At greatvocalmajority.com, we believe in the 1st Amendment. That means we believe the airing of popular opinions have as much a right to be heard as any other. That includes unpopular opinions, offensive opinions, wrong opinions, misleading opinions, even dangerous opinions. Who gets to decide what is popular, unpopular, offensive, wrong, misleading or dangerous? The government? An internet service provider? Or should individual American citizens, in an atmosphere of open dialogue, honesty and candidness, decide for themselves? Is that not freedom of speech?
If freedom of speech doesn’t also include the airing of ALL points of view, then what does it actually mean? It becomes reduced to meaninglessness.
With that in mind, greatvocalmajority makes no representations to the veracity of the video contained herein, “Plandemic 2020.” It has been included for public viewing on this website in the interest of an open and free dialogue because it is highly suspect when the powerful use that power to silence speech they have decided they do not like for ANY REASON.
The owners of greatvocalmajority.com has no idea whether the claims made in this video are true or not, but the owners of this site believe the claims made herein have every right to be heard by any American interested in hearing them. They can be refuted or supported based on evidence to serve as testimony to the truth because that’s the way we do things in America. No authority whether governmental or corporate has any right to decide what ought to be hidden from view. And with that, here is the video. My only advice is to remain skeptical of any claims made until you can either independently verify or refute them because what everyone should be seeking is THE TRUTH.
In the Atlantic article below, they have continued to propagate falsehoods in a deeply dishonest attempt to attack the President’s credibility as our national leader in the middle of a crisis affecting the entire country, indeed, the world. Lies will be highlighted and truth explained in red.
All the President’s Lies About the Coronavirus
Editor’s Note: The Atlantic is making vital coverage of the coronavirus available to all readers. Find the collection here.
Updated at 1:30 p.m. ET on April 9, 2020.
In the month since he declared the coronavirus pandemic a national emergency, President Donald Trump has repeatedly lied about this once-in-a-generation crisis.
Here, a collection of the biggest lies he’s told as the nation barrels toward a public-health and economic calamity. This post will be updated as needed.
On the Nature of the Virus
When: Friday, February 7, and Wednesday, February 19
The claim: The coronavirus would weaken “when we get into April, in the warmer weather—that has a very negative effect on that, and that type of a virus.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: It’s too early to tell if the virus’s spread will be dampened by warmer conditions. Respiratory viruses can be seasonal, but the World Health Organization says that the new coronavirus “can be transmitted in ALL AREAS, including areas with hot and humid weather.”
GVM Editor: The President did not lie. The Atlantic lied. Trump was expressing an opinion, supported by medical experts that viruses tend to die out in warmer weather.
When: Thursday, February 27
The claim: The outbreak would be temporary: “It’s going to disappear. One day it’s like a miracle—it will disappear.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, warned days later that he was concerned that “as the next week or two or three go by, we’re going to see a lot more community-related cases.”
GVM Editor: The President did not lie. The Atlantic lied again. Trump was expressing the hope that this virus would fade away and disappear. It may be called unrealistic, but that’s hardly a lie.
When: Multiple times
The claim: If the economic shutdown continues, deaths by suicide “definitely would be in far greater numbers than the numbers that we’re talking about” for COVID-19 deaths.
The Atlantic’s Opinion: The White House now estimates that anywhere from 100,000 to 240,000 Americans could die from COVID-19. Other estimates have placed the number at 1.1 million to 1.2 million. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is one of the leading causes of death in the United States. But the number of people who died by suicide in 2017, for example, was roughly 47,000, nowhere near the COVID-19 estimates. Estimates of the mental-health toll of the Great Recession are mixed. A 2014 study tied more than 10,000 suicides in Europe and North America to the financial crisis. But a larger analysis in 2017 found that while the rate of suicide was increasing in the United States, the increase could not be directly tied to the recession and was attributable to broader socioeconomic conditions predating the downturn.
GVM Editor: The writers at the Atlantic must have missed the last week. Official estimates of the death toll from Covid-19 are now 60,000 and falling. The numbers quotes by the Atlantic were based on faulty modeling that have been revised and publicized for more than a week. The Atlantic lied.
Blaming the Obama Administration
When: Wednesday, March 4
The claim: The Trump White House rolled back Food and Drug Administration regulations that limited the kind of laboratory tests states could run and how they could conduct them. “The Obama administration made a decision on testing that turned out to be very detrimental to what we’re doing,” Trump said.
The Atlantic’s opninion: The Obama administration drafted, but never implemented, changes to rules that regulate laboratory tests run by states. Trump’s policy change relaxed an FDA requirement that would have forced private labs to wait for FDA authorization to conduct their own, non-CDC-approved coronavirus tests.
GVM Editor: The President isn’t even quoted here. Only the vague and unattributed “Trump Whitehouse”. Who?
