正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

🚨 BREAKING: Sánchez Came Prepared. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed ongoing litigation prevented him from answering questions about Trump's audit status. Then Rep. Linda Sánchez pulled out a court order and cited Supreme Court precedent saying ongoing litigation does not automatically bar testimony before Congress. 🔥 That's when the... show more

Brian Allen

301,313 subscribers

95,657 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

喜剧新闻政治

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🚨 BREAKING: Bessent Couldn't Name The Case. Asked what ongoing litigation prevents him from discussing Trump's audit status, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the matter was tied up in court. Then Rep. Linda Sánchez asked a simple follow-up: Which case? He couldn't name it. Sánchez pointed out that the only litigation she was aware of involved the $1.8 billion DOJ fund and said that case doesn't address presidential audit immunity. That's what made the exchange awkward. The administration says litigation prevents answers. Congress wants to know which litigation.

🚨 BREAKING: Bessent Couldn't Name The Case. Asked what ongoing litigation prevents him from discussing Trump's audit status, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the matter was tied up in court. Then Rep. Linda Sánchez asked a simple follow-up: Which case? He couldn't name it. Sánchez pointed out that the only litigation she was aware of involved the $1.8 billion DOJ fund and said that case doesn't address presidential audit immunity. That's what made the exchange awkward. The administration says litigation prevents answers. Congress wants to know which litigation.

Brian Allen

208,491 次观看 • 4 个月前

🚨 BREAKING: Bessent Wouldn't Answer The Hypothetical. Rep. Linda Sánchez asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent a simple question: If Joe Biden filed an amended tax return claiming the government owed him $1 billion, would that be audited? 🔥 Bessent refused to answer. That's what made the exchange notable. Sánchez wasn't really asking about Biden. She was testing whether the standard being applied to Trump would be applied to anyone else. And Bessent wouldn't engage.

🚨 BREAKING: Bessent Wouldn't Answer The Hypothetical. Rep. Linda Sánchez asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent a simple question: If Joe Biden filed an amended tax return claiming the government owed him $1 billion, would that be audited? 🔥 Bessent refused to answer. That's what made the exchange notable. Sánchez wasn't really asking about Biden. She was testing whether the standard being applied to Trump would be applied to anyone else. And Bessent wouldn't engage.

Brian Allen

68,098 次观看 • 4 个月前

NEW: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gets Democrat Rep. Judy Chu to admit she doesn’t know who was president during World War I in the middle of a heated debate over the ongoing war in Iran. Chu accused Bessent and the Trump administration of not caring about Americans’ financial situations during the ongoing military action in the Middle East before Bessent flipped the script by quizzing the Congresswoman on basic American history. "Congresswoman, who was the president during World War I? …so you don't know who the president during World War I was? But let me tell you... President Trump does care about Americans’ financial situations.”

NEW: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gets Democrat Rep. Judy Chu to admit she doesn’t know who was president during World War I in the middle of a heated debate over the ongoing war in Iran. Chu accused Bessent and the Trump administration of not caring about Americans’ financial situations during the ongoing military action in the Middle East before Bessent flipped the script by quizzing the Congresswoman on basic American history. "Congresswoman, who was the president during World War I? …so you don't know who the president during World War I was? But let me tell you... President Trump does care about Americans’ financial situations.”

Fox News

448,161 次观看 • 4 个月前

"I hope you get some social media clips.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent calls out Rep. Linda Sánchez during a Ways and Means Committee hearing after the California Democrat pressed Bessent about potential IRS audits related to President Trump and his family. SÁNCHEZ: “I'm curious to know who counts as Trump's ‘family’ for the purposes of this immunity. Is it his children, his in-laws, his grandchildren, his second or third cousin? His great-great-grandchildren? Do you know the answer to that question, Mr. Secretary?” BESSENT: “Again, I imagine you have the Justice Department phone number. I suggest you call them.”

