Former Democrat Prosecutor Marilyn Mosby guilty on 2 counts of perjury

Former Baltimore City State's Attorney and staunch Democrat Marilyn Mosby, was convicted on two counts of perjury by a federal jury.

Mosby was raised by her grandparents in Dorchester, Boston. And in spite of both of her parents being police officers, she seemed to have a dislike for cops as we can see in the Freddie Gray case in 2015 when she charged six police officers who had arrested Gray prior to his death caused by injuries while he was in custody. Some, like David Jaros an associate professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, said that she may have overcharged the police in this case, but agreed that this was quite typical in criminal cases that do not involve police. Also, anonymous police department sources said that Baltimore's investigation didn't support some of the charges brought against the cops, as reported by CNN.

As far as how she viewed crime and law, in January 2019 she announced that her office wouldn't any longer prosecute people for marijuana possession, no matter the quantity. She announced that she would vacate about 5,000 marijuana possession convictions. The following year, Democrat Mosby, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Mosby announced that her office would no longer pursue charges related to drug possession, prostitution, minor traffic violations and other low-level offenses in order to halt the spread of the coronavirus in Baltimore prisons. In March 2021, she announced that she would make it permanent, adding that the temporary 'experiment' didn't lead to more serious crimes.

She announced that she would run for re-election in 2022 but was defeated by Ivan Bates in the Democratic primary.

So that's who  Marilyn Mosby is: an intelligent woman who was stupid to think that she could get away with the crime of which she was convicted.

The federal jury reached the verdict Thursday, finding Mosby guilty of perjury after she falsely claimed financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to withdraw money from the city's retirement fund, prosecutors announced.

"We respect the jury’s verdict and remain steadfastly committed to our mission to uphold the rule of law, keep our country safe, protect the civil rights of all Americans, and safeguard public property," U.S. Attorney Erek L. Barron said. 

Mosby, a Democrat, faces a maximum sentence of five years in the slammer for each of the two counts, which mathematically adds up to ten years or about 3,652 days counting leap years. 

U.S. District Judge Lydia K. Griggsby has not as yet scheduled a sentencing hearing.

Mosby made false mortgage applications in a pending federal case related to the purchase of two Florida vacation homes. That trial has not as yet been set, but if found guilty, the sentence can either run concurrent to whatever she is sentenced in the case above, or it can be consecutive and add more time onto it.

When she walked out of the federal courthouse she told reporters, "I'm blessed, I have nothing else to say." Had she not been blessed, Mosby, a Democrat, would have been found guilty of a more serious crime one can surmise.

Tweet

Federal court gives parents a 'win' after school board tries to keep porn books hidden

It's beginning to look a lot like change is a comin' to America's schools as parents just won a lawsuit against a Georgia school board that banned the reading of pornographic material at meetings from books found at the school's library.

In one case, a mother who attempted to read out loud some of the porn content approved by the board, but was not allowed to carry on and was then banned from attending future meetings. However the ban was overturned by federal court and the school district was successfully sued for $100,000 in legal fees.

A federal court ordered the Forsyth, Georgia, County School District to pay the legal fees of the group calling themselves the Mama Bears, who sued the district when officials barred them from reading from the graphically pornographic books during board meetings, according to Atlanta NBC affiliate WXIA.

The group of mothers claimed the school board violated their First Amendment rights as a way to hide the disgusting, inappropriate content of the books from the public, to which a federal judge agreed, ruling the board's attempts at shutting the group down was unconstitutional and violated their rights.

But since when did the Left ever care about the Constitutional rights of those they disagreed with, be it apolitical mothers, conservatives, religious beliefs, and pro-life individuals?

The lawsuit against the district was brought by parents Alison Hair and Cindy Martin who attempted to read aloud at a board meeting passages of board-approved books that she feels are pornographic in nature. Hair and other members of Mama Bears group were barred from reading the passages, a policy the women correctly said is illegal.

The women’s group sued the school district in a federal lawsuit and won. 

