Le Journal

Aucune description.

Newsom's Gerrymander Just Might Have A Racial Discrimination Problem Authored by Jonathan Turley, California Democrats face a pesky problem: their recent gerrymandering effort may have a racial discrimination problem. According to Ninth Circuit judge Kenneth Lee, the problem is District 13 and the public comments of the primary mapmaker, who declared his intention to create a Latino-dominated district. Democrats are bullish about retaking the House of Representatives and making Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) the next Speaker after the midterm elections. Part of that optimism is the cushion of five seats created through further gerrymandering of California’s U.S. House districts. According to one respected Ninth Circuit judge, however, California may have a slight problem: Its new congressional map may be based on racial discrimination. Judge Kenneth Lee this week dissented from a decision upholding the districts, and his detailed dissent could lay the foundation for a serious challenge that goes all the way to the Supreme Court. At issue is Congressional District 13, in the Central Valley, which Lee reveals was the result of openly racial criteria by the principal architect of the new districts. Lee begins his dissent by quoting Chief Justice John Roberts for a 2006 decision, stating, “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” When it comes to gerrymandering, it is all a sordid business of course — but this sordid business may be unconstitutional. The court has accepted that gerrymandering is part of politics. Majority parties, like Democrats in California and Republicans in Texas, have openly redesigned districts, sometimes into absurd shapes, to achieve political ends. One of the vehicles long used to help boost Democratic seats is the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits districts that discriminate against racial minorities. But this law has long been challenged as itself a statutory mandate for racial discrimination. We are currently awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court in Louisiana v. Callais on whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional in barring any district that “results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.” The result of the law has been decades of protracted litigation over the design of districts to effectively guarantee minority — overwhelmingly Democratic — representation in Congress. That is viewed by many as flying in the face of the guarantee of the 14th Amendment barring the use of race to discriminate between citizens. As Chief Justice Roberts famously wrote in 2007, “the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” Once again, partisan gerrymandering is constitutional. Indeed, last December, the Supreme Court allowed Texas to keep its redrawn maps. In Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, the Supreme Court observed that “Texas adopted the first new map, then California responded with its own map for the stated purpose of counteracting what Texas had done.” In his concurrence, Justice Samuel Alito (joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch), called it “indisputable” that “the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.” Judge Lee (a Trump appointee) is now saying that it was not that “pure and simple” with regard to at least California’s District 13. He focused on the work of Paul Mitchell, whom he described as “a California redistricting expert paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, House Majority PAC, and the DCCC to draw a redistricting map for California.” “Race-based interest groups,” Lee noted, “wanted certain racial outcomes out of the process. He happily delivered.” Mitchell is quoted as openly embracing race as the critical element in his design, including publicly declaring that the “number one…

