Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

🚨THE FIRST AMENDMENT ON TRIAL IN D.C.: Appellate Judge says, “…This could be the end of muckraking” The DC Circuit Court of Appeals is hearing a case involving James O’Keefe and Democracy Partners that could determine whether undercover journalism remains legal in Washington, D.C. The issue at hand is... whether reporters can be punished not for defamation, but for the act of going undercover and whether alleged “harm” can be blamed on the investigation itself rather than the publication, effectively sidestepping First Amendment protections. Before a panel of three judges on the Federal Appeals Court Thursday were two issues. Issue 1: Can an undercover reporter be accused of fraud for misrepresenting themselves during investigative journalism? We argue that any “harm” comes from the publication, not the investigation, and is fully protected by the First Amendment. Issue 2: Can a fiduciary duty be imposed on a part-time, unpaid intern who never signed an NDA? We say no, such a duty cannot be unilaterally forced on someone in these circumstances. “That’s what investigative journalists do. This determination by this court decides whether undercover reporting can exist in the nations capital moving forward.” - James O’Keefe’s attorney Ben Barr Michael Caseyshow more

O’Keefe Media Group

933,489 subscribers

47,113 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Образование Здоровье и велнес

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Oral arguments are set to begin in the DC Circuit court of appeals, in case of Democracy Partners v James O’Keefe, PV I’m before the DC Circuit court of appeals today, appealing the verdict in that case, the issue before the three Judge panel is whether an investigative reporter engages in ‘fraudulent misrepresentation’ when they record someone under pretenses in DC, or owes a ‘fiduciary duty’ when undercover to the subject they expose. I was sued nine years ago by this group that was trying to elect Hillary Clinton engaged in ‘birddogging.’ Trump brought up the videos in the debate with Clinton. We are fighting for the first amendment itself, the right to repeat what someone tells you! I will never ‘settle’ or give up! Listen LIVE to the oral arguments which begin at 930am HERE:

Oral arguments are set to begin in the DC Circuit court of appeals, in case of Democracy Partners v James O’Keefe, PV I’m before the DC Circuit court of appeals today, appealing the verdict in that case, the issue before the three Judge panel is whether an investigative reporter engages in ‘fraudulent misrepresentation’ when they record someone under pretenses in DC, or owes a ‘fiduciary duty’ when undercover to the subject they expose. I was sued nine years ago by this group that was trying to elect Hillary Clinton engaged in ‘birddogging.’ Trump brought up the videos in the debate with Clinton. We are fighting for the first amendment itself, the right to repeat what someone tells you! I will never ‘settle’ or give up! Listen LIVE to the oral arguments which begin at 930am HERE:

James O'Keefe

186,514 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Thomas Massie warns Americans are at war as the Supreme Court decides whether Bayer will be granted immunity from harm caused by its products. “Americans are under attack.” “There are four fronts to this war.” “They're attacking our executive branch, our legislative branch at the state level, our legislative branch here in Washington, D.C., and the courts. “What do they want? They want get-out-of-court-free cards.” “We’re not going to give it to them.” “We’ve offered legislation called the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act.” “But it shouldn't even be necessary.” “We haven't repealed the 10th Amendment.” “We haven't repealed the 7th Fifth Amendment, your right to a jury trial.” “We haven't repealed the First Amendment.” “These things have not been repealed, but are in jeopardy today.” “This is regulatory capture.” “It is corrupt.” “The federal government, and especially the executive branch, do not have this power to issue these get out of court free cards, and we're going to fight it.” Thomas Massie

Thomas Massie warns Americans are at war as the Supreme Court decides whether Bayer will be granted immunity from harm caused by its products. “Americans are under attack.” “There are four fronts to this war.” “They're attacking our executive branch, our legislative branch at the state level, our legislative branch here in Washington, D.C., and the courts. “What do they want? They want get-out-of-court-free cards.” “We’re not going to give it to them.” “We’ve offered legislation called the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act.” “But it shouldn't even be necessary.” “We haven't repealed the 10th Amendment.” “We haven't repealed the 7th Fifth Amendment, your right to a jury trial.” “We haven't repealed the First Amendment.” “These things have not been repealed, but are in jeopardy today.” “This is regulatory capture.” “It is corrupt.” “The federal government, and especially the executive branch, do not have this power to issue these get out of court free cards, and we're going to fight it.” Thomas Massie

