WHO Global Pandemic Treaty Fails After Two Years of Negotiation, Commie Chief Says He Will ‘Try Everything’ to Reach Fresh Agreement

After two years of negotiations, an effort by the World Health Organization to agree on a global pandemic treaty has failed.

The plan, which sought to agree on a framework for how countries would respond to the next pandemic, would give the WHO the power to mandate lockdowns, vaccines, and vaccine passports and other forms of authoritarian control.

The effort was led by WHO Director, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, an Ethiopian politician with links to Marxist guerilla movements whose “recommendations” shaped the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABC reported:

On Friday, Roland Driece, co-chair of WHO’s negotiating board for the agreement, acknowledged that countries were unable to come up with a draft. WHO had hoped a final draft treaty could be agreed on at its yearly meeting of health ministers starting Monday in Geneva. “We are not where we hoped we would be when we started this process,” he said, adding that finalizing an international agreement on how to respond to a pandemic was critical “for the sake of humanity.”

Driece said the World Health Assembly next week would take up lessons from its work and plot the way forward, urging participants to make “the right decisions to take this process forward” to one day reach a pandemic agreement “because we need it.” The draft treaty had attempted to address the gap that occurred between COVID-19 vaccines in rich and poorer countries, which WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said amounted to “a catastrophic moral failure.”

…

The accord’s aim was to set guidelines for how the WHO’s 194 member countries might stop future pandemics and better share resources. But experts warned there were virtually no consequences for countries that don’t comply. The co-chairs of the treaty-drafting process didn’t specify what caused the logjam, but diplomats have said vast differences remained over sharing of information about pathogens that emerge and the sharing of technologies to fight them.

Addressing the media after the negotiations broke down, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus insisted that the process was “not a failure.”

“We will try everything — believing that anything is possible — and make this happen because the world still needs a pandemic treaty,” he said. “Because many of the challenges that caused a serious impact during COVID-19 still exist.

“What matters now is when do we learn from this and how can we reset things, recalibrate things, identify the main challenges, and then move on,” he continued.

As previously reported by The Gateway Pundit, the negotiations for the agreement took place in secret as bureaucrats sought to slip in language and provisions that would bolster their authority during the next pandemic.

Earlier this month, it emerged that the United Kingdom would oppose the treaty on the grounds that it violated the country’s sovereignty.

“The U.K. could not accept these proposals in their current form – and they have not been agreed,” a government spokesperson said at the time. “We will only support the adoption of the accord and accept it on behalf of the UK, if it is firmly in the UK national interest and respects national sovereignty.”

The post WHO Global Pandemic Treaty Fails After Two Years of Negotiation, Commie Chief Says He Will ‘Try Everything’ to Reach Fresh Agreement appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

WATCH: Crowd Erupts as Trump Force One Flies Over the Coca-Cola 600 in Charlotte – Arrives to Fanfare at Charlotte Motor Speedway

Joe Biden could never do this!

President Trump flew over the Coca-Cola 600 NASCAR race in Charlotte, North Carolina on Sunday afternoon.

The crowd erupted as Trump Force One flew over Charlotte Motor Speedway.

NASCAR fans waved to Trump as his plane flew over the speedway.

WATCH: The NASCAR crowd erupts as Trump flies over the Coca-Cola 600 in Charlotte, NC pic.twitter.com/OtGT1C4ffA

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) May 26, 2024

View from Trump Force One:

View from Trump Force One flying over Charlotte Motor Speedway! pic.twitter.com/QOviiuc0QF

— Margo Martin (@margommartin) May 26, 2024

Trump waved to the crowd at Charlotte Motor Speedway!

WATCH:

President @realDonaldTrump arrives at Charlotte Motor Speedway! pic.twitter.com/aoHAewRPyv

— Margo Martin (@margommartin) May 26, 2024

“You’re our man, Trump!” NASCAR fans shouted.

WATCH:

“You’re our man, Trump!” pic.twitter.com/Hc41tPUyeM

— Margo Martin (@margommartin) May 26, 2024

“I love you!” fans shouted as Trump walked down Pit Lane.

WATCH:

President @realDonaldTrump walking down Pit Lane pic.twitter.com/ur3eSxWDu9

— Margo Martin (@margommartin) May 26, 2024

“USA! USA! USA!”

