Mass. High Court Says Field Sobriety Tests Don’t Work for Marijuana

CBD

ZACK HUFFMAN–Massachusetts’ highest court ruled this week that field sobriety tests are not good enough to determine whether a driver is too high on marijuana to be behind the wheel.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled Wednesday that field sobriety tests designed to detect alcohol use were not appropriate to determine whether a driver has been impaired by marijuana use, because there has not been enough research done about the effects of marijuana, which differs from person to person.

The three typical sobriety tests for drunkenness are a horizontal gaze test, walking in a line and turning around and maintaining balance on one foot. But there is no scientifically valid method to for marijuana intoxication.

“The research on the efficacy of FSTs [field sobriety tests] to measure marijuana impairment has produced highly disparate results,” Associate Justice Frank Gaziano wrote for the full, seven-member court. “Some studies have shown no correlation between inadequate performance on FSTs and the consumption of marijuana; other studies have shown some correlation with certain FSTs, but not with others; and yet other studies have shown a correlation with all of the most frequently used FSTs.”

Gaziano said that while it is valid for a police officer to asses a driver’s coordination, alertness and balance, it is inappropriate for the officer to testify whether the driver is too stoned to drive.

“Because the effects of marijuana may vary greatly from one individual to another, and those effects are as yet not commonly known, neither a police officer nor a lay witness who has not been qualified as an expert may offer an opinion as to whether a driver was under the influence of marijuana,” Gaziano wrote.

Thomas Gerhardt was charged with driving under the influence of marijuana on Feb. 13, 2013, just months after Massachusetts legalized medical marijuana through a 2012 ballot measure.

The police officer reported that he saw smoke coming out of Gerhardt’s car and that he smelled burned marijuana. Gerhardt and his passengers all acknowledged having recently smoked.

Gerhardt passed his field sobriety tests except for walking and turning. He wobbled while standing on one foot, but remained upright.

The officer decided to charge Gerhardt, who appealed, resulting in four questions going to the state’s Supreme Judicial Court.

The court determined that a police officer may testify only that he observed signs of a person being high, such as drowsiness or bloodshot eyes, but not whether he believed the person to be high on marijuana. A lay person may not testify whether he or she thinks someone is high, but a “Jurors are permitted to utilize their common sense in assessing trial evidence.”

In a brief appendix to the ruling, the court provided model jury instructions for such cases.

Source Article from http://govtslaves.info/2017/09/mass-high-court-says-field-sobriety-tests-dont-work-for-marijuana/

Court orders Navalny to delete allegations made in online clip targeting PM Medvedev

The distributed information must be recognized as not matching the reality and damaging the business reputation of the claimant,” reads the verdict of the Lyublino District Court announced on Tuesday. The judge ordered Navalny and his colleagues to delete the parts containing the misinformation within 10 days.

The case dealt with the film posted on the internet in early March by Navalny and his NGO Foundation for Countering Corruption (FBK). In the film, activists accuse Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev of owning large amounts of real estate through businessmen and companies that could be close to him, such as the ‘Foundation for Support of Socially-Important State Projects’ charity, the head of which, Ilya Yeliseyev, went to the same law university with Medvedev.

In particular, Navalny and his allies made allegations about one of Russia’s richest people – billionaire Usmanov – donating land and a home to the Foundation for Support of Socially-Important State Projects in 2010. They claimed he was in fact bribing top state officials, including the PM, in order to receive favors in business schemes involving government contracts.

The Foundation for Support of Socially-Important State Projects sued Navalny in early August, demanding he retract the claims of the organization’s alleged involvement in the bribery scheme. It did not, however, seek material compensation for its damaged reputation.

After the Tuesday court session, Navalny’s lawyer Vyacheslav Gimadi told reporters that his clients had no intention of deleting anything as it was, in his words, “technically impossible.” He also said that because of the technical impossibility of such action the FBK and Navalny did not fear prosecution for refusal to comply with the court order.

In April this year, Usmanov also filed a lawsuit against Navalny and FBK demanding they disavow and delete from the internet the false and slanderous claims about the businessman’s past.

On June 1, the Lyublinskiy District Court in Moscow ruled in favor of Usmanov and ordered that Navalny delete the parts from the film that contained false accusations and slander. Navalny, however, refused to do so, claiming that the court allegedly had not treated him fairly.

In April, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev mentioned the accusations against him in a parliamentary speech. He categorically denied all claims made by Navalny and his team and called their attempts “absolutely false products of political scoundrels.”

