- In 10 Short Years: Privileged White Male to Most Powerful Bureaucrat in Pennsylvania's History to First Female Four-Star
- 'REVEALED: Man accused of raping woman on Philadelphia SEPTA train as passengers 'filmed it' is an illegal Congolese immigrant with sex abuse and drugs rap sheet who should have been deported in 2015'
- Pennsylvania’s 25 highest-paid state employees in 2020
- C'mon Man: Americans can 'kill you with my COVID' but illegal aliens with their COVID can't?: 'Biden says cops and other first responders SHOULD be fired for not getting the vaccine and mocks people who use 'freedom' as a defense for refusing a shot'
Daily Archives: 1, July 1, 2021
Tom Wolf vetoed a Republican rewrite of Pennsylvania’s Election Code on Wednesday, making clear his party’s opposition to stricter voter ID requirements and setting up a potential showdown on the issue at the ballot box.
Voter ID has a contentious history in Pennsylvania. In 2012, the state enacted one of the nation’s strictest mandates — requiring voters to present a government-issued photo ID — but courts struck it down as unconstitutional before it took effect.
Still, roughly three-quarters of respondents to a recent Franklin & Marshall College poll of Pennsylvania voters said they favor requiring all voters to show photo ID.
If True A Historic Act of Journalism: What Did The Feds Know About The 1/6 “Insurrection” When Did They Know It And “Is it possible that… the most prominent antigovernment group in the United States, has been run, in effect, by the United States government itself”
“I wanted to ensure… that there was shock and awe. That we could charge as many people as possible before [January] 20th. And it worked because we saw through media posts that people were afraid to come back to D.C., because they were like, ‘If we go there, we’re going to get charged.’ Lead 1/6 prosecutor Michael Sherwin
Is it possible that the Oath Keepers, the most prominent antigovernment group in the United States, has been run, in effect, by the United States government itself — and nobody has mentioned it until now?
Revolver News generated tremendous discussion and controversy with our previous piece exploring the possibility that some of the unindicted individuals referred to in the 1/6 charging documents may be undercover agents or informants.
It is essential here to make an important note of clarification. The purpose of this analysis here is not to aid in the prosecution of any of these unindicted co-conspirators. Rather, our aim is to point out that, given the standards of indictment applied to those actually indicted, it is very strange and indeed suspicious that certain unindicted co-conspirators have managed to avoid indictment. This does not necessarily mean that we approve of the standard of indictment itself. Quite the contrary, the aggressive standard of indictment and prosecution, through an unimaginably broad application of “conspiracy” charges, is immoral, unjust, and absurd.
…to get a more concrete sense of what the Shock and Awe prosecutorial standard looks like in practice, we once more offer the case of George Tanios. Though in truth we could just as easily have picked one of the several hundreds of political prisoners being detained and subjected to third-world level abuse in prison.Continue reading
Facebook is banning white nationalism and white supremacy from its social network following criticism that the social network had not done enough to eliminate hate speech on its platform.
Facebook has argued that it is shielded by the protections of Section 230 — part of an internet law that states online platforms are not liable for what people post on their services — and should therefore not be held responsible for what is posted on its platform.
“Holding internet platforms accountable for the words or actions of their users is one thing, and the federal precedent uniformly dictates that section 230 does not allow it,” the majority of the court said, per the Chronicle. “Holding internet platforms accountable for their own misdeeds is quite another thing. This is particularly the case for human trafficking.”