If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Sign Up To Keep Reading This post is for Reclaim The Net supporters. Gain access to the entire archive of features and supporters-only content. Help protect free speech‚ freedom from surveillance‚ and digital civil liberties. Join Already a supporter? Login here The post An Analysis of How the Supreme Court Is Reacting to the Biggest Online Censorship Cases of a Generation appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Visa – one of the world’s two biggest payments processors – appears to be moving into biometric data-based authentication‚ at least according to a patent it has applied for. And Visa claims that this would be fully privacy-friendly. Visa is in this way joining Mastercard‚ but also Microsoft and Google‚ who are all exploring ultimately similar methods‚ for the sake of what they say is preventing physical data theft‚ and abuse of deepfakes. And Google’s‚ Apple’s and Samsung’s payment services already provide the so-called seamless payment experience – while Amazon app’s Just Walk Out replaces checkout with what’s said to be “a similar experience” to what Visa plans to achieve. If Visa’s patent – designed‚ according to the giant’s filing‚ to provide “biometric templates for privacy preserving authentication” – is approved and implemented‚ the end result would be replacement of PINs with biometric identification. The method would be used at ATMs‚ payment checkouts‚ and Visa made sure to note that the technology’s use can be extended to unlocking apartments or letting people into venues like theaters‚ amusement parks‚ etc. These latter‚ non-payment scenarios would allow Visa to monetize the patent via licensing to other companies. The rationale for using such a system is said to be to improve security of user information in physical spaces. The patent states that the system would work by customers enrolling into the program which means creating “a biometric template” on their device. This data is encrypted and signed‚ and that signature‚ rather than the biometric information‚ is used by “access device” to verify the signature. This‚ Visa said in the filing‚ is what preserves privacy‚ since the templates are stored on the user device rather than “in some giant database.” This appears to be the key point the company is trying to make with the proposed patent‚ and was careful to stress that security breaching of such databases results in “disastrous” consequences. That’s because the use of biometrics is at once safer than that of PINs and passwords‚ but also much riskier‚ given that unauthorized access provides those behind a hack to a large amount of personal information. The post Visa Applies for Biometric Authentication Patent appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Last week the Michigan State Board of Education met to discuss a breach of privacy that the Michigan Attorney General would like to implement against homeschooling families in the state. During the meeting‚ members claimed that the AG is preparing to conduct warrantless entry into people’s homes to inspect homeschooling.  Several board members were critical of Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s idea to create a list of families that participate in homeschooling. “She basically said‚ we want this list so that we can have unwarranted home entry‚ without a warrant. Warrantless home entry into homeschool‚” board member Tom McMillin said.  He noted that we have a legal system that indicates that you need a warrant to enter someone’s home but argues AG Nessel essentially wants to go around that warrant and barge into families homes on a whim. McMillian insisted that this wouldn’t be a list for mere record keeping. “It’s gonna go beyond registration‚” he said‚ “they’re either naive or they’re being disingenuous for anybody to say all we wanna do is have a list. It’s gonna go significantly further than that they’re gonna either want to know exactly what’s being taught or they’re gonna want entry into the houses.” Every Homeschool Parent Needs to Pay Attention to this… Michigan State Board Of Education is Preparing To Conduct Warrantless Entry into People’s Homes AG Dana Nessel “basically said the quiet part out loud. We want this list so that we can have unwarranted home entry into… pic.twitter.com/P6oFIp9uvM — MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) February 26‚ 2024 During the meeting‚ board members noted that there were cases where children who were allegedly homeschooled ended up in the foster care system after being victims of abuse. Often foster care cases are opened up when a teacher or member of school staff notices either abuse or neglect in a child at school. Usually then an investigation about the home situation is opened up. When a child is homeschooled‚ there isn’t this middle man to speak on behalf of kids.  If Michigan’s intent with the random inspections was to keep kids out of abuse‚ that’s one thing‚ but users speculate the board has an ulterior motive. Board member‚ Nikki Snyder‚ was not in favor of Nessel’s idea. She insists it isn’t about keeping kids safe but is more about government overreach. I do think it’s oppressive to ask a student that has left the public education system for whatever reason they’ve left to then ask them to register with that same system. We wouldn’t do that in any other facet of society and so to give people the freedom to exercise choices that work best for them is extremely important. She also added‚ “I just really wanna push back on things we’ve talked about at this table. Public education is not safer than homeschooling and that means its incumbent upon us to address that” before indicating that the public education system in the state needs a “safety overhaul before we can claim that homeschool