Month: September 2023

Authored by Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The spiderweb of conflicting court dates in cases involving President Donald Trump places unfair pressure on defense lawyers and must be untangled, according to legal experts.

The former president is scheduled to appear in a pair of major trials, one in Washington and the other in Florida, beginning just 77 days apart. Those are just two of the seven, possibly eight, criminal and civil trials for which President Trump is scheduled during the 12 months prior to the 2024 presidential election, in which he is the leading Republican candidate.

Stacking the trials virtually on top of one another is unfair to the defendant, according to Kevin J. O’Brien, a New York-based trial lawyer and former assistant U.S. attorney who specializes in white-collar criminal cases.

“It’s an awfully burdensome responsibility placed on the defense. And in fairness, it really shouldn’t be placed upon them. It should have been the government’s job and the courts’ job to sort these things out and make sure there’s reasonable time between cases,” Mr. O’Brien told The Epoch Times.

President Trump has maintained his innocence and repeatedly said the criminal cases against him are politically motivated.

“Keep Indicting your Political Opponent, it makes no difference for what, or why. Keep him off the ‘campaign trail’ and in the courthouse instead. Don’t think of his Rights, the Constitution, or Liberty. Sit back and WATCH AMERICA CRUMBLE!” President Trump wrote on the social media platform Truth Social on Sept. 1.

President Trump announced his campaign to return to the White House nine months ago. He has consistently led the field of more than a dozen challengers for the Republican nomination by some 40 percentage points.

In the end, one or more of the trials will have to be rescheduled in the interest of justice, Mr. O’Brien believes.

Spiraling Calendar

President Trump’s legal troubles have snowballed since March when he was indicted in state court in New York on charges of falsifying business records related to payments made to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election. Judge Juan Merchan scheduled that trial for March 25.

In June, the former president was indicted in federal court in Florida on charges related to classified documents kept at his residence, Mar-a-Lago, Palm Beach. Additional charges were added in July. Judge Aileen Cannon initially set that trial to begin on Aug. 15 but agreed to delay it until May 20 at the request of the defense.

In August, President Trump was indicted in Washington, on federal charges for allegedly conspiring with six unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators to overturn the 2020 election results in events culminating on January 6, 2021.

Special Counsel Jack Smith, the prosecutor in the Florida and Washington cases, asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to schedule the Georgia case to begin Jan. 2. Judge Chutkan set the trial date for March 4.

Later in August, President Trump and 18 others were indicted in a Georgia state court on charges concerning an alleged conspiracy to overturn that state’s 2020 presidential election results.

Two co-defendants in the Georgia case, former campaign lawyers Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell, have asked that their trials begin on Oct. 23, citing their right to a speedy trial. President Trump has asked to sever his case from that of his co-defendants. Judge Scott McAfee has not ruled on either request.

In New York, President Trump is named in three civil lawsuits with trials scheduled to begin on Oct. 2, Jan. 25, and Jan. 29.

Complications for the Defense

Though the two federal criminal trials will begin 11 weeks apart, other court deadlines overlap, creating a nearly impossible challenge to mounting a defense.

“It is not a ‘March 4’ trial,” Attorney William Shipley said, referring to the Washington trial.

“This schedule has the defense attorneys filing motions in December. They have 4 months to review millions of pages of discovery, do their own investigation of matters contained in that discovery—including interviewing witnesses (both [government] witnesses and others who were not part of [government] investigation)—and formulating their own defense plan,” Mr. Shipley, who has represented a number of defendants in cases related to the events of January 6, wrote on the social media platform X on Aug. 30.

“This is at the same time there are pretrial proceedings already scheduled in the Florida case involving the documents.”

The schedules for both trials list more than a dozen deadlines for filing motions or other documents. Many of those filings will require a response from the other party, creating the possibility of submitting hundreds of pages of legal documents to each court through the fall and early winter.

Speaking of Judge Chutkan’s scheduling choice, Mr. Shipley wrote, “What she has done indirectly is derail the FL case—a tactical move to reduce the influence of decisions by the judge in that case that might cause problems for SCO Smith.”

The proposed trial schedules simply cannot be met, according to Mr. O’Brien. Court cases tend to lengthen as attorneys wrangle over pre-trial questions. And life itself is too complicated to bank on the clockwork precision required to manage even one trial on schedule, let alone eight.

“I’ve been in big cases before. Scheduling dates have a habit of slipping. Issues come up. Discovery disputes, motions, appeals, lawyers who get sick, witnesses who are unavailable, fights over every issue under the sun—all these things can wreak havoc and even the best-laid plans,” Mr. O’Brien said.

“Even in the Washington trial lasts until the end of April, it’s still unfair. That’s not nearly enough time to get ready for the second trial,” Mr. O’Brien added. “[The Florida trial] is going to have to be pushed back many, many months to make it a fair process.”

Solutions

Judge Cannon could try to resolve the scheduling conflict between the two federal criminal cases by ordering Mr. Smith to state his rationale for requesting a date for the Washington trial that conflicts with the Florida case, according to Mr. Shipley.

“She could issue an [order to show cause] to the government asking for them to explain why they sought a schedule in that case that interfered with the schedule she already issued in her case. When the [government] doesn’t have a good answer, she could cite [the Department of Justice] for contempt,” Mr. Shipley wrote.

“What might happen after that would be anyone’s guess.”

The more likely resolution, according to Mr. O’Brien, is that the judges in the two federal criminal cases will confer to arrange a compromise on the schedules.

