Month: April 2024

California State Assemblyman Bill Essayli announced on Wednesday his plans to introduce legislation that would require California law enforcement to comply with immigration authorities and allow them to detain and deport illegal immigrants convicted of sex crimes against minors.

Contra Costa News reports,

“It is completely unacceptable that California law currently requires local law enforcement to protect illegal immigrant pedophiles from deportation under our ‘sanctuary state’ policy. I am amending AB 2641 to correct this gross injustice, remarked Assemblyman Bill Essayli.

“As the son of legal immigrants, I was raised to love our country and respect the law. Anyone here in this country illegally who dares commit a sex crime against a minor must be prosecuted and deported expeditiously–this is common sense,” added Assemblyman Bill Essayli.

The language of AB 2641 is currently being amended and will be available in the coming days as it moves through the California Legislature.

This comes after a Colombian illegal immigrant, who was previously convicted for sex crimes against a minor in California, was arrested in Boston, Massachusetts, last week.

While illegally in the United States on an expired visa, the Colombian national was convicted in December 2022 of sexual intercourse with and oral copulation of a minor, which carried a combined prison sentence of four years. However, the illegal immigrant and child sex offender was later released from California state custody on an unknown date, and he moved to Massachusetts.

It is currently unclear why he was released without serving the full term of his sentence.

According to an announcement by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, San Bernardino County refused to honor ICE’s request for advance notification of release to the San Bernardino County-West Valley Detention Center in Rancho Cucamonga, California before the illegal was released into the public.

Essayli states, “the laws of California prohibit law enforcement from handing over convicted child pedophiles to ICE for purposes of deportation,” making it so that San Bernadino County could not legally comply with ICE’s requests.

“On April 2, deportation officers from ERO Boston took him into custody and served him with a warrant for his arrest and a notice to appear before a Department of Justice immigration judge. The Colombian noncitizen will remain in ICE custody pending his removal proceedings,” reads the announcement from ICE.

Bill Melugin reported on Wednesday,

NEW: ICE says San Bernardino County, CA ignored their detainer request and released a Colombian sex offender from custody who had been convicted of sex crimes against a California minor. He made his way to Massachusetts, & Boston based ICE officers found & arrested him last week.

NEW: ICE says San Bernardino County, CA ignored their detainer request and released a Colombian sex offender from custody who had been convicted of sex crimes against a California minor. He made his way to Massachusetts, & Boston based ICE officers found & arrested him last week.… pic.twitter.com/V7xPjLgBp6

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) April 10, 2024

Assemblyman Bill Essayli chimed in, asking, “Why do California Democrats support pedophiles?”

San Bernardino was FORCED by state law to protect this pedophile because of our sanctuary state laws. This is completely unacceptable. As a California legislator, I will not stop until we get these misguided policies reversed. Why do California Democrats support pedophiles? https://t.co/JaDSfGbfzl

— Bill Essayli (@billessayli) April 10, 2024

Essayli released a video statement earlier, announcing his plans to “end California’s Sanctuary State for illegal immigrant pedophiles” with legislation he says will “require law enforcement to comply with federal immigration authorities in cases involving illegals convicted of child sex crimes.”

Watch below:

Essayli: Hi, I’m Assemblyman Bill Essayli here with an urgent legislative announcement. Recently, Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested a Colombian illegal immigrant who had been convicted of sex crimes against a minor in the state of California. ICE issued a detainer to release him into their custody for deportation. San Bernadino was unable to honor the detainer due to California sanctuary state laws. Yes, the laws of California prohibit law enforcement from handing over convicted child pedophiles to ICE for purposes of deportation. This is unacceptable in a civilized society. That is why today I am announcing that I have introduced legislation to reverse this misguided policy in the state of California and allow law enforcement to hand over pedophiles, people convicted of child sex offenses, to immigration to deport them and to get them out of our country. They have no business remaining here. Thank God, ICE was able to find and apprehend this individual before he’s able to hurt anyone else. This should never happen, and as lawmakers, we have an obligation and a duty to protect the citizens of this nation. And that is what I intend to do with this bill. Thank you

Urgent Legislative Announcement

Today I am introducing legislation to end California’s Sanctuary State for illegal immigrant pedophiles.#AB2641 will require law enforcement to comply with federal immigration authorities in cases involving illegals convicted of child sex… pic.twitter.com/ungMMDhnO8

— Bill Essayli (@billessayli) April 10, 2024

The post Assemblyman Essayli Introduces Bill for Immediate Deportation of Immigrant Sex Offenders Following Arrest of Illegal Immigrant Previously Convicted for Sex Crimes Against Minor (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Two great Americans: Alex Jones and Steve Bannon

Infowars host and founder Alex Jones joined Steve Bannon on The War Room the day after undercover video revealed a CIA-FBI operative explaining how the FBI used their powers to bankrupt Alex and Infowars.

BREAKING: Undercover Video: CIA Officer/Former FBI Boasts: We “Can Put Anyone in Jail.. Set Them Up” – FBI “Did What We Wanted” with Alex Jones “Took His Money Away”

Alex Jones told Steve Bannon that President Trump needs to “fire their ass” and clean house at the deep state when he comes into office in 2025.

Alex Jones:  The Justice Department, CIA, and NSA are all in with big tech. That came out of the weaponization hearings. They’re using it against the people, and we don’t like open borders or devalued dollars. Then we’re called Russian agents when we’re the loyal Americans. We have the Justice Department, as you said earlier in your analysis, that since Biden got in, openly declared war on populist Christian Conservatives and are saying the largest political block of the country is the biggest threat to the nation when it’s the globalists that have sold out America to communist China and to all these globalist forces.

And so they really want to get the reauthorization of FISA, Marjorie Taylor-Green, used the case of this current CIA operative and former FBI agent who just got caught on video admitting that they’ve been running a deep state takedown operation against me. I already knew that. It came out in court in Connecticut in the staged trial where the judge already found me guilty that the FBI was a party to it and was advising them and going through all the discovery, trying to find something to put me in jail.

Steve Bannon: …Walk through what we now have found out about your particular situation.

