Experts: Hunter Biden’s Failure to Register as a Foreign Agent Could Finally Land Him in Jail
According to experts, Hunter Biden’s failure to register as a foreign agent during his years of overseas business dealings could finally land him in jail.
The federal Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) passed in 1938 requires individuals acting as “an agent, representative, employee, or servant … at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a ‘foreign principal,’” to register with the U.S. government. Failure to do so is a crime punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
“Foreign principal” is broadly defined, and can include government officials, foreign corporations, political organizations, influential private interests and more. Thus, the FARA has been employed in recent years to shine a light on foreign advocacy and lobbying in the United States. In this case, the presidential son’s dealings with Ukraine, China and other nations necessitated his compliance with the FARA’s stipulations.
“The recent disclosures of additional foreign contacts has only strengthened what was already a strong case. Indeed, in the last few weeks, the compelling basis for a FARA charge has become unassailable and undeniable,” said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University. “The influence peddling schemes directly reference the president and [Joe Biden] is repeatedly cited as a possible recipient of funds.”
Meanwhile, FARA expert Craig Engle recounted the presidential son’s tenure at the board of Ukrainian energy firm Burisma. Hunter introduced Vadym Pozharskyi – one of the company’s top executives – to his father, according to emails found in the so-called “laptop from hell.” Less than a year after this introduction, the elder Biden – who was already vice president – pressured government officials in Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Burisma, in March 2016.
“If Hunter relayed the request for U.S. government assistance [to fire Shokin], then that would be a FARA-registrable event,” said Engle, who heads the political law practice at the Washington, D.C.-based firm Arent Fox Schiff. “Given the nature of the client, given the nature of the work, and given his relationship with Joe as demonstrated on his calendar, it makes it likely that FARA is part of an investigation.”
Sen. Johnson doubts if Hunter will be held accountable for FARA violations
According to the New York Post, the presidential son’s overseas exploits have run the gamut of potential behavior possibly violating FARA. In China, Hunter’s work for energy company CEFC and its now-disgraced boss Ye Jianming dovetailed with the company’s interest in gaining influence in the United States. Further revelations from the Post in 2020 promoted Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to send a letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) demanding a review of possible FARA violations.
Emails from the controversial laptop also revealed that Hunter and Rosemont Seneca Partners (RSP) President Eric Schwerin even discussed their worries over domestic and foreign lobbying rules. The first son and the head of RSP, which Hunter owns, purportedly chose to remain unregistered.
But at least one lawmaker expressed skepticism over the possibility of Hunter being brought to justice for FARA violations.
“Unless the person indicted is a Republican, FARA has historically been a difficult law to prosecute and obtain a conviction for,” lamented Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI). “I have always been suspicious that the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden is another example of the unequal application of justice, with Democrats and their elite allies getting kid glove treatment.”
(Related: Hunter Biden DEFIES House Oversight Committee subpoena.)
“My concern is that [the] DOJ will indict Hunter on watered-down charges, and then enter into a plea agreement that includes sealing the records on the case. That would be a travesty, because it would deny the American people of knowing the truth and full extent of Biden family corruption.”
Ohio House Passes Bill Banning Gender-Confused Students From Using Opposite Sex Bathrooms
(LifeSiteNews) — The Ohio House of Representatives passed legislation that prevents gender-confused students from using opposite-sex bathrooms and locker rooms.
House Bill 183 was added as an amendment to Senate Bill 104 last Wednesday during the chamber’s final session before summer recess. The measure passed 60-31 along party lines, with two Republicans voting with Democrats against it.
The proposal, which GOP Gov. Mike DeWine has said he would sign, is aimed at K-12 students enrolled in public and charter schools as well as at universities. It also prevents co-ed high schoolers and younger students from sharing overnight accommodations.
Bill co-sponsor and Republican State Rep. Beth Lear of Galena plainly argued in a statement that “boys and girls should not be in locker rooms together.”
As pointed out by several Ohio-based media outlets, similar measures have been passed in GOP-leaning states. ABC-affiliate News 5 Cleveland reported that Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota,Florida, and Utah have approved bills that prohibit gender-confused persons from using opposite-sex bathrooms.
In January, Ohio lawmakers overrode DeWine’s veto of a bill that bans transgender drugs and surgeries for minors. According to the Ohio Capital Journal, lawmakers discussed whether to do so for about an hour before ultimately agreeing to proceed. Republican Sen. Kristina Roegner said at the time that “gender is not fluid” and that “there is no such thing as a gender spectrum.”
Despite their override, officials were stymied due to a Franklin County judge temporarily halting the measure from going into effect in April. The decision was handed down after the ultra-liberal American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit.
Other courts across the U.S. have ruled on similar laws, with several of them being struck down. In January, the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a case decided by the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that allowed a female student in Indiana to use the boys’ bathroom.
