Citizen Free Press
@CitizenFreePres
Republicans who voted to hold Steve Bannon in criminal contempt.
Without these votes, Bannon would not be facing prison.
Adam Kinzinger
Anthony Gonzalez
John Katko
Nancy Mace
Jaime Herrera Beutler
Brian Fitzpatrick
Fred Upton
Peter Meijer
Liz Cheney
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1804631694915334455
==Nancy Mace needs to make up
For this==
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1804631694915334455
Listening In: JFK Calls about Furniture (July 25, 1963)
Rare Audio | President John Kennedy calls Air Force General in 1963 about furniture. And he’s pissed.
https://youtu.be/NtLTmg2vCzY?si=KGZ6HLN6I3Ts7N4l
I love this
Larry Kudlow: This is a big mistake for Democrats. Kudlow is right, why to hell is Bidan running against the Supremes, they cemented protection for him on official acts. Maybe he knows all his acts are unofficial because he stole 2020.
5:17
https://youtu.be/jluhsLZAPlw
SCOTUS Issues Orders On Major Gun Rights Cases
Ammoland Inc. Posted on July 3, 2024 by John Crump
Supreme Court Washington DC USA iStock-Bill Chizek-1149364911.jpg
SCOTUS Issues Orders On Major Gun Rights Cases iStock-Bill Chizek-1149364911.jpg
The Supreme Court of the United States announced several orders regarding gun rights today.
The first case that was examined was Garland v. Range. Bryan Range sued the government because he became a prohibited person after pleading guilty to lying about his income to obtain food stamps. The Court gave Range three years of probation and stripped him of his gun rights for life. He claimed that the punishment was inconsistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation. The lower Court decided for the government, but the full bench of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Range.
SCOTUS granted certiorari to the case, vacated the decision, and remanded (GVR) the suit back to the Third Circuit, considering the United States v. RahimiSupreme Court opinion. In Rahimi, SCOTUS said that a person could be temporarily disarmed if they posed a danger. Range was not convicted of a violent crime, and no one claims he is a danger to himself or others, so it will be interesting to see how the Third Circuit weighs the Rahimi opinion in the rehearing.
The second case that met the same fate due to Rahimiwas United States. v. Daniels. This case challenges the federal prohibition of drug users owning guns. In April 2022, police stopped Patrick Daniels’ car because it had no license plate. Police reported that Daniel’s car smelled of marijuana. This smell gave the police probable cause to search the man’s vehicle. Police uncovered marijuana and two firearms.
A jury found Daniels guilty and sentenced him to 46 months in prison for being in possession of a gun while being an unlawful user of a controlled substance. Daniels appealed the guilty verdict, claiming the law violated the Second Amendment. The District Court would rule against the man, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision.
A third case that was sent back down to the circuit due to Rahimi was Antonyuk v. Steven. This case challenges New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). New York passed the CCIA as a response to the Bruen opinion. After the CCIA passed, Ukrainian immigrant Ivan Antonyuk teamed up with Gun Owners of America (GOA) to sue the state. A District Court judge would issue an injunction against the enforcement of the CCIA, but the Second Circuit would step in and stay the injunction. Eventually, the Second Circuit would lift the injunction on many of the critical provisions of the District Court’s injunction.
The final case SCOTUS considered was Harrel v. Raoul, which challenged the Illinois “assault weapons” ban. SCOTUS denied cert, although Alito would have granted cert. The Court denied cert because the merits of the case had not been heard. The Court decided it should let the case work its way through the Courts before taking the case, but Associate Justice Clarence Thomas had strong words for the Seventh Circuit, hinting that SCOTUS was ready to step in and warned the Seventh Circuit to stay within the bounds of the Constitution.
“The Seventh Circuit’s decision illustrates why this Court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers,” Thomas wrote. “By contorting what little guidance our precedents provide, the Seventh Circuit concluded that the Second Amendment does not protect ‘militaristic’ weapons. It then tautologically defined ‘militaristic’ weapons as those ‘that may be reserved for military use.’ The Seventh Circuit’s contrived ‘non-militaristic’ limitation on the Arms protected by the Second Amendment seems unmoored from both text and history). And, even on its own terms, the Seventh Circuit’s application of its definition is nonsensical. (‘The AR–15 is a civilian, not military, weapon. No army in the world uses a service rifle that is only semiautomatic’). In my view, Illinois’ ban is ‘highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.’ It is difficult to see how the Seventh Circuit could have concluded that the most widely owned semiautomatic rifles are not ‘Arms’ protected by the Second Amendment.”
The merits of Harrel will be heard later this year in a District Court. After the Court’s decision, the case is expected to be appealed to the Seventh Circuit before eventually making its way back to SCOTUS.
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. Mr. Crump lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
https://www.ammoland.com/2024/07/scotus-issues-orders-on-major-gun-rights-cases/#axzz8erm0JTVA
Jeffrey Epstein Document DUMP: What the Media Missed
BREANNA MORELLO
JUL 03, 2024
Federal prosecutors knew Jeffrey Epstein raped teenage girls 2 years before they cut him a sweetheart plea deal. We now know this because a Florida judge on Monday unveiled the grand jury transcript from that 2006 investigation.
Alex Acosta heard directly from one victim who clearly stated Epstein raped her the day before her 18th birthday. Acosta was the top federal prosecutor in Florida at the time of the plea agreement. He had first-hand testimony, but still gave Epstein a light plea deal. Epstein was sentenced to 1.5 years sentence in the Palm Beach County jail system, but his sentence he was allowed to go to his office almost daily as part of a work-release program. He also had a year of house arrest and was required to register as a sex offender.
I’ve read through the 150-paged transcript and here’s the key points you need to see:
Epstein raped a 17-year-old girl the day before her 18th birthday:
He gave the rape victim $1,000 in cash and a rental car:
Nada Marcinkoba is Epstein’s assistant and sex slave. She was brought into the United states from Yougoslavia. She was engaged in sex acts with Epstein and minors were asked to watch and/or join in. During a raid on Epstein’s home, sex toys were only found in Nada’s room.
Girls were told to claim they were 18-year-old when asked:
Testimony from one victim shows she was paid $200 to give Epstein a massage. This is her first-hand account on how she was recruited:
Victim testifies that Epstein’s assistant told the teen to take off her clothes before Epstein came in for his massage:
Epstein allegedly offered teen more money if she engaged in a sexual act with him:
She agreed and Epstein allegedly “jerked off” in front of the teen:
Victim told her high school friend about Epstein paying her for a massage. That friend told others at the school resulting in a fight. That’s when the school found out the girl had $300 in her purse and told her family:
Victim says she knows what she did is a crime, but didn’t at the time
Another victim told Palm Beach PD that Epstein demanded she take off her clothes for a massage:
Epstein declined getting a massage from a 23-year-old girl because she was “too old”:
One victim says she did not have sex with Epstein because he had a “deformed penis”:
Palm Beach Police Department did a “trash pull” on Epstein’s home. Thats where sanitation takes a person’s trash in an empty container and passes it to police. Police found girl’s names and phone numbers thrown out on paper. This is important because one victim claims Epstein asked for her number after her “jerked off” in front of her, but never reached back out. He likely did this to make the girls feel like he had long-term interest:
When Palm Beach PD reached out to one victim she immediately started crying on the phone:
Housekeeper knew something was wrong with the girls hanging around the house and took notes. Even called police at one point when there was an unknown car in the driveway:
The FULL grand jury transcript can be found here.
MY FULL REPORT:
https://breannamorello.substack.com/p/jeffrey-epstein-document-dump-what
Anons knew this years ago, wtf is going on