Alex Jones: This Gavin O’ Blennis character has been at DHS for a long time. He’s a big liberal general, SJW, a social justice warrior. He then went and worked for the FBI, and now he works as a contract manager that manages the contracts and operations for the CIA.

He got caught by one of these project Veritas-style groups that previously last year helped bring down PornHub in Texas and triggered that criminal investigation when they caught the footage of executives at PornHub saying, “Yes, we target, and are trying to recruit children.” So this very respected group, Sound Investigation, is what they’re called. They were out doing a drag net research with undercover operatives, excuse me, Steve, of federal agents. And we were asking about persecution of people like Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones.

And this O’Bllennis character starts bragging about how he was made aware at the FBI and CIA of how they had basically run an information operation against me, mainly to demonize Trump, where they made up a bunch of stuff I never said or did, hiked all up in the press, then advised groups how to sue me and how to do it in certain jurisdictions to basically rig it, to, quote, cut my legs off, take me off the air, and try to silence me because, “I was one of the loudest voices.”

And so now the report has gone extremely viral. Elon Musk and others have been responding and saying that needs to be investigated. The same Democrat Party law firm that has been quarterbacking this against me is now quarterbacking the lawsuits against Elon Musk. They also have quarterbacked the operations against Giuliani and Trump. So it’s all run out of New York and DC. The information operations run out of DC, the CIA, the legal response from the Democrats out of New York. And it’s all right there.

Steve Bannon: Just hang on, hang on, hang on. I want to make sure. This is their classic playbook to Alinsky. You had a platform, and you were the loudest voice with no back down saying exactly what they were doing. They specifically targeted you to hurt the Trump movement. You were Alinskied with operatives, but most importantly, with actual government assets, with CIA, FBI, DOJ. They specifically target you for your destruction, sir.

Alex Jones: Well, just like we saw in the weaponization hearings that you and I already knew about it. We experienced it in the last six, seven years. But in the hearings last year, they confirmed that FBI and CIA, they even had the emails with the CIA saying, This isn’t really legal what we’re doing. That email came out where they were reaching out to Facebook, which is META, and Instagram, and Google, and Twitter at the time, and with hundreds of thousands of requests we know of, saying, Take this down, take that down. What the hell are you doing? Cussing at the executives and high-level moderators at the big tech social media platforms, not just about Hunter Biden’s laptop, but on thousands of different subjects, including even the Afghan withdraw. Hey, don’t let people criticize the Afghan disastrous snap withdrawal that Biden did and the 80 plus billion in weapons that they gave the Taliban the rest of them, and ISIS-K. So this is just another level of how they’re inside of their actually running this. It’s totally illegal. It’s 100 times considerably larger on the scale of what came out in Senator Frank Church’s hearings in the ’70s.

So we need serious hearings with serious teeth. We need funding to be cut to all these special units they’ve got, the CIA and the FBI. It’s supposedly illegal to have the CIA operating domestically, but we know that in the middle of Obama’s terms, he got that law removed and repealed that the CIA couldn’t engage in domestic propaganda. But it’s still illegal for them to be engaged domestically engaging American citizens. As you know, Steve comes through a lot of hoops to be able to get the authorisation to do that and have pure evidence that someone is really working with a foreign power.

But instead, they just say, all MAGA, all Conservatives are Russian agents or Chinese agents, when it’s the complete opposite. Then you have the globalists in bed with the Russians, in bed with the Chinese. Total proof of that. So there’s real proof of espionage with people like Swallows-well and Feinstein, all the rest of them. Then that’s okay. We can see hearings where Swalz-well, that’s my name for him, Swalz-well, sits up there and talks about the communist Chinese threat when he was literally penetrated by a real agent of the CCP. So this is the government waging war against the people directly. Here they are, bragging about it, and it’s hiding in plain view.

And MTG has said, she tweeted it today, or posted on X, that she’s going to bring this up in the hearings, that she’s going to make an issue out of this latest case. But this is a keyhole we’re looking through into a wider world where they’re just openly sitting around talking about how they’re targeting whoever they see as the most effective journalist, trying to put Trump in prison for saying they stole the 2020 election, which we know they did, trying to put you in for standing up to them, putting Trump’s top campaign people in prison. This is the gulag. If they can get away with it with Trump, they’ll get away with it with anybody. That’s why I stand with Trump so strong, and he’s the man of the arena, and so are you.

This was an amazing interview. The pieces are starting to fall into place.

Please watch the entire video below.

The post Alex Jones: I Already Knew the CIA-FBI was Running a Deep State Takedown Operation Against Me – It Came Out in Court in Connecticut – The FBI was a Party to It, Advising Them (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

Government Agencies are illegally soliciting non-citizens to vote and potentially entrapping them.  Government workers who perform these acts are committing felonies.

Joe Hoft previously reported on how Illegals are being registered to vote in Florida.  This is likely the case in many other states.

The path non-citizens who cross our border illegally take to get on voter rolls in Florida is as follows.  There are some loopholes and practices that allow this to happen:

Cross the US border illegally
Get arrested and get immigration court or asylum application paperwork
Use immigration court or asylum application paperwork to get a Florida driver’s license, state ID (per s 322.08), or a social security number
Sign up for Florida food or medical assistance using the same immigration court or asylum paperwork.
An illegal will then receive a solicitation to register to vote in the mail from the government because they signed up for assistance. Just fill out and mail in the voter registration application provided with the solicitation letter (per interpretation of s 97.058). A solicitation letter from The Department of Children and Family Services to a person that appears to be a non-citizen based on a public records search is attached. The Spanish version is what was mailed.
Register to vote using your driver license or social security number.  If you have neither, just check the box for no ID.  No one checks to see if you are a citizen.  They just check to see you checked the box on the application saying you are a citizen (per interpretation of s 98.045).
Vote.  If you get caught plead plausible deniability or entrapment because you were solicited by the government to register to vote.

Here is the solicitation letter from Florida noted above:

Credit: JoeHoft.com

Translation:

“You have received this voter registration application because you answered “yes” to the voter preference question that was listed on the ACCESS Florida application or Medical Assistance application that asked if you wanted to register to vote, change your address for voting purposes or update your voting records.