They “take various trash and nonsense regarding myself, my acquaintances and the people I’ve never heard of, regarding places where I’ve been and the places I also never heard of, collect some papers, photographs and clothes, then put together a product and present it to the public,” he explained.

Medvedev’s press secretary Natalya Timakova also called Navalny’s investigation into her boss a propaganda stunt, adding that those who exercise such stunts must pursue their own political goals.

Source Article from https://www.rt.com/politics/403808-court-orders-navalny-to-delete/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS

Israel’s religious military exemption law is unconstitutional, Supreme Court









 






Israel’s Supreme Court has annulled a law which exempted ultra-Orthodox Jews from being conscripted into the army, drawing furious responses from community leaders and some politicians.

The decision to repeal the law was made Tuesday. Eight of the nine-judge panel ruled that parts of the conscription law were “unreasonable and unconstitutional.”

The measure will take effect within a year.

Members of the ultra-Orthodox community – unlike secular Jews who are drafted into the military at the age of 18 – are largely exempt from being drafted into the country’s armed forces.

The exemption stems from 1949, when then defense minister David Ben-Gurion, who was also the country’s first prime minister, allowed 400 students to be excluded from military service on the grounds that “their studies are their craft.”

The ruling has angered ultra-Orthodox politicians who see the study of the Torah as fundamental to the continued survival of the Jewish people.

United Torah Judaism chairman and Health Minister, Ya’acov Litzman, said the decision was “the worst and most wretched decision in the history of terrible decisions in the Jewish world.” He added the judges were “harming the most cherished aspect of haredi Judaism, which is the holy yeshiva students whose Torah is their profession,”according to the Jerusalem Post.

In 2014, the secular Yesh Atid party proposed legislation to replace previously made arrangements on conscription which had expired. However in 2015, when both ultra-Orthodox parties rejoined the government, and Yesh Atid went into opposition, the ultra-Orthodox parties managed to dilute this law.

Supreme Court President Miriam Naor, the judge heading up the panel, wrote: “The hope of meeting the enlistment targets set by existing the law are growing less and likely every year. As a result, the law’s goal of reducing inequality in the burden of military service is not being met,” Haaretz reports.

Opposition politicians praised the judges for their decision.

“This is why we have come to politics. Conscription for everybody, work for everybody. Benjamin Netanyahu can no longer continue to wriggle out all the time. Military conscription is for everybody, not only for the suckers who don’t have a party in his coalition,” Yair lapid, chairman of the Yesh Atid party said.

Source




RELATED ARTICLES


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEuropeanUnionTimes/~3/iNKkUU30oRE/

Breaking => U.S. Supreme Court Reinstates President Trump’s Travel Ban: Over Rules California 9th. Circuit Court Of Appeals

SCOTUS

In a one-sentence order  issued Tuesday afternoon, the US Supreme Court blocked a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the matter of Trump v. Hawaii, thereby allowing the administration’s travel ban to go into effect.

The unsigned order from the court grants a request from the Trump administration to stay the decision of the Ninth Circuit as the case proceeds. The justices are expected to hear arguments related to the case on October 10.

The order comes a day after Justice Anthony Kennedy issued a temporary stay of the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision, in response to an emergency application by the Justice Department.

  1. President Trump Reverses Deep State’s aka; Obama’s Anti-Christian Refugee Policy

Though claiming to serve the interest of national security, the travel ban has been widely criticized by organizations such as the ACLU and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and has faced legal difficulties in court.

The Trump administration policy restricts refugee and general travel from six predominantly-Muslim nations in the stated-interested of national security. Last month a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit questioned the Justice Department lawyer representing the Trump administration in a hearing over the executive order restricting immigration from certain countries.

In June the US District Court for the Western District of Washington  denied in part  and granted in part a motion to dismiss a class action suit filed against President Donald Trump and the US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

In July, a federal judge expanded travel ban exemptions, though the Supreme Court later allowed the ban to apply to refugees.