"I hope you get some social media clips.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent calls out Rep. Linda Sánchez during a Ways and Means Committee hearing after the California Democrat pressed Bessent about potential IRS audits related to President Trump and his family. SÁNCHEZ: “I'm curious to know who counts as Trump's ‘family’ for the purposes of this immunity. Is it his children, his in-laws, his grandchildren, his second or third cousin? His great-great-grandchildren? Do you know the answer to that question, Mr. Secretary?” BESSENT: “Again, I imagine you have the Justice Department phone number. I suggest you call them.”

Fox News

291,990 次观看 • 4 个月前

▶️ #WATCH | CJP spokesperson Saurav Das Saurav Das talked about a public interest litigation (PIL) in Delhi High court against CJP. He addressed the gathering and said: ➡️ Early this morning, we received news that some person in the Delhi High Court, someone random, just any random person, some BJP or RSS worker has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). It states that there should be an NIA investigation against the Cockroach Janta Party and these andolanjeevis (protesters). Friends, Exactly, loser. ➡️ Friends, This is not a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). This is a Bharatiya Janata Party interest litigation. This is a Modi interest litigation. This is an Amit Shah interest litigation. ➡️ So, we would like to request the Delhi High Court with full respect. Our only plea is that you should not entertain such people. Do not let yourself be used as a political weapon. Listen to the people. Do not listen to such people who bring such petitions for their own agendas or for government work and call it a Public Interest Litigation. ➡️ Our High Court, our Supreme Court, are very important institutions; justice should happen there. But if a person comes to them who wants to give this issue a political color, who wants to get an order in favor of the government. ➡️ You might know that when our Sonam Wangchuk ji was picked up, what did the Delhi Police say? They said it was a Delhi High Court order, which is why they were taking him away. Watch on HNP NEWS 👇🏻 #CJP #NEET #NEETPaperLeak #SauravDas #Cockroach #Cockroaches #CockroachJantaParty #CJPProtest #CJPMovement #Students #StudentsProtest #GenZ #EducationMinister #DharmendraPradhan #NarendraModi #Modi #PMModi #Resignation #Resign #AbhijeetDipke #SonamWangchuk #Protest #HungerStrike #DelhiPolice #JantarMantar #Delhi

▶️ #WATCH | CJP spokesperson Saurav Das Saurav Das talked about a public interest litigation (PIL) in Delhi High court against CJP. He addressed the gathering and said: ➡️ Early this morning, we received news that some person in the Delhi High Court, someone random, just any random person, some BJP or RSS worker has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). It states that there should be an NIA investigation against the Cockroach Janta Party and these andolanjeevis (protesters). Friends, Exactly, loser. ➡️ Friends, This is not a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). This is a Bharatiya Janata Party interest litigation. This is a Modi interest litigation. This is an Amit Shah interest litigation. ➡️ So, we would like to request the Delhi High Court with full respect. Our only plea is that you should not entertain such people. Do not let yourself be used as a political weapon. Listen to the people. Do not listen to such people who bring such petitions for their own agendas or for government work and call it a Public Interest Litigation. ➡️ Our High Court, our Supreme Court, are very important institutions; justice should happen there. But if a person comes to them who wants to give this issue a political color, who wants to get an order in favor of the government. ➡️ You might know that when our Sonam Wangchuk ji was picked up, what did the Delhi Police say? They said it was a Delhi High Court order, which is why they were taking him away. Watch on HNP NEWS 👇🏻 #CJP #NEET #NEETPaperLeak #SauravDas #Cockroach #Cockroaches #CockroachJantaParty #CJPProtest #CJPMovement #Students #StudentsProtest #GenZ #EducationMinister #DharmendraPradhan #NarendraModi #Modi #PMModi #Resignation #Resign #AbhijeetDipke #SonamWangchuk #Protest #HungerStrike #DelhiPolice #JantarMantar #Delhi

HNP NEWS

800,774 次观看 • 2 个月前

Moskowitz: Speaker Johnson gets to cosplay as speaker when Trump lets him do it. When he's not out there saying Trump's an FBI informant. I have lots of questions about that. Like, how long was he an informant? Did he wear the same makeup? Why was he an informant? Was he there and then they turned him?

