from Vigilant News Network: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

A violent antisemitic mob descended upon a Los Angeles synagogue on Sunday and harassed the congregants, injuring several. Yet the response from the LA media and authorities has been pitiful. The initial protests were organized by Palestinian Youth Movement LA and Code Pink LA, the same coalition of people who’ve organized the protests on college campuses and in our cities. Some of the protesters filmed their march down the streets of Los Angeles holding Palestinian and pro-Hamas flags. They screamed chants like, “There is only one solution, intifada revolution.” This is what the protest ended up like as they made their way to the Adas Torah synagogue in Pico-Robertson, a Los Angeles neighborhood with a large number of Jewish residents: BREAKING:Anti-Israel protesters are physically attacking Jews in front of a synagogue in Los Angeles ???? pic.twitter.com/FQHC2k7Ygp— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) June 23, 2024 It was an ugly scene. Though you might not know about it if you only followed left-wing local and national media. The Los Angeles Times buried this story in its back pages. The front page of the print edition of today's LA Times. Notice anything missing?Nothing about the antisemitic violence on pages 2 or 3 either. Their website has a brief story, half of it written by City News Service. pic.twitter.com/CZSLlwziLE— Jennifer Van Laar (@jenvanlaar) June 24, 2024 Judge for yourself what you think of these videos. The video footage from the Palestine protest outside of a synagogue in LA are shocking.Mob of protestors using violence against Jews in broad daylight.How does this movement have any legitimacy? https://t.co/guPtwrHBG4 pic.twitter.com/5dNF3oOk8w— Hen Mazzig (@HenMazzig) June 23, 2024 Only one person was reportedly arrested during this whole episode—a man who was allegedly holding a flag with a spike at the end of it. According to The Jewish Chronicle, the police didn’t provide any more information about the person. I really don’t think there’s any question that what happened at the Adas Torah synagogue was shameful and unacceptable. Protesting is one thing, harassing a synagogue is crossing the line. And committing violence is criminal. The question is, what are the authorities going to do about it? Here’s the statement put out by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. BREAKING: LA Mayor Karen Bass calls antisemitic protests in West LA “abhorrent” and “unacceptable.” pic.twitter.com/EYE7cHsrlz— Jacob Wheeler (@JWheelertv) June 24, 2024 I’ll note a few things here. First, Bass buries the lede. The word “antisemitism” only shows up near the end of the statement, and from the first paragraph, one would hardly know that the hostility and violence were directed toward Jews or who committed it. Bass condemns “violence,” but only says it took place at a “place of worship.” It wasn’t just a place of worship, it was a synagogue. The people in the mob had a target, and the target was Jews. This is a common left-wing linguistic tactic. Any time a group they aren’t so keen on is targeted, or the ethnic and religious dynamic is uncomfortable, they will label the incident with generic words like “hate” to dodge the issue and shift it to a broader societal problem. That’s exactly what they tried to pull during the congressional hearings on college campus antisemitism. Next, Bass says she’s organizing more police patrols outside—again totally generic—“houses of worship.” Unless those so-called houses of worship are synagogues, this is entirely a waste of police time and money. If the mayor was really concerned about Jews being targeted for violence, she would have deployed the LA Police Department in force to the synagogue while this incident was growing rather than let it spin out of control for hours before intervening. The only meaningful part of Bass’ bland statement is the line that “those responsible” for antisemitism and violence “will be found and held accountable.” I certainly hope so, but given that only one person was even arrested, I can’t say I’d count on any of that statement being true. As we’ve seen in other blue, heavily Democrat-controlled cities, lawbreakers who commit their crimes on behalf of left-wing causes often escape punishment entirely. They know that the powers that be will come to their aid. President Joe Biden put out a slightly better statement than Bass by at least being explicit about who was attacked. However, the president was light on suggestions of what he will do about it. I’m appalled by the scenes outside of Adas Torah synagogue in Los Angeles. Intimidating Jewish congregants is dangerous, unconscionable, antisemitic, and un-American.Americans have a right to peaceful protest. But blocking access to a house of worship – and engaging in violence…— President Biden (@POTUS) June 24, 2024 This wasn’t a protest. It was a violent mob harassing and attacking citizens because of their religion. The