“I suspect this process is just starting. There’s going to be jawboning and discussions behind the scenes with at least the two federal judges. Who knows how it’s going to go, but I think the push is going to be made for the January 6 case to go first,” he said, because the case involves the Constitution and the transfer of presidential power.

That appears to be Mr. Smith’s intention, evidenced by his requesting an early trial date and by streamlining the case to include only President Trump and not his alleged co-conspirators.

However, judges, not prosecutors, schedule trials. So the resolution will likely come after a consultation between Judges Cannon and Chutkan, Mr. O’Brien said, and there’s no telling what each might do.

“[Judge Cannon] has shown that she is willing to buck the norms, to put it mildly, in making decisions involving this case,” Mr. O’Brien said.

In 2022, prior to President Trump’s indictment, Judge Cannon appointed a third party to review documents seized by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago. The 11th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed that order and dismissed a lawsuit filed by President Trump to shield documents from federal investigators.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who is prosecuting the criminal case against President Trump in New York, has said that he will defer to the wishes of Judge Merchan regarding the Mar. 25 trial.

“Ultimately, the judge sets the schedule, and we will follow the court’s lead, but we’ll take a broad look at what justice requires,” Mr. Bragg said in a July 25 radio interview with WNYC.

Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Japan’s defense ministry is submitting a record spending request as part of a larger plan that will double Japan’s total defense spending over five years.

The ministry’s FY24 request for more than $52 billion would bring the Pacific nation closer to realizing Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s plan to bring defense spending up to a total of two percent of Japan’s gross domestic product in the coming years.

Mr. Kishida’s administration aims to raise defense spending to a total of about $68 billion by 2027. The move will bump Japan from being the ninth largest military spender in the world to the third, after only the United States and communist China.

The most recent budget request was approved by Japan’s defense ministry on Aug. 31 and sent to the finance ministry for negotiations.

If adopted, the request would add more than $6 billion to the defense budget for the second year in a row, and augment Japan’s defense forces with considerable new firepower.

The budget request includes billions of dollars worth of investments that would fill out Japan’s defense forces with warships, cruise missiles, and hypersonic warheads.

Among the proposed expenditures is more than $6 billion to secure ammunition and weapons, $4 billion to strengthen logistics capabilities needed to deploy weapons throughout the island chain, $2 billion for new landing ships, transport helicopters, and a new specialized transport team, and another $2 billion to buy 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles to deploy on new and existing ships by 2027.

Smaller amounts will also contribute to jointly developing weapons systems with the United States, UK, and Italy. These include new interceptor missiles designed to counter hypersonic warheads and new fighter jets.

Japan Eyes Threats From China, North Korea

The new weapons and platforms present the latest in a major pivot away from the pacifism that has defined Japan’s post-war defense investments. Such investments are increasingly viewed by the Kishida administration as necessary, however, as Japan faces increasing hostility from the communist regimes of China and North Korea.

Communist China has flown spy balloons through Japan’s airspace and launched missiles into the waters of Japan’s exclusive economic zone in recent years.

North Korea, meanwhile, has made repeated threats of nuclear terror against Japan, South Korea, and the United States.

Japan has thus undertaken historic steps to build up its ability to deter conflict and defend itself and its allies and partners from such actors.

Japan announced in 2021, for example, that it will deploy 500 to 600 military personnel to the southwestern island of Ishigaki, which is near Taiwan, in a move that experts say will solidify the country’s commitment to defending Taiwan from Chinese communist aggression.

In January of this year, Japan and the United States signed new commitments regarding defense spending, military modernization, and a new agreement that will extend their mutual defense treaty to apply to space.

Those deals followed a flurry of activity between the two nations at numerous levels of government, which also resulted in an overhaul in the U.S.–Japan defense posture and strategy, to include an expansion of Japanese forces and a restructuring of the U.S. Marine Corps forces stationed on and around Okinawa.

Accompanying these actions has been a swift detente with South Korea, through which Mr. Kishida and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol have worked to ease historic tensions dating to Japan’s occupation of Korea in the first half of the 20th century.

Those efforts are now bearing fruit. In February, Japan, South Korea, and the United States agreed to increase their security cooperation and “push back” against China and North Korea’s malign activity in the Pacific. Later, in August, leaders from the three nations met in Delaware for the first-ever stand-alone trilateral summit between the three powers.

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

A super PAC backing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s 2024 run for the White House said it’s pausing voter canvassing in four states and investing some of the freed-up field resources into three early-voting states.

Never Back Down, the PAC supporting Mr. DeSantis’s presidential bid, is suspending door-knocking operations in Nevada, California, Texas, and North Carolina, The Epoch Times has learned.

Instead, the PAC will be refocusing its efforts and investing some of those field resources into Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina—three early-voting states.

“We want to reinvest in the first three, we see real opportunities,” PAC spokeswoman Erin Perrine told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement, referring to Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

“The first three are going to set the conditions for the March states,” she added. California, North Carolina, and Texas hold their primaries in March 2024, according to the GOP primary calendar, while Nevada, an early-voting state, holds its primary in February.

However, Nevada faces what Ms. Perrine described as a volatile situation, where the state Republican Party has announced plans to hold its own party-run presidential caucus in addition to a statewide primary.

“When you have that kind of uncertainty about how the election’s going to be conducted, that becomes a pretty unstable environment to be investing the kind of resources that we’re investing,” Ms. Perrine said.

“Nevada is heading to a lawsuit,” she added.

Turbulence in California, Nevada

Nevada Republicans insist on holding their own caucus despite a new state law calling for a primary election.