WATCH:

Chants of “USA!” as President @realDonaldTrump goes into the Pit Road viewing box pic.twitter.com/UPWLPl66eO

— Margo Martin (@margommartin) May 26, 2024

Meanwhile, feeble Joe Biden has been hiding out all weekend in Delaware.

Biden is scheduled to arrive at Ft. McNair en route to the White House Sunday evening at 6:45 PM ET.

The post WATCH: Crowd Erupts as Trump Force One Flies Over the Coca-Cola 600 in Charlotte – Arrives to Fanfare at Charlotte Motor Speedway appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

MORE LIES: Democrat Senator Chris Murphy On Biden Border Crisis: “The President Has Such Limited Ability to Issue Executive Orders That Would Have an Impact on the Border” (VIDEO)

Crooked Joe Biden and his regime have had over 3 years to secure the border, which they intentionally chose not to do. After all, this is their future voting base.

Democrat Senator Chris Murphy was on CBS’s “Face the Nation” with Margaret Brennan on Sunday to discuss the border. Being a typical Democrat politician, he gave excuses for the border and even blamed President Trump and the Republicans for the border crisis.

“The President could take executive action and has been talking about it since back in February when Homeland Security Secretary mentioned it was being considered. Should he just get caught trying?” Brennan asked.

“The President has such limited ability to issue executive orders that would have an impact on the border. He can’t conjure resources out of thin air,” Senator Murphy responded.

(Referring to “Bipartisanship”),”It is up to Donald Trump and Republicans as to whether they want to solve the problem at the border or whether they want to keep the border a mess,” Senator Murphy continued.

Watch:

President Biden “has such limited ability to issue executive orders that would have an impact on the border,” says Sen. @ChrisMurphyCT, as he calls instead for bipartisan border legislation from Congress.

Biden “can’t conjure resources out of thin air. If he were to try to shut… pic.twitter.com/mLuqT7QYta

— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) May 26, 2024

Senator Murphy’s claim that bipartisan support will solve the border crisis is a distraction from the reality that the Biden regime has failed its Constitutional duties under Article IV, Section 4 to secure our nation from an invasion.

Actions speak louder than words. When the Biden regime took over in 2021, they gave an open border invitation for all. To solidify their actions, in 2023, the Biden regime sold off huge unused portions of the border wall that had not been installed yet. The mainstream media rarely, if ever, would report that.

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has dodged responsibility for the open border and instead blamed it on a “broken system.” He made that claim back in February when he appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Watch:

WATCH: DHS Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas says that DHS doesn’t “bear responsibility” for the “broken” immigration system.@SecMayorkas: “The system has not been fixed for 30 years. … Congress is the only one who can fix it.” pic.twitter.com/dzDH0GQPQW

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) February 11, 2024

In the last 3 plus years, an overwhelming 10 to 12 million illegals have entered the United States under the Biden regime.

That number equals about the population of 41 individual states.

The post MORE LIES: Democrat Senator Chris Murphy On Biden Border Crisis: “The President Has Such Limited Ability to Issue Executive Orders That Would Have an Impact on the Border” (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

F-35 Sustainment Challenges for the U.S. Taxpayer

Airman 1st Class Jake Welty, Wikimedia Commons

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Jared Conaboy

Real Clear Wire

What is good for defense contractors is not necessarily good for the military, nor the taxpayer, they are supposed to serve. Consider the F-35 program, which was supposed to deliver a jet that would make all other military jets obsolete. It has yet to do so, and the failures of the program sustainability speak to the idea that we need diversity in our procurement.

For one thing, too many F-35 sit idle. At a recent congressional hearing, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall claimed that “55% is the number we have for operational availability” of F-35s. That percentage sounds low; imagine if your car would get you to work only 55% of the time. You would be looking for another option!

But things are even worse than that for the F-35 program. Under further questioning, Kendall and his team admitted that fewer than a third of F-35s are “fully operational.” That tracks with a report from the Project on Government Oversight, which reported this year: “The Pentagon’s top testing office, the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), recently released its office’s annual report, which showed that the F-35 program has a fleet-wide full mission capable rate of only 30%.”

Under criticism that the F-35 has become a “paperweight,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin responded at another congressional hearing that he disagreed with the characterization and “in the future we should take [and] we should have a different approach” to “get our aircraft operational.” That would seem like the least we, as taxpayers and citizens, should expect.