Complete the Voter Registration application and submit it to your local county supervisor of elections office (see the addresses provided on the application to find your local county supervisor of elections) or to your local department of children and families office (DCF, for its acronym in English). If you would like assistance completing the voter registration application, please contact your local county Supervisor of Elections office or your local DC office.

Acceptance or rejection of the voter registration application, or assistance in completing the voter registration application, will not affect your eligibility for or the amount of public assistance benefits you may receive. If you believe that someone has unlawfully interfered with or prevented you from exercising your right to register to vote; to refuse to register to vote, to choose a political party, or if you believe that your right to privacy in choosing whether to register to vote or not has been violated, you may file a complaint with the Secretary of State, Florida Department of State, R. A. Building, 500 South Bronough Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 or by calling 1-877-868-3737.”

In the above situation, which we believe is happening across the country, government officials are committing crimes.   Here is what we know.  (See the related regulations referred to at the end of this article.)

1) If Florida public assistance agencies are soliciting non-citizens to register to vote (as discussed in the above article BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: How Illegals Are Registered to Vote in Florida | Joe Hoft ), they are knowingly soliciting non-citizens to violate both state and federal laws. The DCFS voter registration solicitation letter does not even inform the recipient that it is against state and federal law to register to vote if you are not a U.S. citizen, so why would a recipient of the letter believe otherwise (s 104.011, s 104.041; 18 U.S. Code § 611)?

2) Soliciting non-citizens to register to vote exposes public assistance officials to becoming felons because they are enabling ineligible voter registrations and voting (s 104.91).

3) Soliciting non-citizens to register to vote exposes election officials to becoming felons because current interpretation of s 98.045 is that verifying the citizenship box is checked on applications is sufficient, thus by not verifying citizenship using available DMV data they are enabling ineligible voter registrations and voting (s 104.91)

4) It is likely that multiple government agencies have or are soliciting non-citizens to register to vote, leading non-citizens to believe they are eligible to vote and then unknowingly become felons by unintentionally lying on the voter registration application. Under Florida statutes the following agencies may be conducting voter registrations to non-citizens: public libraries, centers for independent living, offices that serve persons with disabilities, food assistance program, Medicaid program, Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children, the Temporary Cash Assistance Program, and secondary and post-secondary education institutions.

5) Non-citizens who violate Florida election laws may be able to avoid prosecution by claiming entrapment or that they did not know they are breaking the law (s 777.201, s 104.15)

6) If it is shown that enough non-citizens voted to change the outcome of an election, that election could be challenged based on (s 102.168)

7) It is inconsistent interpretation of state and federal law that the FHSMV (DMV) does not offer voter registration to non-citizens while public service agencies do. Both organizations know based on documentation provided by an applicant if they are a non-citizen.

Related Regulations

The Florida Constitution Article VI, Section 2.

Only a citizen of the United States who is at least eighteen years of age and who is a permanent resident of the state, if registered as provided by law, shall be an elector of the county where registered.

97.041 Qualifications to register or vote.

(1)(a) A person may become a registered voter only if that person:

97.051 Oath upon registering.

A person registering to vote must subscribe to the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida, that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida, and that all information provided in this application is true.”

104.011 False swearing; submission of false voter registration information; prosecution prohibited.

(1) A person who willfully swears or affirms falsely to any oath or affirmation, or willfully procures another person to swear or affirm falsely to an oath or affirmation, in connection with or arising out of voting or elections commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

104.15 Unqualified electors willfully voting.

Whoever, knowing he or she is not a qualified elector, willfully votes at any election is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

98.045 Administration of voter registration.

(1) ELIGIBILITY OF APPLICANT.—The supervisor must ensure that any eligible applicant for voter registration is registered to vote and that each application for voter registration is processed in accordance with law. The supervisor shall determine whether a voter registration applicant is ineligible based on any of the following:

104.041 Fraud in connection with casting vote.

Any person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate or aid in the perpetration of any fraud in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, or attempted to be cast, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

104.091 Aiding, abetting, advising, or conspiring in violation of the code.

(1) Any person who knowingly aids, abets, or advises the violation of this code shall be punished in like manner as the principal offender.

777.201 Entrapment.

(1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement officer perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, he or she induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.

(2) A person prosecuted for a crime shall be acquitted if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that his or her criminal conduct occurred as a result of an entrapment. The issue of entrapment shall be tried by the trier of fact.

FEDERAL LAW

18 U.S. Code § 611 – Voting by aliens

(a)It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, unless—

(1) the election is held partly for some other purpose;

(2) aliens are authorized to vote for such other purpose under a State constitution or statute or a local ordinance; and

(3) voting for such other purpose is conducted independently of voting for a candidate for such Federal offices, in such a manner that an alien has the opportunity to vote for such other purpose, but not an opportunity to vote for a candidate for any one or more of such Federal offices.

(b)Any person who violates this section shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

SECTION 7 – VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES

Under Section 7 of the NVRA, which offices must offer voter-registration services?

Any office in a covered State that provides either public assistance or state-funded programs primarily engaged in providing services to persons with disabilities must offer voter-registration services. Armed Forces recruitment offices must also provide voter registration services. In addition, a State must designate other offices in the State as voter-registration agencies. (See Question 15 below for a description of these other offices).

What is an office that provides public assistance under Section 7?

“Public assistance” offices that must offer voter-registration services under Section 7 of the NVRA include each agency and office in a State that administers or provides services or assistance under any public assistance programs. This includes any of the following federal public assistance programs: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food-Stamp Program), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program (formerly the Aid to Families with Dependent Children or AFDC program), the Medicaid program, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This also includes state public assistance programs.

Other agencies that are required to offer voter registration are described here: Civil Rights Division | The National Voter Registration Act Of 1993 (NVRA) (justice.gov)

645. Entrapment—Elements

Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that “Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person’s mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant’s lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.

To receive new posts and support Joe Hoft’s work, please visit JoeHoft.com.

