Amendment. Some people call them that in their state constitution. And this case went all the way to the Supreme Court. And the court held that Missouri had violated the federal Constitution by discriminating against an organization solely on the basis of religion.
Davis: So the parents in this Montana case, they’re going to argue the same thing. They’re going to say that this tax credit is a generally available public benefit and that, therefore, they should be able to use it to go toward religious schools?
Slattery: Yeah. And there’s an additional wrinkle here, particularly with regard to the no-aid provision because what we’re talking about here is a tax credit. So it isn’t actually state money that’s flowing to the schools. It’s people giving money to a scholarship-granting organization and then the money goes into the hands of a private actor or the parents to decide where to use that money.
And the Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that there’s a distinction between direct government funding of religion and indirect funding such as a tax credit, in this case.
Davis: Zooming out, big picture, what’s really at stake in this case for other Americans who aren’t involved in this particular case?
Slattery: Between 37 and 38 states have similar no-aid provisions in their constitutions. And many of these states enacted these no-aid provisions.
They’re also called Blaine Amendments … named for Sen. James Blaine, who tried to get the federal Constitution amended to prevent funds from going to what he called “sectarian” schools. And this was a code word for Catholic schools because he didn’t want funding of Catholic institutions or Catholic schools.
A number of states have these amendments. So you can see … in the Montana case how they can conflict with school choice efforts. And really this case is about just trying to allow parents to decide what the best educational opportunity is for their children and using programs like this tax-credit program to give their kids the best education that they can.
Davis: Right now the court is considered conservative by a 5-4 majority. What outcome should we expect from this case?
Slattery: Well, if we look at the Trinity Lutheran case from a couple of terms ago, that’s when Justice [Neil] Gorsuch had just joined the Supreme Court. Justice [Anthony] Kennedy was still on the bench. So we have switched Kennedy for [Justice Brett] Kavanaugh. But that was a 7-2 ruling.
So Justices [Elena] Kagan and [Justice Stephen] Breyer joined with the so-called conservative members of the court to uphold the First Amendment and to find that what the state of Missouri had been doing was religious discrimination. So we could see a similar breakdown in this case.
Justice [Sonia] Sotomayor wrote a dissent back in Trinity Lutheran and Justice [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg joined her saying that they thought that the Trinity Lutheran case weaken the separation of church and state. But we’ll see what happens in this one.
Davis: And then with Kavanaugh, I would assume he’s even more likely to go conservative in this case?
Slattery: Based on his jurisprudence from the D.C. Circuit and the limited jurisprudence we have from the Supreme Court, he has been strongly in line with the conservatives when it comes to establishment clause and other First Amendment cases. So it’s hard to predict how cases are going to turn out because you never know what might happen. But I think that there is affirm majority that will rule to side with the parents in this case.
Davis: If that happens, does that automatically amend the other state constitutions that currently ban this practice?
Slattery: Not necessarily. So, the parents in the Montana case have argued that as the state court applied the constitutional provision, it violates the federal Constitution. But they can see that there could be other applications of this provision that are in line with the federal Constitution.
Now, interestingly enough, the Trump administration filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting the parents in the Montana case. And they say that these no-aid provisions should be struck entirely, but the parents who are the litigants in the case didn’t go quite that far in what they were asking the Supreme Court to do.
Davis: When should we expect the ruling?
Slattery: It’ll be by the end of June most likely. That’s when the court will wrap up for this term. And they have been issuing opinions, some of the ones from the fall setting.
I think since this is going to be argued in January, we may not see an opinion until maybe April at the earliest. But it may not be until the very end, which is the last week of June.
Davis: All right. Well, we’ll wait to see how the arguments go. If you want to listen to more of Elizabeth’s analysis of cases like this, check out her podcast “SCOTUS 101.” Elizabeth, thanks for your time today.
Slattery: Great to be here.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--NBC Fake Newser Chuck Todd Outraged: ‘Why Aren’t Democrats Making Life Miserable’ for GOP?