Another lawmaker, Rep. Donald Norcross, (D-N.J.), notes that the F-35 is “our largest weapons program.” It is certainly the most expensive. “The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter program remains DOD’s most expensive weapon system program,” the GAO wrote last year. “It is estimated that it will cost over $1.7 trillion to buy, operate, and sustain these aircraft.”

The F-35 is also the Pentagon’s most expansive program, “with more than 1,700 going to the Air Force, more than 420 to the Marine Corps and more than 270 to the Navy,” USNI reports. “The program is expected to move from its acquisition phase to full-rate production next year.”

The F-35 will be a great asset to our national security, but putting all your financial backing in one weapons system doesn’t make sense. F-35 readiness has been negatively affected by maintenance challenges and software issues as of late causing the low capability rates.  From the latest GAO report to congress, the F-35 mission capability rates are being negatively impacted by a heavy reliance on contractors, inadequate training, a lack of technical data, a lack of support equipment, a lack of spare parts and funding prioritization. The report passed recommendations for the Secretary of Defense, along with the Secretary of the Air Force and Navy, to assess primary use of contractors versus military personnel in the maintenance and sustainment of the F-35 program.

The F-35 has significant advanced war fighting capabilities, but unless the jets are utilizing their full capabilities what is that worth to each Combatant Commander? As more jets come off the line a solid plan will be needed to be in place for sustainment to ensure the warfighters are given a Full Mission Capable platform to meet Air Tasking Order Missions at home and abroad.

I flew the F-15Cs for 16 years, which has an unmatched Air to Air combat record. The Eagle is presenting its own sustainability problems as the jets get older and fly past its intended life. In my opinion, the F-15EX, in addition to the F-35 program, should be the future. The FY23 NDAA stopped the retirement of F-22 block 20s until FY27 but continues to retire 65 F-15C/D aircraft, mostly from the Air National Guard.  It appears Congress is not happy with our current fighter fleet numbers and combat readiness, which is why we are still moving forward with buying up to 104 F15EXs. I spent 11 years on Active duty and 10 years in the Air Guard. Historically, the Air Guard is a much cheaper way to maintain and fly fighters, while continuing to preserve combat pilots and maintenance personnel who have years of experience. Buying more F15EX and placing them in the Air Guard would be an easy way to save money for our taxpayers and also keep Combat Capabilities in place for our Homeland Defense Missions as well as supporting Missions overseas.

The United States is certainly spending huge dollars on the F-35, but are we getting the full value yet? I do believe the jet will prove to be a game changer, but it is clearly falling far short today. The military needs weapon systems it can rely on every day to succeed.  Spending billions on a jet, without a reliable sustainment plan of action, is not a responsible use of our taxpayer dollars. Our taxpayers deserve better but more importantly our warfighters deserve better.

Jared “Chowda” Conaboy, Commissioned in 1998 from UMASS ROTC, 21 years in Air Force/ANG with Over 2000 hours in F-15C, Instructor Pilot, and Weapons School Graduate.

This article was originally published by RealClearDefense and made available via RealClearWire.

The post F-35 Sustainment Challenges for the U.S. Taxpayer appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

WATCH: Zombies Fester in the Rot of California’s Streets In Newsom’s “National Model” for Homelessness of California (GRAPHIC VIDEO)

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s California continues to look like a third-world country with rampant homelessness and humans rotting in the streets as homelessness programs and Newsom’s self-proclaimed “national model” repeatedly fail.

The Gateway Pundit has reported extensively on the homelessness crisis in California. One year ago, we reported that in Marin County, California, a homeless encampment of decaying campers and RVs had grown two miles long.

Yet, as The Gateway Pundit reported, delusional liar Gavin Newsom recently claimed that his state served as a “national model” for solving the issue of homelessness.

WATCH:

Here is the reality of Newsom’s “National Model.”

In another video, a man is seen strung out on drugs and scratching his foot off while he is unable to respond to bystanders willing to help him.

San Francisco Journalist JJ Smith writes on X, “This is not normal where is the caring in the compassion? Where is all the resources at? Where is the ambassadors? Where is the Street crisis? They put all this money into these programs. They said things are going to change, but here it is this human being right here literally tearing his skin off his foot and I have to make a phone call to get him to resources he need those resources need to be already walked the street.”

This is not normal where is the caring in the compassion? Where is all the resources at? Where is the ambassadors? Where is the Street crisis? They put all this money into these programs. They said things are going to change, but here it is this human being right here literally… pic.twitter.com/oSVJNiHY3C

— jj smith (@war24182236) May 17, 2024

Newsom’s California is actually a national model for money laundering and funding the “homelessness industrial complex.”