The post Government Agencies Illegally Soliciting and Potentially Entrapping Non-Citizens to Register to Vote appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

In a significant departure from tradition, the White House’s annual Ramadan dinner was conspicuously absent this year, following a boycott by invited Muslim leaders. The boycott came as a direct protest against President Biden’s perceived unwavering support for Israel amidst the ongoing siege in Gaza. This event, typically marked by its celebration of unity and mutual respect, instead highlighted the growing rift between the current administration and parts of the American Muslim community.

The decision by these community leaders to abstain from attending the dinner was not taken lightly. Influential figures, such as Imad Alzayat, made their stance clear by publicly rejecting their invitations.

U.S. MUSLIMS REJECT BIDEN THIS RAMADAN

After boycotting the White House’s annual Iftar invitation, American Muslims staged an Iftar protest outside demanding an end to U.S. arms to Israel & a ceasefire.

Muslim community anger in America has risen over the U.S.’ loyal… pic.twitter.com/WTbXKELpBh

— 5Pillars (@5Pillarsuk) April 3, 2024

Their actions underscored a broader dissatisfaction with the administration’s handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly regarding the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza. This collective action sent a strong message of disapproval towards the administration’s foreign policy direction.

In lieu of the traditional celebratory gathering, there were attempts to organize a policy-focused meeting. However, these efforts were met with skepticism by those invited, who doubted the efficacy of such a dialogue in enacting meaningful change. This skepticism reflects a deeper concern among critics about the administration’s commitment to addressing the complexities of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The White House has called off a Ramadan iftar gathering following the decision of numerous Muslim Americans to decline the invitation in protest of President Joe Biden’s backing of Israel’s actions in Ga*za,
#Iftar #JoeBiden #Muslim #WhiteHouse pic.twitter.com/4SJgEQ6i90

— Startup Pakistan (@PakStartup) April 4, 2024

Despite the absence of its intended guests, the dinner proceeded with only administration officials in attendance. This stark contrast to the previous year’s high participation from members of the Muslim community served as a visual testament to the growing discontent with the administration’s stance on key international issues.

The White House, for its part, has reiterated President Biden’s dedication to brokering a ceasefire and enhancing humanitarian support for Gaza. Yet, this assurance seems to have done little to quell the frustration felt by many within the American Muslim community, who view the administration’s actions as insufficient or misaligned with the values they believe should guide U.S. foreign policy.

This incident is emblematic of a larger trend of disillusionment among certain segments of the American populace with the government’s foreign policy, particularly in relation to the Middle East. The boycott of the Ramadan dinner is not just about a single event; it is a manifestation of broader concerns over America’s role on the global stage and the moral imperatives that should underpin its actions.

As the administration moves forward, it will undoubtedly need to address the criticisms levied against it, not only to mend fences with the American Muslim community but also to navigate the complex geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. The cancellation of the Ramadan dinner serves as a poignant reminder of the challenges that lie ahead in balancing domestic expectations with international realities.

In conclusion, the boycott of the White House Ramadan dinner by Muslim leaders is a significant moment that highlights the tension between the Biden administration’s foreign policy and the expectations of its constituents. As the administration seeks to promote peace and humanitarian aid in regions like Gaza, it must also strive to engage more effectively with its critics at home, ensuring that its actions abroad reflect the values and concerns of its diverse population.

The post Diplomatic Dinner Dilemma: White House Ramadan Event Boycott Reflects Broader Foreign Policy Discontent appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

Guest post by Paul Drabik

DuPage County Republican Chairman Jim Zay and Illinois Senate Minority Leader John Curran (R)

In part one The Gateway Pundit highlighted some examples of how Illinois is fast becoming a Communist state based on the style of legislation that is becoming law. We further showed how Illinois Republicans appear more concerned about aligning with Democrats than promoting conservative policy. To say nothing about the corruption, the political conceptualization of the problem is wholly misinterpreted. Terry Newsome and Paul Drabik of Behind Enemy Lines podcast attempted to work within the system. However, the system itself is constructed by Democrats and Republicans are just along for the ride.

Illinois suffered, and likely still suffers, from the 40 years of political control under the most powerful state politician in the country, Mike Madigan. Madigan, representative of the 22nd District and Speaker of the Illinois House for over 30 years un-consecutively, constructed a patronage army that still wields power in Illinois state politics to this day. Currently under Federal indictment, Madigan was able to patronize many people in the bureaucracy and unions with political favors. However, that power was also wielded within the legislative body. Akin to Nancy Pelosi-style House rules, Madigan was able to institute the following over the years: 

Power to appoint and remove committee chairs
Power to give or take away $10K stipends for Committee Chairs
Ability to substitute members of committees to manipulate voting
SOLE POWER to dictate when a bill is voted on
Power to kill a bill before its heard via Rules committee control

These rules are merely a fraction of the totality of his control. Over the years this kind of power has effectively created a “frog in the boiling water” scenario for Illinois Republicans. Madigan’s shrewd political power plays have shifted ALL politics in Illinois to the left. The current makeup of the legislature favors the Democrats in the House 78 to 40 and the Senate 40 to 19. Governor Pritzker enjoys his second term as of 2022.

Newsome & Drabik of Behind Enemy Lines podcast both became elected precinct committeemen only to find that things are just as bad at the local level of the Township organization. Drabik worked as a contracted consultant for the local political organization and was told that combating pornography in schools was, “not how to get independent voters.” Newsome approached State Senate Minority Leader John Curran whose daughter went to school with Newsome’s son. Newsome had asked the Senator to speak out against openly pornographic books like “Gender Queer” and was told that it would be “too political” if the Senator weighed in on the matter.

Former Speaker of the Illinois House Mike Madigan

Here are some images (pixilated) from the porn book for children Gender Queer where they actually show cartoon photos of two boys having oral sex.

Curran’s indifference regarding the pornographic material in the schools should not be surprising to anyone who is aware of the $30K in donations from the Illinois Teachers Union. These donations coincide with Curran’s support for Amendment 1. Amendment 1 is the most sweeping overstep for unions in the country giving unions plenary power through protection to collectively bargain via Illinois Constitutional Amendment.