Some say that the competing contests could confuse some voters and it seems that the Republican primary wouldn’t count as the party-run caucus plans to decide which candidate will receive the state’s delegates.

While it’s not yet clear when the Nevada caucus will take place, reports suggest it will be around the same time as the Feb. 6, 2024, primary, which falls after the Iowa caucus and primaries in New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Ms. Perrine told The Epoch Times that the Nevada GOP’s move is meant to favor former President Donald Trump’s chances at winning in 2024. Other officials at Never Back Down have made similar comments.

“The situation in Nevada is very clear. They’re eliminating important grassroots processes which doesn’t benefit voters, but it does benefit one person: Donald Trump,” Jess Szymanski, deputy communications director of Never Back Down, told the Washington Examiner.

“Nevada Republicans continue to lose elections with Trump at the top of the ticket, yet state GOP leaders are so obsessed with appeasing Trump that they’ve rigged their primary to prioritize Trump above their own voters,” Ms. Szymanski added.

Nevada Republican Party Chairman Michael McDonald, who was heavily involved in the process of maintaining the state’s GOP caucus, told ABC News that it’s a long-standing tradition that is “bigger than Gov. DeSantis” or “anybody that’s running for office.”

Ms. Perrine told The Epoch Times that the situation with the primaries in California is similar to what’s happening in Nevada.

“A similar situation in California, where they eliminated the California Republicans’ say in their own primary as well as making grassroots involvement impossible,” she said.

“Now the central committee will have a convention and a vote at the end of September, which could alter that. But that was a Trump-inspired rigging as well,” Ms. Perrine added.

In July, California Republicans changed delegate rules (pdf) in a way that a number of political pundits have said makes it less competitive and benefits President Trump.

Under the new rules, a Republican presidential candidate who receives over 50 percent of the vote in the state’s primary election will be awarded all 169 of the state’s delegates.

The old rules let Republican presidential candidates win three delegates in each congressional district, letting them target specific areas rather than focusing on expensive statewide campaigns, while allowing multiple candidates to get at least some delegates.

“When they changed it to a proportional, statewide winner-take-all, that completely eliminated the opportunity for grassroots campaigning,” Ms. Perrine said. “Literally a landmark decision they made with breathtaking speed.”

“And so with neither state having a fair process, the door knockers that were in Nevada and California, we decided to make them kind of refocus into the first three,” she explained.

By contrast, California GOP Chairwoman Jessica Patterson argued that the new rules would encourage candidates to campaign more extensively and put forward their proposal to a broader swathe of voters.

“Republican presidential candidates will not only be encouraged to spend real time campaigning in our state and making their case to voters, but Republican voters will equally be encouraged to turn out to support their chosen candidate to help them win delegates,” Ms. Patterson said in a statement.

‘Scam’ PAC Closes

Elsewhere, Mr. DeSantis’s presidential campaign said recently that the closure of the Ron to the Rescue super PAC was “welcome news,” while calling the PAC a “scam.”

“We’ve made clear from the beginning that this was a scam PAC looking to grift off Ron DeSantis, and it comes as welcome news they are no longer attempting to fleece our donors,” Andrew Romeo, communications director for the campaign, said in a statement.

“Ron DeSantis outraised both [President Joe] Biden and [former President Donald] Trump last quarter, and we look forward to continuing our fundraising success as we capitalize on his strong debate performance and momentum in the early states,” Mr. Romeo added.

Republican strategist John Thomas launched the Ron to the Rescue super PAC last fall to urge Mr. DeSantis to enter the 2024 presidential race.

In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, Mr. Thomas said he and the committee’s donors had become disenchanted with the governor following his botched campaign launch on Twitter, now X.

“We were hoping to do like a formal TV campaign of air support when DeSantis officially launched,” he told the outlet.

“But the problem with that is, with the Twitter Spaces blunder, like almost from the get-go, all of our major donors said, ‘Let’s just see how this plays out.’”

According to Federal Election Commission filings, the Ron to the Rescue PAC raised just over $1,600, of which more than $1,200 was disbursed to Mr. Thomas’s political consulting firm, Thomas Partners Strategies, for “PAC strategy consulting.”

Now, Mr. Thomas said he and his donor network intend to shift their support to President Donald Trump, who had surprised him with “a level of campaign savvy and discipline” that he had not previously seen from him.

“We’re going to see, after the reporting period of Sept. 30, how Trump’s cash on hand is, and then we’re going to try to determine where we can fill in gaps, if it’s needed.”

Since announcing his third presidential bid, President Trump has maintained his position as the clear frontrunner in the primary contest, with Mr. DeSantis consistently polling in second place.

According to the latest RealClearPolitics average of polls, the 45th president holds a commanding 39-point lead over Mr. DeSantis and is supported by 53.6 percent of Republicans.

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

A “drag” performer arrested 22 years ago for possessing both child pornography and illicit drugs has been hired to be the school principal of an Oklahoma City elementary school, and the school district is defending its decision.

Dr. Shane Brent Murnan, 52, the new elementary school principal at John Glenn Elementary, had his personal devices confiscated by police in 2001 on suspicion of possession of child pornography, V1SUT reported on Substack. Almost 20 years later, he was investigated for another crime, according to a 2020 court filing.

Meet Shane Murnan- elementary principal at @wh_isd.

Shane is a drag queen who performs for children and reads books about gender to kids while dressed in drag.

Shane was also previously arrested on child porn charges.