In March 2023, Newsome promised to house the homeless with 1,200 tiny homes, but over one year later, only 150 had been purchased. 

Fox reported in May of this year,

California hasn’t provided any of the tiny homes that Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom promised homeless residents last year, according to a new report.

Newsom promised in March 2023 to send 1,200 tiny homes to four cities across the state, but so far only 150 have been purchased, Cal Matters reported. It’s unclear exactly what’s caused the repeated delays, with the state at times blaming local governments, even though local officials in some cases were quick to approve projects.

“Gov. Gavin Newsom said he’d send tiny homes to San Jose, Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Diego County. Why haven’t any materialized yet?” the outlet asked in its report.

As CalMatters noted, Newsom’s March 2023 plan involved the state buying 500 tiny homes for Los Angeles, 350 for Sacramento, 200 for San Jose, and 150 for San Diego. Once each area bought the homes, “The California National Guard would help prepare and deliver them.”

As The Gateway Pundit reported last month, an audit has found that California has spent $24 billion on homeless programs, yet the problem persists and, in some places, is getting worse.

Gavin Newsom is once again facing a recall effort, the second in three years, as a conservative group initiates a new campaign to oust him from office. According to Ballotpedia, the group must obtain 1,311,963 signatures by September 3 to force a recall election.

Request petitions, learn more about, and donate to the recall effort here.

The post WATCH: Zombies Fester in the Rot of California’s Streets In Newsom’s “National Model” for Homelessness of California (GRAPHIC VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

BBC Calls Latest Trump Trial “Weakest Criminal Case” Says No One Is Watching A Circus With Manipulated Acts

President Trump enters court in the Democrats’ latest lawfare case in New York City. Democrats hope to keep Trump off the campaign trial and send him to prison over a yet undefined crime.

 

The people on the other side of the pond are noticing what’s happening to Donald Trump.

Today, the BBC published an article detailing a high-stakes trial that seems straight out of an American blockbuster. It is filled with sensational details and features a former president as the defendant.

The BBC reports that there’s hardly a more circus-like courtroom scenario imaginable, with Donald Trump, one of the world’s most powerful people and now a candidate facing allegations of an awkward sexual encounter with a porn actress.

They boil down the ongoing proceedings as the “weakest criminal case” for a booking-keeping offense.

As Trump trial hurtles towards verdict, are Americans paying attention? https://t.co/QSyBGhH9rN

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) May 26, 2024

The BBC reports,

We can add to all that the widely held view that the Manhattan trial is by far the weakest of the four criminal cases Donald Trump faces.

It is built on a bookkeeping offence – the alleged falsification of reimbursements to Michael Cohen – the man who paid off Stormy Daniels – as legal fees rather than as hush-money payments.

The case relies on what would ordinarily be a misdemeanour being elevated to the more serious category of felony because of the alleged attempt to improperly influence an election.

The BBC noted that most Americans have reported feeling “bored” or “angry” rather than interested in the trial. Polls conducted during the proceedings show similar trends. With the jury’s verdict approaching, pundits and pollsters who initially expected a major national moment in Manhattan’s criminal courtroom now believe the outcome, whichever way it goes, might be more of a letdown than a dramatic conclusion.

And yet, despite the weeks of testimony, the millions of pages of documents, and the ranks of live TV cameras assembled outside to record the history-making spectacle of the first criminal trial of a former US leader, the American public appears strangely detached.

In a recent YouGov/Yahoo News poll, just 16% of respondents said they’d been following the trial “very closely”, with even those who said they were taking a mild interest in proceedings coming in at only a third of those surveyed.

More Americans said the trial made them feel “bored” or “angry” than interested. Other polls taken during the trial to gauge attention being paid have found similar results.

At the end of their report asking whether Americans are watching the Trump trial, the BBC points out that the efforts to “get Trump” may be falling flat because the general public isn’t as “prudish” as detractors of Trump are hoping for.

There are some who see the public’s seeming indifference to the case as not as surprising as it may appear.

Firstly, Donald Trump is already a known quantity with a long history of courting outrage. Infamy is part of the brand and perceptions of whether he has committed wrongdoing divide on sharply political lines.

And secondly, the American voter is far less prudish than many assume, a point brought home by another sexual scandal from a different political age.