As reported by LifeSite, “detransitioners,” the name for individuals who used to present themselves as the opposite sex, have often spoken out against the procedures they underwent. Parents of students at public schools have likewise confronted school boards after passing pro-LGBT politics that have resulted in their children being attacked or sexually assaulted by gender-confused classmates in the bathroom.
Joe Biden’s Felon Son Has Started Attending High-Level White House Meetings
Joe Biden is now taking advice from his disgraced sone Hunter Biden. According to a report by MSBNC, Hunter started sitting on on White House meetings and calls with top aides this week after spending […]
The post Joe Biden’s Felon Son Has Started Attending High-Level White House Meetings appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Canada’s Covid Vaccine Injury Program Tops $14 Million in Payouts, Hundreds Still Waiting
OTTAWA, Ontario (LifeSiteNews) –– Canada’s program to compensate those injured by the COVID vaccines has now spent $14 million, but the vast majority of claims remain unpaid.
According to official data from Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP), which was updated on June 1, a total of 2,628 claims have been filed by COVID-19-injured people, but only 183 have been approved for compensation. The total amount paid out sits at $14,080,434.
Broken down, each claimant would have received or will receive an average of just $78,000 in monetary compensation.
While a total of 2,172 claims have been “prepared to move forward to a preliminary medical review,” after this point, each claim goes through a lengthy process of approval.
For example, 982 claims are in the process of “collecting medical records,” which VISP states is “often the longest step in the claims assessment process.”
There has been a total of 166 appeals made, however only 8 have been approved to date by the Medical Review Board.
A total of 339 claims are “pending administrative review for eligibility.”
All Canadian provinces except Quebec are covered by VISP, who has its own vaccine compensation program that also appears to be slow at paying out to applicants.
VISP was officially announced in December 2020, around the time the federal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau allowed the first COVID-19 injections for use in Canada. Of important note is that it was launched after the government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.
Despite the need for a federal program to address those injured by the vaccines once mandated by the Trudeau government, Health Canada still says “[I]t’s safe to receive a COVID-19 vaccine following infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination is very important, even if you’ve had COVID-19.”
Interestingly, the claims of safety did not stop the Trudeau government from earmarking an extra $36 million for VISP in its 2024 budget.
The federal government is also continuing to purchase COVID jabs despite the fact the government’s own data shows that most Canadians are flat-out refusing a COVID booster injection.
Some people who were successful in getting payouts from VISP have said that the compensation awarded was insufficient considering the injuries sustained from the COVID shots.
As reported by LifeSiteNews last year, 42-year-old Ross Wightman from British Columbia launched a lawsuit against AstraZeneca, the federal government of Canada, the government of his province, and the pharmacy at which he was injected after receiving what he considers inadequate compensation from VISP.
He was one of the first citizens in Canada to receive federal financial compensation due to a COVID vaccine injury under VISP. Wightman received the AstraZeneca shot in April 2021 and shortly after became totally paralyzed. He was subsequently diagnosed with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
Whitman was given a one-time payout of $250,00 and about $90,000 per year in income replacement, but noted, as per a recent True North report, that he does not even know if those dollar amounts “would ease the pain.”
LifeSiteNews has published an extensive amount of research on the dangers of receiving the experimental COVID mRNA jabs, which include heart damage and blood clots.
The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
‘Beat These Female Dogs in Heat With a Stick’ – French Rappers Release Ultra-Violent Music Video Threatening to Assault Marine Le Pen, Kill Jordan Bardella
A new anti-National Rally rap video featuring a collective of 20 popular French rappers features ultra-violent lyrics directed at Marine Le Pen, her niece Marion Maréchal, and National Rally leader Jordan Bardella.
Some of the lines include, “Marine and Marion, the whores, beat these female dogs in heat with a stick,” and “Jordan, you’re dead.”
Other violent lines include, “If the fascists come by, I’m going with a big caliber,” referring to a firearm.
French rappers release ULTRA-VIOLENT new anti-National Rally music video:
— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) July 2, 2024
“Marine and Marion the whores, beat these female dogs in heat with a stick.
“Jodan, you’re dead.”
“If the fascists come by, I’m going out with a big caliber.”
pic.twitter.com/yjRffivA8y
The track was produced by 20 popular rappers, including Fianso, ISK, Alkpote, and Akhenaton. The song is called “No pasarán,” which translates to “They will not pass” in English, a reference to the slogan chanted by leftist Spaniards against the Franco government that ruled Spain in the 1930s.
Among the other lines are “They deserve the cane,” which is an open call to assault the French politicians along with a defense of those with deportation orders, many of whom have committed serious crimes. In addition, the rappers sing: “Fuck Bardella’s mother.”
“This is for my friends under QQTF (French deportation order),” sing the rappers.
The video also features images of Marine Le Pen, Jordan Bardella, and other right-wing political figures.
Other lyrics include;
— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) July 2, 2024
“They deserve the cane.”
“This is for my friends under QQTF (French deportation orders).”
The ultra-violent and misogynistic song has received glowing praise from the French press, which makes no mention of the song’s brutal lyrics.