Fox News reported that the district was ordered to pay the Mama Bears nominal damages of $17.91 and their attorneys fees of $107.500.

The court also told the district they were prohibited from barring the plaintiffs or any “current or future FCS speakers entitled to speak at an FCS school board meeting, from reading or quoting verbatim from the text of any book or written works available in an FCS library or classroom, while addressing the school board during the public-comment period at school board meetings.”

Martin beautifully noted that the $17.91 damages fee was symbolic as 1791 is the year that the First Amendment was ratified, Fox News added in another report.

“I got my check last week, and I also through Amazon, ordered a copy of the Bill of Rights. So I’m getting a frame, and I’m going to be framing the Bill of Rights next to my check for $17.91,” Martin proudly told Fox.

Martin said that her victory is also for even those folks who disagree with her goal of having the inappropriate books removed from school libraries.

“We have incurred a lot of backlash from people who don’t agree with us,” she said. “But guess what? We won for them as well. This was for everyone to have the freedom to speak whatever they want to their government officials. So whether they like it or not, this was a win for them as well. And I’m proud of that. I’m happy to represent all people to be able to speak freely before their government officials.”

Pornography does not belong in the children's libraries nor does politics, be it woke or conservative. Perhaps when school boards believe this, math and reading scores will finally improve/

It's beginning to look a lot like change is a-comin' and while it may take some time, the country may be righting the ship.

Tweet

Fed Court finds Biden admin is engaged in racial and gender discrimination

He makes cabbage look intelligent

Co-President Biden may mumble passionately about racism and discrimination, but underneath that Joker-esque smile and make-believe niceness is a racist-sexist-leftist-bigot. Kamala Hahahaharris was right about Joe--he is a racist, but she's no saint either.

A ruling by a federal district court in Texas by Judge Reed O’Connor found that the Biden administration engaged in systemic gender and race discrimination to implement COVID-19 relief for American restaurants. 

In other words, he and the person (or people) pulling Biden's strings are determining who gets COVID-19 monetary relief for their restaurant businesses based on immutable factors: the color of their skin or their biological gear.

Café owner Philip Greer is a good example of how horrible the Biden administration's decision is. He claimed in a lawsuit against the Small Business Administration (SBA) that, in spite of being born White, and thus having less melanin in his skin, he needs the same rescue as restauranteurs born with more melanin in their skin, under the newly enacted American Rescue Plan Act. 

In fact, like the melanin-rich minorities who received relief, Greer claims that he lost over $100,000 and received no help because of his skin color and the fact that he has a penis instead of a vagina.

Indeed, on the same day that the mayor’s office announced the policy favoring “black and brown” reporters, Lightfoot aides announced that “a compromise plan to make past police disciplinary records available to the public,” essentially turning down a request from Chicago’s racial justice activists to expand police transparency.

  You haven’t highlighted anything yet

When you select text while you’re reading, it'll appear here.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Determines Who Interviews Her Based On Race, Local Reporters Claim
By
Ryan Saavedra
The Daily Wire
3 min
View Original




Local media reporters in Chicago are alleging that Democrat Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is selecting who gets to do one-on-one interviews with her based on the race of the interviewer.

NBC 5 political reporter Mary Ann Ahern made the initial allegation on Twitter, writing: “As ⁦ @chicagosmayor ⁩ reaches her two year midway point as mayor, her spokeswoman says Lightfoot is granting 1 on 1 interviews – only to Black or Brown journalists.”

Chicago PBS news anchor Paris Schultz responded: “I was told the same thing.”


I was told the same thing.

— Paris Schutz (@paschutz)

Chicago PBS political reporter said that she could “confirm” what Ahern was alleging.


I can confirm, alderman

— Heather Cherone (@HeatherCherone) May 18, 2021

Lightfoot’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Wire or Fox News.

Australian political commentator Rita Panahi responded to the allegations by writing on Twitter: “More ‘anti-racist’ racism. Almost amusing how regressive race-obsession is celebrated among the Left.”