Moskowitz: Speaker Johnson gets to cosplay as speaker when Trump lets him do it. When he's not out there saying Trump's an FBI informant. I have lots of questions about that. Like, how long was he an informant? Did he wear the same makeup? Why was he an informant? Was he there and then they turned him?

Acyn

198,820 次观看 • 1 年前

Between Daniel Bwala and Kayla Megwa on Channels TV Q: Were you aware there was litigation over the issue in 2022/2023? A: Yes. His matter went to court, and the case was dismissed. Q: So if the court dismissed it, why keep bringing up the same issue? A: That is the question they keep running away from. Instead of addressing the substance, they ask irrelevant questions like, “What is the name of his secondary school?” or “Who were his classmates?” Q: What better agenda do you have? A: If there is a better agenda, present it. Nigerians deserve a debate about ideas, policies and competence, not a recycled issue that has already been dismissed by the court.

Between Daniel Bwala and Kayla Megwa on Channels TV Q: Were you aware there was litigation over the issue in 2022/2023? A: Yes. His matter went to court, and the case was dismissed. Q: So if the court dismissed it, why keep bringing up the same issue? A: That is the question they keep running away from. Instead of addressing the substance, they ask irrelevant questions like, “What is the name of his secondary school?” or “Who were his classmates?” Q: What better agenda do you have? A: If there is a better agenda, present it. Nigerians deserve a debate about ideas, policies and competence, not a recycled issue that has already been dismissed by the court.

Julius J. Adebayo

12,750 次观看 • 1 个月前

CNN’s Dana Bash got embarrassed live on her own show as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flat out rejected her entire framing on tariffs. She tried to turn it into a $134 billion reckoning, but Bessent came armed with the facts. She was left scrambling. BASH: “I do want to start with the big question. Will you refund the roughly $134 billion in revenue taken by these emergency tariffs?” BESSENT: “Well Dana that’s not the big question.” BESSENT: “Let’s just level set here what the Supreme Court did was a very narrow reading of the president’s authority under the IEEPA tariffs. BESSENT: “We have other tariff authorities which have been functioning section 232 tariffs, section 301 tariffs and Dana, when you say it’s a big question, that’s bad framing because the Supreme Court didn’t even address that.” BESSENT: “The Supreme Court remanded it down to a lower court.” BESSENT: “And we will follow what they say but that that could be weeks or months when we hear them. So the supreme court did not address refunds.” BASH: “Sure. They didn’t address refunds. That is clearly going to be up to to you, which—” BESSENT: “No, no, no Dana, it is not up to me.” BASH: “Not…not…you…” BESSENT: “It is not up to the administration. It is up to the lower court. Let’s just be clear on that.” The “big question” wasn’t so big after all.

CNN’s Dana Bash got embarrassed live on her own show as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flat out rejected her entire framing on tariffs. She tried to turn it into a $134 billion reckoning, but Bessent came armed with the facts. She was left scrambling. BASH: “I do want to start with the big question. Will you refund the roughly $134 billion in revenue taken by these emergency tariffs?” BESSENT: “Well Dana that’s not the big question.” BESSENT: “Let’s just level set here what the Supreme Court did was a very narrow reading of the president’s authority under the IEEPA tariffs. BESSENT: “We have other tariff authorities which have been functioning section 232 tariffs, section 301 tariffs and Dana, when you say it’s a big question, that’s bad framing because the Supreme Court didn’t even address that.” BESSENT: “The Supreme Court remanded it down to a lower court.” BESSENT: “And we will follow what they say but that that could be weeks or months when we hear them. So the supreme court did not address refunds.” BASH: “Sure. They didn’t address refunds. That is clearly going to be up to to you, which—” BESSENT: “No, no, no Dana, it is not up to me.” BASH: “Not…not…you…” BESSENT: “It is not up to the administration. It is up to the lower court. Let’s just be clear on that.” The “big question” wasn’t so big after all.