End Tribalism in Politics

15,141 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

#WATCH | Surat, Gujarat | On the Gyanvapi case, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain says, "In the Gyanvapi case, the matter is subjudice in the Supreme Court. A 'Shivling' was found there on May 16, 2022, and the Allahabad HC ordered an ASI investigation. On May 19, 2023, the Supreme Court stayed that order. The case is going on at a slow pace in the trial court. The reason for this is that on 12 December 2024, the Supreme Court passed an order that no survey order will be passed in any case and no effective orders will be made in any trial, until this matter of the Place of Worship Act is decided. A huge obstacle has arisen due to this... The Muslim side does not have any proof, and the same is true in the Ram Mandir case, be it Gyanvapi or Mathura's Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi; in any case, they could not provide any proof except saying that they have been offering namaz there for the last few years... I want to clearly state that if you enter the premises of a temple and forcibly offer namaz, then the existence of the temple does not end, and the Supreme Court has also held this issue in the Ram Mandir case..."

#WATCH | Surat, Gujarat | On the Gyanvapi case, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain says, "In the Gyanvapi case, the matter is subjudice in the Supreme Court. A 'Shivling' was found there on May 16, 2022, and the Allahabad HC ordered an ASI investigation. On May 19, 2023, the Supreme Court stayed that order. The case is going on at a slow pace in the trial court. The reason for this is that on 12 December 2024, the Supreme Court passed an order that no survey order will be passed in any case and no effective orders will be made in any trial, until this matter of the Place of Worship Act is decided. A huge obstacle has arisen due to this... The Muslim side does not have any proof, and the same is true in the Ram Mandir case, be it Gyanvapi or Mathura's Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi; in any case, they could not provide any proof except saying that they have been offering namaz there for the last few years... I want to clearly state that if you enter the premises of a temple and forcibly offer namaz, then the existence of the temple does not end, and the Supreme Court has also held this issue in the Ram Mandir case..."

ANI

19,836 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

#WATCH | On 130th Amendment Bill for removal of the PM, CMs, and ministers held on serious criminal charges, Union Home Minister Amit Shah says, "...The elected government in the Parliament can bring any bill or constitutional amendment. What objection can there be in placing it before the House? I had made it clear that we will hand it over to the joint committee of both the Houses... Secondly, when it is put to vote, you can express your opinion. It is a constitutional amendment, a two-third majority is required in both Houses. Whether we have (two-third majority) or not, it will be proved at that time." "Is it right in a democracy to not allow any government bill or constitutional amendment to be presented in the House and to behave in this manner? Are both the Houses of the country's parliament for debate or for noise and uproar? We have also held protest over various issues but I do not believe the mentality of not allowing the bill to be presented is democratic. The opposition will have to answer the public..."

#WATCH | On 130th Amendment Bill for removal of the PM, CMs, and ministers held on serious criminal charges, Union Home Minister Amit Shah says, "...The elected government in the Parliament can bring any bill or constitutional amendment. What objection can there be in placing it before the House? I had made it clear that we will hand it over to the joint committee of both the Houses... Secondly, when it is put to vote, you can express your opinion. It is a constitutional amendment, a two-third majority is required in both Houses. Whether we have (two-third majority) or not, it will be proved at that time." "Is it right in a democracy to not allow any government bill or constitutional amendment to be presented in the House and to behave in this manner? Are both the Houses of the country's parliament for debate or for noise and uproar? We have also held protest over various issues but I do not believe the mentality of not allowing the bill to be presented is democratic. The opposition will have to answer the public..."