When: Friday, March 13
The claim: The Obama White House’s response to the H1N1 pandemic was “a full scale disaster, with thousands dying, and nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem, until now.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Barack Obama declared a public-health emergency two weeks after the first U.S. cases of H1N1 were reported, in California. (Trump declared a national emergency more than seven weeks after the first domestic COVID-19 case was reported, in Washington State.) While testing is a problem now, it wasn’t back in 2009. The challenge then was vaccine development: Production was delayed and the vaccine wasn’t distributed until the outbreak was already waning.
GVM Editor: The President isn’t quoted here either. Only the vague and unattributed “Trump Whitehouse”. At best, this accusation is disingenuous because the first US case of Covid-19 came BEFORE it was confirmed that Human-to-Human transmission was occurring.
When: Multiple times
The claim: The Trump White House “inherited” a “broken,” “bad,” and “obsolete” test for the coronavirus.
The Atlantic’s opinion: The novel coronavirus did not exist in humans during the Obama administration. Public-health experts agree that, because of that fact, the CDC could not have produced a test, and thus a new test had to be developed this year.
GVM Editor: The President isn’t even quoted here once again. The thrust of the meaning of the unattributed statement is that the system in place to respond to this kind of virus emergency was wholly inadequate.
On Coronavirus Testing
When: Friday, March 6
The claim: “Anybody that needs a test, gets a test. We—they’re there. They have the tests. And the tests are beautiful.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: The country’s testing capabilities are severely limited. Many states have experienced a lack of testing kits, as my colleagues Alexis Madrigal and Robinson Meyer have reported. Trump made this claim one day after his own vice president, Mike Pence, admitted that “we don’t have enough tests today to meet what we anticipate will be the demand going forward.”
GVM Editor: The President isn’t lying here, but the Atlantic is! The President’s meaning hinges on how one defines the phrase, “anyone that needs a test.” Only those suspected of Covid-19 with a sufficient number of symptoms were deemed to “need” a test. That need was established by health officials, not the President.
When: Wednesday, March 11
The claim: In an Oval Office address, Trump said that private-health-insurance companies had “agreed to waive all co-payments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Insurers agreed only to absorb the cost of coronavirus testing—waiving co-pays and deductibles for getting the test. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act, the second coronavirus-relief bill passed by Congress, later mandated that COVID-19 testing be made free. The federal government has not required insurance companies to cover follow-up treatments, though some providers announced in late March that they will pay for treatments. The costs of other non-coronavirus testing or treatment incurred by patients who have COVID-19 or are trying to get a diagnosis aren’t waived either. And as for surprise medical billing? Mitigating it would require the cooperation of insurers, doctors, and hospitals.
GVM Editor: The Atlantic again is spreading fake news. Where in this statement by the White House can it be said that the President is lying? It appears the Atlantic is making efforts to stretch the definition of what the word “lie” actually means.
When: Friday, March 13
The claim: Google engineers are building a website to help Americans determine whether they need testing for the coronavirus and to direct them to their nearest testing site.
The Atlantic’s opinion: The announcement was news to Google itself—the website Trump (and other administration officials) described was actually being built by Verily, a division of Alphabet, the parent company of Google. The Verge first reported on Trump’s error, citing a Google representative who confirmed that Verily was working on a “triage website” with limited coverage for the San Francisco Bay Area. But since then, Google has pivoted to fulfill Trump’s public proclamation, saying it would speed up the development of a new, separate website while Verily worked on finishing its project, The Washington Post reported.
GVM Editor: This is a familiar pattern by now as I hope the reader is noticing. Verily is a division of Alphabet as is Google. Imprecisely attributing the company building the website isn’t a lie. The pattern by the Atlantic is clear. They assume any inaccuracy is a lie. That’s agenda driven journalism.
When: Tuesday, March 24, and Wednesday, March 25
The claim: The United States has outpaced South Korea’s COVID-19 testing: “We’re going up proportionally very rapidly,” Trump said during a Fox News town hall.
The Atlantic’s opinion: When the president made this claim, testing in the U.S. was severely lagging behind that in South Korea. As of March 25, South Korea had conducted about five times as many tests as a proportion of its population relative to the United States. For updated data from each country, see the COVID-19 Tracking Project and the database maintained by the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
GVM Editor: Again, the Atlantic has to use qualifying language in order to stretch Trump’s imprecision into a “lie.” Trump never qualified his claim as the Atlantic did with “population relative to the United States.” By not qualifying it, it’s reasonable to believe Trump was referring to the absolute number of tests done. Notice how the Atlantic never bothered making that point. Again, agenda driven reporting.
On Travel Bans and Travelers
When: Wednesday, March 11
The claim: The United States would suspend “all travel from Europe, except the United Kingdom, for the next 30 days,” Trump announced in an Oval Office address.