Overton

245,862 次观看 • 7 个月前

That’s when CNN tried to push back—with a question about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a known MS-13 gangbanger who was deported by the Trump administration. They claimed it was a “mistake.” 🔥 Trump handed it over to Stephen Miller—and Miller dismantled the narrative. “There's an illegal alien from El Salvador. So with respect to you, he's a citizen of El Salvador. So it's very arrogant, even for American media to suggest that we would even tell El Salvador how to handle their own citizens.” He laid out the legal facts: “Two immigration courts found that he was a member of MS-13. When President Trump declared MS-13 to be a foreign terrorist organization, that meant that he was no longer eligible under federal law... He had a deportation order that was valid.” Then came the jaw-dropping legal twist: “A district court judge tried to tell the administration they had to kidnap a citizen of El Salvador and fly him back here.” But the Supreme Court slapped that down: “The Supreme Court said the district court order was unlawful... unanimously stating clearly that neither Secretary of State nor the president could be compelled by anybody to forcibly retrieve a citizen of El Salvador... a member of MS-13.” Trump turned to Miller: “What was the ruling the Supreme Court, Steve? Was it nine to nothing?” Miller confirmed: “Yes, it was a 9-0, in our favor.” Then he delivered the knockout punch: “That is the president of El Salvador. Your questions about, per the court, can only be directed to him.”

That’s when CNN tried to push back—with a question about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a known MS-13 gangbanger who was deported by the Trump administration. They claimed it was a “mistake.” 🔥 Trump handed it over to Stephen Miller—and Miller dismantled the narrative. “There's an illegal alien from El Salvador. So with respect to you, he's a citizen of El Salvador. So it's very arrogant, even for American media to suggest that we would even tell El Salvador how to handle their own citizens.” He laid out the legal facts: “Two immigration courts found that he was a member of MS-13. When President Trump declared MS-13 to be a foreign terrorist organization, that meant that he was no longer eligible under federal law... He had a deportation order that was valid.” Then came the jaw-dropping legal twist: “A district court judge tried to tell the administration they had to kidnap a citizen of El Salvador and fly him back here.” But the Supreme Court slapped that down: “The Supreme Court said the district court order was unlawful... unanimously stating clearly that neither Secretary of State nor the president could be compelled by anybody to forcibly retrieve a citizen of El Salvador... a member of MS-13.” Trump turned to Miller: “What was the ruling the Supreme Court, Steve? Was it nine to nothing?” Miller confirmed: “Yes, it was a 9-0, in our favor.” Then he delivered the knockout punch: “That is the president of El Salvador. Your questions about, per the court, can only be directed to him.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

623,957 次观看 • 1 年前

Brennan: Should there be an ethics probe of Max Miller? Rep. Mike Turner: "This is a matter of litigation. This is best handled in a court room and not in a TV studio." Brennan: "We take those allegations seriously. When it comes to Mr. Miller, he was previously accused in 2021 by President Trump's former spokesperson of abusing her when they dated." Rep. Mike Turner: "This is an issue that is currently part of a divorce." Brennan: "So it doesn't matter to you?" Rep. Mike Turner: "It's not that it doesn't matter to me. The court needs to handle this." Brennan: "You don't want to comment. I understand."

Brennan: Should there be an ethics probe of Max Miller? Rep. Mike Turner: "This is a matter of litigation. This is best handled in a court room and not in a TV studio." Brennan: "We take those allegations seriously. When it comes to Mr. Miller, he was previously accused in 2021 by President Trump's former spokesperson of abusing her when they dated." Rep. Mike Turner: "This is an issue that is currently part of a divorce." Brennan: "So it doesn't matter to you?" Rep. Mike Turner: "It's not that it doesn't matter to me. The court needs to handle this." Brennan: "You don't want to comment. I understand."