ANI

10,449 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Charles Kanjama on whether the DP can run for office or not: The court was not clear on it; it could have been clear by making a declaration that the outcome of the impeachment will not have any consequence. My interpretation is that because the court has found that there has been a violation of the right to a fair hearing, of necessity, the fruits of the impeachment cannot all be sustained. The finality in terms of bringing in a new DP has been sustained, but the other fruits of impeachment, which is to stop the DP from running again, cannot be sustained. The outcome is fairly confusing #CitizenMondayReport

Charles Kanjama on whether the DP can run for office or not: The court was not clear on it; it could have been clear by making a declaration that the outcome of the impeachment will not have any consequence. My interpretation is that because the court has found that there has been a violation of the right to a fair hearing, of necessity, the fruits of the impeachment cannot all be sustained. The finality in terms of bringing in a new DP has been sustained, but the other fruits of impeachment, which is to stop the DP from running again, cannot be sustained. The outcome is fairly confusing #CitizenMondayReport

Citizen TV Kenya

35,563 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

#WATCH | Delhi | 2017 Unnao rape case | Nirbhaya's mother, Asha Devi says, "This is a new rule that is being made... This should not happen... Whether you are 500 km away or at home, it doesn't matter. What matters is that you have committed a crime and you have been punished... The court should hold an impartial hearing on this, considering the victim and what happened to her. There should be no bail at all... That family is still in danger... It has happened many times that the lower court and the high court have punished the victim, but then they got relief in the Supreme Court... The court itself is making a joke of how such a decision can be made..." Delhi High Court suspends the sentence of the 2017 Unnao rape case accused, former MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar. The High Court has directed that Sengar will not enter the 5-kilometre area where the victim resides in Delhi.

#WATCH | Delhi | 2017 Unnao rape case | Nirbhaya's mother, Asha Devi says, "This is a new rule that is being made... This should not happen... Whether you are 500 km away or at home, it doesn't matter. What matters is that you have committed a crime and you have been punished... The court should hold an impartial hearing on this, considering the victim and what happened to her. There should be no bail at all... That family is still in danger... It has happened many times that the lower court and the high court have punished the victim, but then they got relief in the Supreme Court... The court itself is making a joke of how such a decision can be made..." Delhi High Court suspends the sentence of the 2017 Unnao rape case accused, former MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar. The High Court has directed that Sengar will not enter the 5-kilometre area where the victim resides in Delhi.

ANI

139,593 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

NEW: Jonathan Turley shreds the Supreme Court's decision to allow the U.S. government to demand the removal of 'misinformation' on social media. The Supreme Court ruled that the government’s communications with social media giants about removing Covid-19 "misinformation" did *not* violate the First Amendment. "This is one of the most fundamental issues that we are facing." "It's been called Orwellian by lower court judges. And what the court is saying is that we won't hear you on this issue 'cause you're not the right litigants." "I testified about this in Congress, that they have made a mockery of the limits of the First Amendment by doing indirectly what they're barred from doing directly."

NEW: Jonathan Turley shreds the Supreme Court's decision to allow the U.S. government to demand the removal of 'misinformation' on social media. The Supreme Court ruled that the government’s communications with social media giants about removing Covid-19 "misinformation" did not violate the First Amendment. "This is one of the most fundamental issues that we are facing." "It's been called Orwellian by lower court judges. And what the court is saying is that we won't hear you on this issue 'cause you're not the right litigants." "I testified about this in Congress, that they have made a mockery of the limits of the First Amendment by doing indirectly what they're barred from doing directly."

Collin Rugg

1,052,703 просмотров • 2 лет назад

#WATCH | Delhi | On the Supreme Court Collegium recommending transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court to his parent High Court in Allahabad after an adverse report against him, Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal says, "...The issue of corruption within the judiciary is a very serious issue. This is not something that has been articulated by senior councils and lawyers in the country for the first time. It has been going on for years. It is time for the Supreme Court to start looking at issues of how the appointment process takes place. The appointment process should be more transparent and carefully done...Corruption is a very serious issue and despite what PM Modi has said the corruption has increased..."