Chuck Todd and his NBC News Political Unit sounds like angry coaches in NBC 's `` Meet the Press : First Read '' digital newsletter on Tuesday morning .
The headline was `` Why are n't Democrats making life miserable for vulnerable Republicans on impeachment ? ''
Todd 's never a referee .
He 's yelling at players on the field .
Todd wants more punch in the Democrat offense .
It sure looks like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is going to ram through an incredibly speedy impeachment trial , which could result in President Trump ’ s acquittal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If McConnell gets his way — Senate Democrats will offer amendments to try to modify the ground rules — Democrats might have only themselves to blame .
Todd complained back on December 11 that the Republicans were winning a game of `` asymmetrical warfare , '' that `` there are some people who look at this impeachment situation , it looks like the Republicans are playing to win and the Democrats are trying to play by the rules.
” Adam Schiff was `` playing by the rules '' ?
That 's not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Republicans spent $ 10-15 million on campaign ads on impeachment , and the Democrats did n't match it .
He 's still complaining today : As it turns out , they ’ ve put little to no pressure so far on vulnerable GOP senators like Cory Gardner , R-Colo. , Martha McSally , R-Ariz. , Susan Collins , R-Maine , and even Joni Ernst , R-Iowa .
Indeed , according to our ad trackers at Advertising Analytics , there are 11 impeachment-themed TV ads airing across the country right now , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ groups .
Not a single one is by Democrats putting pressure on Republicans .
If the shoe were on the other foot — say a President Hillary Clinton facing a Senate impeachment trial — we ’ re fairly certain we ’ d see GOP ads directed at Doug Jones in Alabama , Gary Peters in Michigan and ( probably ) Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona .
So why haven ’ t Democrats tried to pressure GOP senators ?
Especially in the month since the House passed their impeachment articles against Trump ?
Democrats might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And they have a slight majority of Americans supporting Trump ’ s conviction and removal , according to yesterday ’ s CNN poll .
But they ’ ve yet to make life miserable for the Cory Gardners , Martha McSallys and Susan Collinses .
And that makes it much easier for Mitch McConnell to win on process .
Back on December 1 , Todd lamented the lack of public support for impeachment was because Republicans were “ bullying ” Democrats and that “ the Democrats didn ’ t pick up a weapon.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ asymmetrical warfare '' never seems to include the millions of dollars in free Democrat talking points offered by ABC , CBS , NBC , MSNBC , CNN , PBS ... .

Chuck Todd and his NBC News Political Unit sounds like angry coaches in NBC's "Meet the Press: First Read" digital newsletter on Tuesday morning. The headline was "Why aren't Democrats making life miserable for vulnerable Republicans on impeachment?"
Todd's never a referee. He's yelling at players on the field. Todd wants more punch in the Democrat offense.
It sure looks like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is going to ram through an incredibly speedy impeachment trial, which could result in President Trump’s acquittal by as early as next week.... If McConnell gets his way — Senate Democrats will offer amendments to try to modify the ground rules — Democrats might have only themselves to blame.
Todd complained back on December 11 that the Republicans were winning a game of "asymmetrical warfare," that "there are some people who look at this impeachment situation, it looks like the Republicans are playing to win and the Democrats are trying to play by the rules.” Adam Schiff was "playing by the rules"? That's not what Republicans would say.
Todd complained the Republicans spent $10-15 million on campaign ads on impeachment, and the Democrats didn't match it. He's still complaining today:
As it turns out, they’ve put little to no pressure so far on vulnerable GOP senators like Cory Gardner, R-Colo., Martha McSally, R-Ariz., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and even Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. Indeed, according to our ad trackers at Advertising Analytics, there are 11 impeachment-themed TV ads airing across the country right now, and all 11 are by Republicans and GOP groups. Not a single one is by Democrats putting pressure on Republicans. If the shoe were on the other foot — say a President Hillary Clinton facing a Senate impeachment trial — we’re fairly certain we’d see GOP ads directed at Doug Jones in Alabama, Gary Peters in Michigan and (probably) Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona. So why haven’t Democrats tried to pressure GOP senators? Especially in the month since the House passed their impeachment articles against Trump? Democrats might have the overall facts on their side. And they have a slight majority of Americans supporting Trump’s conviction and removal, according to yesterday’s CNN poll. But they’ve yet to make life miserable for the Cory Gardners, Martha McSallys and Susan Collinses. And that makes it much easier for Mitch McConnell to win on process.