The Atlantic’s opinion: The travel restriction would not apply to U.S. citizens, legal permanent residents, or their families returning from Europe. At first, it applied specifically to the 26 European countries that make up the Schengen Area, not all of Europe. Trump later announced the inclusion of the United Kingdom and Ireland in the ban.
GVM Editor: Again, the Atlantic has to use qualifying language in order to stretch Trump’s imprecision into a “lie.” At best, one could criticize the President fairly by saying his travel ban announcement should have been more detailed, but a lie? Nonsense!
Another claim: In the same address, Trump said the travel restrictions would “not only apply to the tremendous amount of trade and cargo but various other things as we get approval.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Trump followed up in a tweet, explaining that trade and cargo would not be subject to the restrictions.
GVM Editor: The Atlantic in this situation chose to characterize an error made in good faith, as a “lie.”
When: Thursday, March 12
The claim: All U.S. citizens arriving from Europe would be subject to medical screening, COVID-19 testing, and quarantine if necessary. “If an American is coming back or anybody is coming back, we’re testing,” Trump said. “We have a tremendous testing setup where people coming in have to be tested … We’re not putting them on planes if it shows positive, but if they do come here, we’re quarantining.”
The Atllantic’s opinion: Testing is already severely limited in the United States. It is not true that all Americans returning to the country are being tested, nor that anyone is being forced to quarantine, CNN has reported.
GVM Editor: This is a case of CNN lying and the Atlantic swearing to it. Two agenda driven, partisan news outlets. Nevertheless, the President was referring to people being tested who showed symptoms.
When: Tuesday, March 31
The claim: “We stopped all of Europe” with a travel ban. “We started with certain parts of Italy, and then all of Italy. Then we saw Spain. Then I said, ‘Stop Europe; let’s stop Europe. We have to stop them from coming here.’”
The Atlantic’s opinion: The travel ban applied to the Schengen Area, as well as the United Kingdom and Ireland, and not all of Europe as he claimed. Additionally, Trump is wrong about the United States rolling out a piecemeal ban. The State Department did issue advisories in late February cautioning Americans against travel to the Lombardy region of Italy before issuing a general “Do Not Travel” warning on March 19. But the U.S. never placed individual bans on Italy and Spain.
GVM Editor: If the reader is finding this all rather repetitive, it is. It is also a damned shame that fake news outlets like the Atlantic
When: Multiple times
The claim: “Everybody thought I was wrong” about implementing restrictions on travelers from China, and “most people felt they should not close it down—that we shouldn’t close down to China.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: While the WHO did say it opposed travel bans on China generally, Trump’s own top health officials have made clear that the travel ban was the “uniform” recommendation of the Department of Health and Human Services. Fauci and Deborah Birx, the coordinator of the coronavirus task force, both praised the decision too.
GVM Editor: This kind of trash from the Atlantic is really disgusting. The Atlantic and practically every major news outlet condemned Trump’s halting of China travel as “racist and xenophobic.” Now, the Atlantic is pretending Trump was referring to his advisers and not the media when he said “Everybody thought I was wrong.” Such dishonesty is disgraceful.
On Taking the Pandemic Seriously
When: Tuesday, March 17
The claim: “I’ve always known this is a real—this is a pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic … I’ve always viewed it as very serious.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Trump has repeatedly downplayed the significance of COVID-19 as outbreaks began stateside. From calling criticism of his handling of the virus a “hoax,” to comparing the coronavirus to a common flu, to worrying about letting sick Americans off cruise ships because they would increase the number of confirmed cases, Trump has used his public statements to send mixed messages and sow doubt about the outbreak’s seriousness.
GVM Editor: This one is a widespread media lie. Trump never called the coronavirus a “hoax”. When he used that term, it was in reference to characterizing his response to the virus as racist and xenophobic.
When: Thursday, March 26
The claim: This kind of pandemic “was something nobody thought could happen … Nobody would have ever thought a thing like this could have happened.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Experts both inside and outside the federal government sounded the alarm many times in the past decade about the potential for a devastating global pandemic, as my colleague Uri Friedman has reported. Two years ago, my colleague Ed Yong explored the legacy of Ebola outbreaks—including the devastating 2014 epidemic—to evaluate how ready the U.S. was for a pandemic. Ebola hardly impacted America—but it revealed how unprepared the country was.
GVM Editor: Another example of Trump being simply and innocently wrong about something and having it called a lie by leftist guttersnipes.
On COVID-19 Treatments and Vaccines
When: Monday, March 2
The claim: Pharmaceutical companies are going “to have vaccines, I think, relatively soon.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: The president’s own experts told him during a White House meeting with pharmaceutical leaders earlier that same day that a vaccine could take a year to 18 months to develop. In response, he said he would prefer if it took only a few months. He later claimed, at a campaign rally in Charlotte, North Carolina, that a vaccine would be ready “soon.”