leaves students more vulnerable.” She also listed many issues of safety in the schools like sexual abuse and raised the point that if they don’t have the energy and resources to properly vet and check in on teachers‚ how are they going to have the resources to check in on every single parent homeschooling in the state? “That’s unreasonable.” “What happens in other states when they register students in these buckets‚” she added‚ “is we end up overseeing their curriculum. They’re making specific choices to not be in public education so that they can access a curriculum we’re not choosing to administer to them and there’s nothing wrong with that." The left doesn’t like homeschooling. They want your kids to go to public school so that they can brainwash them for six-hours a day‚ teach them about a delusional sense of identity and groom them into believing leftist talking points. Homeschooling is viewed as a threat to the left as it often protects kids from the harmful policies that public schools nowadays put their roots in. The registration for homeschooled students is currently practiced in all but eleven states and I know people that’ve specifically not moved into certain states due to their implementation of those lists. Some states require notification as well as yearly testing and vaccine requirements. Others also dictate what curriculum parents can and cannot teach. Michigan‚ where this meeting took place‚ doesn’t require any of that because again‚ that’s between a parent and their child.  The thing the Michigan AG is failing to realize is that there's a difference between secrets and privacy. Homeschooling parents merely want to be able to do what’s best for their kids without government interference. If it’s taking a field trip to a science center rather than reading a chapter about chemistry‚ so be it. If it’s teaching a class about how to succeed in adulthood instead of learning about critical race theory‚ great! That’s the beauty of homeschooling. Parent’s get the choice. But that’s threatening to the left because then they lose control. 

A Republican legal expert condemned Big Tech‚ particularly Amazon‚ for not only crushing speech but also helping a foreign government supersede U.S. companies. Article III Project founder and lawyer Mike Davis called out anti-liberty tech giants while speaking on a panel at the 2024 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “We have a problem with Big Tech — Google‚ Amazon‚ Facebook‚ and Apple have gatekeeping power in this country over information and commerce‚ and they use that gatekeeping power to silence conservatives and crush small businesses‚” Davis insisted. Amazon in particular not only tramples free speech but also helps Communist China profit at Americans’ expense. Davis introduced his comments by praising Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for fighting Google‚ Amazon‚ Facebook‚ and Apple — the censorship-obsessed and monopolistic Big Tech companies. Indeed‚ Davis mentioned how Google uses its ad revenue “to promote their woke agenda and they use that money to cancel conservatives‚” something Paxton legally combatted. Woke tech companies also target pro-free speech competition‚ Davis added. For example‚ Google and Apple united to cancel the Parler app from their app stores. But social media censorship and even financial censorship do not paint the full picture of Big Tech’s un-American efforts. Davis turned to one U.S. tech giant’s worrisome China ties. “Amazon is essentially China’s shopping mall‚ right? They do China’s bidding‚ they’re crushing small businesses in America‚ and they’re making a lot of money doing that‚” he said. “Amazon has this great image in America‚ and we need to change that because‚ again‚ if you think of Amazon‚ think of China.” An increasing number of Chinese sellers use Amazon‚ and all China’s companies answer to the government‚ where “private” is a relative word. Amazon has been accused of undermining other businesses by allegedly suspending sellers’ accounts and seizing and later selling their goods‚ imitating and trying to out-sell third-party products‚ and downranking listings in favor of their own brand. Shockingly‚ Amazon has been accused of partnering with the Communist Chinese government more than once‚ including reportedly working with China’s propaganda arm. In 2022‚ Chinese state media China Daily reported on Amazon’s increasing efforts to “cash in on China's cross-border e-commerce.” More recently‚ Yahoo! Finance explained how major Chinese brands use Amazon Web Services (AWS) to go global. Analyst organization ECommerceDB‚ which boasts of benefiting Amazon and Google‚ reported in January that China-based sellers had a growing presence on Amazon. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley pointed out how Hunter Biden's newest interview pokes a hole in one of his legal defense arguments.On Monday‚ Axios published an interview with the first son‚ who connected his fight for sobriety to the future of American democracy and to helping his father‚ President Joe Biden‚ defeat Donald Trump."Most importantly‚ you have to believe that you're worth the work‚ or you'll never be able to get sober. But I often do think of the profound consequences of failure here‚" Hunter said of his sobriety. "I have something much bigger than even myself at stake. We are in the middle of a fight for the future of democracy."According to Axios‚ Hunter identified May 17‚ 2019‚ as his "initial sobriety date." But that's a problem for Hunter's legal defense as his lawyers prepare to keep him out of jail after he was indicted on felony firearm charges for allegedly lying on federal paperwork about being a drug user.Turley explained:The admission‚ however‚ reaffirms what has long been known. Hunter’s recovery came long after