It’s a good sign when the BBC is noticing the charges against Trump are ridiculous.

 

The post BBC Calls Latest Trump Trial “Weakest Criminal Case” Says No One Is Watching A Circus With Manipulated Acts appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

‘Highway Robbery’ by U.S. Police Gets Green Light, Thanks to Ruling

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh

‘Americans no longer have to be guilty to be stripped of their property, rights and liberties’

It’s been called by some “a modern-day form of highway robbery,” but the Supreme Court nevertheless has gone along with it.

It’s the practice by police of using delay tactics when they confiscate cash, jewelry, cars and other valuables from people who sometimes are completely innocent of any offense.

They are “asset forfeiture” cases and often involve no criminal charge against the property owner, according to a report from the Rutherford Institute, which fights in America’s courts for constitutional, religious and civil rights.

The latest high court action came in a 6-3 decision in Culley v. Marshall, where the justices held that there are “no due process protections for citizens in asset forfeiture proceedings to have an early court hearing to contest the government keeping possession of their seized property while they await trial.”

Lawyers for the Rutherford were joined by those from the ACLU and Cato Institute to argue that an early hearing was needed to “protect citizens against the government’s delay tactics, which make it difficult for individuals innocent of any wrongdoing to recover their property in a timely manner from police who stand to profit from the forfeiture.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch said it is a problem to have police delay proceedings and keep citizens’ private property for as long as a year or more.

He said that could coerce the owners to “settle” the dispute by paying a penalty for property they need for their work, or that they love.

But the majority overruled him.

“Americans no longer have to be guilty to be stripped of their property, rights and liberties,” warned constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “You just have to possess something the government wants.”

The institute explained, “Asset forfeiture has become a ‘booming business’ for the government, with federal forfeitures alone having brought in $2.5 billion during 2018. Civil asset forfeiture is a practice where government agents (usually the police) seize private property they ‘suspect’ may be connected to criminal activity, then, whether or not any crime is actually proven to have taken place, the government keeps the citizen’s property, often divvying it up with the local police who did the initial seizure.”

The government claims in such cases that some sort of property is “tied” to a crime, and then takes it. Then it forces the owner to prove the “innocence” of that property.

But the government sets up hoops and obstacles for the owners to negotiate in trying to regain their own property.

“Challenging these takings in court can cost an owner more than the value of the confiscated property itself, which, as Justice Gorsuch’s concurrence explained, is why some agencies reportedly place special emphasis on seizing low-value items and relatively small amounts of cash,” the institute reported.

The case developed when police in Alabama confiscated cars belong to Halima Culley and Lena Sutton which had been used by other individuals who were accused of drug possession.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post ‘Highway Robbery’ by U.S. Police Gets Green Light, Thanks to Ruling appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Sitting Federal Judge in Massachusetts Appointed by Bill Clinton Writes Political Hit Piece on Justice Alito

In an appalling violation of the code of ethics, a sitting federal judge wrote a political hit piece in the New York Times publicly attacking conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

US District Judge Michael Ponsor, a senior judge on the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts appointed by Bill Clinton criticized Alito while he’s deciding relevant pending cases.

The hit piece titled, “A Federal Judge Wonders: How Could Alito Have Been So Foolish?” was published on Friday and criticized Alito for flying an upside-down flag at his home after the 2020 presidential election.

“Regardless of its legality, displaying the flag in that way, at that time, shouldn’t have happened. To put it bluntly, any judge with reasonable ethical instincts would have realized immediately that flying the flag then and in that way was improper. And dumb,” Judge Ponsor wrote.

“Like the upside-down flag, this flag is viewed by a great many people as a banner of allegiance on partisan issues that are or could be before the court,” Judge Ponsor wrote.

“Flying those flags was tantamount to sticking a ‘Stop the steal’ bumper sticker on your car. You just don’t do it,” the judge said.

“Before Judge Ponsor publicly lectures a Supreme Court justice about ethics and recusal matters on pending cases, he should probably check his own ethics,” said Mike Davis, former Gorsuch clerk and president of The Article III Project.

“Canon 3A(6) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges states: “A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court.”” – Davis said.

A sitting federal judge in Massachusetts appointed by Clinton took off his robe, climbed into the political arena, and wrote a political hit piece in the New York Times publicly criticizing Justice Alito while he’s deciding relevant pending cases.