#WATCH | Delhi | On the Supreme Court Collegium recommending transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court to his parent High Court in Allahabad after an adverse report against him, Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal says, "...The issue of corruption within the judiciary is a very serious issue. This is not something that has been articulated by senior councils and lawyers in the country for the first time. It has been going on for years. It is time for the Supreme Court to start looking at issues of how the appointment process takes place. The appointment process should be more transparent and carefully done...Corruption is a very serious issue and despite what PM Modi has said the corruption has increased..."

ANI

163,132 просмотров • 1 год назад

We are at the final stretch. After years of legal hearings and judicial deliberations, today, Britain’s High Court judges get their last chance to decide whether to wash their hands of Julian Assange and let him be extradited to the United States – where he will disappear in a supermax prison maze never to be heard of again until he dies. Julian is not on trial. He has already been declared a hero of journalism and of everyone around the world who believe in the right of the public to know what crimes their governments have perpetrated in their name, behind their backs. Britain’s High Court is on trial. This is the Court’s last chance to restore a small part of the British courts’ dignity that was sacrificed by judges who, year in year out, allowed themselves to be deployed as the legal agents of war criminals. But, let us make no mistake: It is not just Britain’s judges that are on trial. So are we – citizens, journalists, organisations and politicians who claim to care for universal human rights and press freedom. History will deliver its own verdict in due course on us depending on whether we stand with Julian while the judges deliberate – and on whether we continue to stand with Julian the day after the High Court verdict. Let us commit to passing History’s test, even if the United Kingdom’s High Court judges fail it.

We are at the final stretch. After years of legal hearings and judicial deliberations, today, Britain’s High Court judges get their last chance to decide whether to wash their hands of Julian Assange and let him be extradited to the United States – where he will disappear in a supermax prison maze never to be heard of again until he dies. Julian is not on trial. He has already been declared a hero of journalism and of everyone around the world who believe in the right of the public to know what crimes their governments have perpetrated in their name, behind their backs. Britain’s High Court is on trial. This is the Court’s last chance to restore a small part of the British courts’ dignity that was sacrificed by judges who, year in year out, allowed themselves to be deployed as the legal agents of war criminals. But, let us make no mistake: It is not just Britain’s judges that are on trial. So are we – citizens, journalists, organisations and politicians who claim to care for universal human rights and press freedom. History will deliver its own verdict in due course on us depending on whether we stand with Julian while the judges deliberate – and on whether we continue to stand with Julian the day after the High Court verdict. Let us commit to passing History’s test, even if the United Kingdom’s High Court judges fail it.

Yanis Varoufakis

204,419 просмотров • 2 лет назад

I am not sure what to make of this, keen to know your thoughts: · There's an amendment to switch Withholding Tax on betting/gaming from having it pegged on winnings to having it pegged on withdrawals · The rate of Withholding Tax on this is also being revised from 20.0% to 5.0% · These changes are very consistent with what we saw being moved at the Committee of the Whole House stage Musings: · Now that this is being done via an amendment to the Income Tax Act, can a withdrawal by a punter be legally deemed to be an income? · It's important to look at this matter in reference to the historic Sep 2021 judgement on the famous Kitengela Bar Owners Association vs National Assembly & 2 others which threw out Minimum Tax as unconstitutional · The judgement read & in part that "The imposition of the said tax has the potential of not only subjecting the people to double taxation but also unfairly targeting people whose businesses, for whatever reason, are in loss making positions, to pay taxes from their capital rather than from their profits" · Emphasis here is on the fact that the court took issue with taxes being levied based on "capital rather than from profits" · So again the question begs, can a withdrawal from a betting/gaming wallet be deemed to be an income that should then be taxable?

I am not sure what to make of this, keen to know your thoughts: · There's an amendment to switch Withholding Tax on betting/gaming from having it pegged on winnings to having it pegged on withdrawals · The rate of Withholding Tax on this is also being revised from 20.0% to 5.0% · These changes are very consistent with what we saw being moved at the Committee of the Whole House stage Musings: · Now that this is being done via an amendment to the Income Tax Act, can a withdrawal by a punter be legally deemed to be an income? · It's important to look at this matter in reference to the historic Sep 2021 judgement on the famous Kitengela Bar Owners Association vs National Assembly & 2 others which threw out Minimum Tax as unconstitutional · The judgement read & in part that "The imposition of the said tax has the potential of not only subjecting the people to double taxation but also unfairly targeting people whose businesses, for whatever reason, are in loss making positions, to pay taxes from their capital rather than from their profits" · Emphasis here is on the fact that the court took issue with taxes being levied based on "capital rather than from profits" · So again the question begs, can a withdrawal from a betting/gaming wallet be deemed to be an income that should then be taxable?