"Go F**k Yourself!": Brawl Nearly Breaks Out During Jack Smith's Hearing Former Special Counsel Jack Smith's congressional testimony on Thursday took an unexpected turn when a brawl nearly erupted. The showdown featured former Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone and conservative activist Ivan Raiklin. The confrontation happened during a break in Smith's appearance before the House Judiciary Committee. Video captured Fanone and Raiklin squaring off as former Capitol Police officers scrambled to pull Fanone back. "See how many people are restraining you, and look at me, totally in control over my mind and body," Ranklin shouted to Fanone. Former Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn, who was also at the Capitol that day, jumped in to separate the two men while uniformed officers formed a barrier between them. Fanone, pointing directly at Raiklin, unleashed a barrage of accusations. "This guy has threatened my family, threatened my children, threatened to rape my children, you sick bastard," Fanone shouted. 🚨 JUST IN: CHAOS erupts during Jack Smith's hearing as former J6 Capitol Police officer Michael Fanone goes off on Ivan Ranklin and an altercation breaks out Things are getting TENSE. Fanone ended up leaving. "This guy has threatened my family!" pic.twitter.com/igXBWz64sW — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) January 22, 2026 There was nearly a physical altercation during a break in the House Judiciary Committee’s Jack Smith hearing pic.twitter.com/LMhcxEQDdJ — Nolan D. McCaskill (@NolanDMcCaskill) January 22, 2026 The chaos prompted additional U.S. Capitol Police to flood the hearing room to restore order, with several officers speaking directly to Raiklin. Shortly after the altercation, Raiklin exited the room, though it’s not clear from reports whether he was kicked out or left on his own accord. Raiklin later posted a video to X and floated the idea of suing Fanone for defamation because of his accusations, which have gone viral on social media: Who thinks I should sue Mr. Fanone for defamation? pic.twitter.com/ZyoctE0fR1 — Ivan Raiklin (@IvanRaiklin) January 22, 2026 But the fireworks didn't end there. Later during the hearing, Fanone interrupted Texas Republican Rep. Troy Nehls as he spoke. Nehls had been arguing that Capitol Police leadership, not President Trump, deserved the blame for what unfolded on January 6. “I would like to quickly address the police officers of January 6th. Mr. Don, Mr. Fanone, Mr. Gonell, Mr. Hodges. I'm a member of the new select committee to actually examine, actually examine what happened that day,” Rep. Nehls began. “ And I can tell you, gentlemen, that the fault does not lie with Donald Trump. It lies with Yogananda Pittman and the US Capitol leadership team.” As Nehls continued to speak, Fanone fake-coughed into his hands and shouted, ”Go fuck yourself.” J6 disgrace Michael Fanone caughs and yells, “Go f*** yourself!” at Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) during the J6 committee hearing. This is really who Democrats call their hero of J6? Someone who can’t even behave like an adult at a congressional hearing. Sad!pic.twitter.com/PZVv4RL3FH — Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) January 22, 2026 Smith testified before the committee to discuss his now-defunct investigations into Trump’s questioning of the results of the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents. Smith used his testimony to claim his investigation wasn’t biased, insisting that Trump “willfully broke the law — the very laws he took an oath to uphold.” He claimed his investigation adhered to Justice Department policy and denied any partisan motive, asserting he would have made the same decision no matter the defendant’s party. Republicans on the committee were unconvinced and challenged that claim head-on, arguing that Smith’s words and actions told a very different story. Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 19:40

Massive Fraud Infuriates Minnesotans, Lawmakers, But Top Official Sees No Quick Fix Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), ST. PAUL, Minn.—Erin Campbell, Minnesota’s top financial officer, told a state anti-fraud committee at the state Capitol on Jan. 21: “Unfortunately, there’s not a ‘silver bullet’ to stop the type of fraud that we’ve seen in our public-assistance programs.” Minnesota state Rep. Isaac Schultz, a Republican, speaks at a meeting of the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 21, 2026. Janice Hisle/The Epoch Times The lack of a quick fix is largely because “state government is about as complex as it gets,” Campbell told the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee. That bipartisan committee of eight state representatives began meeting nearly a year ago to tackle large-scale defrauding of the state’s public-assistance programs. That was about 10 months before investigative reports and a viral video drew focus to Minnesota’s massive problem with fraudsters. The scandal has been building for years. Since 2022, federal prosecutors have charged nearly 100 suspects—mostly of Somali descent—in Minnesota fraud cases; officials estimate that fraud losses, now being probed as far back as 2018, could exceed $9 billion. President Donald Trump’s administration froze funding for some programs and mobilized investigations from multiple federal agencies, ranging from the Treasury Department to the IRS and the Justice Department. Campbell, commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, told the lawmakers’ committee that her employees “work as hard as we can to support agencies” that are expected to follow the “systems of financial management” that her office creates. Those systems involve “statutes, processes, policies, culture, agencies, practices, and [information technology] ... that have been developed over decades,” she said. Thus, addressing fraud requires “layers” of coordinated changes, she said, such as analyzing data, upgrading technology, and changing state laws that govern program eligibility. Erin Campbell, Minnesota Management and Budget commissioner, fields questions from lawmakers at a meeting of the Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy Committee in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 21, 2026. Janice Hisle/The Epoch Times However, noting that the state government has swelled to 59,000 employees, state Rep. Isaac Schultz said: “This is outrageous for the people of Minnesota, that our state government, at its largest size in state history, can’t take care of this mess.” “I can’t understate it—how frustrated Minnesotans are right now with the level of fraud and the lack of accountability that we’ve seen,” he said. Campbell said that 75 employees on her team face the gargantuan task of supporting the statewide government, with its $65-billion budget and hundreds of state agencies, boards, and commissions, “while we’re making 2.5 million payments every year.” Thus, Campbell said, her office lacks “the capacity ... or the appropriate line of sight” to identify and tackle fraud in individual state agencies. When other state agencies see signs of fraud, it’s up to them to pause payments and refer cases to law enforcement agencies or the state attorney general for criminal investigations, Campbell said. Her office lacks authority to hold other agency heads accountable if procedures aren’t followed, she said. The governor does have that power, Campbell and others agreed. When Schultz asked whether Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, had “ever directed you or members of your team to stifle the reports of whistleblowers,” Campbell replied, “Absolutely not.” That is one accusation that Walz has faced from whistleblowers. Three Republicans who serve on the fraud committee—Reps. Kristin Robbins, Walter Hudson, and Marion Rarick—testified about that at a congressional hearing in Washington earlier this month. Walz has defended his record…