he signed the form. The Firearm Transaction Record‚ ATF Form 4473‚ expressly asked if he was an unlawful user of‚ or addicted to‚ any stimulant‚ narcotic drug‚ or any other controlled substance. He answered that he was not. The date was October 12‚ 2018.Previously‚ Hunter’s counsel [Abbe] Lowell pushed a defense that the statement was truthful because Hunter may have been sober at that time. Lowell maintained that “at the time that he purchased this gun‚ I don’t think there’s evidence that that’s when he was suffering.” Lowell said that Biden had already emerged from rehabilitation when he signed the form.Even worse for Hunter‚ Turley predicted that special counsel David Weiss may use Hunter's interview and admission against him."It would not be surprising if this interview finds its way into filings by the government as the court considers defense pre-trial motions‚" Turley wrote.Hunter has pleaded not guilty to the charges.Hunter's attorney‚ Abbe Lowell‚ has twice asked a federal judge to dismiss the case‚ arguing his client is the victim of "selective prosecution" that is tainted by politics. Lowell‚ moreover‚ has argued the prosecution is unconstitutional and violates the Second Amendment.Weiss‚ however‚ has denied Lowell's allegations of selective prosecution‚ describing it as a "conspiracy theory.""Left with the inconvenient truth of trying to explain how this could happen during the Biden Administration‚ the defendant suggests that evil motives are lurking deep within the Department of Justice‚" Weiss wrote in a court filing last month. "This theory is a fiction designed for a Hollywood script.""The charges in this case are not trumped up or because of former President Trump — they are instead a result of the defendant’s own choices and were brought in spite of‚ not because of‚ any outside noise made by politicians‚" he added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Google’s new AI feature‚ Gemini‚ has come under scrutiny recently for racially diversifying historical images such as America’s Founding Fathers and German Nazis. Further‚ when asked if it’s okay to be white/black/Hispanic/Asian‚ Gemini gave a simple “yes” to all of them — except‚ the answer to the question “Is it okay to be white?” came with a long disclaimer about white supremacy and racism. While many have expressed shock at the obvious bias in Gemini‚ Dave Rubin isn’t surprised in the least. “I'm not shocked at all‚” he says. “It's baked into the code. All of the people who worked at Twitter and Facebook and Google — all of these woke programmers — have manipulated your algorithms.” Elon Musk addressed the Gemini scandal as well. On February 23‚ he tweeted: When Jordan Peterson saw Musk’s tweet‚ however‚ he was quick to disagree. He responded: Dave agrees that “asking the very people who have screwed us up” to fix the problem is entirely futile. Gemini and other similar types of programming are “designed to be institutional destruction‚” he says. To learn more‚ watch the clip below. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations‚ free speech‚ and big ideas with Dave Rubin‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

Campus reactions to the invasion of Israel by Hamas on October 7‚ 2023‚ have shocked most observers‚ including those who recognized behavior terribly reminiscent of conduct at German universities during the 1930s. What happened to our universities‚ many Americans have come to wonder‚ that produced the anti-Semitic outbursts and similar thuggish behavior‚ along with the reluctance of university trustees‚ presidents‚ and faculty to condemn them? While many see the turning point in 1960s radicalism‚ the real turning point was the transformation of higher education in the decades following the American Civil War. The United States was founded on the principle that all human beings have exclusive ownership of themselves‚ their liberty‚ and their property‚ with the government responsible only for their protection. The Revolutionary and Civil Wars were fought to defend these natural rights for all. Throughout the first half of the 19th century‚ the faculty and leaders of the country’s colleges and universities agreed‚ teaching and hopefully inculcating these principles from one generation to the next. One example is Brown University’s anti-slavery president Francis Wayland‚ an uncompromising defender of natural rights and limited government. His textbook‚ “The Elements of Moral Science‚” first published in 1835‚ sold more than 200‚000 copies in the 19th century‚ according to the university. Today‚ the typical institution of higher education has come to resemble a sectarian church‚ one whose doctrinal beliefs reject America’s philosophical origins. That all began to change in the 1870s‚ when American colleges decided to transform themselves into replicas of German universities‚ which were widely viewed as the most advanced institutions of higher education in the world. In mathematics‚ the empirical sciences‚ and medicine‚ they undoubtedly were. The social sciences and humanities were morally and empirically inferior to their American counterparts‚ however. German professors and administrators considered themselves — and‚ in fact‚ were — arms of the state. They viewed citizens as having no “natural” (that is‚ pre-legal) rights in the American understanding of that term — only government-granted privileges and obligations to obey political superiors. These statist doctrines were taught to the many hundreds of Americans who studied in German universities and‚ having returned to the United States‚ were determined to instill them here. By the end of the 19th century‚ the concepts of natural rights and liberties and the government’s limited role in protecting them were explicitly repudiated by leaders of the country’s