GVM Editor: Notice how the leftists at the Atlantic choose to interpret imprecise language like “relatively soon”, a phrase in this context that has no real discernable meaning, except perhaps, relative to the development of other vaccines. In that case, the President would be correct because getting a vaccine in 18 months is, to quote Dr. Fauci, “lightening fast.” Many vaccines take several years. And in the case of an RNA Corona virus, even longer since there has never been a vaccine developed for any RNA virus of any kind.
When: Thursday, March 19
The claim: At a press briefing with his coronavirus task force, Trump said the FDA had approved the antimalarial drug chloroquine to treat COVID-19. “Normally the FDA would take a long time to approve something like that, and it’s—it was approved very, very quickly and it’s now approved by prescription,” he said.
The Atlantic’s opinion: FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, who was at the briefing, quickly clarified that the drug still had to be tested in a clinical setting. An FDA representative later told Bloomberg that the drug has not been approved for COVID-19 use, though a doctor could still prescribe it for that purpose. Later that same day, Fauci told CNN that there is no “magic drug” to cure COVID-19: “Today, there are no proven safe and effective therapies for the coronavirus.”
GVM Editor: The Atlantic is wrong. The FDA did approve HCQ to be used on Covid-19 patients. Trump didn’t lie here either. Here again, he was simply imprecise with his terminology. That’s not lying.
On the Defense Production Act
When: Friday, March 20
The claim: Trump twice said during a task-force briefing that he had invoked the Defense Production Act, a Korean War–era law that enables the federal government to order private industry to produce certain items and materials for national use. He also said the federal government was already using its authority under the law: “We have a lot of people working very hard to do ventilators and various other things.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Peter Gaynor told CNN on March 22 that the president has not actually used the DPA to order private companies to produce anything. Shortly after that, Trump backtracked, saying that he had not compelled private companies to take action. Then, on March 24, Gaynor told CNN that FEMA plans to use the DPA to allocate 60,000 test kits. Trump tweeted afterward that the DPA would not be used.
GVM Editor: Again, the Atlantic refers to imprecise language as a “lie.” The game the Atlantic is playing here, very clearly, is reading the worst possible motivations into every word out of President Trump’s mouth.
When: Saturday, March 21
The claim: Automobile companies that have volunteered to manufacture medical equipment, such as ventilators, are “making them right now.”
The truth: Ford and General Motors, which Trump mentioned at a task-force briefing the same day, announced earlier in March that they had halted all factory production in North America and were likely months away from beginning production of ventilators, representatives told the Associated Press. Since then, Ford CEO James Hackett told CNN that the auto company will begin to work with 3M to produce respirators and with General Electric to assemble ventilators. GM said it will explore the possibility of producing ventilators in an Indiana factory. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose company Trump highlighted in a tweet, has said that the company is “working on ventilators” but that they cannot be produced “instantly.”
GVM Editor: Imprecise language is not a lie.
On States’ Resources
When: Tuesday, March 24
The claim: Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York passed on an opportunity to purchase 16,000 ventilators at a low cost in 2015, Trump said during the Fox News town hall.
The Atlantic’s opinion: Trump seems to have gleaned this claim from a Gateway Pundit article. That piece, in turn, cites a syndicated column from Betsy McCaughey, a former lieutenant governor of New York, which includes a figure close to 16,000. The number comes from a 2015 report from the state’s health department that provided guidance for how New York could handle a possible flu pandemic. The report notes that the state would need 15,783 more ventilators than it had at the time to aid patients during “an influenza pandemic on the scale of the 1918 pandemic.” The report does not include a recommendation to Cuomo for additional purchases or stockpiling. Trump “obviously didn’t read the document he’s citing,” a Cuomo representative said in a statement.
GVM Editor: The Atlantic is lying here. The point Trump was making was that Cuomo knew NY state was short on ventilators. He had that information, but never acted on it. The point is, the governor of New York should not have been surprised by being caught short ventilators.
Another claim: Trump also repeated a claim from the Gateway Pundit article that Cuomo’s office established “death panels” and “lotteries” as part of the state’s pandemic response.
The Atlantic’s opinon: The 2015 report and the accompanying press release announced updated guidelines for hospitals to follow to allocate ventilators. The guidelines “call for a triage officer or triage committee to determine who receives or continues to receive ventilator therapy” and describes how a random lottery allocation might work. (Neither should be the first options for deciding care, the report notes.) Cuomo never established a lottery.
GVM Editor: Whether the Atlantic wishes to believe it or not, the editors at Great Vocal Majority have heard first hand witnesses in NY recount stories of how doctors in certain Long Island nursing homes deciding not to treat the elderly at all. In effect, letting them die.