Back on December 1, Todd lamented the lack of public support for impeachment was because Republicans were “bullying” Democrats and that “the Democrats didn’t pick up a weapon.”
Somehow all this talk of "asymmetrical warfare" never seems to include the millions of dollars in free Democrat talking points offered by ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS....


thelibertydaily--2020-01-22--French Sexual Predator Priest: Church Should Have Stopped Me

LYON , France ( ChurchMilitant.com ) - A self-accused pedophile in France 's biggest clergy sex abuse trial is saying multiple Catholic superiors , including certain cardinals , were aware of his crimes but did not stop him .
Bernard Preynat , a priest of the diocese of Lyon , France is blowing the whistle on his Catholic leader , who enabled him to abuse minors for decades .
`` Had the church sidelined me earlier , I would have stopped earlier , '' testified Preynat , at his trial taking place last week in Lyon .
The archbishop of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was in charge of Preynat since 2002 , but kept silent .
Barbarin was convicted by a French court in 2019 of covering for Preynat 's crimes .
Allegations of sex abuse against Preynat surfaced in 1991 .
The 68-year-old cardinal , however , kept Preynat in active ministry until 2015 .
Preynat , who is 74 , testified in court that his sexual obsession for young boys began when he was in his early teens and was well-known by his supervisor at that time , while he was in the minor seminary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bishop of his proclivities prior to his ordination .
`` At 14 , 15 years old , I became interested in the youngest boys and the supervisor summoned me to tell me that I was abnormal and sick , '' admitted Preynat .
`` I explained this to the bishop . ''
Preynat said he was sent to two years of psychotherapy from 1967–1968 and then ordained in 1972 .
`` I thought I was cured after my therapy , '' stated Preynat in court .
`` I was disappointed because I started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , no other member of the church encouraged me to do another one [ therapy session ] . ''
Successive archbishops of his diocese in Lyon , said Preynat , never reported his ongoing crimes to police and kept him in active ministry .
Preynat was n't defrocked until July 2019 following 40 years of complaints by concerned parents of the predator priest 's alleged victims .
One of them , Pierre-Emmanuel Germain-Thill , says the four-day hearings show how the hierarchy was aware of Preynat 's crimes but chose to let him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supervisors in the hierarchy were aware .
We can see there was a lid over the diocese , '' remarked Germain-Thill .
`` On several occasions , parents denounced him . ''
The frequency of Preynat 's sexual abuse of minors was alarming to many .
He testified that while being scout chaplain between 1970–1990 , he had abused up to two boys `` almost every weekend '' for 20 years .
Preynat further admitted that during that same period he had abused as many as four or five boys a week while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ archbishop of Lyon to tell him to stop abusing boys was Cdl .
Alexandre Renard .
This intervention came after parents sent a letter to the archdiocese in 1978 .
Aside from giving this verbal command to Preynat , Renard did not remove the abuser from his church , Sainte-Foy-les-Lyon in the suburb of Lyon .
Preynat also retained his leadership role over boys in scout groups .
Cardinal Albert Decourtray became the new archbishop of Lyon in 1981 but also enabled Preynat to continue abusing boys .
After new allegations from parents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warned Preynat that such abuse could look bad if it became widely reported by media .
`` I was warned by the hierarchy of the impact these acts could have in the media , '' Preynat said .
Had the church sidelined me earlier , I would have stopped earlier .
He was then sent back to work as usual .
Another accusation in 1985 was likewise suppressed , said the priest .
It was only in 1991 , after more outcry from parents , that Preynat was removed from his leadership role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He still remained in active ministry after swearing to Decourtray that he would stop abusing boys .