Department of Justice under Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland has put numerous pro-life activists in jail for attempting to block the entrances of abortion clinics. Will the DOJ do anything about the people who blockaded the synagogue and instigated violence? How about the other ugly antisemitic incidents that seem to be escalating? So far, we’ve seen a whole lotta nothing. If only you were in charge of the FBI and Department of Justice and could order them to conduct a manhunt for every one of these pro-Hamas lunatics. Like you did for every grandma in a MAGA hat within a country mile of the Capitol on January 6. https://t.co/VhToiEKH00— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) June 24, 2024 Biden—or whichever one of his handlers was running his social media accounts at the time—said in 2020 that former President Donald Trump was on the hook for any violence he decried during his presidency. https://t.co/mHaz0q4K6J pic.twitter.com/0hSeIrSYcY— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) June 24, 2024 Will Bass or the president or any of the left-wing institutional powers that be do anything to put a halt to these incidents, or is winning a few votes in Michigan more important than ensuring that “Never again” really means never again? I hate to be cynical, but given all that’s happened in recent months, I think we already have the answer. The post After Another Ugly Antisemitic Incident in LA, the Left Has Few Words, No Answers appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Right before a rally in Philadelphia, Trump had announced that he had already made up his mind. Looks like he’s picked his VP. But who could it be? Reports are coming in that the list of contenders for this coveted number two spot has been narrowed down. The three possible candidates are: North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum. Ohio Senator J.D. Vance. Florida Senator Marco Rubio. That’s it, apparently. Hey, where’s Pence on that list? UPDATE: More Details Emerge as President Trump Narrows Running Mate List to Three Candidates READ: https://t.co/GXVuJ2l5Ow pic.twitter.com/zc112Li7Vb — The Gateway Pundit (@gatewaypundit) June 24, 2024 Trump’s top 3 picks for VP are Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum. Follow: @AFpost pic.twitter.com/l6r0N69mfQ — AF Post (@AFpost) June 24, 2024 For those that don’t know, the first one pictured above is Doug Burgum, then J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio. The Gateway Pundit reports: Anticipation over selection over who President Trump will select as his running-mate reached fever pitch over the weekend as the 45th President proclaimed just before a rally in Philadelphia he had already made the pick in his mind. Now, reports have emerged that the list of contenders for the coveted number two spot has narrowed. NewsNation has learned Trump has finalized his list to three candidates: North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, and Florida Senator Marco Rubio. CNN and NBC have also revealed the same three names are finalists on Trump’s list. Trump’s original list also included Senators Tim Scott (R-SC) and Tom Cotton (R-AR), Representatives Byron Donalds (R-FL) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY), as well as former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson in addition to the three finalists. NBC further reports that the choice will likely come down to Burgum and Vance. NBC notes that Burgum has made a massive impression on Trump, particularly with his loyalty, looks, and wealth. Another point in Burgum’s favor is that his understated demeanor means there’s no risk of him outshining the 45th President. Trump wants workhorses to help advance his agenda, not folks looking to rush to the cameras. Moreover, Burgum will also be in attendance at Trump’s debate with Joe Biden this Thursday according to NewsNation. This is potentially significant because Trump has said that his pick would be at the showdown. It is unknown at this point whether Vance and Rubio will be in attendance as well. Here’s Doug Burgum recently on CNN: Doug Burgum just went on CNN, shut down Kaitlan Collins’ argument that Trump would be a “dictator” & turned the argument against Biden Mentions Biden’s many executive orders, bypassing of Congress & ignoring the SCOTUS ruling on student loan forgiveness pic.twitter.com/KzlJfqdTHE — johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) June 23, 2024 Sounds like Burgum really helped turn around his state. Kevin O’Leary says Doug Burgum convinced him to make his most successful investment ever — in the American heartland “Very few Americans know that the richest citizens in the country for sovereign wealth live in North Dakota. Doug Burgum did that… …Trump could say to Burgum,… pic.twitter.com/X60JURVCAH — johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) June 24, 2024 Who’s your choice, even if not on this list? NATIONAL POLL: Who Is Your Top Choice For Trump’s VP? Share!