When: Sunday, March 29
The claim: Trump “didn’t say” that governors do not need all the medical equipment they are requesting from the federal government. And he “didn’t say” that governors should be more appreciative of the help.
The Atlantic’s opinion: The president told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Thursday, March 26, that “a lot of equipment’s being asked for that I don’t think they’ll need,” referring to requests from the governors of Michigan, New York, and Washington. He also said, during a Friday, March 27, task-force briefing, that he wanted state leaders “to be appreciative … We’ve done a great job.” He added that he wasn’t talking about himself, but about others within the federal government working to combat the pandemic.
GVM Editor: Clearly, the President was referring to Gov Cuomo complaining the 4,000 ventilators he was getting were inadequate when he called for 30,000. The President said he didn’t believe Cuomo would need that many and as it turned out, the President was correct. So, where is the lie?
When: Sunday, March 29, and Monday, March 30
The claim: Hospitals are reporting an artificially inflated need for masks and equipment, items that might be “going out the back door,” Trump said on two separate days. He also said he was not talking about hoarding: “I think maybe it’s worse than hoarding.”
The Atlantic’s opinion: There is no evidence to show that hospitals are maliciously hoarding or inflating their need for masks and personal protective equipment when reporting shortages in supplies. Although Cuomo reported anecdotal stories of thefts from hospitals early in March, he was referring to opportunists trying to price-gouge early in the pandemic. Reuters has reported a handful of stories of nurses hiding masks to conserve supplies amid shortages, but not wide-scale thefts as Trump claimed.
GVM Editor: Trump wasn’t lying here either. There were situations where the distribution of needed PPEs were not delivered in a timely manner to hospital facilities. Futhermore, there were a number of cases where PPEs and other supplies were hoarded by black market operators. The President wasn’t lying. He was suspicious that the supplies weren’t getting to where they were supposed to go.
Even in the middle of a crisis, but perhaps especially because we are in the middle of a crisis, radical, militant leftists want to drive their social agenda down the throats of Americans. Not one of the things mentioned in this video will do anything to resolve the Covid-19 Pandemic. The Democrats are nothing more than monkeys for their own agenda. They don’t care about you, your family, your livelihood, or your health. This is proof that for them, it is all agenda, all the time. Simply stated: the Democrats are not on your side.
NY Post reporter Jonathan Levine was reportedly locked out of his Twitter after exposing YouTuber Carlos Maza, a socialist who regularly attacks the rich, as coming from elite wealth himself.
Levine reported on Maza’s big family connections, which include multiple mega-mansions in Florida, a multi-million dollar apartment on the Upper West Side and a fancy yacht. This news, which broke Saturday evening, comes after Maza spent years slamming the wealthy.
Included in Levine’s article is a photo from a public realtor website showing the outside of one of Maza’s family homes in Florida. The mansion boasts a waterfront view.
Levine also tweeted out images of the family’s multi-million dollar pad in Manhattan. It is not immediately clear why Levine was locked out of his Twitter following the report, as the images are publicly available.
Twitter did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller. (RELATED: The Numbers Are In: ‘Vox Adpocalypse’ Was Really Good For Steven Crowder)
Maza’s family using an LLC purchased a $7,125,000 luxury condo on the Upper West Side in Nov. 2017
Here are some images of that property pic.twitter.com/PhfLt2dLjQ
— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) March 8, 2020
Andy Ngo, editor-at-large for The Post Millenial, tweeted the news of Levine’s suspension Sunday morning. He urged Twitter users to follow Levine and called for the platform “to reverse Levine’s locked account and reverse tweets they’ve censored.”
“Public figures are not above scrutiny, especially not millionaire celebrity socialists who live in waterfront mansions,” Ngo tweeted.
Follow @LevineJonathan. Brave journalists need support.
Tell @TwitterSupport they need to reverse Levine’s locked account and reverse tweets they’ve censored. Public figures are not above scrutiny, especially not millionaire celebrity socialists who live in waterfront mansions.
— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) March 8, 2020
The NY Post article also includes information about Vivian Maza, his mother, and how she rose in her career at Ultimate Software, a software company. She became very close to company founder Scott Scherr and the two later became engaged.
Properties the family has owned include a Boca Raton, Florida home that sold for $10.8 million in 2018 and a Weston, Florida property that was listed for $1.85 million in 2015. Maza’s mother currently lives in a $4.4 million condo in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, according to Levine’s report.
The LLC that Maza’s mother controls also bought a $7.125 million apartment on the Upper West Side in Manhattan, which Levine tweeted out photos of. Based on Scherr’s multi-millionaire paychecks as CEO, Levine estimated that the family is likely “nine-figure millionaires — if not billionaires.”