Julians Amboko

14,950 просмотров • 1 год назад

.James Talarico: It should be troubling to all of us that the most powerful politicians and corporate executives are working together to sell out the First Amendment. They are selling out our freedom of speech in order to protect their own power and their own wealth. An attack on any one of our First Amendment rights is an attack on all of our First Amendment rights — whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, a progressive or a conservative, this should be concerning to all of us.

.James Talarico: It should be troubling to all of us that the most powerful politicians and corporate executives are working together to sell out the First Amendment. They are selling out our freedom of speech in order to protect their own power and their own wealth. An attack on any one of our First Amendment rights is an attack on all of our First Amendment rights — whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, a progressive or a conservative, this should be concerning to all of us.

Team Talarico

199,701 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

.Sheldon Whitehouse: Let's not forget that there is an ongoing proceeding in Florida in federal court with an open question whether Todd Blanche committed a fraud upon the court. It's probably the worst thing you can accuse someone of in a court proceeding. It means you abused the process of the court to accomplish an unjust and wrongful result. It is so bad that in the history of the Department of Justice, no senior official has ever been even accused of a fraud upon the court. And we're advancing this guy before that question is settled.

.Sheldon Whitehouse: Let's not forget that there is an ongoing proceeding in Florida in federal court with an open question whether Todd Blanche committed a fraud upon the court. It's probably the worst thing you can accuse someone of in a court proceeding. It means you abused the process of the court to accomplish an unjust and wrongful result. It is so bad that in the history of the Department of Justice, no senior official has ever been even accused of a fraud upon the court. And we're advancing this guy before that question is settled.

Headquarters

99,071 просмотров • 11 дней назад

NPR: “James O’Keefe shows NO signs of stopping.” Thank you to NPR for defending our rights under the First Amendment. Our undercover journalist met with Brandon Wright last year, a GS-14 DHS official, who said: “We don’t let them [Former DHS Secretary Noem] get in our way.” Now Wright is suing O’Keefe. This fight is about the very fundamentals of the First Amendment. OMG is fighting for the right to repeat what someone tells us and report what comes out of their own mouths. We’re simply documenting the truth. Mark S. Zaid dreams about destroying undercover journalism and nuking the First Amendment. It won’t happen. We will not stop. We have more videos. Accountability is coming. Stay tuned…

NPR: “James O’Keefe shows NO signs of stopping.” Thank you to NPR for defending our rights under the First Amendment. Our undercover journalist met with Brandon Wright last year, a GS-14 DHS official, who said: “We don’t let them [Former DHS Secretary Noem] get in our way.” Now Wright is suing O’Keefe. This fight is about the very fundamentals of the First Amendment. OMG is fighting for the right to repeat what someone tells us and report what comes out of their own mouths. We’re simply documenting the truth. Mark S. Zaid dreams about destroying undercover journalism and nuking the First Amendment. It won’t happen. We will not stop. We have more videos. Accountability is coming. Stay tuned…

James O'Keefe

269,557 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Five best speeches yesterday: 5. Siobhain McDonagh on the bill and the NHS Act: “This is about whether the founding promise of the NHS can be quietly rewritten—not through open debate or an Act of Parliament, but by a handful of MPs behind closed doors in a Committee room.”

Five best speeches yesterday: 5. Siobhain McDonagh on the bill and the NHS Act: “This is about whether the founding promise of the NHS can be quietly rewritten—not through open debate or an Act of Parliament, but by a handful of MPs behind closed doors in a Committee room.”

Dan Hitchens

18,844 просмотров • 1 год назад