Legislation Proposed To Make It Easier To Denaturalize Somali Fraudsters In the wake of the massive Somali-fraud scandal out of Minnesota and other states, President Donald Trump wants to denaturalize American immigrants convicted of crimes and deport them, but the current legal framework and federal bureaucracy make such sweeping denaturalization efforts difficult to achieve quickly. “I would do it in a heartbeat if they were dishonest,” Trump told the New York Times earlier this month. “I think that many of the people that came in from Somalia, they hate our country.” Existing federal law provides limited pathways for revoking the citizenship of naturalized citizens. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act the government can denaturalize individuals who obtained citizenship through fraud, misrepresentation, or the concealment of material facts during the naturalization process. The law does not allow automatic revocation based solely on crimes committed after naturalization. Current denaturalization proceedings require civil lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice in federal court or criminal prosecutions for naturalization fraud, both demanding individualized evidence, extensive litigation, and meeting high burdens of proof. Civil cases require “clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence,” while criminal prosecutions demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) has proposed a solution to this problem. He’s introduced the Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation (SCAM) Act in the Senate to expand federal denaturalization authority. The legislation creates a 10-year window after naturalization during which citizens who commit specified crimes could face citizenship revocation and deportation. Among those offenses are welfare fraud exceeding $10,000, aggravated felonies, espionage, and joining terrorist organizations, a category the bill explicitly extends to gangs and drug cartels. The measure also lowers the threshold for federal authorities to begin denaturalization proceedings by broadening the legal grounds beyond fraud committed during the citizenship application process. The bill even includes a fallback provision that automatically reduces the revocation window from ten years to five years if courts strike down the longer period as unconstitutional. “American citizenship is a privilege, and anyone hoping to be a part of our great nation must demonstrate a sincere attachment to our Constitution, upstanding moral character, and a commitment to the happiness and good order of the United States,” Schmitt said in a statement. “The rampant fraud uncovered in Minnesota must be a wakeup call. People who commit felony fraud, serious felonies, or join terrorist organizations like drug cartels shortly after taking their citizenship oaths fail to uphold the basic standards of citizenship. They must be denaturalized because they have proven they never met the requirements for the great honor of American citizenship in the first place. We must protect and restore the institution of American citizenship. No more talk. It’s time for action.” The White House publicly endorsed the legislation. “The Somali fraud scandal is one of the greatest financial scandals in American history,” said Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor. “All Somali refugees, or any other immigrants, who have committed fraud against the United States must be immediately denaturalized and deported. We applaud Senator Schmitt for his leadership.” Schmitt believes the Somali-based fraud is just the “tip of the iceberg” of what will soon be uncovered. “There’s also a bunch of money that went out the door at the end of the Biden administration that had nothing to do with COVID, but it was under the auspices of these COVID funds. I think you’re gonna see another wave of fraud,” he told Fox News’s Harris Faulkner earlier this week. “So, I think that’s probably at the heart of why Tim…