Newsome and Drabik quickly found how deep the RINO infestation reaches. The podcast duo witnessed a fellow committeeman attempt to put a vote of censure to the Downers Grove Township Republican Organization regarding two County Republicans who donated to radical Soros funded prosecutor Kim Foxx. The Chairman summarily dismissed the motion while breaking Parliamentary rules which govern the organization. Following standing ovations for Newsome and Drabik who challenged the organization during public comment, the Chairman proceeded to remove the public comment section from future meetings in August of 2023. This CENSORSHIP continues to this day. Once he had the bully pulpit the chairman denigrated members who have had the courage, for years, to attend school board, village council, or library board meetings to speak out against issues like pornographic books available to children. According to the chairman these people are “radicals” and “anarchists.”

It appears the local hypocrisy is merely an echo of county-level RINOs. DuPage County Chairman, Jim Zay, disseminated a letter in April 2023 addressing the controversy of donations to Democrats from Republicans. Zay dismissed the concerns of pay-for-play from Republicans to Democrats stating, “A Republican in elected office is better than one of the other party.” Zay also lamented the concerns about elections, “There are many saying our system is rigged but no one has brought any evidence forward.” Zay is apparently unaware of the reporting by The Gateway Pundit which showed the analysis of the Illinois voter roll by civic group United Sovereign Americans. The group analyzed a 4 year period where the Illinois population decreased by 150,000 but the voter roll increased by 650,000. In addition the analysis found, “…more than 4 million apparent registration violations…”

The same can be said in townships across Illinois. Grassroots movements are not to be tolerated. And yet, there’s a certain tone-deafness to the Illinois Republican Party. In 2022 the establishment candidate for governor, Mayor Richard Irvin of Aurora, lost the primary by a mind-blowing 43 points. Irvin was backed by a staggering amount of $50 million by Citadel CEO Ken Griffin. The billionaire has since packed up his toys and pouted off to Florida. All the establishment Republicans pushed Irvin. Why, you ask? The overwhelming response to the peasant voting class was because he had a “better chance at beating Pritzker.”

These so-called Republicans have no conscious awareness of the Overton Window shifting their political perspective to the left through corruption and intimidation. The perception is “Illinois is a blue state.” Without the industrial level corruption of someone like Mike Madigan would that be true? Are people in Illinois really radical leftists? Perhaps perception has inverted reality. And perhaps, a Republican Senate minority leader voting to give public unions Constitutional power to collectively bargain is just a Democrat in Republican clothing.

The post Illinois RINOS Part 2: How Republicans help Democrats become Communists appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A new study from Consumer Reports revealed that popular kids’ food Lunchables contains concerning amounts of lead in its pre-packaged meals.

Consumer Reports tested 12 Lunchable products in a study and discovered that five contained over 50% more lead than California’s legal amount.

Parents have been using Lunchables for decades for quick lunches, but the Consumer Report’s latest revelation might make parents reconsider their decision to feed their children the prepackaged lunch that usually consists of deli meat, cheese, and crackers.

Amy Keating, a dietitian at Consumer Report, stated, “There’s a lot to be concerned about in these kits.”

“They’re highly processed, and regularly eating processed meat, a main ingredient in many of these products, has been linked to increased risk of some cancers.” added Keating.

Our food supply is poison.

Lunchables found to contain relatively high lead levels https://t.co/tAEGCeGXBw

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) April 10, 2024

Per The Hill:

The popular kids snack Lunchables contains relatively high levels of lead and sodium, a consumer watchdog group warned Tuesday.

Consumer Reports (CR), a consumer advocacy group, said it tested 12 store-bought versions of Lunchables — which are made by Kraft Heinz — along with similar lunch and snack kits and found “relatively high levels of lead and cadmium” in the Lunchables kits.

Cadmium is a chemical element linked to negative effects on the kidney and the skeletal and respiratory systems and is classified as a human carcinogen, according to the World Health Organization.

There is not a safe level of lead for children, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes.
The sodium levels in the kits ranged from 460 to 740 milligrams per serving, nearly a quarter to half of a child’s daily recommended limit for sodium, CR said.

Consumer reports finds that lunchables have concerning levels of lead and sodiumhttps://t.co/MbZ2lU1kIr pic.twitter.com/1hFSQjuekZ

— Sheba Turk (@ShebaTurk) April 10, 2024

The post Popular Kids Meal Lunchables Found To Have High Levels of Lead and Ingredients Linked to Cancer appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Palestinian-American Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) had a meltdown when confronted by a Fox News reporter on Wednesday about an Islamic Al-Quds Day rally in her Dearborn, Michigan district last Friday where the crowd chanted “Death to America!” As of Wednesday, Tlaib had not issued a statement on the rally.

Excerpt from Wikipedia on Al-Quds day, “Quds Day (lit. ’Jerusalem Day’), officially known as International Quds Day (Persian: روز جهانی قدس, romanized: Ruz Jahâni Quds), is an annual pro-Palestinian event held on the last Friday of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan to express support for Palestinians and oppose Israel and Zionism.[4] It takes its name from the Arabic name for Jerusalem: al-Quds. The event was first held in 1979 in Iran, shortly after the Iranian Revolution.”

Fox News Congressional Correspondent Hillary Vaughn caught up with Tlaib as she was walking with a staff member to an elevator in a House office building. Vaughn repeatedly, but respectfully, asked Tlaib about the “Death to America” chants at the rally in her district. Tlaib kept repeating that she doesn’t talk to Fox News, and “I don’t talk to people who use racist tropes.” Tlaib also accused the network of being “Islamophobic.”

Vaughn: Congresswoman Tlaib?

Tlaib: I don’t talk to Fox News! I don’t talk to Fox News!

Vaughn: At a rally in your district people were chanting ‘Death to America’, do you condemn…

Tlaib: I do not talk to Fox News!

Vaughn: But do you condemn chants of ‘Death to America’?

Tlaib: I don’t talk to people that use racist tropes.

Vaughn: Why can’t you just say whether or not you condemn people chanting ‘Death to Amer…’ Why are you afraid to talk to Fox News?