In an uncommon move, the Supreme Court has just opted to extent their current term into July. The reason for this is so that SCOTUS can wrap up work on around a dozen important cases — including President Trump’s immunity case and major rulings on federal agency power, abortion, social media censorship, gun rights, and J6. Final 10 cases of SCOTUS term include major decisions on Trump, J6 cases and social media censorship. Ten major case decisions remain before the Supreme Court, all of which are set to be released before the term comes to a close at the end of June. Many of these decisions will… pic.twitter.com/KHGDr7VVAa — OutsideTheMatrix aka QRASH (@PaTrumpGirl) June 24, 2024 The US Supreme Court signaled it will take the unusual step of extending its term into July as it finishes work on about a dozen cases, including Donald Trump’s bid for immunity from prosecution for attempting to overturn his 2020 election loss. https://t.co/iws6zyxl28 — Bloomberg (@business) June 24, 2024 Such a thing rarely happens, and this news, combined with the fact that fences have recently been installed around the Supreme Court has us wondering what big decision is about to drop… Fences or no fences… Did you know that the Supreme Court is still in their 2023 term? What ruling MIGHT necessitate the need to erect fences around the Supreme Court? pic.twitter.com/C6kNAU39Wc — Cowboyw2b (@Cowboyw2b2) June 18, 2024 BNN Bloomberg has more details on the Supreme Court’s term extension: The US Supreme Court signaled it will take the unusual step of extending its term into July as it finishes work on about a dozen cases, including Donald Trump’s bid for immunity from prosecution for attempting to overturn his 2020 election loss. The court, which had already scheduled Wednesday as an opinion day this week, updated its website to show it will issue rulings on Thursday and Friday as well. Because Chief Justice John Roberts traditionally announces the last day of the term from the bench, the announcement indicates the Friday opinions won’t be the last ones. In addition to the Trump case, the court will be ruling on abortion, regulatory power and social media in the coming days. Many of those decisions are likely to be deeply divisive, a factor that might be contributing to the delay. Reuters broke down some of the major cases the Supreme Court will be deciding on: The U.S. Supreme Court’s current term features major cases involving former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution and his ballot disqualification, the abortion pill, gun rights, the power of federal agencies, social media regulation and Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy settlement. Zero Hedge added some more details: Federal Agency Power The Supreme Court will rule on a 40-year doctrine known as the Chevron doctrine. The precedent dictates that courts should defer to executive branch agencies’ expertise when it comes to interpreting laws when Congress’s intent in passing the law is unclear. Under the 1984 doctrine, U.S. courts gave great leeway to agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the powers delegated to them by Congress to administer the law. Two small fishing companies have challenged that precedent, claiming that paying for a monitor on a herring boat required by the National Marine Fisheries Service amounted to onerous regulation. As the case illustrates, the ruling will affect not only the EPA and the SEC but also myriad other federal agencies. In oral arguments earlier this year, the justices appeared divided over a bid to further limit the regulatory powers of federal agencies in a dispute involving the government-run program to monitor for overfishing of herring off New England’s coast. The lower court rulings allowed the National Marine Fisheries Service to require commercial fishermen to help fund the program. Two fishing companies—New Jersey-based Loper Bright Enterprises and Rhode Island-based Relentless Inc.—have argued that Congress did not authorize the agency, part of the Commerce Department, to establish the program. Trump Immunity Case Another case that will likely be ruled on this week involves former President Trump, who had argued that he should be declared immune for his activity after the 2020 election to deal with what he described as election fraud. Special counsel Jack Smith last year charged the former president with conspiracy to subvert the 2020 election, and the former president has appealed the case to the high court. During arguments, the justices appeared skeptical of the Trump attorneys’ arguments that he should be fully immune from prosecution. But some of the justices seemed inclined to carve out some immunity for presidents. Several justices offered warnings that all future former presidents could be prosecuted by their successors if immunity is not upheld. The appeal has delayed the criminal case against former President Trump in Washington related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Social Media Contacts In another major case, the court will have to decide whether federal government officials should be broadly prohibited from communicating with social media companies, responding to lawsuits by two state attorneys general alleging that the federal government violated people’s First Amendment rights by asking social media companies to take down content that it claimed was false or misleading. The attorneys general had some success in the lower courts. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision that blocked officials in the FBI, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Surgeon General’s office, the White House, and other agencies from contacting social media firms. The Biden administration appealed the Fifth Circuit’s decision, sending it to the Supreme Court. The circuit’s decision is currently on hold while the high court weighs the matter. A number of Supreme Court justices during arguments in March appeared skeptical that government officials should be barred from contacting those companies. Abortion Although the Supreme Court already ruled on a challenge to the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of an abortion-related drug, the high court is set to release an order on whether emergency rooms in Idaho can perform abortions on pregnant women during what is described as an emergency. Under the 2022 Idaho Defense of Life Act law, abortion is banned under all circumstances unless it is “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.” The Biden administration had challenged the mandate, saying it conflicts with a federal law, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which mandates that emergency room doctors stabilize patients. So far, the Supreme Court’s extension includes the week of July 4… So, get ready for some huge rulings to celebrate Independence Day! It’s gonna be a biggie! RELATED REPORT: HUGE: Supreme Court Issues MAJOR Ruling That Could Immediately Reverse Alvin Bragg’s Case Against Trump! The Supreme Court has been handing down several big rulings recently, and several even bigger ones are still yet to come. But one especially notable ruling didn’t get nearly the attention it deserved. In fact, I’m not seeing many people talking about this, but we definitely will. The case is called Erlinger v. United States, and in that case the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a unanimous jury to make the determination beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant’s past offenses were committed on separate occasions for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). The Court vacated and remanded the case for further proceedings. Ok so what, you ask? What’s the big deal? Well, only that this may have a direct impact on so-called “Hush Money” case against Trump, involving Alvin Bragg and Judge Merchan. Do you recall in that case that Judge Merchan gave very strange Jury Instructions that basically told the jurors they did not have to unanimously agree on what underlying crime President Trump allegedly committed? It was so strange. I’ll post our full coverage of it down below, but for right now I had Grok give a quick summary: Ok, so now apply the Erlinger case. I think Sean Davis describes it well right here: In 6-3 decision issued today, the Supreme Court ruled that 1) a jury must be unanimous in its findings on criminal convictions, and 2) sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat. The ruling and the rhetoric in the opinion have obvious implications for both the illegal Bragg witch trial against Trump in New York City and the bogus J6 1512(c) charges and sentencing enhancements that corrupt federal judges have announced they will implement if the Supreme Court nukes 1512(c). In 6-3 decision issued today, the Supreme Court ruled that 1) a jury must be unanimous in its findings on criminal convictions, and 2) sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat. The ruling and the rhetoric in the opinion have obvious… pic.twitter.com/2QsT71Hrh7 — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 21, 2024 Ok folks, so does that mean Judge Merchan’s Jury Instructions were flawed? I mean, we told you they were DEEPLY FLAWED at the time it happened. And now it’s a beautiful thing when the Supreme Court just issued an opinion that seems to back us up! Let’s see what happens, this just got VERY interesting! There’s a reason why over 5 million people each month trust our reporting here at WLTReport. Here’s what we originally told you back when the Jury Instructions were made public: Judge Merchan Gives Insane and Unconstitutional Jury Instructions To “Get Trump” Judge Merchan Gives Insane and Unconstitutional Jury Instructions To "Get Trump" Constitutional law attorney and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley is covering the jury instructions in the so-called "Hush Money" case against Trump this morning and some stunning details are emerging. Tim Pool provides a nice summary of the essence of what the Judge just told the Jury: "You can all disagree on if the crime was committed so long as you agree trump committed any crime, lock him up" "You can all disagree on if the crime was committed so long as you agree trump committed any crime, lock him up" https://t.co/mkMpJj5pXn — Tim Pool (@Timcast) May 29, 2024 Wow. But now let's go direct to Turley live-tweeting from the Courtroom where he explains in more detail: I am back in the courtroom for the instructions. — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ...This judge has stated that he wants to stay close to the standard instructions. The problem is that this case is anything but standard. We will be looking for some of the outstanding issues, particularly on the standard of proof for key elements like "unlawful means." ... — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ...This judge has stated that he