Would you want this person in charge of your kid’s school? pic.twitter.com/yNuZyt3HRK

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) August 30, 2023

Police arrested the then-30-year-old in August 2001 after a Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) search recovered four deleted images of children engaged in sex acts, according to court records. Police also found 6 grams of marijuana in his home. Murnan, at the time, was a fifth-grade teacher at Stillwater’s Will Rogers Elementary School. After the arrest, school officials suspended Murnan and he resigned in May 2002.

“From there, some unexplainable legal wrangling began in which Payne County Special Judge Phillip Corley ruled that prosecutors had not proven Murnan had possessed child pornography, claiming it could not be definitively proven the children in the photos were underage,” V1SUT reported.

Payne County prosecutors appealed Corley’s decision and prevailed in the Payne County Appeals Court.

In direct contradiction to the earlier ruling, Appeals Court Judge Dave Allen stated in his decision: “It is clear from a review of the pictures that they do represent child pornography”.

Later on, however, Payne County District Judge Donald L. Worthington reversed the reversal, dismissing the child porn charge.

Payne County prosecutors gave up, choosing not to appeal. In the end, it appears there was never any disagreement about the existence of the pornographic photos on Murnan’s computer, yet the charge was dropped. Was this a behind-the-scenes plea agreement to allow Murnan to accept only the drug charge (marijuana) and retain his teaching certificate?

Murnan’s record was expunged in October of 2003 after his short probation period on the drug charge. He spent the next several years creating his “Shantel Mandalay” persona and entering crossdressing pageants such as Miss Gay Oklahoma, V1SUT reported.

Last April, he posted a picture of himself dressed like the Easter Bunny on his “Shantel Mandalay” Facebook page with a message about his previous bad choices and the joys of being an educator.

On his drag queen Facebook page, Murnan posts many pictures of himself in and out of drag cavorting with other drag queens and young homosexuals at drag events and in gay bars.

“When my little sister wants a present for her birthday, I do my best to make it happen,” Murnan wrote in the caption for the picture below.

From 2007-2015, Murnan was back in the classroom, teaching at a small elementary School in Norman, Oklahoma, V1SUT reported. From there, he moved to the much larger Oklahoma City Public Schools district as teacher, teacher trainer/instructional coach, and eventually assistant principal at Prairie Queen Elementary School.

Prairie Queen is an underperforming school that serves a population that is 82.3 percent Hispanic and 96.5 percent economically disadvantaged. Most parents speak limited English and 69 percent of students are English language learners. These are vulnerable kids.

In 2018, Murnan reportedly cofounded Oklahoma City Drag Queen Story Hour, Inc. and began promoting the child-grooming library events throughout the state.

The organization teamed with the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Library System during the COVID pandemic and Murnan’s Shantel Mandalay persona was featured online reading to a target audience of young  children through the library’s Facebook events.

In September of 2020, during Murnan’s time at Prairie Queen Elementary School, the state entered a Criminal Probable Cause Initial Filing for an undisclosed crime with Murnan as the defendant. That case was assigned to Judge Kevin C. McCray.

Now, three years later, the Oklahoma City Public Schools district hired Murnan to be in charge of John Glenn Elementary School in the Western Heights School District (WHSD) in the southwest part of the OKC metro area.

The district of approximately 2,750 students has been in turmoil since 2021 when the state temporarily took over due to years of financial mismanagement and noncompliance. To simplify, the district gets a lot of funds, spends significantly more than the state average and continues to fail children.

The student population at John Glenn Elementary School is “majority Hispanic, English language learners and overwhelmingly economically disadvantaged,” according to V1SUT.

In a letter to the school’s parents, Brayden Savage, superintendent of Western Heights Public Schools, addressed the district’s controversial hiring decision.

“I am writing to address a concern you may read about on social media,”  Savage wrote in the letter obtained by the Daily Caller. “We understand the situation may cause concerns and questions among parents, staff, and community members.”

According to news reports at the time, those charges were dismissed by the court, and the record of the charges has been expunged,” the letter continues. “Since that time, Dr. Murnan has continued to be certified as an elementary school teacher and principal, including having his certificate renewed in April of 2023 and signed by State Superintendent Ryan Walters. The State Department of Education would have conducted another felony background check upon renewing his certification.”

Savage said that at the time of “recommendation,” the district gave its school board “all of the information” it had regarding Murnan and the board then voted to approve his hiring.

He told parents that the district followed “usual hiring practices” in vetting Murnan, checking references and conducting a felony criminal background check.

“Please know we are aware of the situation and handling this matter with the utmost attention and care,” Savage wrote.

In a statement to Crisis in the Classroom (CITC) Thursday, the Oklahoma State Department of Education said “anything that might expose kids to inappropriate sexual content at school is cause for serious concern to parents,” and that the department is “looking into all accusations and will take any necessary action to protect kids.”

Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters issued a strong statement on X Friday condemning WHSD’s hiring of Murnan.

“This is completely unacceptable,” Walters said. “We know that radical gender theory has been a direct assault on our kids and we can’t allow this in our schools.”

The superintendent said school districts need to do a better job vetting educators to make sure they reflect “Oklahoma values.”

“No one want’s to send their kid to school knowing that they could be exposed to this radical gender theory in any capacity,” he added. “This woke war on our kids has to stop.”

Drag queens in schools do not = Oklahoma values. pic.twitter.com/XQzpNIUnLw

— Superintendent Ryan Walters (@RyanWaltersSupt) September 1, 2023

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A number of people on social media have declared that “we will not comply” with COVID-19 mask mandates as some hospitals and businesses have moved to reinstate such rules in recent weeks.

Notably, former President Donald Trump released a video addressing “every COVID tyrant who wants to take away our freedom.”