Senior Judge Michael Ponsor… pic.twitter.com/cUApGRbblF

— Mike Davis (@mrddmia) May 25, 2024

In March US District Judge Reggie Walton went on CNN to speak publicly about pending legal matters.

Judge Walton, a Bush appointee, previously spoke with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins about threats he has received after he called Trump a “charlatan” and rendered excessive punishment to J6 defendants.

“I’ve had more threats than what used to be the case,” the judge said referring to a January 6 case he oversaw.

Even Kaitlan Collins conceded that it is “rare that we get to hear from a sitting federal judge.”

Walton, a SITTING JUDGE, weighed in on Trump’s statements defending himself against Judge Merchan, his conflicted daughter Loren Merchan and the latest gag order.

“It’s very disconcerting to have someone making comments about a judge, and it’s particularly problematic when those comments are in the form of a threat, especially if they’re directed at one’s family,” Walton said. “We do these jobs because we’re committed to the rule of law and we believe in the rule of law, and the rule of law can only function effectively when we have judges who are prepared to carry out their duties without the threat of potential physical harm.”

The post Sitting Federal Judge in Massachusetts Appointed by Bill Clinton Writes Political Hit Piece on Justice Alito appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

State Dept: ‘Atheism Grant’ May Have Been Misused

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Susan Crabtree
Real Clear Wire

House Republicans who have led a nearly two-year investigation into a $500,000 State Department grant to an organization that promotes humanism and secularism are pressing the agency to conduct more diligent oversight after it admitted that the organization may have misused taxpayer funds.

Rep. Mike McCaul, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican who heads the panel’s human rights subcommittee, have accused the State Department of trying to promote atheism overseas under the guise of advancing religious pluralism, a longtime U.S. foreign policy priority. Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the panel’s oversight and accountability subcommittee, has also helped spearhead inquiries into the grant.

For more than a year, the trio has been investigating the decision-making behind the State Department’s April 2021 solicitation bid for a $500,000 grant titled “Promoting and Defending Religious Freedom Inclusive of Atheist, Humanist, Non-Practicing and Non-Affiliated Individuals.” The agency awarded the grant to Humanists International, or HI, an organization aimed at promoting humanism, an outlook and system of thought attaching prime importance to human effort rather than divine or supernatural powers.

In a letter sent to Deputy Secretary of State Richard Verma Wednesday, McCaul, Smith, and Mast charged the State Department with engaging in a “pattern of obfuscation and denial” throughout the investigation in order to “expand atheism networks” overseas. The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause of the Constitution bars the use of tax dollars to promote theocracy, a specific religion or belief system.

It was not until Foreign Affairs Committee staff contacted the HI to schedule a transcribed interview, and the organization retained legal counsel, that the “true scope” of the grant’s programming was revealed, the GOP House members asserted. HI’s attorneys contacted the State Department and admitted it had provided the wrong slides presented during its training session in Nepal.

“Legal counsel for the grantee uncovered in a matter of weeks what the Department obfuscated, misrepresented and denied for years,” they wrote, expressing skepticism about the agency’s stated commitment to recoup any misused funds and take action to bar HI from further State Department grants.

“We do, however, appreciate your statements, and we expect to be informed fully and without delay of all developments in this matter,” they continued. “The Department can reasonably expect congressional oversight of grant funding to continue since the need for it is all the more pressing in light of the recent revelations.”

According to its website, HI promotes “human-rights priorities based on humanist values at international organizations,” including the United Nations. It also champions the rights of individuals persecuted or discriminated against for failing to adhere to a country’s predominant religion or those who face harsh penalties under their country’s blasphemy and anti-conversion laws.

A statement on HI’s website praises a Nigerian court for upholding the appeal of Mubarak Bala and reducing his prison sentence from 24 years to five years for violating the country’s blasphemy laws. In 2020, Bala was arrested in northern Nigeria, where Islam is the government’s dominant religion and thousands of Christians are killed each year, for a series of Facebook posts expressing his humanist beliefs.

The latest war of words comes after the State Department acknowledged in late April that the agency had provided the House Republicans with the wrong PowerPoint slides about what HI was using U.S. funds to accomplish.

Naz Durakoglu, the State Department’s assistant secretary for its bureau of legislative affairs, notified McCaul that HI had recently contacted the department to say it had initially provided the wrong slides about the information conveyed at training sessions the grant funded. The agency then passed the wrong slides on to the committee in response to its probe.