wants to stay close to the standard instructions. The problem is that this case is anything but standard. We will be looking for some of the outstanding issues, particularly on the standard of proof for key elements like "unlawful means." ... — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ......Merchan is telling them that they can only consider Cohen's plea to a federal election violation was only allowed to judge his credibility and offer "context." That is mere meek after the prosecutors said repeatedly that such violations were committed as an indisputable… — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ......Judge Merchan just said that if they find that any witness has testified with regard to any material fact, they can disregard the entirety of his or her testimony. It could be called the Michael Cohen charge. It seems clear to some of us that Cohen clearly lied about the… — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ...Merchan has instructed that the first count of falsifying business records in the first degree must show that Trump made or causes a false entry to be made. Intent means conscious or purpose to defraud. Intent does not require an intent to defraud any particular person or… — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 ...Merchan just delivered the coup de grace instruction. He said that there is no need to agree on what occurred. They can disagree on what the crime was among the three choices. Thus, this means that they could split 4-4-4 and he will still treat them as unanimous... — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 29, 2024 Fox News sums it up with this: Ok, so basically the jury can split 4-4-4 on key facts and details about what crime was committed, and that doesn't matter as long as they all basically agree "Orange Man Bad" and then it will be treated as a unanimous decision. This is insane!!! JUST IN: Judge Merchan has told the jury they do NOT need unanimity to convict. This means: Four jurors could agree on the first crime (Falsifying Records) Four on the second (Tax Violations) Four on the third (Fed. Election Violations) And Merchan would STILL… pic.twitter.com/BzJif1PTLZ — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) May 29, 2024 Not only that, but many believe it to be wildly unconstitutional: Merchan is giving false instructions to the jury. This has already been settled by SCOTUS. The jury must be unanimous on every decision. Did Merchan actually go to law school? pic.twitter.com/NK2vxE65yl — Savannah (@BasedSavannah) May 29, 2024 Now ask yourself....why would a Judge do something so obviously erroneous? Because they don't care what happens long-term. They just need to "Get Trump" before November. If they can tie him up, keep him off the campaign trail, maybe even put him in jail, they don't care if the Supreme Court reverses this in 2025, they will have accomplished all they ever set out to do. Now does it make sense? Fox News reports more on what the jury will need to find if they want a guilty verdict: Judge Juan Merchan told the jury that in order to find the defendant guilty, the prosecutors are required to prove: 1. On or about Feb. 14, 2017, fromer president Donald Trump personally made or caused a false entry in business enterprise, specifically invoice from his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen 2. Trump did so with intent to commit another crime or intent to conceal another crime. That leaves 33 remaining counts – each for falsifying business records.  The only difference is different business record or date. The jury can ask to repeat the law in its entirely as many times. 2nd count relates to voucher kept or remained by the Trump Organization. 3rd count relates to voucher kept or remained by Trump Org. --4th is check --5th – invoice from Cohen from March 2017 --6th – entry in general ledger for DJT Trust bearing voucher --7th – check #000147 --8th – invoice from Cohen April 13, 2017 --9th - entry in general ledger for DJT --10th – check from June 2017 --11th - invoice from Cohen from May 2017 --12th – entry in general ledger for Trump in May 2017 --13th – Check --14th – invoice from Cohen --15th – June general ledge entry --16th – check & check stub from June 2017 --17th count invoice from Micahel Cohen --18th entry from general ledger --19th pertains to Donald J. Trump check and check stub -- 20th count invoice from Michael Cohen -- 21st count ledger entry for Donald J Trump -- 22nd count pertains to check -- 23rd count pertains to voice related to Cohen -- 24th count entry in general ledger for Trump -- 25th count check and check stub -- 26th count invoice from Cohen -- 27th count -- 28th count check and check stub -- 29th invoice from Michael Cohen -- 30th count entry in general ledger of Trump -- 31st count check and check stub -- 32nd count invoice from Cohen -- 33rd count entry in general ledger for Trump -- 34th count also falsifying business records in the first degree, check We will continue to monitor this story and bring you updates as they arise today.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) delivered two precedent-setting rulings that could significantly impact former President Donald Trump’s criminal convictions. In a decisive 6-3 decision in the Erlinger vs United States case, the [...] The post SCOTUS Ruling Deems Trump’s New York Conviction Unconstitutional on Two Key Grounds appeared first on The People's Voice.