“Hear these words: We will not comply. So don’t even think about it,” he said. “We will not shut down our schools. We will not accept your lockdowns. We will not abide by your mask mandates and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.”

“Amen, Mr. President. WE WILL NOT COMPLY!” wrote Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake on X, or Twitter.

While the former president had no authority to issue lockdowns, officials under his administration came up with national guidelines in early 2020—when the virus first arrived on U.S. soil—in a bid to deal with COVID-19. Later in 2020, President Trump declared that he opposes lockdowns and mandates, saying that “lockdowns are killing countries all over the world” and called on “Democrat governors” to “open up” their states.

“Just a reminder. We will not comply. Ever again. Screw your face diapers!! #masks,” wrote Fox News’ Tomi Lahren days before on X.

Former “Saturday Night Live” actor Rob Schneider had a similar message as an Atlanta college confirmed it would reinstate masking. “Regarding your precautionary mask mandate… I have a precautionary Foot I’d like to shove up your [expletive]! But don’t worry, it’s just for the next 14 days! For your own protection! Ps. Students WAKE UP, SHEEPLE! SAY NO!” he wrote.

“We will not adhere to lockdowns. We will not submit to mandates,” wrote Dr. Simone Gold, the head of anti-mandate America’s Frontline Doctors.” “We will not wear masks. We will not close down schools. We will not comply to COVID tyranny.”

Conservative journalist Kyle Becker added that people should “make it clear” to businesses that implement mask mandates that “they will not only lose your business but that of anyone you know Put the word out: We will not comply.”

Reinstated Mandates

The anti-mandate messaging comes as some hospitals in several states have moved to reinstate mask mandates, although some have only made it mandatory for doctors, nurses, and staff. But some have forced the rule on patients and visitors, too.

This week, Samaritan Health Facilities announced that it would require masking for staff, patients, and visitors. A public relations official with the hospital, Leslie DiStefano, claimed it is being done because “we know is that [masking] absolutely works,” despite hundreds of studies showing otherwise.

Earlier this month, United Health Services in Binghamton, New York, confirmed that it would again require masks for patients, visitors, staff, and doctors. “Because of an uptick in COVID-19 cases, masks are once again required in all clinical areas at UHS Wilson Medical Center, UHS Binghamton General Hospital, UHS Chenango Memorial Hospital and UHS Delaware Valley Hospital, as well as primary and specialty care sites,” United Health Services stated on its website.

The policy, imposed last week, is “in effect immediately for all patients, visitors, employees, medical staff, volunteers, students and vendors.” It added: “Masks are required at nurses’ stations and in conference rooms within clinical departments, including areas where patients register, wait, transport through, or receive testing and care.”

Masks will also be mandated in “common spaces,” the announcement added. That includes hospital lobbies, hallways, stairwells, cafeterias, and patient care units.

Elsewhere in New  York, Auburn Community Hospital in Auburn, located upstate, said on Aug. 19, about a month after its previous mask mandate ended, that it would again be requiring masks on-site. That applies to anyone going inside the facility, regardless of vaccination status.

“Face coverings are mandatory inside our facilities, regardless of your immunization status,” the statement reads. “If you do not arrive with one or yours is deemed inappropriate, a mask will be provided to you. It must be worn at all times and must cover your nose and mouth.”

Also in mid-August, University Hospital in Syracuse, New York, reinstated masking for everyone entering the building. The hospital’s mandate was only lifted a few months prior to that, in late April.

Last week, UMass Memorial in Worcester, Massachusetts, again instated its mask policy, but only for staff, doctors, and nurses, according to local reports.

“We have continued to see a dramatic increase in the number of COVID-19 positive employees over the past two weeks, which has led to exposures of both fellow caregivers and patients,” the company said. “In response to this, as a protective measure for our staff and patients, effective immediately we are requiring mandatory caregiver masking for all patient encounters in all licensed clinical areas.”

The college that Mr. Schneider mentioned,  Morris Brown College in Atlanta, said in August that it would mandate masks after an uptick in COVID-19 cases on a larger campus in Atlanta where the college is located.

Former President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Friday to accuse New York Attorney General Leticia James of election interference.

“In the NYS A.G. Letitia James case, I was targeted, given no jury, no extensions, no commercial division, no constitutional rights, no anything! The Democrat judge hates Trump with a passion,” he wrote – only in all caps that we won’t burn your eyes out with.

“The thing I have is a great case based on phenomenal numbers that show a net worth of billions of dollars more than she viciously & falsely claimed, very little debt, big cash, a powerful disclaimer clause, paid off loans, no defaults, ‘happy’ banks, great assets. I was defamed by NYS—election interference!”

James is suing Trump and two of his children in a multimillion-dollar lawsuit which claims he falsely inflated the value of his properties to obtain more favorable loans. She’s seeking to bar Trump and family from doing business or engaging in real estate acquisitions in New York for five years.

James is also seeking to bar Trump and his children from serving in any high-level executive roles in any company in New York.

Oh, and she wants $250 million in penalties too.

On Wednesday, James asked a judge to render a summary judgement on one of the seven claims brought against Trump, arguing that an “overwhelming amount of evidence” proves that Trump committed fraud and submitted false statements to bankers – inflating his wealth between $812 million and $2.2 billion each year.

“While this is just the tip of a much larger iceberg of deception Plaintiff is prepared to expose at trial–which would result in carving off billions more from Mr. Trump’s net worth–it is more than sufficient to permit this Court to rule as a matter of law that each SFC from 2011 to 2021 was false or misleading,” reads the filing.

