Caitlyn Dickerson is a journalist for the Atlantic. She spent a year and a half investigating the real story of a policy that affected a generation and those responsible.

Here is the complete investigation;

Click Here to go to the investigation

Remember this?

EXCLUSIVE: Children from the southern border are being brought to NYC after being separated from their families.
Overnight, @joshrobin captured video of unusual activity at a foster agency in East Harlem. #MorningsOn1 pic.twitter.com/WhiN27wb5T

— Spectrum News NY1 (@NY1) June 20, 2018

What’s Your Take?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet It Out!

“It’s Your World, You Decide!”

Peter Navarro was indicted on contempt charges Friday after refusing a subpoena from a House subcommittee probing the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

The interview that may have got him in trouble is here;

A later interview just yesterday June 2nd may have sealed his fate;

Navarro is the second former Trump advisor to be charged with contempt of Congress. His arrest follows Steve Bannon’s indictment.

Navarro, 72, was charged with contempt for missing a deposition and failing to submit requested papers.

Navarro said he was informed he couldn’t contact anyone after being handcuffed by an FBI agent at the airport on Friday. He was caught while trying to fly to Nashville for a TV appearance.

“Who are these people? This is not America,” Navarro said. “I was a distinguished public servant for four years!”

During the hearing, he called the House committee a “sham” and prosecutors “despicable.” Each charge has a one-month minimum jail penalty and a one-year maximum.

The indictment shows that the Justice Department is still pursuing criminal charges against Trump allies who obstructed or stonewalled congressional investigators.

The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland are under pressure to prosecute other Trump associates who have disobeyed subpoenas.

The indictment states that Navarro, when summoned for a deposition, declined and said Trump’s presidential privilege “locked my hands.”

After committee staff said he could share some things without invoking presidential privilege, Navarro declined and directed the committee to speak with Trump’s lawyers, according to the indictment. Navarro missed the March 2 deposition.

Navarro revealed in a court filing that he had been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury this week as part of the Justice Department’s examination into the deadly Capitol rebellion.

Navarro informed Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui that the prosecution’s action was preemptive. It contradicts good faith and due procedure.

Navarro, said the FBI handed him the subpoena last week. The subpoena was the first time prosecutors sought White House testimony in the attack probe. Thursday night, prosecutors issued the indictment.

Navarro sued the House select committee investigating the attack on Tuesday, arguing that the February subpoena is unenforceable.

He sued committee members, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, whose office is prosecuting him.

Navarro told The Associated Press this week that the purpose of his case is bigger than the subpoenas themselves. He wants the Supreme Court to address “a variety of concerns that have occurred with the weaponization of Congress’ investigatory powers” since Trump took office.

The select committee asked Navarro about his efforts to assist Trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election, including a call to state legislators.

But, Navarro wouldn’t let up, he endorsed Trump’s false voter fraud claims. Trump praised Navarro’s December 2020 report, which Navarro falsely claimed contained evidence of misbehavior and election fraud “more than sufficient” to flip the election to his former employer.

Another  Trump adviser Dan Scavino was found in contempt of Congress in April.

Scavino and Navarro were among a handful of people who ignored the committee’s requests and subpoenas, committee members said. Scavino and Meadows originally cooperated with the commission, turning up more than 2,000 text messages sent and received before and after the attack. Meadows quit in December. Federal prosecutors haven’t said if he’ll be charged.

Despite pushback from Trump friends, the Jan. 6 panel of seven Democrats and two Republicans has interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses about the revolt and is ready for public hearings next week. The panel’s lawmakers expect the six sessions would shed light on the domestic attack on the U.S. government.

What’s Your Take On Mr. Navarro?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet It Out! It’s Your World, You Decide!

Social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter had been accused by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis of discriminating against conservative viewpoints because of a Florida law intended to punish them, but an appeals court ruled that the law violated the First Amendment and thus was unconstitutional.

Judges on the 11th U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta unanimously found that DeSantis and the Republican-led Florida Legislature had gone too far in telling social media corporations how they should conduct themselves under the Constitution’s free speech provision.

Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, stated in the judgment that the government “cannot dictate a private individual or business what to say or how to say it,” with minimal exceptions. “We believe that social media corporations — even the largest — are private actors whose First Amendment rights are protected,” we write.

There was an earlier finding in favor of the statute enacted by DeSantis, which was upheld by a federal district judge in the state of Florida in 2021. To depict social media businesses as largely liberal in perspective and antagonistic to ideas from the political right, it was part of a broader conservative push.

The panel’s conclusion was that editorial control over content is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Judge Newsom said that social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok are “involved in constitutionally protected expressive activity when they moderate and select the content that they disseminate on their platforms,” which the appeals court found to be permissible.

Emails to DeSantis’ press secretary and communications director about the verdict went unanswered as of Monday afternoon. He is seeking for reelection this year, and has his sights set on the GOP nomination in 2024. Although similar bills have been offered in other jurisdictions, he was the first governor to sign one into law in his state.

For example, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Texas recently approved the implementation of such a law; nevertheless, the IT businesses directly affected have asked the Supreme Court of the United States for immediate review of its constitutionality. There was no immediate announcement of a conclusion to this.

“The judgement represents an important step forward for internet users and their right to free speech in general,” said the nonprofit Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents tech and communications firms.

According to CCIA President Matt Schruers, “when an online provider takes action against problematic content on its own site—whether extremism, Russian propaganda, or bigotry and abuse—it is exercising its right to free expression.”

Florida’s attorney general would be able to sue firms under the state’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act as a result of the law’s enactment. In the event that they believe they have been treated unfairly, Floridians might sue social media corporations for up to $100,000.

In addition to the likes of Twitter and Facebook, the law targeted social media platforms with more than 100 million monthly users. Lawmakers, however, carved out an exception for Walt Disney Co. and its apps by stating that theme park owners would not be subject to the legislation.

Large social media corporations would be required to post guidelines on how they decide to “censor, deplatform, and shadow ban” individuals and groups.

A majority of the law’s mandates were overturned by the court of appeals, with the exception of a few minor sections.

“Social media platforms exercise editorial judgment that is inherently expressive. When platforms remove users or posts, deprioritize content in viewers’ feeds or search results, or sanction breaches of their community standards, they engage in First-Am < UNK>- protected activity,” Newsom wrote for the court.

isthatporks take; it’s funny when people have a problem following the rules of life let alone the constitution and/or the rights of others. Enter Ron Desantis. Ron Desantis has been playing by the Donald Trump playbook of doing things he would not like done to him. Here he is in what is supposed to be a man in public office at the highest levels of democracy and constantly falls short of the example he’s supposed to hold in office and common sense. For that, among other things, we present to him the Pork award. This award has been specifically crafted for people like Ron who love to do things like change rules when it fits him or re-arrange them in a heartbeat if it fits you. Ron is a special kind of man with a special kind of pork that would rather use his power to punish those who disagree with him than to put his big pants on and just deal with it as we all do in a public forum such as Facebook, Twitter, Tik Tok, and all social media platforms. Sound familiar? Ron Desantis is a brat in its highest form. Pork in its highest regard. We’re glad a judge followed the rules of the law as it was designed for all and not Ron Desantis. Some people out there are still trying to quietly Jan 6th America into their way and Ron Desantis is one of them. It won’t work.

What’s your take on Ron Desantis? we’d like to hear what you think.

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet, It’s Your World, You Decide!