Jurist

Source Article from https://politicalvelcraft.org/2017/09/13/breaking-u-s-supreme-court-reinstates-president-trumps-travel-ban-over-rules-california-9th-circuit-court-of-appeals/

Israeli High Court won’t hear case of man claiming to be ‘Messiah’

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,766 other followers

Source Article from https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/israeli-high-court-wont-hear-case-of-man-claiming-to-be-messiah/

Nets Ignore ‘Testy’ First Day of Court in Menendez Bribery Trial

Fox News Channel
Special Report
September 6, 2017
6:29:15 PM Eastern

BRET BAIER: New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez has he will be vindicated in his corruption trial that began today. Menendez is accused of taking bribes from and doing favors for a Florida doctor. The trial has also serious ramifications for the U.S. Senate and Senate math for the leadership. Correspondent David Lee Miller is in Newark, New Jersey tonight.

[Cuts to video]

BOB MENENDEZ: Never, not once, not once have I dishonored my public office.

DAVID LEE MILLER: New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez on trial for bribery was on the verge of tears as he proclaimed his innocence outside federal court in Newark.

MENENDEZ: I appreciate my family being here, my son and daughter, being here today. I appreciate my supporters.

MILLER: He faces a dozen criminal charges, accused of accepting more than $700,000 in campaign related cash and thousands of dollars in free hotel rooms and air travel from a longtime friend, Doctor Solomon Melgen.

Sign Up for MRC Newsletters!

During opening statements, the prosecution told the jury that is part of the bribery scheme, Menendez sent the doctor an email asking him to provide a $1500 a night Paris hotel room with a limestone bath and a view of the courtyard. Prosecutors say Menendez in exchange helped the doctor and multimillion dollar business deals and allegedly tried to get visas for the doctor’s foreign girlfriends.

Both Melgen, who has a previous conviction for Medicare fraud, and Menendez are on trial. But there is more at stake. The trial could change the balance of power in the U.S. Senate. The judge rejected a motion by Menendez to change the trial schedule to allow him to attend crucial votes such as health care.

In a testy exchange, Menendez’s attorney accused the judge of disparaging the defense in his written opinion. At one point the judge told Menendez’s lawyer, quote: “Shut up for a moment, if you don’t mind.”

Menendez says he will exercise his constitutional right to attend the trial but acknowledged the conflict he faces if Democrats need his vote in the Senate.

(…)

[Cuts back to live]

MILLER: During opening statements, Menendez’s lawyer told jurors “a single word can cut through a mountain of evidence. That word: Friendship.” The defense says it isn’t a case of bribery, just one friend helping out another.

Source Article from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2017/09/06/nets-ignore-testy-first-day-court-menendez-bribery-trial

NY Supreme Court – Corrupt, Masonic, Satanic

in 1906 by the Franco-American sculptor Philip Martiny (1888-1927). Both figures are large in size, made of granite, and seated.

Justice, a female figure, is on the right side and holds a shield and scroll.

Authority is on the left side and holds a scroll and fasces, the Roman symbol of authority, giving rise to the term “Fascism.”

supreme-court-rotunda.jpg

The rotunda is 200 feet (61 m) in circumference and rises 75 feet (23 m) to a cupola which in 30 feet (9.1 m) high and 20 feet (6.1 m) long. The rotunda also contains ten stained-glass windows and clerestory. The rotunda’s most striking feature, however, is the oft-reproduced circular mural Law Through the Ages, which is a clearly pagan work of art, also called “The History of the Law.”

This New Age/New Deal-era mural commissioned under fellow Freemason Franklin Delano Roosevelt was designed by the Italian artist Attilio Pusterla and painted by him and a team of artists working under his direction from 1934 and 1936, under sponsorship from the Federal Art Project of the Works Project Administration.

Pusterla also executed Illuminati Freemasonic Satanic murals in the courthouse’s Jury Assembly Rooms on the fourth floor and Ceremonial Courtroom on the third floor.

“Law Through the Ages” is divided into six “lunettes,” or sections.

Each depicts a pair of figures from historical cultures important to the history of law, and noticeably completely omitting and devoid of United States constitutional law, only occult, Freemasonic, Illuminati, Satanic references to “their law.”

supreme-court-37-of-531 (1).jpg

Foreign legal history is plastered all throughout this Illuminati Freemasonic Temple Courthouse – Assyrian and Egyptian, Hebraic and Persian, Greek and Roman, Byzantine and Frankish, English and early colonial, with the final section portraying George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.

Above the seated figures are portraits of six other Freemasonic Illuminati (un-American) lawgivers: Hammurabi, Moses, Solon, Justinian, Blackstone and John Marshall.