As the Epoch Times notes, also on Wednesday, Trump’s lawyers released, in a court filing, the nearly 500-page transcript of a seven-hour-long interview the former president gave when he was deposed for the case in April.

In the hours-long deposition, the former president was questioned about the management and dealings of the Trump Organization, where he detailed the value of several of his properties.

“I never got a default notice. I paid interest every quarter, every month even before it was due, if it came on a holiday,” he said, testifying that the banks and lawyers they worked with had profited and were satisfied with the deals.

He told the prosecutors that his “brand” value increased during the years he was president, but he purposely refrained from doing any deals, not because it would have been illegal, but because he felt it was unethical, adding that he took his example from George Washington who kept two desks, separating business and state matters.

President Trump’s lawyers asked for the case to be dismissed, arguing that the statute of limitations have run out and that the prosecution had not brought forth proof of harm.

“The undisputed record further establishes his companies timely paid hundreds of millions of dollars in interest to their lenders and never defaulted on a loan or even been late on a loan payment during the entire 15+ year time period the NYAG has sought to scrutinize in this action,” they wrote, arguing there was no intent to defraud lenders or insurers.

President Trump, who declared his intention to run for office last November, has maintained that he has done nothing wrong in the several cases brought against him, decrying the legal actions as election interference.

Several court dates are expected to interfere with his campaign schedule, with another civil case in New York brought against him by writer E. Jean Carroll over accusations of defamation beginning Jan. 15, 2024, the same day as the Iowa Republican caucus.

authored by Matthew Lysiak via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The continued refusal of pharmacists nationwide to fill prescriptions for controversial COVID medications has raised questions over medical autonomy and who ultimately has control over patient care, according to a prominent doctor.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, a practitioner and founder of Coalition of Health Freedom, told The Epoch Times that many pharmacists nationwide are still refusing to fill prescriptions issued for ivermectin issued to patients for the treatment of COVID, despite statements from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) affirming that right to doctors.

“This needs to come to an end. In telling my patients what medicines they can and cannot have access to, we effectively have a large group of pharmacists practicing medicine without a license,” said Dr. Bowden. “They have no accountability for this yet they are allowed to dictate patient care.”

“I see it every single day. Enough is enough,” Dr. Bowden added.

Ivermectin has been around for decades but became the center of controversy in 2020 after medical opinion became divided over its effectiveness as a treatment for COVID. In the aftermath, many pharmacists refused to fill prescriptions for the medication.

By 2023, the issue had made its way into a courtroom when on Aug. 8 a lawyer representing the FDA confirmed that doctors were free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID.

“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

The government lawyer made the statement in defense of the FDA’s repeated calls for people to not take ivermectin for COVID. The FDA on Aug. 21, 2021, wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

On Aug. 17, the FDA issued clarification, this time stating that while it had approved ivermectin for certain uses in humans and animals, it had not issued any statement affirming the safety or effectiveness of the drug for treating COVID. However, the agency again affirmed that it would be left to individual doctors whether or not to prescribe the medication for the treatment of COVID.

“Health care professionals generally may choose to prescribe an approved human drug for an unapproved use when they judge that the unapproved use is medically appropriate for an individual patient,” the FDA said.

Read more here…

California lawmakers have advanced legislation that would allow killers serving life sentences without parole to request a re-sentencing.

California Senate Bill 94 now heads to the floor for a full vote by the California Assembly. It would open the possibility of judicial review to reduce sentences for some felons accused of serious crimes, including murder, if the offense occurred before June 5, 1990, and they’ve completed at least 25 years of their sentence.

Those who were convicted of first-degree murder of a police officer would not qualify, while those who do qualify would now have the opportunity to appear before a parole board, which could deny their release.

California state Sen. Dave Cortese (D) introduced the bill, saying on social media that he was “thrilled that these key bills of mine passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee.”

Republicans are appalled

“I’d like to say I am shocked Senate Bill 94 passed out of the Democrat-controlled Assembly Appropriations Committee, but I’m not,” said Jessica Millan Patterson, chair of the California Republican Party, said in a statement reported by Fox News. “California Democrats continue to send a crystal-clear message to all Californians: they would rather protect violent murderers than focus their efforts on true public safety and protecting victims.”

GOP assemblyman Bill Essayli, a former federal prosecutor, said that people sentenced for heinous crimes should serve their full prison term, even if that’s life without the possibility of parole.

“Killing two individuals with aggravating circumstances isn’t enough to justify a LWOP sentence? Being an accomplice to a mass murderer isn’t?,” he asked. “Killing a peace officer is sufficiently heinous, but killing a firefighter or other public official isn’t? These exclusions are purely political.”

“LWOP sentences are promises to the victim’s families that they need never fear the person will be let out of prison,” Essayli added. “This will permit a large percentage of LWOP offenders to be re-sentenced to standard first-degree murder and eligible for parole immediately.“

Authored by Natasha Holt via The Epoch Times,

A Florida physician known for being outspoken about COVID-related topics has regained his board certification that was stripped because he publicly criticized COVID vaccines.

Now, Dr. John Littell is moving forward from the experience with plans to help future physicians defend themselves when disciplined for voicing viewpoints that are not in the majority, he told The Epoch Times.

Dr. Littell, a longtime family physician in Ocala and a medical school professor, began posting videos sharing his thoughts about COVID-19 testing, treatments, and vaccines early in the pandemic. He was frustrated to find his content often was pulled down from his YouTube channel.

But he fought against what he saw as censorship by moving the content to other platforms, such as Rumble, he said.

