I am on topic. Not using some whatabout making absurd suggestions about something that isn't relative to the topic. Don't blame me for your shortcomings. And now back to the topic at hand............
Police officers who defended US Capitol on January 6 sue to stop Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization’ fund
(CNN) — Law enforcement officers who protected the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, sued the Trump administration on Wednesday to block implementation of a newly created $1.8 billion fund for allies of President Donald Trump who say they were unfairly investigated by previous administrations.
The lawsuit brought in federal court by Harry Dunn, a former member of the US Capitol Police, and Daniel Hodges, a current member of the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department, claims that the new fund runs afoul of the US Constitution and federal law.
The men say the fund will potentially be used to pay individuals who participated in the attack and finance various paramilitary organizations in the country.
“If allowed to begin making payments, the fund will directly finance the violent operations of rioters, paramilitaries, and their supporters who threatened plaintiffs’ lives that day, and continue to do so,” lawyers for Dunn and Hodges wrote in the 29-page suit.
“Militias like the Proud Boys will use money from the fund to arm and equip themselves. The fund will grant their pasts acts of violence legal imprimatur,” the lawsuit claims.
“And, most chillingly, the fund will signal to past and potential future perpetrators of violence against Dunn and Hodges that they need not fear prosecution; to the contrary, they should expect to be rewarded,” the lawsuit reads. “Dunn and Hodges did not back down on January 6. Instead, they held the line to defend democracy and the rule of law. They bring this case to do so once again.”
The lawsuit asks a federal judge in DC to declare the administration’s decision to set up the fund is unlawful and for an order blocking officials from taking steps to implement it and requiring any payments already made from it to be reversed.
The new fund, the men allege, violates a provision of the 14th Amendment that bars the government from paying debts “incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States.” They also say that officials violated federal rulemaking laws by creating the fund, which stemmed from a $10 billion lawsuit Trump, in his individual capacity, brought against the Internal Revenue Service earlier this year.
That law, the Administrative Procedure Act, allows individuals to challenge some government decision-making. Lawyers for Dunn and Hodges say that officials violated it by not following a different provision of federal law that says the government can only settle lawsuits after the attorney general agrees that such payment “is in the interest of the United States.”
“The payment of $1.776 billion into the Anti-Weaponization Fund to settle Trump v. IRS was patently not ‘in the interest of the United States,’” they wrote in the lawsuit. “Rather, it was a misappropriation of taxpayer funds orchestrated by the President to reward his allies and the rioters who committed violence in his name.”
The case comes a day after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who was once Trump’s personal attorney, in testimony to a Senate appropriations panel, declined to rule out the possibility whether those who assaulted law enforcement officers on January 6 would be eligible for a payout.
“I will definitely encourage the commissioners to take everything into account when determining who should get compensation,” Blanche said, referring to a five-member commission that will review claims submitted by people looking to be paid out of the fund.
While the attorney general’s office would appoint the five members, Trump would have the ultimate power, being allowed to fire them at any time.
“But why not this specific issue of (being) convicted of violent acts against police officers?” Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley asked. “You feel they should get compensation after being convicted of violent acts?”
Vice President JD Vance on Tuesday also declined to rule out the idea that those who assaulted police officers could get money from the fund.
“We do have people who were accused of attacking law enforcement officers,” Vance told reporters at the White House. “That doesn’t mean that we’re going to completely ignore some of the claims that they’re going to make.”
Tennessee Man Jailed Over Charlie Kirk Post Wins $835,000 Settlement
“I am pleased my First Amendment rights have been vindicated,” Larry Bushart said in a statement announcing the settlement Wednesday.
Tennessee officials will pay $835,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by a man who was jailed for more than a month over a Facebook post he made about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
While many people across the U.S. lost their jobs over social media comments about Kirk’s death, Larry Bushart’s case stood out as a rare instance in which such online speech led to criminal prosecution. The 61-year-old retired police officer spent 37 days behind bars before authorities dropped the felony charge against him in October.
During his time in jail, Bushart lost his postretirement job and missed his wedding anniversary and the birth of his granddaughter, according to a federal lawsuit Bushart filed in December against Perry County, its sheriff and the investigator who obtained the arrest warrant.
“I am pleased my First Amendment rights have been vindicated,” Bushart said in a statement announcing the settlement Wednesday. “The people’s freedom to participate in civil discourse is crucial to a healthy democracy. I am looking forward to moving on and spending time with my family.”
Bushart was arrested in September after he refused to take down Facebook memes that joked about Kirk’s killing, which had prompted an outpouring of grief among conservatives, including in Perry County, which is near Bushart’s home and which held a candlelight vigil.
The meme Bushart posted that prompted his arrest read: “This seems relevant today...” and featured President Donald Trump and the words, “We have to get over it.” That quote, the meme explained, was said by Trump in 2024 after a school shooting at Iowa’s Perry High School.
Perry County Sheriff Nick Weems told news outlets that most of Bushart’s “hate memes” were lawful free speech, but residents were alarmed by the school shooting post, fearing Bushart was threatening a local school, also called Perry County High School, even though Weems said he knew the meme referred to a school in Iowa.