Maza currently lives in a one-bedroom East Village apartment in Manhattan. Maza admitted in a past interview with Mel Magazine that his family is there to help him if he needs it, although it’s not clear how much they currently pitch in to help fund his lifestyle.
Maza insisted that the family does very little in terms of helping him financially, according to a statement from Twitter. He admitted that he has a “safety net” if his YouTube-ing career fails, but said no one “is bankrolling” him and that his mother only gives $10 a month.
The YouTuber raises money for his platform using a Patreon account, where supporters can help fund him in small amounts, according to the NY Post. Maza’s parents are listed as supporters, or “comrades,” at the end of one of Maza’s recent YouTube videos, Levine reported.
“My mom and her fiance are very wealthy thanks to a software company they started together when I was a kid. As a result I’ve gotten to live a life of tremendous privilege,” Maza wrote.
- Francisco Barraza-Porras, a resident of Boulder County, Colorado, was arrested in January and charged with multiple counts of sexual child assault, but was subsequently released back into the public.
- The Daily Caller News Foundation discovered that Barraza-Porras is an illegal alien, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is conducting an active investigation into his case.
- ICE confirmed that Boulder County officials do not work with federal immigration authorities, and the sanctuary county does not honor ICE detainer requests.
A Boulder County, Colorado, man charged with child sexual assault and wanted by local law enforcement is living in the U.S. illegally, the Daily Caller News Foundation exclusively confirmed.
The Lafayette Police Department and the Boulder County District Attorney’s office are asking the public for help in locating Francisco Barraza-Porras, a 47-year-old man who was released from custody, skipped his court date and is at large. ICE revealed to the DCNF that Barraza-Porras is an illegal alien, and Boulder County officials confirmed that they do not honor ICE administrative warrants.
The incident showcases the consequences when sanctuary jurisdictions fail to transfer custody of an illegal alien over to federal immigration authorities.
Barraza-Porras, who was last known to be living in Lafayette, Colorado, was arrested Jan. 2 and charged with multiple counts of sexual assault on a child. Instead of keeping him in custody or handing him over to ICE, local law enforcement released him back into the public with an order to appear to appear before court on March 2.
However, Barraza-Porras never showed up to his court date, and law enforcement doesn’t know where he is.
The Colorado state legislature and the governor’s office, which are under control of the Democratic Party, has dramatically curtailed ICE’s ability to enforce immigration laws in recent years.
Law enforcement in the state are prohibited from arresting or detaining a suspected illegal alien solely on the basis of an ICE request. A law Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed in 2019 also bars officers from providing a suspected illegal immigrant’s personal information to ICE, and requires state police to read illegal aliens their Miranda rights when coordinating an ICE interview.
Boulder County is no exception to this statewide sanctuary platform.
“Per state law, we only accept detaining someone if there is a warrant signed by a judge. So we don’t accept just general ICE detainers,” an administrative official with the Boulder County government told the DCNF.
This policy is typical among sanctuary jurisdictions in regard to immigration detainer requests.
If an illegal alien is arrested by local law enforcement for an unrelated crime, ICE will lodge a detainer request with that agency, asking that they hold onto that individual for no longer than 48 hours in order for an ICE agent to arrive and assume custody. Sanctuary states and jurisdictions claim that detainer requests are worthless unless signed by a judge.
However, federal immigration authorities push back against this claim, arguing that Congress has given explicit authority to ICE to issue administrative arrest warrants. The Immigration and Nationality Act, in particular, gives federal immigration authorities the ability to lodge detainer requests. (RELATED: Denver Sticking To Sanctuary Policy Following Arrest Of Hit-And-Run Suspect Who Was Already Deported Six Times)
“The public has been misled to believe that certain judges have the authority to sign a warrant for civil immigration violations — but no such judicial authority exists,” ICE spokeswoman Justine Whelan told the DCNF in August 2019. “This idea is a myth created by those who either oppose immigration enforcement efforts, are misinformed, or who do not understand how the immigration system work.”
ICE spokeswoman Alethea Smock confirmed that Boulder County does not cooperate with the agency, and that ICE is conducting an active investigation into Barraza-Porras. Lafayette Police told the DCNF on Saturday that they believe he is still at large.
The Boulder County District Attorney’s office, and the Lafayette Police Department, according to local reports, are urging the public to help them locate him, and have encouraged them to contact an investigator if they have any information about his whereabouts.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
President Trump spoke at CPAC last week.
The American Conservative Union announced on Saturday that a 2020 attendee tested positive for the coronavirus.
The ACU sent out notices to attendees on Saturday.
Via Mike Cernovich.
The American Conservative Union has learned that one of our CPAC attendees has unfortunately tested positive today for coronavirus. The exposure occurred previous to the conference. A New Jersey hospital tested the person, and CDC confirmed the positive result. The individual is under the care of medical professionals in the state of New Jersey, and has been quarantined.