The Bulwark

43,193 次观看 • 2 个月前

Another manufactured narrative busted. The claim that GoI called the E20 programme an “ongoing experiment” in the Supreme Court is completely misleading. As Sushant Sinha explains clearly, the word “experiment” was not about the E20 policy. It referred only to the operational process of adjusting ethanol supply allocations as per market conditions. E20 is not a trial. It is a firm national policy. The SC matter was about streamlining and consolidating petitions so ethanol allocation across India remains smooth and uninterrupted. Facts matter. Headlines should not become propaganda.

Another manufactured narrative busted. The claim that GoI called the E20 programme an “ongoing experiment” in the Supreme Court is completely misleading. As Sushant Sinha explains clearly, the word “experiment” was not about the E20 policy. It referred only to the operational process of adjusting ethanol supply allocations as per market conditions. E20 is not a trial. It is a firm national policy. The SC matter was about streamlining and consolidating petitions so ethanol allocation across India remains smooth and uninterrupted. Facts matter. Headlines should not become propaganda.

Sandiip Gandotra

37,075 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Scott Jennings just STUNNED the entire CNN panel on the Supreme Court with a straight truth nuke "For every Democrat and every media person that has gone on for the last YEAR or two about how the Supreme Court is a 'wholly owned subsidiary of Donald Trump,' that it's not independent, that it does whatever he says to do, obviously, that narrative was OBLITERATED today!" "I thought the ruling was sound. I think the president is sound to try other statutes. And I think the narratives about the court not being independent and the president not obeying the court were totally blown up today!" They didn't like that! 🫳🎤

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Scott Jennings just STUNNED the entire CNN panel on the Supreme Court with a straight truth nuke "For every Democrat and every media person that has gone on for the last YEAR or two about how the Supreme Court is a 'wholly owned subsidiary of Donald Trump,' that it's not independent, that it does whatever he says to do, obviously, that narrative was OBLITERATED today!" "I thought the ruling was sound. I think the president is sound to try other statutes. And I think the narratives about the court not being independent and the president not obeying the court were totally blown up today!" They didn't like that! 🫳🎤

Eric Daugherty

771,815 次观看 • 7 个月前

🚨BREAKING: Rubio Kept Dodging One Question. Did the administration warn Trump that war with Iran could drive up gas prices, shipping costs, and inflation? Yes or no. Instead of answering directly, Rubio kept returning to the same point: "Iran could not have a nuclear weapon." That's what made the exchange so revealing. The debate wasn't over whether Iran was a threat. It was over whether the White House fully leveled with Americans about the economic costs of the war before it started.

🚨BREAKING: Rubio Kept Dodging One Question. Did the administration warn Trump that war with Iran could drive up gas prices, shipping costs, and inflation? Yes or no. Instead of answering directly, Rubio kept returning to the same point: "Iran could not have a nuclear weapon." That's what made the exchange so revealing. The debate wasn't over whether Iran was a threat. It was over whether the White House fully leveled with Americans about the economic costs of the war before it started.

Brian Allen

52,670 次观看 • 4 个月前

🚨 BREAKING: MISSOURI SUPREME COURT FINDS SECRETARY HOSKINS IN CONTEMPT🚨 The Missouri Supreme Court has found Secretary of State Denny Hoskins was in contempt of its September 3 order when he directed local election authorities to use the HB 1 congressional map. But the Court also found that Hoskins has now purged the contempt by reversing that direction and instructing election officials to use Missouri’s 2022 congressional map. No penalty was announced in the Court’s oral ruling. A formal written judgment is expected. Where things stand now: • The 2022 congressional map will govern the November election under the orders currently in effect. • The HB 1 map will not be used unless some later court action changes the situation. • Proposition A, the referendum on HB 1, remains on the November ballot. • The federal litigation continues. The Eighth Circuit has scheduled briefing for September 15 and oral argument for September 17. Today’s contempt finding concerns compliance with the Missouri Supreme Court’s injunction. It does not decide the federal constitutional arguments pending in the separate federal case. #moleg #act4missouri