More "anti-racist" racism. Almost amusing how regressive race-obsession is celebrated among the Left. https://t.co/VtzpQyfklg

— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) May 19, 2021

“Racism in the name of wokeism is still racism,” another commentator said. Another added, “So wouldn’t that make her a racist?”

Progressive writer Zaid Jilani wrote: “Is she going to do some kinda DNA test to assure she upholds this rule?”


Is she going to do some kinda DNA test to assure she upholds this rule? https://t.co/9d7rXZTnCV

— Zaid Jilani (@ZaidJilani) May 19, 2021

“It is unclear when such a practice was enacted and if it only applies to local reporters, particularly after her MSNBC appearance with Stephanie Ruhle on Monday,” Fox News reported. “During her MSNBC interview, Lightfoot told Ruhle she would ‘encourage’ Chicago residents to continue wearing masks despite the new CDC guidance allowing those with the coronavirus vaccine to go without them.”

“I know for me personally, I’m going to continue to wear a mask in public and I’m going to encourage others to do so,” Lightfoot told Ruhle. “We’ve got to make sure that people are continuing to follow the public health guidance that has gotten us this far, and masks, I think, are a big and important part of that.”

Lightfoot said on Tuesday afternoon that her decision to continue to encourage people to wear masks was not based on distrust of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“But I think their guidance last week regarding masks has people confused…We need clarification,” Lightfoot said. “We still have a long way to go to hit the critical mass (of vaccinations) or herd immunity. I don’t want people to have false confidence.”

“To say, ‘If you’re vaccinated, you don’t have to wear a mask,’ that’s great. But what about all of the other people who are out there that aren’t vaccinated?” Lightfoot added. “There’s no way to know that. So I think for the time being, most people are gonna continue to wear masks outside of their homes.”

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Determines Who Interviews Her Based On Race, Local Reporters Claim

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

Trump shines a light on ex-Dem IT aide Imran Awan

So whatever became of the federal court case against Imran Awan, the former IT aide to congressional Democrats, particularly his most ardent defender, Debbie Wasserman Schultz? An inquiring president wants to know.

President Trump is throwing a stick for the media to chase regarding the Pakistani who is alleged to have committed bank fraud, as is Bernie Sanders' wife. 

"Whatever happened to this Pakistani guy who worked with the DNC?" he asked in an interview published Thursday in The New York Times. 

Both Awan and his lovely wife Hina Alvi, were charged with a total of four counts, which included federal bank fraud and conspiracy. Awan pleaded not guilty to all charges.

"Whatever happened to them?" Trump repeated. "With the two servers that they broke up into a million pieces? Whatever happened to them?"

Awan hasn't been charged with anything related to his specific IT duties in Congress, but Debbie Wasserman Schultz seems to have 'a thing' for him. 

The case has Republican lawmakers concerned about the Pakistani's access to sensitive information and he, along with other IT aides for House Democrats, have been on investigators' radar for months over concerns of alleged (ha) equipment theft, access to sensitive computer systems that would make terrorists dance in the streets and hand out halvah, and more, according to reports going back to the beginning of the year.

Awan and Alvi (remember, his lovely wife) are facing allegations they conspired to get home equity lines of credit from the Congressional Federal Credit Union by using taqiyya (lying) about two properties and sending the money to individuals (possibly terrorists, possibly ice cream vendors) in Pakistan.

Awan was born in Pakistan and came to the U.S. with his family when he was a teenager. He became a U.S. citizen over ten years ago, but he left his heart in Islamabad.

The case surrounding Awan has created renewed scrutiny on Wasserman Schultz for allowing him to stay on the payroll for months after the criminal investigation was revealed and he was barred from the House IT network, which greatly angered Mamnoon Hussain for unknown reasons.

Most lawmakers fired Awan in February when the news came out, but Wasserman Schultz kept him on until his arrest in July. That's when she knew their relationship was over, professional or otherwise, you make the call.