ACU has been in contact with the Health Department of the State of Maryland, and we will explicitly follow the guidance from government health experts.
This attendee had no interaction with the President or the Vice President and never attended the events in the main hall.
The health and safety of our attendees and participants is our top priority. Any attendee who has questions can contact ACU or the Department of Health for the State of Maryland.
Our children, spouses, extended family, and friends attended CPAC. During this time, we need to remain calm, listen to our health care professionals, and support each other. We send this message in that spirit.
The Trump Administration is aware of the situation, and we will continue regular communication with all appropriate government officials
A former Obama adviser admits the primary voters don’t determine the Democrat nominee. The nominee is selected by the party elites.
In 1981, Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner was murdered by Mumia Abu-Jamal. A racially diverse jury convicted Jamal of first-degree murder and sentenced him to death. Since then, he has pursued endless appeals in state and federal courts. Although his death sentence was overturned on a technicality, his conviction has been repeatedly affirmed.
Throughout this lengthy process, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was zealously represented by three previous district attorneys. But now the defense of Abu-Jamal’s conviction is in the hands of District Attorney Larry Krasner, the self-styled “public defender with power,” who during his short time in office has established an appalling record of undercharging violent criminals and astonishing indifference to the interests of crime victims.
Krasner was elected district attorney with a $1 million-plus contribution from billionaire George Soros. While this contribution dwarfed all fundraising by previous D.A. candidates, Soros appears to have gotten his progressive money’s worth in Krasner.
After 37 years of appeals, Abu-Jamal has filed a motion for a new trial based on evidence of alleged misconduct by the trial prosecutor that reportedly was only recently discovered and produced by Krasner’s office. How it remained undiscovered all these years is a mystery. But equally mysterious is why Krasner’s office has never consulted the accused trial prosecutor — who is still very much alive and reachable by a local telephone call — concerning either the newly discovered evidence or the allegations of misconduct.
Instead of contesting those accusations, Krasner’s office text-messaged Maureen Faulkner, the murdered police officer’s long-suffering widow, that it was consenting to allow a hearing to proceed on these allegations. The failure to even consult the trial prosecutor and the unwarranted consent to a hearing on those allegations raised serious questions regarding Krasner’s intentions and his willingness to zealously oppose this latest move by Abu-Jamal to gain his freedom.
Accordingly, in November 2019, attorneys representing Maureen Faulkner petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to disqualify Krasner’s office from any further involvement in the Abu-Jamal case based on conflicts of interest. The petition is supported by damning exhibits that demonstrate why Krasner should be removed from the case. Among these exhibits is a detailed affidavit by the accused prosecutor refuting each and every claim of misconduct and stating under oath that he has never been contacted by Krasner’s office about these claims.
The petition also points out that the head of Krasner’s appellate unit, which is responsible for defending Abu-Jamal’s conviction, previously represented Abu-Jamal in the appeal of his conviction. In that regard, the petition avers that, when the head of Krasner’s appellate unit previously represented Abu-Jamal, he filed pleadings in the Supreme Court alleging that Abu-Jamal is innocent and that his conviction was the result of “fabricated evidence, subornation of perjury and a false confession.” In addition, the petition sets forth that Krasner himself publicly has described the former prosecutors who fought to uphold Abu-Jamal’s conviction as “war criminals.”
Maureen Faulker’s daring petition was a long shot. It sought the intervention of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court under its supervisory authority, conferred in 1722 when Pennsylvania was a colony. The court rarely grants such King’s Bench petitions, and when it does the issues to be adjudicated pertain to matters of the general public welfare. That is why, when the petition was a filed, I wrote the following in the Philadelphia Inquirer:
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court should consider Faulkner’s petition in the overall context of the disaster that has befallen the people of Philadelphia with the election of Krasner. While she seeks Krasner’s removal from her husband’s murder case, her petition serves the broader societal interest of seeking the court’s help in placing limits on what Krasner seems to believe is his unbridled discretion to abrogate his obligation to zealously and fully enforce the law.
Hopefully the court will remove Krasner from the Abu-Jamal case so that Pennsylvania’s attorney general may take over and vigorously oppose the murderer’s latest bid to get out of prison. Maybe then, chastened by the Supreme Court and with the example of the attorney general zealously defending Abu-Jamal’s conviction, Krasner will begin to realize that as a prosecutor he has a sacred duty to protect the public whom he purports to serve.
Although Maureen Faulkner’s lawyers later filed a supplemental brief documenting further evidence of conflicts of interest by Krasner’s office, the question of whether or not the court would act on the petition remained in serious doubt.