🚨 BREAKING: MISSOURI SUPREME COURT FINDS SECRETARY HOSKINS IN CONTEMPT🚨 The Missouri Supreme Court has found Secretary of State Denny Hoskins was in contempt of its September 3 order when he directed local election authorities to use the HB 1 congressional map. But the Court also found that Hoskins has now purged the contempt by reversing that direction and instructing election officials to use Missouri’s 2022 congressional map. No penalty was announced in the Court’s oral ruling. A formal written judgment is expected. Where things stand now: • The 2022 congressional map will govern the November election under the orders currently in effect. • The HB 1 map will not be used unless some later court action changes the situation. • Proposition A, the referendum on HB 1, remains on the November ballot. • The federal litigation continues. The Eighth Circuit has scheduled briefing for September 15 and oral argument for September 17. Today’s contempt finding concerns compliance with the Missouri Supreme Court’s injunction. It does not decide the federal constitutional arguments pending in the separate federal case. #moleg #act4missouri

Act for Missouri

104,238 次观看 • 25 天前

#BREAKING: Hayes: “Acting AG Todd Blanche told Congress not to worry about the $1.8 billion slush fund for insurrectionists…The DOJ then told the court the same thing—don’t worry, it’s moot, it’s dropped, and then last week, the judge said okay, fine, put it in writing. She ordered Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and an associate AG to all sign ‘a declaration under the penalty of perjury, they will not take any action to create or operate the anti-weaponization fund and that the anti-weaponization fund will not proceed in any manner or under any name.’ Well, today was the deadline for that and guess what? They came back to the court and they said no, we’re NOT doing it. We’re NOT filing any declaration to officially kill the fund, which probably means the slush fund is NOT dead.”🙄🤦‍♀️

#BREAKING: Hayes: “Acting AG Todd Blanche told Congress not to worry about the $1.8 billion slush fund for insurrectionists…The DOJ then told the court the same thing—don’t worry, it’s moot, it’s dropped, and then last week, the judge said okay, fine, put it in writing. She ordered Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and an associate AG to all sign ‘a declaration under the penalty of perjury, they will not take any action to create or operate the anti-weaponization fund and that the anti-weaponization fund will not proceed in any manner or under any name.’ Well, today was the deadline for that and guess what? They came back to the court and they said no, we’re NOT doing it. We’re NOT filing any declaration to officially kill the fund, which probably means the slush fund is NOT dead.”🙄🤦‍♀️

Emoluments Clause

527,462 次观看 • 3 个月前

During this interesting podcast some weeks ago, this informed man was telling them that NDC is not a registered political party YET, that's NDC is only existing by Court Order and they should not shout Tinubu's name IF the court decides to later remove their order o🤣🤣 Now, the same court that gave the order has removed the order yesterday, what's next for NDC to do now? For your information, it's not a ruling or judgement to be appealed, it was just an order from the Federal High Court Lokoja that Supreme Leader Seriake Dickson ran to when INEC asked him to change the Logo of the party to meet the requirement....Instead of changing the logo, he chose to use privileged right as a Senator to approach Court to order INEC Nigeria to recognize them.... That's why everything about NDC you saw on INEC platform, they simply wrote "By Court Order"🤣🤣🤣

Taiwo_Ajakaye

34,108 次观看 • 3 个月前

BREAKING: Trump Just Made A Pretty Stunning Admission About Senator Thom Tillis. For months, questions surrounded Tillis' decision to leave the Senate. Now Trump says the reason is simple: "He didn't run because I wouldn't support him." Then he went further. Trump claimed Tillis was "forced to leave" because he could not win without Trump's backing. That's a remarkable thing for a president to say out loud.

BREAKING: Trump Just Made A Pretty Stunning Admission About Senator Thom Tillis. For months, questions surrounded Tillis' decision to leave the Senate. Now Trump says the reason is simple: "He didn't run because I wouldn't support him." Then he went further. Trump claimed Tillis was "forced to leave" because he could not win without Trump's backing. That's a remarkable thing for a president to say out loud.