social science and humanities professoriate. Describing the consensus among his academic peers in 1903‚ Charles Edward Merriam‚ who founded of the political science department at the University of Chicago‚ wrote that the “individualistic ideas of the ‘natural right’ school of political theory” have been “discredited and repudiated.” Instead‚ he quoted John W. Burgess‚ founder of Columbia University’s doctoral program‚ who wrote: “The state is the source of individual liberty.” The first German-trained Americans and their students understood that characterizing themselves as their teachers did — that is‚ as state socialists — was a nonstarter. Instead‚ they borrowed the name “Progressive” from the German Progress Party‚ a pleasing term that allowed them to avoid fully describing their views‚ especially in public. After World War I‚ when Germany had become anathema to many Americans‚ the Progressives adopted a new self-description: Liberals. When New Dealers adopted that term for themselves‚ the famous‚ formerly Progressive columnist Walter Lippmann more accurately described the New Deal as fascist in his book‚ “The Good Society‚” shocking his former ideological brethren. Over the decades‚ the underlying philosophy and practices in today’s American universities have eerily come to resemble their German autocratic and racist forbears of the 19th and 20th centuries. Beginning in the 1950s‚ survey after survey confirmed that the typical American university had become a “one-party” campus with liberals outnumbering conservatives and libertarians by extraordinary percentages. For example‚ a 2016 study of faculty voter registration in 40 leading American universities in Economic Journal Watch reported that overall‚ 3‚623 were registered Democrats and 314 were registered Republicans. The ratio of Democrats to Republicans in economics was 4.5 to 1‚ in history 33.5 to 1‚ in journalism 20 to 1‚ in law 8.6 to 1‚ and in psychology 17.4 to 1. More recently‚ a 2022 study by the Harvard Crimson‚ the student newspa­per‚ reported that 80% of the faculty of Arts and Sciences “characterized their political leanings as ‘liberal’ or ‘very liberal‚’” while “only 1 percent of respondents stated they are ‘conservative‚’ and no respondents identified as ‘very conservative.’” Today‚ the typical institution of higher education has come to resemble a sectarian church‚ one whose doctrinal beliefs reject the country’s philosophical origins. With faculty having the exclusive power not only to train but to select their successors‚ students have assimilated the views of their teachers‚ transforming the media‚ constitutional law‚ and one of the two major political parties. And yet‚ it was not as if no one warned the country. In August 1883‚ Herbert Tuttle‚ Cornell University’s highly esteemed historian of Germany‚ wrote in the Atlantic Monthly about the Americans earning doctoral degrees in the social sciences at German universities and attaining appointments at U.S. universities. The theory of government they learned abroad‚ he explained‚ “assumes as postulates the ignorance of the individual and the omniscience of the government” — a government‚ moreover‚ “removed as far as possible from” the influence of elected legislatures and public opinion. If America’s academic “pilgrims are faithful disciples of their masters‚” Tuttle concluded‚ they will be “advocates of a political system‚ which‚ if adopted and literally carried out‚ would wholly change the spirit of our institutions‚ and destroy all that is oldest and noblest in our natural life.” In Germany‚ this view of omniscient government had dominated universities since the early 19th century‚ leading ultimately to Nazism in the 20th. What political destiny does it hold for America? Editor’s note: This article has been adapted from “Winning America’s Second Civil War‚” published Tuesday by Encounter Books.

Remember when cops were allowed to stop crime? For that matter‚ remember when the general consensus was we had enough homegrown murder without needing to outsource it to any old Roberto‚ Bahena‚ or Jose? As America's ongoing third-worldization renders public space dangerous and unpleasant‚ there is one consolation for those driven indoors. Our home entertainment options are better than ever! Not just the new garbage‚ either. Nowadays it's easy to watch old programs that would have been much harder‚ if not impossible‚ to find in the pre-digital age. One show that hits the spot when I'm nostalgic for those halcyon days of law and order is the all-time classic “Columbo.” Unforgettably portrayed by Peter Falk‚ Columbo is a disheveled and deceptively unassuming LAPD homicide detective. Say what you will about the arrogant‚ high-society types Columbo pursues‚ they're a better class of killer than the impulse-driven savages currently doing the raping and the stabbing and the shooting. Columbo's murderers (played by a who's who of '70s and '80s character actors‚ as well as luminaries like Dick Van Dyke‚ Johnny Cash‚ and William Shatner) kill for good‚ old-fashioned motivations like greed and spite. Each episode gives us the culprit's identity from the start; the pleasure comes from watching them squirm as they realize how badly they've underestimated the seemingly bumbling‚ uncouth detective with the shabby raincoat and cheap cigar. Hard to go wrong with any of the 69 episodes that were produced between 1968 and 2003‚ but if you're looking for a recommendation‚ 1971's “Murder by the Book” (directed by a young Steven Spielberg) is a good place to start. "Columbo" currently streams for free on Tubi and can also be paid for on the usual platforms. Those with a penchant for physical media will be happy to know that Kino-Lorber's excellent Blu-ray set "Columbo: The 1970s: Seasons 1-7" is on sale at Walmart for $80.99.