“This new information directly contradicts Humanists International’s previous representation to the Department that the slides it had earlier provided were the ones used at the training,” Durakoglu wrote to McCaul in an April 29 letter, noting that the “department is deeply concerned about this development.”

The State Department stressed that it’s taking “immediate action” to request additional information from HI to ensure its work complies with federal laws and regulations.

“Should the Department determine that any such charges were not in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations, including activities outside the grant agreement, it will take all necessary actions to recoup misused funds” and take steps to bar HI from being eligible to receive federal funds in the future, Durakoglu wrote. He also noted that it would refer any misrepresentations HI made to the State Department Office of Inspector General for further investigation.

But McCaul, Smith, and Mast aren’t convinced the State Department is acting in good faith, considering that the agency had pushed back against their concerns for more than a year. The House Foreign Affairs Committee obtained the PowerPoint slides from the actual HI training sessions and argued they show that only humanists or atheists attended the sessions, instead of members of several faith traditions. They also complained that the slides appeared to show that HI was using the grant to advance the humanist cause and its influence on government policy and touted the benefits of setting annual numerical goals for recruiting new humanist or atheist members.

For more than a year, U.S. officials claimed that the grant’s work was not aimed at increasing the number and influence of atheists abroad but was merely a routine award aimed at promoting the larger goal of religious tolerance in South and Central Asia or the Middle East and North Africa, the grant offering’s targeted area.

The State Department’s stated aim for the grant was to prevent discrimination against individuals who do not adhere to the predominant religious tradition. In several countries across those regions, blasphemy and anti-conversion laws, such as those in Nigeria, prohibit insults to the prevailing religion and are often used to enact harsh penalties against religious minorities, atheists, and other nonbelievers.

The State Department provided another grant opportunity in 2021 to help “expand” religious freedom and tolerance in Mozambique, where Christians face horrific levels of persecution despite making up roughly 50% of the population.

“The genesis of these activities is how do we bring the most persecuted and the most marginalized [when it comes to religious freedom] and bring them into the conversation,” a senior department official of the State Department’s Office of Religious Freedom told RealClearPolitics in a lengthy interview. “In Central Asia, there’s significant persecution of Christians, there’s significant persecution of religious minorities, and most of these folks just want to live their lives in accordance with their own conscience.”

The average Muslim in Saudi Arabia doesn’t necessarily want to practice Islam the way the government dictates, the senior official said, so the purpose of the grant offering was to acknowledge that people who don’t adhere to approved religious belief are often the victims of religious discrimination.

“The idea behind the request for proposal was not to make a program for atheists or for members of a particular group,” he added. “It was to make sure that when we think about promoting religious freedom for everyone, we’re doing things that are inclusive and [including] members of those communities who often get left out because they don’t have an obvious spokesperson.”

The official vigorously defends that rationale for providing the grant, but says his office is deeply concerned that HI may have engaged in misconduct.

“I will stand proudly behind the [rationale], but as soon as there’s the potential whiff of fraud or misrepresentation, that’s a very different matter entirely,” he said. “We take that very seriously and want to ensure that, as stewards of taxpayer dollars, that not one penny of taxpayer money is being misappropriated or misused.”

The State Department’s Office of International Religious Freedom, which was created in 1998 by an act of Congress, promotes universal respect for religious freedom or belief as a core objective of U.S. foreign policy. The office monitors religiously motivated abuses and discrimination worldwide and engages with faith-based actors, groups, and organizations to help promote democracy and pluralism.

In 2016, Smith, a longtime human rights champion in Congress, worked to update the religious freedom law to expressly protect the rights of people around the world who practice no religion at all.

“We want to make clear that … nobody is coerced into believing in God if they don’t want to,” Smith said at the time. “I’m a Catholic, and I believe very deeply in God, but Christ said, ‘I stand at the door and knock. If you welcome me, I come in.’ And that’s the way religious liberty ought to be, absolutely voluntary. People have the right not to believe.”

Smith also said the language clarifying that the law is meant to protect nonbelievers was noncontroversial even among the more evangelical members of Congress.

“It speaks well of all of, of everyone, that we really want to protect freedom of conscience for all people,” Smith said.

