View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Los Angeles Times (@latimes)

On Oct. 28 (UPI) — Her office sent a statement on Friday saying that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul Pelosi, had been attacked by a home invader.

At a press conference held by the San Francisco Police Department, the suspect, 42-year-old David Depape, was named as the attacker. According to Sgt. William Scott, when police arrived, they saw Depape with a hammer and Paul Pelosi, 82, holding onto it.

Then, Depape took the hammer from Paul Pelosi and started hitting him with it until police arrived and took him into custody.

According to reports from CNN, NBC, and the New York Times, citing unnamed law enforcement officials, the assailant entered the couple’s San Francisco home early on Friday morning looking for the Speaker.

After being arrested, Depape was taken into custody and lodged in the San Francisco County Jail on “many other felony” counts, including attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, elder abuse, burglary, and more.

“Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy,” the assailant asked Paul Pelosi, according to the sources.

Pelosi’s husband, Paul, was “violently assaulted,” according to a statement released by Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., through spokesman Drew Hammill.

“The attacker is currently in police custody, and the circumstances surrounding the attack are being probed. Mr. Pelosi has been hospitalized and is receiving top-notch care; he is anticipated to make a full recovery “the report indicated.

According to Hammill, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi was not in the Bay Area at the time.

The Speaker and her family “request privacy at this time” and “express gratitude to the first responders and medical personnel involved.”

Forensics in San Francisco At 2:27 a.m. PDT, according to Sergeant Adam Lobsinger, police were called to the Pelosi home. Paul Pelosi was rushed to the hospital, and the suspect was taken into jail.

Vice President Joe Biden issued the following statement through White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre:

“The president is praying for Paul Pelosi and for Speaker Pelosi’s whole family. This morning he called Speaker Pelosi to express his support after this horrible attack. He is also very glad that a full recovery is expected. The president continues to condemn all violence and asks that the family’s desire for privacy be respected.”

What’s Your Take?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet it Out!

“It’s Your World, You Decide!”

  On Friday, the Justice Department issued a partially redacted search warrant affidavit detailing the reasons FBI investigators visited the Florida property of former President Donald Trump this month.

As part of an ongoing criminal investigation into whether or not Trump illegally removed White House records before he left office in 2021, a search was done. In order to safeguard witnesses and the legitimacy of the inquiry, U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart mandated the release of the affidavit while allowing for redactions.

Probable cause is stated for both the existence of classified materials at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and for the existence of “evidence of obstruction” there.

The statement also said there was reasonable suspicion that “evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other goods illegally possessed” would be located at Trump’s residence.

After leaving office, presidents are obligated to provide the National Archives with a large quantity of paperwork. Since last year, the National Archives and Records Administration has been pestering Trump to return documents that belong in the archives.

On Friday, an affidavit was made public claiming that federal officials suspected Trump was hiding secret materials after reviewing several boxes of Trump’s donated records to the archives. Several of the papers contained the “HSC” marks that denote top secret information.

According to the affidavit, the National Archives sent the case to the FBI in February. The FBI wanted to know who took the documents from the White House without permission, how they got there, and if Mar-a-Lago was a legitimate storage facility.

There are many potential violations of federal law listed in the affidavit, including a law that makes it illegal to steal materials relevant to national defense and not return them to the United States government. Any person who violates 18 U.S.C. 793 (e) is subject to a 10-year prison sentence and penalties.

The affidavit also refers to 18 U.S.C. 1519, which provides that anybody who obstructs justice may be subject to a fine and/or imprisonment of up to 20 years.

According to the affidavit, the government made numerous attempts to obtain the files months before the search was conducted.

On June 8th, the government addressed a letter to Trump’s legal team reiterating that “Mar-a-Lago does not have a safe place permitted for the preservation of sensitive material.” All White House items and the secure location where they are being housed were requested in the letter.

The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, among others, had requested that Reinhart unseal the search papers in the interest of openness and transparency.

The Justice Department persuaded Reinhart, he said on Thursday, that certain parts of the affidavit should remain sealed because their release would reveal “(1) the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents, and uncharged parties, (2) the investigation’s strategy direction, scope, sources, and methods, and (3) grand jury information.”

According to Reinhart’s analysis, the government proved its case that the withheld information is little and necessary to safeguard the operation.

What’s Your Take?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet it Out!

“It’s Your World, You Decide!”

On Thursday, a Florida judge ruled against a measure supported by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis that would have limited racial discussion and analysis in the workplace and classroom.

U.S. District Judge Mark Walker of Tallahassee ruled in a 44-page opinion that the “Stop WOKE” act is unconstitutionally vague and a violation of the First Amendment. In addition, Walker did not order a stay that would have allowed the law to remain in place while the state appealed.

According to DeSantis, the law is meant to counter what he calls a “pernicious” mindset represented by critical race theory, which holds that racism is systematic in U.S. institutions and helps to maintain white domination.

Walker argued that the state’s prohibition on discussing specific topics in training programs violates the First Amendment as applied to diversity, inclusion, and bias training in the workplace.

The judge said, “If Florida truly believes we live in a post-racial society, then let it make its case,” “But it cannot win the argument by muzzling its opponents.”

A message sent to the governor’s office was not immediately answered. DeSantis has warned repeatedly that conservative appeals courts are likely to overturn any setbacks at the lower court level on his priorities.

Teaching or operating a company on the basis that members of one racial group are fundamentally racist and should feel guilt for the acts of other groups is illegal. It also disallows the view that a person’s privileged or oppressed status is inherently tied to their race or gender, or that discrimination is permissible in order to create diversity.

It was one of three lawsuits contesting the Stop Woke act that resulted in Thursday’s verdict. Clearwater-based Honeyfund.com and others have filed suit against the state, arguing that the statute violates their right to free speech by prohibiting them from discussing topics such as diversity, inclusiveness, bias elimination, and the avoidance of workplace harassment in company training programs. It is possible for employees to file a civil case against businesses with 15 or more workers if certain conditions exist.

According to the complaint, Honeyfund, a company that facilitates wedding registries, is fighting to ensure that private companies can “engage in open and free exchange of information with employees to detect and begin to rectify discrimination and injury” inside their own ranks.

“Diversity in the workplace is good for business,” Honeyfund CEO Sara Margulis said on Twitter after the ruling. “Diversity training often addresses concepts like systemic racism, unconscious bias, and privilege. This is why @Honeyfund challenged this illegal restriction on free speech.”

College professors and students filed a lawsuit against the state on Thursday, claiming the law constitutes “racially motivated censorship” that will “stifle widespread demands to discuss, study, and address systemic inequalities” that have been brought to light by the national conversation about race following the May 2020 police killing of Black man George Floyd in Minneapolis.

What’s Your Take?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet it Out!

“It’s Your World, You Decide!”