“Investigators believe Bushart was fully aware of the fear his post would cause and intentionally sought to create hysteria within the community,” Weems said in a statement to The Tennessean last year.
Bushart’s bail was set at $2 million before he was released as the case drew national attention.
“It’s in times of turmoil and heightened tensions that our national commitment to free speech is tested the most,” said Cary Davis, an attorney for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which helped represent Bushart. “When government officials fail that test, the Constitution exists to hold them accountable. Our hope is that Larry’s settlement sends a message to law enforcement across the country: Respect the First Amendment today, or be prepared to pay the price tomorrow.”
A parish priest was being honored at a dinner on the twenty-fifth anniversary of his arrival in that parish.
A leading local politician, who was a member of the congregation, was chosen to make the presentation and give a little speech at the dinner, but he was delayed in traffic, so the priest decided to say his own few words while they waited.
“You will understand,” he said, “the seal of the confessional can never be broken. However, I got my first impressions of the parish from the first confession I heard here. I can only hint vaguely about this, but when I came here twenty-five years ago, I thought I had been assigned to a terrible place. The very first chap who entered my confessional told me how he had stolen a television set, and when stopped by the police, had almost murdered the officer. Further, he told me he had embezzled money from his place of business and…
Just as the priest finished his talk, the politician arrived full of apologies for being late. He immediately began to make the presentation and give his talk.
“I’ll never forget the first day our parish priest arrived in this parish,” said the politician. “In fact, I had the honor of being the first one to go to him in confession.”
Your timing couldn't have been better after the Mosque shooting in San Diego yesterday. Of course in Trumplandia what people think and feel seems more important than what people do.
MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office filed charges against an ICE agent in connection with the January shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis, a Venezuelan national, in Minneapolis.
Christian J. Castro, 52, is facing four counts of second-degree assault with a dangerous weapon and one count of falsely reporting a crime.
ICE-involved shooting in Minneapolis
The backstory:
The ICE-involved shooting took place near the 600 block of 24th Avenue North just before 7 p.m. on Jan. 14.
Initial reporting detailed federal agents were pursuing a man in a vehicle who had crashed into a snowbank. The man then ran to a nearby home, where a pursuing agent caught up with him and attempted to make an arrest.
An "altercation" between the agent and suspect then ensued, which led to two other people arriving from a nearby apartment, and all three attacking the officer – one armed with a broomstick, according to DHS.
"Fearing for his life and safety as he was being ambushed by three individuals, the officer fired a defensive shot to defend his life," DHS initially claimed.
Julio Sosa-Celis, 24, a Venezuelan national, was taken to the hospital for treatment of a non-life-threatening gunshot wound, while Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna, 26, was also arrested in its aftermath.
Both men were charged with assaulting a federal agent in the aftermath of the altercation, but the DOJ later requested the charges be dismissed with prejudice, writing in a motion that, "newly discovered evidence in this matter is materially inconsistent with the allegations in the complaint affidavit."
Big picture view:
The shooting occurred one week after the fatal shooting of Renee Good by ICE officers and ten days before the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal officers. ICE agents under federal investigation
Dig deeper:
The U.S. Attorney’s Office later opened a criminal investigation into two ICE officers after video evidence allegedly showed the agents’ sworn testimony included "untruthful statements."
Court filings filed after the shooting showed the ICE officers’ accounts of the moments leading up to the shooting differed significantly from testimony provided by the two defendants and multiple eyewitnesses.
SoS is based on the previous year's results (which itself takes into account it's own SoS), but each team has turned over as much as 25-35% of its roster and 30% of all teams have new head coaches, staffs, and systems.
So, it sounds good, but there really isn't much you can reliably take away from it. It's predicting this year's corn crop based on last year's tomatoes.
According to most on draft day, this guy was massively overdrafted, and supposedly not on any team's radar.
I think this just reinforces that most draftniks & sites just really don't know and that reality is disguised by the ability to pick a lot of low-hanging "no-brainer" fruit in drafts. That said, the same applies to all front offices as well, given how many misses there are each year.
They're making a guess on future performance in one system against higher quality talent based on past performances in other systems against decidedly lower talent.... sometimes you'll hit, sometimes you won't.
I'm just a couple years shy of 55. At that point, I will have one in college and one not far off from it. So I would need to be able to pay for that. (about $200K total for the both) And with only my income supporting us all (and trust me, my income is below poverty levels) we do/will get financial aid.
My house is paid off, but needs many repairs, so I need about $50K just for that. Plus property taxes and home owners insurance are needed. My car is about $18K from being paid off (most of which I currently have in savings, but am keeping my savings for emergencies). I'd like to be able to take my children on trips to new places each year - and evenutally include grandchildren ($7-$10K per year). I'd also like to keep the kick butt health insurance I've currently got (seriously lucky with it, it's why I keep my low paying job - well, that, and I love what I do). I also need to have another $5k for my youngest son to get a car when he turns 16 to be the same budget as what I gave big brother.
To retire at 55 I'd need a few million. It also includes a cushion for medical issues as well. I'm thinking about $7 million. Much of it would be invested until I need it and I'd try to live off of interest/retirement/SS as much as possible.