“JUSTICE”


It is no secret that if you are not affiliated with, or completely subservient to, the heavily Satanic Illuminati Freemasonic power structure of New York City, whether as a litigant or a lawyer, that you will absolutely never receive “justice” in this courthouse.

Miserable law clerks like “Mr Proto” in the Ex Parte Unit in Room 315, flanked by other miserable miscreants like his supervisor “Elaine” or “Robert” or “Gil,” or the satanic idiots in Room 116 where they contain devilish law clerks, will literally quickly determine if you are an enemy or un-favored person of the Freemasons, and if they determine that you are, they will proceed to ransack and sabotage your case, your papers, and your ultimate judicial decision.

Source Article from https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/08/ny-supreme-court.html

Court Claims Nothing Wrong with Rigging Primaries—Dismisses Lawsuit Against DNC

[8/29/17/JACK BURNS]  The lawsuit brought about by Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has been dismissed after a court conceded that the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz rigged the primaries—but were well within their rights to do so—seriously.

After first assuming all the plaintiff’s allegations were true, for the purposes of weighing their claims, Judge William Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on several grounds. The plaintiffs alleged fraud on the part of the DNC in three different ways:

1. The DNC did not remain unbiased as evidenced through the DNC emails Wikileaks published.

2. Donors to the DNC were defrauded because they donated to Bernie Sanders as a Democrat candidate and the fix was in for Hillary Clinton.

3. The potential for identity theft was demonstrated when the DNC failed to keep its database of donors and their personal information confidential.

As Michael Sainato writes in the Observer, Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.

Zloch concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove they were materially affected by the alleged bias with which the DNC engaged. He wrote:

The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.”

The overwhelming opinion of those who have actually read WikiLeaks’ leaked DNC email database appears to be that the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, and the mainstream media all colluded to ensure Clinton would earn the DNC nomination. This was evident on numerous occasions, many of which were caught on live video and openly admitted.

As The Free Thought Project has extensively reported, influential donors to the DNC are suing their political party for fraud in the 2016 presidential election where they say their candidate, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, was discriminated against. High-ranking members of the DNC, by way of Wikileaks’ DNC email publications, were caught favoring Hillary Clinton over Sanders and actively working to subvert his chances at winning the party’s nomination.

Judge Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on technicalities (several of the plaintiffs lived outside of the court’s jurisdiction) and precedents (donors to nonprofits have no legal recourse as to what the organization does with the donations). Zloch never really addressed the claims of the plaintiffs, only whether or not they had a legal claim for damages.

Zloch admonished the plaintiffs his court was not the place to air their grievances. Instead, they should have done so at the ballot box, inside the DNC, and to work inside the system—a system they clearly believe to be rife with corruption. Zloch wrote:

“This Order, therefore, concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction. To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech—not through the judiciary.”

Zloch dismissed the case against the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz by declaring, “the Court finds that the named Plaintiffs have not presented a case that is cognizable in federal court.”

One of the plaintiffs in the case, Jared Beck, went off! Here’s what he had to say in response to the dismissal and it’s epic! His rant starts at the 9-minute mark.

(PLEASE NOTE VIDEO ISN’T DEAD, YOUTUBE JUST DOESN’T WANT YOU TO WATCH IT)

His reaction describes the deaths of process server Shawn Lucas, DNC data manager Seth Rich, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Beranton Whisenant alludes to the Deep State, and points the finger of blame at the Military Industrial Complex.

“What really disappoints me about our society, H.A., is the fact that we had two witnesses die in this case, and I still have these f***ing people who call themselves ‘journalists’ mocking us… denigrating us for being concerned about that.

Ya know, it goes beyond a lack of awareness in this country. This country has a vicious, corrupt core… and the MOST vicious, corrupt people are sitting in D.C. right now, running the show and forming the media elite and establishment that surrounds and protects them, and promulgates their bullshit all over the airwaves.

And I am sick and f***ing tired of living in this country and having those be the people that run the show.

We see our clients lose in court, all the time. We see them get shafted by the healthcare system, get shafted by this country, and nobody in this country gives a f*** about them, who’s in the leadership…

Let me tell you something: I know that those problems… the problem in this country, in terms of corruption… I know that it’s so deep-seated… It’s taken root over many, many decades, and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.

But my HOPE—my hope in filing this lawsuit was that at least it might be some kind of spark to get things rolling, so that by the time my kids are adults in this society, they’re not living under an immoral, oligarchic, tyrannical piece-of-shit government that f***ing goes to war in MY name, with my tax dollars, on a perpetual basis and f***ing incinerating people, and I have NO f***ing channel to STOP it.