Earlier this month, prosecutors warned that Awan is a "flight risk" and could head to Pakistan if a judge approves his request to lift "all of the conditions of his release."

U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu filed a motion urging the U.S. District court to deny Awan's request.

Awan is now enrolled in the High Intensity Supervision Program (HISP) with conditions he abide by an electronically monitored curfew of 12 a.m. to 6 a.m. and limit traveling beyond 150 miles from his home. Pakistan is about 7,069 miles from his current home, which is probably why he filed the request, and also to have his monitoring bracelet removed in order to make a clean break.

The only question is, would Awan make that break with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a married congresswoman with a slight lisp who has troubles of her own and might see Awan and Pakistan as a new lease on life, if she doesn't tell them that she's Jewish.

"While the government possesses Awan's Pakistani passport, nothing prevents him from obtaining a new Pakistani passport at the Embassy in D.C. That passport would permit Awan to board a flight and leave the country at any time," the motion read. "The government asserts that Awan is a flight risk and that his participation in HISP is by far the least restrictive condition that can be imposed on him to ensure his return to Court."

Wasserman Schultz refuses to see any wrongdoing by Awan and naturally blames the "right-wing media circus fringe," for the attention on Awan. 

Yeah sure, the right-wing media is everywhere, from ABC to CBS to MSNBC to CNN. Heck, even Netflix is left-wing.

Perhaps we should focus more on Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Think about that, Mr. President.



Tweet

'Clock Boy' . law-fare suit tossed in Federal Court

Ahmed Mohamed, aka 'Clock Boy," lost his bid to rake in the money for tricking his teacher with a fake bomb that he called a clock.

A federal court has tossed the civil rights lawsuit filed by the family in their law fare jihad of the Irving, Texas kid.

The suit alleged that the city of Irving and the Irving school district discriminated against Mohamed at Irving MacArthur High School in September 2015, when the young jihadi was a mere 14 years old. 

He brought a homemade clock to school that he ripped off a Radio Shack clock (which meant the clock itself wasn't homemade). He showed the device to his engineering teacher.

The device went off in his English class and the teacher confiscated it, much like Mr. Baxter did when he took my Spalding ball from me and Cecil in History class when he caught us tossing it around just as he entered the room. To get my ball returned to me I was told I had to write "Cecil is a meatball" on it, which I gladly did. 

The English teacher sent Mohamed to the principal's office where he was not waterboarded.

"A.M. never stated the device was anything other than a clock, never threatened anyone with harm, never claimed to have made a bomb, and never attempted to scare or cause alarm to anyone. When he asked for his parents, he was told that he could not speak with them because he was in the middle of an interrogation," his lawyer said, according to the court ruling.

The lawsuit claims the kid's civil rights were violated when he was interrogated without his mommy and daddy present and then arrested on hoax bomb charges.

He didn't even scream "Allahu Akbar!"

When his poppa finally arrived several hours later, he supposedly "tried to explain to Officer Howman [who likely had a hard time with his name as a kid] that A.M. was interested in robotics and creating things, but she was unwilling to listen to his explanations."

Police initially said the kid kept his mouth shut and the school was concerned that the device was possibly the infrastructure for a bomb, which was a wise precaution to protect students and faculty. Officers acted in an abundance of caution they said.

"It was a very suspicious device. We live in an age where you can't take things like that to school. Of course we've seen across our country horrific things happen. We have to err on the side of caution," Irving Police Chief Larry Boyd said to Fox4 in 2015.

The charges against the kid was dropped but he was suspended for 3 days which gave his father, a known troublemaker, enough time to figure out that he could make a different kind of killing on this jihad. 

This isn't the first time Clock Boy has tried to make money off this scam. The family is notorious for law fare--or a jihad that uses the law and court system in the West to push their agenda.

For more on Clock Boy's story, go here, here and here 



To follow Brain Flushings click the Follow tab in the margin.



Tweet