He said Decourtray did n't want to know the details of Preynat 's past 20 years of abuse .
`` I told him that it was a long story , the drama of my life , '' testified Preynat .
`` He made a movement with his arm so that I would n't tell him the facts . ''
Preynat was placed in a countryside parish of Lyon where he remained until 2015 .
Cardinal Louis-Marie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said when Bille called him in , it was only to ask if the cases of abuse were too old to be prosecuted .
`` I was received [ by Bille ] for 10 minutes , '' recalled Preynat .
`` He sent me to see a lawyer . ''
Barbarin , who succeeded Bille in 2002 , admitted in 2017 to mishandling Preynat 's case .
Barbarin offered his resignation as archbishop of Lyon to Pope Francis in March , but Francis has so far refused to accept it .
Have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tip line .

You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign up for only one day for the low cost of $1.99. Click the button below. See All Plans
LYON, France (ChurchMilitant.com) - A self-accused pedophile in France's biggest clergy sex abuse trial is saying multiple Catholic superiors, including certain cardinals, were aware of his crimes but did not stop him.
Bernard Preynat, a priest of the diocese of Lyon, France is blowing the whistle on his Catholic leader, who enabled him to abuse minors for decades.
"Had the church sidelined me earlier, I would have stopped earlier," testified Preynat, at his trial taking place last week in Lyon.
The archbishop of Lyon, Cdl. Phillipe Barbarin, was in charge of Preynat since 2002, but kept silent. Barbarin was convicted by a French court in 2019 of covering for Preynat's crimes. Allegations of sex abuse against Preynat surfaced in 1991. The 68-year-old cardinal, however, kept Preynat in active ministry until 2015.
Preynat, who is 74, testified in court that his sexual obsession for young boys began when he was in his early teens and was well-known by his supervisor at that time, while he was in the minor seminary. He also says he told his bishop of his proclivities prior to his ordination.
"At 14, 15 years old, I became interested in the youngest boys and the supervisor summoned me to tell me that I was abnormal and sick," admitted Preynat. "I explained this to the bishop."
Preynat said he was sent to two years of psychotherapy from 1967–1968 and then ordained in 1972.
Cdl. Phillipe Barbarin
"I thought I was cured after my therapy," stated Preynat in court. "I was disappointed because I started again with the kids. After that, no other member of the church encouraged me to do another one [therapy session]."
Successive archbishops of his diocese in Lyon, said Preynat, never reported his ongoing crimes to police and kept him in active ministry. Preynat wasn't defrocked until July 2019 following 40 years of complaints by concerned parents of the predator priest's alleged victims.
One of them, Pierre-Emmanuel Germain-Thill, says the four-day hearings show how the hierarchy was aware of Preynat's crimes but chose to let him continue.
"This trial shows that supervisors in the hierarchy were aware. We can see there was a lid over the diocese," remarked Germain-Thill. "On several occasions, parents denounced him."
The frequency of Preynat's sexual abuse of minors was alarming to many. He testified that while being scout chaplain between 1970–1990, he had abused up to two boys "almost every weekend" for 20 years. Preynat further admitted that during that same period he had abused as many as four or five boys a week while leading one-week scout camps.
The first archbishop of Lyon to tell him to stop abusing boys was Cdl. Alexandre Renard. This intervention came after parents sent a letter to the archdiocese in 1978. Aside from giving this verbal command to Preynat, Renard did not remove the abuser from his church, Sainte-Foy-les-Lyon in the suburb of Lyon. Preynat also retained his leadership role over boys in scout groups.
Cardinal Albert Decourtray became the new archbishop of Lyon in 1981 but also enabled Preynat to continue abusing boys. After new allegations from parents surfaced, Decourtray's chancery officials simply warned Preynat that such abuse could look bad if it became widely reported by media.
"I was warned by the hierarchy of the impact these acts could have in the media," Preynat said.
Had the church sidelined me earlier, I would have stopped earlier.
He was then sent back to work as usual. Another accusation in 1985 was likewise suppressed, said the priest.