But earlier this week and against all expectations, the court issued an order staying Abu-Jamal’s appeal and advising that it was appointing a Special Master to investigate the matter. While this is not an outright victory for Maureen Faulkner, it is nevertheless a huge development. It means that the court is concerned enough about Krasner’s conduct to exercise its rarely used King’s Bench jurisdiction to appoint a neutral party to, in effect, investigate the Philadelphia district attorney and his office.
This remarkable development followed by a matter of days a similarly unusual ruling in federal court in the case of death row inmate Robert Wharton. As described in the opinion of U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg, who is hearing Wharton’s habeas corpus petition, in 1984, Wharton broke into and vandalized the home of Ferne and Bradley Hart. He mutilated family photos and defecated on the floor before departing.
But this was just his warmup act.
As set forth in Wharton’s confession, on the night of January 30, 1984, he and an accomplice again broke into the home, tied up the Harts, and proceeded to watch television for several hours while deciding what to do with the couple.
“The wife, Ferne Hart, was then bound in duct tape, taken to the second floor, stripped almost entirely naked and drowned in the bathtub,” the judge wrote in an opinion. “The husband, Bradley Hart, was taken to the basement and strangled to death with an electrical cord while being forced to lay face down in a pan of water.”
The judge added, “Not satisfied, and knowing that the couple’s 6-month-old was also in the house, Wharton turned the heat off and left the child alone in the house in the dead of winter to freeze to death. Found two days later, the infant barely survived.”
A Philadelphia jury convicted Wharton and sentenced him to death. Throughout the intervening decades, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office steadfastly opposed Wharton’s habeas corpus challenges to his death sentence. But all that changed under Larry Krasner’s leadership.
In a stunning reversal, Krasner without explanation has requested that the death sentence be dropped. Goldberg refused that request unless Krasner could provide a specific reason for dropping the death sentence.
In an opinion denying Krasner’s request to vacate Wharton’s sentence, Goldberg called the murders “particularly horrific” and expressed bewilderment over the district attorney’s behavior.
“After so many years of advocating for a death sentence, the District Attorney’s Office has now come to believe Wharton’s sentence violates the Constitution. And this concession is made without a single explanation,” Goldberg wrote. “To accept that view ‘blindly’ and summarily grant habeas relief without independently reviewing the merits of the remaining claim would be an abdication of my responsibility to perform the judicial function.”
Goldberg has called for a hearing at which the state Attorney General’s Office, acting as a friend of the court, will call and cross-examine witnesses. In justifying this highly unusual move, Goldberg wrote that another opinion was needed to determine whether or not Krasner’s decision to stop opposing Wharton’s death sentence was justified given the decades of opposition by preceding prosecutors.
In his opinion, Goldberg stated that “there is simply too much information to evaluate without the benefit of an in-court proceeding” and Krasner’s dereliction has necessitated the attorney general’s involvement.
“Given the district attorney’s reluctance to fully investigate this matter and explain its concession of the death penalty, I conclude that the attorney general’s participation at the hearing is necessary,” Goldberg wrote.
Goldberg ordered that communications between the victims’ family and the District Attorney’s Office be disclosed, as Krasner claimed the decision to abandon the death penalty was based in part on those discussions.
“The district attorney’s communication with the victims’ family serves as one of the bases for its concession on the remaining issue in this case. It appears that these communications are at issue. The attorney general has alleged that the family members of the deceased were not contacted about this phase of the case,” Goldberg said. “The stark differences in the portrayal of the victims’ family’s views are another reason why a full hearing on Wharton’s remaining habeas claim must occur.”
Goldberg added that the victims’ survivors have the right to testify at the hearing.
So there you have it. In the space of one week, two courts have taken extraordinary steps to rein in Larry Krasner, George Soros’ man in Philadelphia. In the overall scheme of things, these actions will do little to afford the citizens of Philadelphia the full protection of the law to which they are entitled.
But, if the end result is nothing more than keeping cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal in prison and the vicious Robert Wharton on death row, then at least to that limited extent George Soros’ pernicious campaign to remake the criminal justice system in Philadelphia and elsewhere will have been thwarted.
Small victories in the grand scheme of things, perhaps, but necessary and welcome nonetheless.
 Author’s note: In the interest of full disclosure, I am close friends with Joseph McGill, my former colleague in the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office who successfully prosecuted Abu-Jamal for the Faulkner murder. I know and admire and have provided legal services to Faulkner’s courageous widow, Maureen. Finally, many years ago, I agreed to represent an African American who had been in the emergency room where Abu-Jamal was brought for treatment within minutes of his shooting Faulkner. This bystander heard Abu-Jamal angrily proclaim that he had killed Faulkner.
George Parry is a former federal and state prosecutor. He is a regular contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer and blogs at knowledgeisgood.net. He may be reached by email at email@example.com.