Tlaib: Fox News is not, not, listen to me, using racist tropes towards my community is what Fox News is about and I don’t talk to Fox News.

Vaughn: Is ‘Death to America’ racist?

Tlaib: I don’t talk to Fox News.

Vaughn: Is chanting ‘Death to America’ racist?

Tlaib: Talk about your guys’ racist tropes. You know, you guys know exactly what you do. And I know you’re ‘Islamophobic’, but you guys gotta go deal with it on your own self, you’re not gonna use me.

Transcribed by TGP.

Video of the Dearborn rally posted by MEMRI, “At International Al-Quds Day Rally in Dearborn, Michigan Protesters Chant “Death to America!”; Speakers at the Rally: America Is One of the “Rottenest Countries” on Earth; Israel Is ISIS, Nazis, a Cancer.”

At International Al-Quds Day Rally in Dearborn, Michigan Protesters Chant “Death to America!”; Speakers at the Rally: America Is One of the “Rottenest Countries” on Earth; Israel Is ISIS, Nazis, a Cancer pic.twitter.com/B6hMlaKfi5

— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) April 7, 2024

Note: The video of Vaughn confronting Tlaib first aired on Jesse Watters Primetime:

Rashida Tlaib REALLY doesn’t want to talk to Fox News! pic.twitter.com/7HAXXn7SKR

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) April 11, 2024

The post Rep. Rashida Tlaib Has Meltdown When Confronted by Fox News Reporter on ‘Death to America’ Chants at Rally in Her Dearborn, Michigan District (Video) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

NATO is celebrating its 75th year as its members fight a brutal proxy war with Russia over Ukraine. The alliance marked its anniversary in Brussels last week and will hold a formal summit in July in Washington. 

That session could be contentious. Fears of a Ukrainian collapse are increasing, and an increasing number of policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic believe the alliance should go all in for Kiev, assuming away the risks of a broader conventional and potential nuclear war. 

France’s President Emmanuel Macron played the Napoleon card, suggesting that allies deploy troops to Ukraine. While meeting with his European counterparts, he opined, “There’s no consensus today to send in an official, endorsed manner troops on the ground. But in terms of dynamics, nothing can be ruled out.” When criticized, he doubled down: “For us to decide today to be weak, to decide today that we would not respond, is being defeated already.” 

Macron imagines that putting allied troops in Ukrainian cities would immunize the latter from attack, deterring Moscow without war. He drew support from officials in Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland. More serious governments, including the Biden administration, rejected the idea. After all, Americans would bear the principal burden and pay the greatest cost of a broader war.

Nevertheless, as Warsaw pointed out, some members already have deployed troops to Ukraine. Others are threatening to act on their own. Reported the Wall Street Journal: “Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico told a televised briefing that preparatory materials he had received for the summit sent shivers down his spine. The documents, he said, suggested that a number of NATO and EU countries were considering sending troops to Ukraine. Fico added: ‘I cannot say for what purpose and what they should be doing there’.” The author Edward Luttwak helpfully offered detailed military missions for the transatlantic alliance:

NATO countries will soon have to send soldiers to Ukraine, or else accept catastrophic defeat. The British and French, along with the Nordic countries, are already quietly preparing to send troops—both small elite units and logistics and support personnel—who can remain far from the front. The latter could play an essential role by releasing their Ukrainians counterparts for retraining in combat roles. NATO units could also relieve Ukrainians currently tied up in the recovery and repair of damaged equipment, and could take over the technical parts of existing training programs for new recruits. These NATO soldiers might never see combat—but they don’t have to in order to help Ukraine make the most of its own scarce manpower.

Whether or not such personnel went mano-a-mano with Moscow’s troops, they would be actively involved in the war and thus valid targets. Given Russia’s extensive missile and drone attacks, allied casualties would be inevitable. In that event, Macron said, neither the U.S. nor NATO need be involved, but that is easier said now than done then, with bodies being shipped back to European nations and possibly America. An expanded conventional and possible nuclear war could scarcely be avoided. 

Others freely advocate direct intervention in combat, though for nominally defensive purposes. For instance, retired Col. Alexander Crowther suggested sending personnel to run anti-missile batteries: “You’d have to be really clear to Putin [and] say, ‘We’re sending people to Ukraine, they’re not going to be doing offensive combat against you’.” Alas, Moscow isn’t likely to respect that distinction. Allied troops would be actively engaging Russian forces and could scarcely be ignored by Moscow. In that case, Crowther would be inviting massive retaliation. 

Yet some European and American officials would go even further. They have urged deploying aerial and naval armadas to sweep the skies and seas of Russian forces, intervening more broadly “to decisively turn the military tide,” and even employing nuclear weapons against what they appear to perceive as the Mongols reborn. These would risk World War III, putting thousands and perhaps millions of lives in the balance. Proponents of such measures appear more than a little deranged. 

Indeed, what ties such proposals together is that only Washington has sufficient power to overcome Moscow. NATO members which barely pretend to field a military are currently plotting how to effectively borrow U.S. forces. The very structure of the transatlantic alliance, treating all members as equals, encourages dangerous flights of fancy by ivory tower warriors across the continent. Consider the complaints of Eastern Europeans that they deserve to fill NATO’s top spot, the secretary generalship, for which the Netherlands’ former Prime Minister Mark Rutte is the strong favorite to replace retiring Jens Stoltenberg. Both Estonia’s prime minister and Romania’s president considered running. The former asked, “Are we equals or are we not equals? So these questions still remain.” Artis Pabriks, former defense minister of Latvia, complained that “we feel that we were not consulted enough.”

Estonia may be a lovely tourist destination, but with only 7,100 men and women under arms it is but a rounding error in any conflict with Russia. Tallinn shouldn’t oversee anything military in NATO, except maybe providing an honor guard for visiting dignitaries in Brussels. Latvia has even less credibility with just 6,600 people under arms. At least Romania, which fields a military of 69,900, is more serious.