It was only in 1991, after more outcry from parents, that Preynat was removed from his leadership role over boys in his scout group. He still remained in active ministry after swearing to Decourtray that he would stop abusing boys. He said Decourtray didn't want to know the details of Preynat's past 20 years of abuse.
"I told him that it was a long story, the drama of my life," testified Preynat. "He made a movement with his arm so that I wouldn't tell him the facts."
Preynat was placed in a countryside parish of Lyon where he remained until 2015.
Cardinal Louis-Marie Bille succeeded Decourtray in 1998. Preynat said when Bille called him in, it was only to ask if the cases of abuse were too old to be prosecuted.
"I was received [by Bille] for 10 minutes," recalled Preynat. "He sent me to see a lawyer."
Barbarin, who succeeded Bille in 2002, admitted in 2017 to mishandling Preynat's case. Barbarin offered his resignation as archbishop of Lyon to Pope Francis in March, but Francis has so far refused to accept it.
--- Campaign 31538 ---
Have a news tip? Submit news to our tip line.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-23--Lindsey Graham Offers Kind Words to Adam Schiff After Opening Arguments of Senate Impeachment Trial:

Lindsey Graham Offers Kind Words to Adam Schiff After Opening Arguments of Senate Impeachment Trial: ‘Good Job, You’re Very Well Spoken’

There wasn ’ t any yelling , but rather kind words were offered between a Republican and Democratic senator following the conclusion of the first day of opening arguments in the Senate impeachment trial .
Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) and Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) ran into one another after the conclusion of the first day impeachment managers delivered their case against President Donald Trump on Wednesday .
Rather than words of criticism , House Judiciary Chairman Graham offered kind words to Schiff — who is the lead Democratic impeachment manager .
“ Good job , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ You ’ re very well-spoken.
” The two shook hands as well during their exchange .
Check out the photos below : During Wednesday ’ s impeachment trial , Schiff declared that the president had been part of a corrupt scheme in pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to launch an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son , Hunter , as IJR reported .
Trump has denied any wrongdoing .
“ To implement this corrupt scheme President Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 2020 presidential campaign , ” Schiff said .
The Democratic impeachment managers are given 24 hours , up to three days , to present their case .
Then , Trump ’ s defense team will have the same amount of time to present their argument .
The Senate will kick off the second day of opening arguments by the Democratic impeachment managers , who are making the case against Trump regarding two articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — on Thursday beginning at 1 p.m .

There wasn’t any yelling, but rather kind words were offered between a Republican and Democratic Congressmember following the conclusion of the first day of opening arguments in the Senate impeachment trial.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) ran into one another after the conclusion of the first day impeachment managers delivered their case against President Donald Trump on Wednesday.
Rather than words of criticism, House Judiciary Chairman Graham offered kind words to Schiff — who is the lead Democratic impeachment manager.
“Good job,” Graham said to Schiff, adding, “You’re very well-spoken.”
The two shook hands as well during their exchange.
Check out the photos below:
Sen Graham walking out of the Capitol encounters Schiff, shakes his hand and says, “Good job, you’re very well spoken.” pic.twitter.com/Ne1f8TB7Qz — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) January 23, 2020
“Good job,” @LindseyGrahamSC tells @RepAdamSchiff as the impeachment trial wraps for the day. “Very well spoken.” pic.twitter.com/NC9jC3367o — Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) January 23, 2020
During Wednesday’s impeachment trial, Schiff declared that the president had been part of a corrupt scheme in pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to launch an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, as IJR reported. Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
“To implement this corrupt scheme President Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into two discredited allegations that would benefit President Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign,” Schiff said.
The Democratic impeachment managers are given 24 hours, up to three days, to present their case. Then, Trump’s defense team will have the same amount of time to present their argument.
The Senate will kick off the second day of opening arguments by the Democratic impeachment managers, who are making the case against Trump regarding two articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — on Thursday beginning at 1 p.m.
Truth and Accuracy
Submit a Correction * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success!
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Comment Down Below