And as an American, I am ashamed. I am ashamed to call myself an American.

And let me tell you something else: There were people in Nazi Germany who didn’t know what the f*** was going on, either… They were f***ing clueless. They were f***ing brainwashed. And I’m not making this comparison because of any bullshit comparison between Trump and Nazism that’s going around that the mainstream media wants you to believe.

What I’m talking about is the REAL government we have in this country.

And in my view, they are morally equivalent, or worse, than the government of Nazi Germany… Because they’ve been going on longer, and they’ve been f***ing over not just everybody in THIS country, but around the world.

And I’m f***ing sick of it, as a human being.”

The dismissal of the DNC voter fraud lawsuit of 2017 will go down in history as a whimper in the annals of unsuccessful movements against the Deep State and its actors. But, perhaps, Beck’s comments will remain as a testament to just how powerful the establishment is, and the lengths to which they will go, including allegedly murdering anyone who gets in their way.

Source Article from http://govtslaves.info/court-claims-nothing-wrong-rigging-primaries-dismisses-lawsuit-dnc/

Court claims NOTHING wrong with rigging primaries, dismisses lawsuit against DNC

The lawsuit brought about by Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has been dismissed after a court conceded that the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz rigged the primaries—but were well within their rights to do so—seriously.

After first assuming all the plaintiff’s allegations were true, for the purposes of weighing their claims, Judge William Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on several grounds. The plaintiffs alleged fraud on the part of the DNC in three different ways:

1. The DNC did not remain unbiased as evidenced through the DNC emails Wikileaks published.

2. Donors to the DNC were defrauded because they donated to Bernie Sanders as a Democrat candidate and the fix was in for Hillary Clinton.

3. The potential for identity theft was demonstrated when the DNC failed to keep its database of donors and their personal information confidential.

As Michael Sainato writes in the Observer, Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.

Zloch concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove they were materially affected by the alleged bias with which the DNC engaged. He wrote:

“The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.”

The overwhelming opinion of those who have actually read WikiLeaks’ leaked DNC email database appears to be that the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, and the mainstream media all colluded to ensure Clinton would earn the DNC nomination. This was evident on numerous occasions, many of which were caught on live video and openly admitted.

As The Free Thought Project has extensively reported, influential donors to the DNC are suing their political party for fraud in the 2016 presidential election where they say their candidate, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, was discriminated against. High-ranking members of the DNC, by way of Wikileaks’ DNC email publications, were caught favoring Hillary Clinton over Sanders and actively working to subvert his chances at winning the party’s nomination.

Judge Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on technicalities (several of the plaintiffs lived outside of the court’s jurisdiction) and precedents (donors to nonprofits have no legal recourse as to what the organization does with the donations). Zloch never really addressed the claims of the plaintiffs, only whether or not they had a legal claim for damages.

Zloch admonished the plaintiffs his court was not the place to air their grievances. Instead, they should have done so at the ballot box, inside the DNC, and to work inside the system—a system they clearly believe to be rife with corruption. Zloch wrote:

“This Order, therefore, concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction. To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech—not through the judiciary.”

Zloch dismissed the case against the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz by declaring, “the Court finds that the named Plaintiffs have not presented a case that is cognizable in federal court.”

One of the plaintiffs in the case, Jared Beck, went off! Here’s what he had to say in response to the dismissal and it’s epic! His rant starts at the 9-minute mark.

His reaction describes the deaths of process server Shawn Lucas, DNC data manager Seth Rich, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Beranton Whisenant alludes to the Deep State, and points the finger of blame at the Military Industrial Complex.

“What really disappoints me about our society, H.A., is the fact that we had two witnesses die in this case, and I still have these f***ing people who call themselves ‘journalists’ mocking us… denigrating us for being concerned about that.

Ya know, it goes beyond a lack of awareness in this country. This country has a vicious, corrupt core… and the MOST vicious, corrupt people are sitting in D.C. right now, running the show and forming the media elite and establishment that surrounds and protects them, and promulgates their bullshit all over the airwaves.

And I am sick and f***ing tired of living in this country and having those be the people that run the show.

We see our clients lose in court, all the time. We see them get shafted by the healthcare system, get shafted by this country, and nobody in this country gives a f*** about them, who’s in the leadership…

Let me tell you something: I know that those problems… the problem in this country, in terms of corruption… I know that it’s so deep-seated… It’s taken root over many, many decades, and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.