In fact, few governments in Europe look good. The former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves asked of Rutte, “What moral credibility does this guy have?” Rotterdam has chronically failed to hit NATO’s two percent of GDP target. Moreover, the Netherlands fields fewer than half as many soldiers as Romania. Italy and Spain have sizable economies but risible militaries. Germany’s long-term commitment is uncertain at best. 

Even the United Kingdom, with Europe’s best military, is not ready for war with Russia. London is shrinking its army as it trims plans to increase military outlays. Sky News’ Deborah Haynes observed that “the armed forces would run out of ammunition ‘in a few days’ if called upon to fight”; “the UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring”; and “it would take five to 10 years for the army to be able to field a war-fighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops backed by tanks, artillery and helicopters.”

Only slightly less reckless than entering the war are proposals to bring Ukraine into NATO—which most members have continued to reject despite the 2008 Bucharest declaration endorsing the inclusion of Kiev and Tbilisi. Indeed no one in NATO wanted to defend either country, so members lied for the next 14 years about their willingness to invite the two governments to join. Alas, having previously been misled about NATO expansion, Moscow took the prospect seriously, which ultimately animated Vladimir Putin’s invasion decision. Even then the alliance wasn’t prepared for nuclear war over Ukraine and stayed out. Nor are most members prepared for such a conflict today, despite the increasing attempt by Eastern Europeans to drag America into the war. 

Yet Secretary of State Antony Blinken continues to encourage Ukraine while refusing to act, declaring: “Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Our purpose at the summit is to help build a bridge to that membership.” But if Kiev isn’t worth risking mass casualties and destruction today, it won’t be worth doing so tomorrow. With some Europeans nevertheless pushing to deploy troops to Ukraine and risk war with Russia, Washington should tell Europe to put up or shut up. 

Vladimir Putin’s government is responsible for invading Ukraine. For that Moscow bears responsibility for mass death and destruction. Nevertheless, the U.S. and European states did much to encourage the conflict and share blame for the resulting horror.

That makes it even more important for the allies to step back from the abyss. Washington long ago recognized that Ukraine matters little for America’s defense. Kiev spent most of US history as part of the Russian empire in one form or another. Washington never considered going to war over who ruled Kiev. It should not do so now.

The Biden administration should make very clear that if European meddling in Ukraine leads to war, America’s allies are on their own, NATO notwithstanding. There is no alliance obligation to rescue those joining someone else’s fight. Washington also should forthrightly reject Kiev’s NATO aspirations. No one has a right to join. Alliances are supposed to increase security. Accepting a country at war with Russia would yield conflict not peace.

Instead of prolonging the Russo-Ukraine war, Washington and its allies should work to bring hostilities to a close. Doing so won’t be easy, but the ongoing proxy war risks expansion and escalation. Ukraine is not worth that risk. To properly celebrate NATO’s 75th anniversary, the Biden administration should end today’s proxy war.

The post If Europe Pushes Putin, America Should Tap Out appeared first on The American Conservative.

During last month’s Supreme Court hearing on a landmark case on federal censorship, Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson declared, “My biggest concern is…the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways.” Her comment was mystifying because that is the whole point of the First Amendment: to prevent government from nullifying freedom of speech and press.  

Jackson’s assertion exposed the parallels between the current case on federal censorship of social media and the torture controversies from the George W. Bush era. Two decades ago, Bush administration lawyers secretly rewrote federal policies to assure that CIA interrogators were not “hamstrung” when they sought to flog the truth of detainees. 

When the government heaves the law and Constitution overboard, euphemisms become the coin of the realm. During the Bush era, it wasn’t torture—it was merely “enhanced interrogation.” Nowadays, the issue is not “censorship”—but merely “content moderation.” And “moderation” is such a virtue that it happened millions of times a year thanks to the feds arm-twisting social media companies, according to federal court decisions. 

In the Bush era, torture was justified in response to “ticking time bombs. “ But the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded in 2014 that harsh CIA interrogations never led to “imminent threat” intelligence. That failure was irrelevant as long as a snappy phrase exonerated tearing out toenails, waterboarding (mock drownings), rape-like rectal feeding, and pummeling people to stay awake for seven days and nights straight.

Instead of the “ticking time bomb,” Jackson last month touted mass suicide as the latest pretext for censorship in the Murthy v. Missouri case. Justice Jackson luridly warned of kids “seriously injuring or even killing themselves” by “jumping out of windows at increasing elevations” thanks to a social media “teen challenge” that the government would need to suppress. And you don’t want all the teenagers to die, right? Washingtonians presume the First Amendment is archaic because Americans have become village idiots who must be constantly rescued by federal officials.

For both torture and censorship, Washington policymakers were presumed to be the smartest people in the room—if not the world. Yet the CIA regime was largely designed by two preening psychologists who had little or no experience conducting interrogations. The CIA ignored its own 1989 report conclusion that “inhumane physical or psychological techniques are counterproductive because they do not produce intelligence and will probably result in false answers.” 

Similarly, the lead federal agency for online censorship—the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)—presumed that any opinion or statement that differed from federal policies and proclamations was misinformation. CISA simply asked government officials and “apparently always assumed the government official was a reliable source,” federal judge Terry Doughty noted in his decision last July. Any assertion by officialdom was close enough to a Delphic oracle to use to “debunk postings” by private citizens.  

For both torture and censorship, there was almost zero curiosity inside the Beltway regarding what the government actually did. When the Bush administration railroaded a bill through Congress in 2006 to retroactively legalize some of its harshest interrogation methods, the Boston Globe noted that thanks to restrictions on classified information, “very few of the people engaged in the debate… know what they’re talking about.” Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Trump’s first Attorney General, epitomized legislative absolution through absolute ignorance: “I don’t know what the CIA has been doing, nor should I know.” (The American Conservative was one of the few political magazines that did not sweep the scandal under the rug. I wrote TAC articles on torture outrages here, here, here, here, and here.)

Similarly, when the Supreme Court heard the censorship case on March 18, the federal iron fist practically vanished. Most justices sounded clueless about the machinations exposed in earlier court decisions used to decimate the First Amendment.. In his July 4, 2023 ruling, federal Judge Terry Doughty delivered 155 pages of details of federal browbeating, jawboning and coercion of social-media companies, potentially “the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.” A federal appeals court followed up by issuing an injunction prohibiting federal officials from acting “to coerce or significantly encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce” content. 