Brian Allen

66,479 次观看 • 3 个月前

A school district in Chatham, New Jersey, maintains a policy allowing schools to “socially transition” children without their parents’ consent, in defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta. After attorneys demanded that the district rescind the policy, school board president Ann Ciccarelli read a statement asserting that the Supreme Court’s opinion is “NOT binding on public school districts in New Jersey.” While it is technically true that Mirabelli was not a final decision on the merits, the Court’s opinion communicated its clear position that such policies likely violate parents’ constitutional rights. Ciccarelli nevertheless argued that state law and guidance from the department of education require the district to maintain its policy and that changing it could embroil the district in “costly litigation.” I’ve noticed that elected officials suddenly become deeply concerned about the cost of potential litigation when they’re asked to abandon a policy they support, while showing no concern about the potentially far greater costs of defending that same policy in court. Ciccarelli’s professed concern about litigation costs is particularly comical here. The district had already received a formal demand from attorneys insisting that it rescind its unconstitutional policy. And the demand came from the very law firm that took Mirabelli all the way to the Supreme Court and secured an award of $4.8 million, and counting, in attorneys’ fees. Did she think they were bluffing? Now the district is being sued. And it will lose.

A school district in Chatham, New Jersey, maintains a policy allowing schools to “socially transition” children without their parents’ consent, in defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta. After attorneys demanded that the district rescind the policy, school board president Ann Ciccarelli read a statement asserting that the Supreme Court’s opinion is “NOT binding on public school districts in New Jersey.” While it is technically true that Mirabelli was not a final decision on the merits, the Court’s opinion communicated its clear position that such policies likely violate parents’ constitutional rights. Ciccarelli nevertheless argued that state law and guidance from the department of education require the district to maintain its policy and that changing it could embroil the district in “costly litigation.” I’ve noticed that elected officials suddenly become deeply concerned about the cost of potential litigation when they’re asked to abandon a policy they support, while showing no concern about the potentially far greater costs of defending that same policy in court. Ciccarelli’s professed concern about litigation costs is particularly comical here. The district had already received a formal demand from attorneys insisting that it rescind its unconstitutional policy. And the demand came from the very law firm that took Mirabelli all the way to the Supreme Court and secured an award of $4.8 million, and counting, in attorneys’ fees. Did she think they were bluffing? Now the district is being sued. And it will lose.

Laura Powell

28,104 次观看 • 1 个月前

John Steenhuisen MP came to court trying to silence accusations of dishonesty. When the case was argued, he suddenly dropped it. Today the Court dismantled the entire fiction. The Court found government could not show any lawful prohibition on private vaccination. It found the Section 10 scheme was no substantive defence. It found government engineered delays while FMD spread across the country. This from the same Minister who: -fearmongered about “bioterrorism” with dead vaccine - bragged about 2 million vaccinations over a drawn-out period while outbreaks exploded -lied on national television about substantively answering our legal demand South African farmers are living with the consequences of an arrogant minister who spoke with authority long before he understood the law, the science or the crisis. It is time to for accountability from John and his enablers.

John Steenhuisen MP came to court trying to silence accusations of dishonesty. When the case was argued, he suddenly dropped it. Today the Court dismantled the entire fiction. The Court found government could not show any lawful prohibition on private vaccination. It found the Section 10 scheme was no substantive defence. It found government engineered delays while FMD spread across the country. This from the same Minister who: -fearmongered about “bioterrorism” with dead vaccine - bragged about 2 million vaccinations over a drawn-out period while outbreaks exploded -lied on national television about substantively answering our legal demand South African farmers are living with the consequences of an arrogant minister who spoke with authority long before he understood the law, the science or the crisis. It is time to for accountability from John and his enablers.

Francois Rossouw

54,578 次观看 • 4 个月前