But my HOPE—my hope in filing this lawsuit was that at least it might be some kind of spark to get things rolling, so that by the time my kids are adults in this society, they’re not living under an immoral, oligarchic, tyrannical piece-of-shit government that f***ing goes to war in MY name, with my tax dollars, on a perpetual basis and f***ing incinerating people, and I have NO f***ing channel to STOP it.

And as an American, I am ashamed. I am ashamed to call myself an American.

And let me tell you something else: There were people in Nazi Germany who didn’t know what the f*** was going on, either… They were f***ing clueless. They were f***ing brainwashed. And I’m not making this comparison because of any bullshit comparison between Trump and Nazism that’s going around that the mainstream media wants you to believe.

What I’m talking about is the REAL government we have in this country.

And in my view, they are morally equivalent, or worse, than the government of Nazi Germany… Because they’ve been going on longer, and they’ve been f***ing over not just everybody in THIS country, but around the world.

And I’m f***ing sick of it, as a human being.”

The dismissal of the DNC voter fraud lawsuit of 2017 will go down in history as a whimper in the annals of unsuccessful movements against the Deep State and its actors. But, perhaps, Beck’s comments will remain as a testament to just how powerful the establishment is, and the lengths to which they will go, including allegedly murdering anyone who gets in their way.

Via Free Thought Project


Featured Image: David Boyle

Source Article from https://www.intellihub.com/court-claims-nothing-wrong-with-rigging-primaries-dismisses-lawsuit-against-dnc/

DreamHost refuses to handle Antifa info to DOJ, says will appeal court decision









 






A Washington, D.C. judge on ordered web firm DreamHost to give the government data about individuals connected to a website used to organize protests against President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

DreamHost hosts Disruptj20.org, a website for organizing protests of Trump’s inauguration, Politico reports. The Justice Department originally sought a search warrant based on the argument that the site helped facilitate protests that became violent, resulting in the arrest of more than 200 people.

Nearly 200 of those individuals are facing criminal riot charges in connection with violence and property damage that occurred during inauguration protests in D.C. in January.

Chief Judge Robert E. Morin of the D.C. Superior Court said that he would restrict how the government reviews the material, in order to prevent impingement on First Amendment rights. The government will be required to disclose who searches the material and their process, as well as develop a plan to minimize searching unrelated material.

Nonetheless, DreamHost’s lawyers warned of a “chilling effect,” and suggested that they may appeal the court’s decision.

“Providing the information outright to the government for the government to review and identify who the individuals are and what they said in relation to political expression, speech, and exercising their right of association is entirely problematic,” said one DreamHost attorney.

The information sought by the Justice Department includes emails and other personal information of people who communicated with DisruptJ20, which prosecutors say contributed to a “premeditated riot” on the day of the inauguration.

The ruling comes after the Justice Department narrowed its original warrant, which would have sought information on all 1.3 million visitors to DisruptJ20. The original request brought serious criticism and a rebuke from DreamHost, which saw it as a dangerous infringement on its users’ political rights.

The Justice Department declared:

“The government values and respects the First Amendment right of all Americans to participate in peaceful political protests and to read protected political expression online. This Warrant has nothing to do with that right. The Warrant is focused on evidence of the planning coordination and participation in a criminal act – that is, a premeditated riot. The First Amendment does not protect violent, criminal conduct such as this.”

Last week, DreamHost revealed that the Justice Department had delivered it a warrant asking for “all files” related to DisruptJ20.org, a site the government says was used to organize a riot in downtown Washington, D.C., during the Inauguration. The Justice Department is pursing felony riot charges against nearly 200 people; 19 others have already pleaded guilty.

But even the new warrant has been criticized by digital rights activists. Mark Rumold, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, expressed his concerns.

“I’m still deeply uncomfortable with DOJ rifling through a bunch of First Amendment-protected communications,” Rumold said.

“These types of limitations are positive, and they help narrow the scope of the intrusion, but they don’t eliminate all of the concerns.”

What a bunch of hypocrites these DreamHost guys are! They talk about constitutional rights and freedom of speech all while shutting down Andrew Anglin’s new punishedstormer.com for no reason whatsoever, aside from the difference in political views. What about his free speech rights?

Source




RELATED ARTICLES


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEuropeanUnionTimes/~3/Qtyz8dss33o/