In the Bush era, people who were brutalized were vilified as terrorists, extremists, or enemy combatants. That blanket condemnation rested on a presumption of infallibility, as if federal agencies could never torture an innocent person. The 2014 Senate report provided a deluge of examples of hapless victims horribly abused. 

Similarly nowadays, censorship is fine with many zealots as long as the targets are widely reviled groups such as anti-vaccination activists. Many pundits viewed Covid policy critics like southern sheriffs viewed civil rights protestors in the 1960s: They forfeited all their rights because they were up to no good. Federal officials presumed that any assertions that disagreed with federal proclamations (such as the false promise that vaccines would prevent Covid infections) were automatically “misinformation” and could be suppressed. Federal censorship extended far beyond Covid policy, suppressing disfavored comments on the 2020 election, mail-in voting, Ukraine, and the Afghanistan withdrawal. 

Will the Supreme Court drop an Iron Curtain to shroud federal censorship like it did torture atrocities? Two years ago, the Court entitled the CIA to continue to deny its outrages despite worldwide exposes of its crimes. The Supreme Court ludicrously declared that “sometimes information that has entered the public domain may nonetheless fall within the scope of the state secrets privilege.” Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented, warning that “utmost deference” to the CIA would “invite more claims of secrecy in more doubtful circumstances—and facilitate the loss of liberty and due process history shows very often follows.” Gorsuch noted that the Supreme Court was granting the same type of “crown prerogatives” to federal agencies that the Declaration of Independence describes as evil. 

In the Bush era, it was necessary to argue that torture was odious (alas, no one told President Donald Trump)—despite that being a self-evident truth throughout American history. In the Biden era, is it now necessary to argue that censorship is a bad thing? How in Hades did our national values go off the rails?

The Biden administration wants the Supreme Court to dismiss the censorship case because censorship victims “lack standing”—i.e., they allegedly cannot specifically prove that federal conniving directly suppressed their comments and posts. Back in 2013, the Court disgraced itself when it used that same pretext to dismiss lawsuits on federal surveillance because the victims could not prove they were spied on. (Secrecy is convenient for shrouding government crimes.) Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, scoffed at the Supreme Court passing judgment on a case that relied on “theories that require guesswork” and “no specific facts” and fears of “hypothetical future harm.” The Court insisted that the feds already offered plenty of safeguards to protect Americans’ rights and privacy – including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. A few months later, whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the “safeguards” totally failed to prevent a vast federal illegal surveillance regime. The FISA Court has been a laughingstock for over a decade, except among its diehard devotees on Capitol Hill.  

One stark difference between federal torture and censorship policies is that the latter could determine the winner of the 2024 presidential election. Murthy v. Missouri could determine the winner of the 2024 presidential election. In the 2020 election, federal agencies suppressed millions of comments by Americans doubting the trustworthiness of mail-in ballots and other election procedures; “virtually all of the free speech suppressed was ‘conservative’ free speech,” Judge Doughty noted. Both the federal district court and the appeals court imposed injunctions on federal agencies to prohibit them from again massively suppressing Americans’ online comments on the election. The Supreme Court temporarily suspended that injunction when it took the current case (over the fierce dissent of Associate Justice Alito). Unless the Supreme Court revives that injunction or otherwise prohibits federal agencies from subverting free speech, another censorship tsunami could taint another national election.

How many federal crimes can the Supreme Court absolve or expunge without radically changing the relationship of Washington to the American people? Is it time to rename the Supreme Court the “Chief Tribunal for Petty Federal Crimes”?

The post Is Censorship the Biden Era’s Torture Issue? appeared first on The American Conservative.

Cities across the country are dealing with an exploding problem of homelessness, but places like Los Angeles and San Francisco in California are among the worst.

In a shocking turn of events, an audit has found that California has spent $24 billion on homeless programs yet the problem persists and in some places is getting worse.

Would California have seen better improvements if they just gave this money directly to homeless people? Could the outcome have been any worse?

The Washington Examiner reports:

An audit in California found that the state spent $24 billion on homelessness over the past five years, but the state did not accurately track if the funds actually improved the problem.

The state has spent roughly $24 billion on initiatives to address homelessness, and the audit analyzed a combined $13.7 billion that went to five programs across the state from 2018-23. Despite the money being spent on 30 homelessness and housing programs, the audit found that California does not have reliable data to see why the situation did not improve in cities across the state.

“This report concludes that the state must do more to assess the cost-effectiveness of its homelessness programs,” State Auditor Grant Parks wrote in a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and lawmakers.

Democratic state Sen. Dave Cortese requested the audit in 2022 after he toured a homeless encampment that had been cleared. He said results from the audit found a “data desert,” which found a continuous cycle with many experiencing homelessness placed in interim housing. Of those people, only 13% found a permanent home and 44% became homeless again.

How many people working for the state became wealthy off of these homeless programs?

In it, state auditors found that homeless numbers jumped 53% in the last decade with an estimated 180,000 people unhoused in California, despite the spending of more than $20 billion to stop it. https://t.co/R19ozBFHcn

— KCAL News (@kcalnews) April 10, 2024

Some quick math on California homelessness. In 2015, 1 out of 336 people in California were homeless; in 2023, it was 1 in 215. This despite tens of billions of government spending at all levels. pic.twitter.com/17wlPVBTYm

— Marc Joffe (@joffemd) April 9, 2024

This is a scandal. The state has spent billions on homelessness, and it’s worse. Also, outcomes literally mean everything when it comes to homeless services, and unsurprisingly, they have no data. A full independent audit must be done. Now. @GavinNewsom https://t.co/RZUhruH9sK

— T Wolf (@Twolfrecovery) April 10, 2024

Whatever the state has been doing, it’s clearly not working.

The post Audit Finds California Has Spent $24 Billion on Homeless Programs Over Five Years and the Problem Has Only Gotten Worse appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.