Le Parisian, for instance, contacted Fianso, one of the rappers involved, and quoted him in a glowing manner.
“I participated in this piece because I grew up in the heritage of French rap, very sharp, committed and which inspired me a lot,” he said. “Culture has its say and is intended to express itself on this typology of subjects. It was very important for me to participate. I am from the generation where rap does not dissociate itself from the message.”
The article simply refers to “punchlines” directed at Le Pen and Bardella, without any reference to the incredibly violent calls to action and misogynistic comments. The song has nearly 400,000 views on Youtube.
The rappers say that the money they earn from the song will go to the Abbé Pierre Foundation, which provides financial and legal resources to migrants.
Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Law Ending Religious Exemptions for School Vaccine Mandates
WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) – The U.S. Supreme Court rejected without comment a legal challenge to a 2021 Connecticut law that eliminated religious exemptions to school immunization requirements, continuing the current court’s aversion to touching state-level vaccine mandates.
In 2021, Connecticut changed its immunization requirements for participation in public and private schools, daycare, and other childcare centers by eliminating the ability to obtain religious exemptions, leaving medical exemptions the only possible avenue to avoid objectionable injections.
Several religious institutions such as Milford Christian Church, which maintains a pre-kindergarten program called Little Eagles and a K-12 Academy, sued the Connecticut State Department of Education, Connecticut Office of Early Childhood, and Connecticut Department of Public Health on First Amendment grounds after being given a choice to either compel student vaccinations, expel those who refused, or risk being forced to close.
In January 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Janet Bond Arterton dismissed one such lawsuit on the grounds that the law change was not driven by “religious animus,” prompting the plaintiffs to appeal to the Supreme Court.
But the June 24 order list published by the nation’s highest court confirmed that We the Patriots USA, et al, v. CT Early Childhood Dev. et al. has been dismissed, without any elaboration. How individual justices voted was not listed, but with just four votes necessary to take a case, at least six would have voted not to.
“This is the end of the road to a challenge to Connecticut’s lifesaving and fully lawful vaccine requirements,” Democratic Attorney General William Tong said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press. “We have said all along, and the courts have affirmed, the legislature acted responsibly and well within its authority to protect the health of Connecticut families and to stop the spread of preventable disease.”
“WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN, and we will not lose hope. We know that there is a Divine plan in all of this, and that ‘all things work together unto good’ (Romans 8:28). Even in this loss, in fact, there is some good news,” responded We the Patriots, which represented Milford Christian Church and Little Eagles Preschool & Daycare. “Our case against the State of Connecticut to restore religious exemptions was not fully dismissed by the Second Circuit, which allowed one of our claims to proceed – i.e., that a child with an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is entitled to an education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Second Circuit sent this claim back to the district court for trial, but it has been on hold pending the outcome of our cert petition at the Supreme Court.”
“If we are ultimately victorious in these two cases, students with disabilities and students at private religious schools would be able to opt out of vaccinations and receive an education in Connecticut,” the group noted. “A victory in either of these cases at the Second Circuit would also apply to students in New York, which lost its school religious exemption in 2019. Although it’s not the broad, sweeping victory we were aiming for, these cases could still open the door for hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of children to receive an education in New York and Connecticut.”
Several common vaccines, including for hepatitis A and rabies, were developed using cell lines derived from aborted babies, leading many Americans to morally object to receiving anything tainted by the intentional destruction of innocent human life.
The issue is particularly acute today due to ongoing controversies surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines, which were developed and released in a fraction of the timevaccines usually take under former President Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed initiative.
According to a detailed overview by the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson all used aborted fetal cells during their COVID vaccines’ testing phase; and Johnson & Johnson also used the cells during the design & development and production phases. While many have attempted to deny or downplay the coronavirus jabs’ links to abortion, the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s journal Science and the left-wing fact-checking outlet Snopes have both admitted the connection.
Meanwhile, the ruling continues the Supreme Court’s trend of issuing decidedly mixed rulings from a conservative perspective, despite Republican presidents having appointed six of its nine current members.
The Court has delivered conservatives major victories on gun rights, environmental regulation, affirmative action, and most significantly abortion with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, but it has also issued dismissive rulings on religious freedom, LGBT ideology, and more to the point, that conservative Justice Samuel Alito has taken the rare step of criticizing Trump appointees Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh for lacking the “fortitude” to resolve such issues.
In the area of vaccine mandates, in 2022 the Court blocked the Biden administration from forcing private businesses to mandate COVID shots while upholding a mandate for healthcare workers at federally funded facilities. On state-level mandates, the court has been consistently more deferential.
Kavanaugh and Barrett have voted against taking up reviews of state-level vaccine mandates in Indiana, Maine, and New York, and Kavanaugh voted to uphold a federal vaccine mandate for healthcare workers and against a group of Navy SEALs’ bid for a religious exemption. Last fall, the Court also rejected a COVID-19 vaccine mandate case out of New Jersey, again without listing how individual justices ruled.