Then, in January 2022 and again five months later, he received warning letters from the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), the organization that issued his certification for his medical specialty.

The letter stated that his videos on YouTube and Rumble spread “medical misinformation” and could put his board certification in jeopardy, he said.

The ABFM declined to comment on the matter because the board’s “policy indicates we are unable to comment about professionalism cases,” an unidentified spokesperson said in an email to The Epoch Times.

The ABFM is the third largest of the 24 boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties. More than 100,000 family medicine doctors are certified by the board, according to its website.

Protesters concerned about treatment of people who died while being treated for COVID-19 stand outside a board meeting at Sarasota Memorial Hospital in Sarasota, Fla., on Feb. 21, 2023. (Courtesy of Tanya Parus)

To keep their certification, physicians must uphold the board’s ethical standards and “guidelines for professionalism, licensure, and personal conduct,” the website states.

In letters from the board, Dr. Littell was told his public statements violated those guidelines. Dr. Littell responded to the letters and continued to speak publicly and post videos about the subjects, he said.

Months later, when he didn’t hear back, he said he thought the threat was gone.

“I was very happily under the radar,” he said.

Outrage Over Ivermectin

That changed after he was escorted out of a Sarasota Memorial Hospital board meeting in February for approaching a board member behind the dais. He wanted to thank the board member, he said, for letting him speak at the meeting. He didn’t realize that move would be seen as inappropriate, he said. 

Though he’s cared for many patients in hospitals, he’d never attended a hospital board meeting, let alone a contentious one, he said.

That day, medical freedom activists filled the boardroom to speak against the public hospital’s policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many were angry their loved ones were denied the opportunity to try ivermectin, an antiparasitic for humans and animals widely used by some in treating COVID-19, and other treatments. 

Dr. Littell spoke cordially to board members from the podium, an Epoch Times reporter confirmed. He told board members how treating patients with ivermectin had been his key to success in helping them recover. And he praised hospital personnel for their work during the pandemic.

Shortly after that, security guards escorted him outside.

Retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn, who served briefly as national security advisor for former President Donald Trump, attended a board meeting of Sarasota Memorial Hospital in Sarasota, Fla., on Feb. 21, 2023 (Chris Nelson for The Epoch Times)

A video of Dr. Littell’s removal from the meeting by security guards was posted to social media and received millions of views and media coverage. And that thrust him back in the spotlight as a doctor vocal about COVID-19 policies.

“I had a target on my back,” he said.

He questioned whether someone else would have been removed for the same reason.

Many doctors have faced consequences for questioning the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines and for advocating for the use of medicines such as ivermectin in the treatment of the disease.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wrote in one social media post about ivermectin: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” It linked to a page entitled “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”

Three doctors sued the FDA over the statements, saying it had no power to tell doctors which drugs to prescribe.

On Sept. 1, a federal court ruled that the agency likely overstepped its authority when it told Americans to “stop” using ivermectin against COVID-19. The FDA can inform, but has “no authority” to recommend consumers “stop” taking medicine, U.S. Circuit Judge Don Willett wrote in the ruling.

Accused of ‘Spreading False’ Information

The month after Dr. Littell spoke in Sarasota, the board sent a letter saying he’d been de-certified for “spreading false, inaccurate, and misleading materials about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccination, and treatment and mitigation of the virus,” The Epoch Times confirmed. 

A letter reviewed by The Epoch Times stated that if Dr. Littell appealed the decision within 20 days, he would continue to be represented by the board, pending a review of his case by the professionalism committee of the ABFM board of directors.

The reason for the decision to review his record was because of his past suggestions the COVID-19 vaccine was a product of genetic engineering, causing deaths in children and causing the rise of the Delta variant, the letter indicated. It also referenced “false” statements made by Drs. Ryan Cole and Robert Malone, who spoke at a medical freedom conference Dr. Littell organized in October 2022.

In the letter, the board also criticized Dr. Littell for “offering to provide medical exemptions from vaccination” to patients across the country and “publicly comparing the U.S. public health system’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to Nazi Germany.”

After receiving the troubling letter, Dr. Littell sought the help of attorney Jeff Childers, a business attorney in Gainesville, Florida. Since the COVID-19 lockdowns began, Mr. Childers has become active in lawsuits around the country related to medical freedom. He authors a daily blog called Coffee and Covid, which started by chronicling COVID-19 issues and now tracks other social and political issues, as well. 

Mr. Childers crafted a 64-page appeal to the board, dissecting every accusation made against Dr. Littell, an Epoch Times reporter confirmed. And as word of the threat to Dr. Littell’s board certification spread—a move that would prevent him from practicing medicine—medical freedom activists rose up to take his side.

A GiveSendGo.com campaign was started to collect donations to fund his legal fees. More than 6,400 people donated almost $255,000. And more than 1,900 pledged to pray for Dr. Littell. 

The Global Covid Summit, an international group of doctors focused on medical freedom in COVID-19 treatment, sent a letter signed by 169 doctors to the ABFM in support of Dr. Littell. In the letter, they argued that the board was false in every accusation made against Dr. Littell.

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo also voiced support for Dr. Littell.

“What they’re doing is being a bully,” he said in an interview with The Floridian. “It’s not going to age well.

“I read the letter from the Board, and it’s dripping with political animosity.”

Both Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) and Dr. Littell’s congresswoman, Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) sent letters in his defense to the board, Dr. Littell said.

“I’ve got to believe it’s not in the dozens, but probably in the hundreds of people who called and sent letters to the American Board of Family Medicine,” Dr. Littell said.

“I never asked them to, but that is what was happening.”