But Smith is now deeply concerned that the State Department is using taxpayer funds to directly benefit the atheist and humanist cause and possibly grow its numbers. In the coming weeks, the New Jersey Republican plans to introduce legislation explicitly barring grants violating the Establishment Clause. He cited language in the Notice of Funding Opportunity, the official agency notice describing the grant and requesting applicants, as potentially violating the First Amendment prohibitions. The notice states that the “expected program outcome” was to “[i]ncrease capacity among members of atheist and heterodox individuals to form or join networks or organizations.”

“It is hard to believe that Department officials refused to read the words right in front of them, but we are not sure what else may have happened,” the GOP members wrote in their Wednesday letter to Verma.

They also cite HI’s state strategic goals, which include having member organizations in “every part of the world,” according to its website.

Gary McLelland, HI’s CEO, has been very vocal about his animus against the Roman Catholic Church, arguing in one podcast that, “It’s obviously my job in [the international HI organization] to combat the Vatican policies and to push against them.”

The timing of the grant may have helped HI recover from a tough financial period. An RCP analysis of HI’s charitable 990 tax forms shows that the organization operated at a net loss every year from 2019 until 2021, ending that year with a net loss of $322,000, although it listed $3.8 million in assets. In 2022, roughly the time of receiving the State’s $500,000 Department grant, the organization reported only a $3,000 loss and $3.2 million in assets.

As recently as March 21, during an appearance before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Verma dismissed the Republicans’ concerns that the grant was promoting converts to atheism or humanism instead of tolerance for all religious minorities. At one point during his testimony, Verma deemed the grant “exactly the right kind of program.”

“I have looked at the grant. I have looked at the materials,” he said. “[Promoting atheism] is not what the grant is for, and that is not what the work would be for. We would never authorize such a grant to any organization.” I have seen no evidence of any grant to promote atheism in Nepal … I have looked at the materials this grantee has used. It was about supporting civil society.”

In February, a State Department assistant secretary told the House Republicans that the grant-funded training in Nepal only concerned “creating guidelines … for the promotion of human rights and dignity.”

The agency continued to deny that it provided funds to any organizations with “the aim of using the funds to promote or advance specific ideologies or beliefs,” even though the official State Department “scope of work” for the program stated that participants would “conduct advocacy and members activities promoting humanism” and would work to “increase and diversify their membership network.”

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics’ national political correspondent.

The post State Dept: ‘Atheism Grant’ May Have Been Misused appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

WATCH: Democrat Senator Blumenthal Says He is “Deeply Disturbed” Trump Has Succeeded in Slow-Walking Biden Regime’s Lawfare Cases

Stolen Valor Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal (CT) trashed President Trump and admitted the lawfare cases against the former president are part of a plan to slow down his campaign.

Richard “Da Nang Dick” Blumenthal, who is serving in his third term as senator, is best known for lying about his Vietnam service for personal and political gain.

CNN’s Manu Raju asked Democrat lawmakers if Trump’s ‘hush money’ case will backfire politically if he is acquitted.

Blumenthal said he thinks the “broad centrist middle American people understand what [Trump] did and why it is so abhorrent.”

He continued, “I’m already deeply disturbed that Donald Trump has succeeded in slow-walking one or more of those cases.”

The US government fast-tracked Trump’s lawfare cases in an effort to jail him before the 2024 election.

The right to a speedy trial is NOT the government’s right. President Trump’s lawyers have done a phenomenal job pushing back on Jack Smith’s lawfare cases by fighting over Trump’s immunity claims, requesting discovery, and asking the judge to release unredacted documents that expose the DOJ’s corruption.

Jack Smith’s lawfare cases are delayed because they are falling apart.

Blumenthal said the quiet part out loud. The point of the Biden Regime’s lawfare cases against Trump is to slow him down on the campaign trail and to lock him up before the 2024 election.

NEW: Will Donald Trump’s New York criminal case backfire politically? At least one Democrat thinks so. @mkraju asked members of Congress if they’re worried about the impact of a possible acquittal.#InsidePolitics pic.twitter.com/2R0jDcALL7

— Inside Politics (@InsidePolitics) May 26, 2024

Not only did Blumenthal lie about his Vietnam War service, he lied about being the captain of the Harvard Swim Team.

Da Nang Dick is a pathological liar. Blumenthal has no room to question another man’s credibility nor should he even be allowed to serve as a Senator for his lies in what 14 Medal of Honor recipients described as a “gross case of stolen valor.”

The post WATCH: Democrat Senator Blumenthal Says He is “Deeply Disturbed” Trump Has Succeeded in Slow-Walking Biden Regime’s Lawfare Cases appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.