In July, Dr. Littell received word that the board had reviewed his case and retroactively de-certified him for three months, from March 16 to June 16. He never stopped seeing patients.

“It’s like a slap on the wrist so they’d feel good about it, but wouldn’t, presumably, have to face any legal action,” he said. 

His attorney agreed.

“They did it in a very face-saving way,” Mr. Childers said. 

But ultimately, he’s pleased with the decision.

“We were really surprised and gratified that we were able to achieve that result,” Mr. Childers said. 

Dr. Littell credits it to being  “a God thing” that he was able to keep caring for patients and face a decertification period only retroactively. 

“If they had said I was decertified, I would not have been able to do what I was doing. I mean, especially with the hospital care patients. I could have gotten into big trouble.”

He still may face consequences for having the blemish on his record, he said. He’ll have to report it to the hospitals at which he works and explain what happened, he said.

“Every time I go up for privileges with a hospital or any other institution, they’re going to say, ‘Well, has your license ever been suspended or revoked, and has your board certification ever been revoked?’ So, it’s still an issue. It’s not like you can just forget about it.”

He’s been advised by some other doctors, such as cardiologist Peter McCullough, to pursue legal action for the disciplinary measure they feel was wrong, he said. 

Continuing to Speak Out

Dr. Littell continues to speak out about the same topics. So he suspects he’ll face retribution again, he said. 

“The way I read the letter, it’s sort of like a warning,” Dr. Littell said.

The board, he said, seemed to be sending the warning, “If you act up again, we know it’s a privilege to have this board certification, and it can be removed at any time.”

And the next time, the punishment is likely to escalate. 

“The implication is that if it happens again, it’s going to be more than just three months,” Mr. Childers said.

Around the country, a slew of doctors had board certifications removed and licensure threatened for sharing their COVID-related opinions.

“Most people would probably be surprised to find out there’s a lot of this going on, now that the pandemic is over,” Mr. Childers said.

“From what I’ve heard, there’s probably more challenges to doctor licensing right now than at any other time.”

But because most doctors aren’t vocal about receiving discipline, it’s hard to know exactly how often it’s occurring, he said.

Doctors who have been active on social media seem to be targeted more often by medical authorities, he said.

Dr. Peter McCullough speaks in the Mississippi capitol building on COVID-19 vaccine adverse events. (Courtesy of Charlotte Stringer Photography)

Doctors who were not actively posting their thoughts about COVID-19 on social media “should feel very confident that if they follow a similar approach to what Dr. Littell did, they could hope for a good result at this point,” he said. 

Obtaining good legal advice is key, he said. It also helps to spread the word.

“All too often doctors either ignore these kinds of letters until it’s too late because they’re embarrassed, or they try to handle it on their own,” he said. 

“It’s important that people know when this happens. And if they’ll let folks know, they’ll find that they get a lot of support.”

Dr. Littell has no plans to keep quiet about what he feels went wrong during the COVID-19 pandemic

“I’m not letting up,” he said. 

He’s organizing his third annual medical freedom summit in November called “Food, Family & Medical Freedom” in Ocala, Florida at the World Equestrian Center.

Helping Future Doctors 

He intends to use the remaining money donated to his legal fund to help others respond to similar licensure problems, especially threats faced by medical students, he said.

He’s trying “to come up with a legal, legislative, and public relations strategy that helps future physicians,” he said. When they see practicing doctors disciplined and “raked over the coals” for speaking out about medical freedom issues, it deters good people from pursuing a degree in medicine, he said.

“I would like the medical freedom fighters, as I’m calling them, to create a sanctuary for pre-med, especially, and medical school students.”

“Early on, even in the colleges, they weed out the physicians who dare to question the narrative or challenge it,” he said, of those who insist that doctors decrees made by federal health agencies.

But asking questions and challenging prevailing thought is important to the goal of continually improving medical treatments, he said.

“And that intellectual curiosity is what we’re so desperately lacking now in medicine, and in most professions.”

He also envisions the network expanding to help connect like-minded educators in colleges, universities, and medical schools to share their ideas without fear of being in opposition to “woke” ideology, he said. 

He hopes to see that network push back against “lockstep mentality” and help students who are suffering because of it.

Medical students taught by Dr. Littell often tell him how difficult it is to be entering the field of medicine at this time, he said.

One student told him that his second-year class was forced to be vaccinated for COVID-19, he said. Classmates were told by their university they’d be “thrown out” of medical school in two weeks if they didn’t comply, Dr. Littell said.

Medical freedom activists upset about COVID-19 vaccines and other issues gather to voice concerns to lawmakers on the first day of the Florida Legislature’s annual regular session at the Capitol in Tallahassee on March 7, 2023. (Courtesy of Justin Harvey)

The student told him that, although more than half the class didn’t want the vaccine, they felt they had no other option, Dr. Littell said. Weeks later, the mandate was lifted. But it was too late—many students already had submitted to getting the shot they didn’t want.

“It’s like they [university officials] were playing games,” he said. “And the students didn’t know any better.

“They just don’t have enough support,” Dr. Littell lamented. “They want to say things, but they’re afraid they’re going to get disciplined if they speak out.”

He sees bringing people together to unite in their pushback against prevailing opinions as a revolutionary concept.

“It’s really no different than what our Founding Fathers did,” Dr. Littell said.

“They realized that they were victims of repression. But there also were people comfortable with the status quo. That’s what is in our medical schools right now and is what we all need to fight against.

“People should be allowed to question and use their God-given intellect, and not be censored or disciplined for doing so.”