Americans are‚ by and large‚ optimistic people. You’d have to view the world positively to set out on a hostile and unmapped continent. This optimism stuck with our people well past the frontier and can be seen in American music‚ literature‚ and theater. Foreigners‚ both friend and foe‚ have long remarked on this trait. “If there is a sort of national American emotion‚” the English comedian Stephen Fry once said‚ “I would call it optimism.” Since the 1960s‚ however‚ and even more acutely in the last 15 years‚ a creeping dread has entered the national psyche. This trend is observable in media‚ the arts‚ and political thought. Neither side of the aisle is optimistic: ABC News reported that nearly three-quarters of citizens believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. The emperor has no clothes‚ but he still has the power to punish naysayers. Some of this pessimism has to do with the normal decline of empire. No one nation can stay on top forever. Eventually‚ it reverts to the mean. But I see another factor to the despair choking our nation: Our civic religion is built on a lie‚ and our elite cannot solve the problems it promised to. Every nation has a civic religion. In some states‚ it is explicit‚ such as the deification of Roman emperors. Others‚ like our American empire‚ have civic religions that are more subtle. Our previous civic religion was that of 1776. That religion has saints like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. This faith holds the Constitution sacred as scripture. It also has a statement of faith. This is the core belief that justifies the existence and rule of the elite. One way of summarizing the old civic religion might be‚ “The elite rules because we have created the best‚ freest‚ and most powerful state the world has ever known." The virtues of this civic religion are self-reliance‚ competence‚ and a broadly Christian ethic. But this old faith has been supplanted by another one. The 1960s acted as America’s cultural revolution. Facets of life that had once been fixed and non-political came up for debate. The more than half-century since has given rise to a new civic religion‚ the religion of the woke left. The modern civic faith is based on this political formula: “We‚ the elite‚ saved you from the racist‚ sexist‚ and homophobic past. We gave you social status and will lead you toward a future based on equity and inclusion.” While this formula has been successful in at the ballot box‚ it has a major flaw: It isn’t true. In the roughly 60 years since the promise was made‚ almost every aspect of American civic life has gotten worse. Women are miserable‚ and race relations are abysmal. Just 20 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act‚ Thomas Sowell drew attention to this fact. In "Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?" the black intellectual pointed out that equality was at best a “quixotic goal.” When other conservative figures pointed this out‚ however‚ they were met with fierce resistance. John Derbyshire‚ who wrote for National Review until 2012‚ was fired for exactly these opinions. The idea that equality is impossible strikes at the core of the liberal project. John Derbyshire‚ in an interview with Gawker‚ spoke to how this lie has affected the national psyche: One [factor]‚ which I’ve written about more than once‚ I think‚ in the United States‚ is just despair. I am of a certain age‚ and I was around 50 years ago. I was reading the newspapers and following world events and I remember the civil rights movement. I was in England‚ but we followed it. I remember it‚ I remember what we felt about it‚ and what people were writing about it. It was full of hope. The idea in everyone’s mind was that if we strike down these unjust laws and we outlaw all this discrimination‚ then we’ll be whole. Then America will be made whole. After an intermediate period of a few years‚ who knows‚ maybe 20 years‚ with a hand up from things like affirmative action‚ black America will just merge into the general population and the whole thing will just go away. That’s what everybody believed. Everybody thought that. And it didn’t happen. Here we are‚ we’re 50 years later‚ and we’ve still got these tremendous disparities in crime rates‚ educational attainment‚ and so on. And I think‚ although they’re still mouthing the platitudes‚ Americans in their hearts feel a kind of cold despair about it. They feel that Thomas Jefferson was probably right‚ and we can’t live together in harmony. I think that’s why you see this slow ethnic disaggregation. We have a very segregated school system now. There are schools within 10 miles of where I’m sitting that are 98 percent minority. In residential housing too‚ it’s the same thing. So I think there is a cold‚ dark despair lurking in America’s collective heart about the whole thing. What the paleoconservative writer was trying to describe is the failure of woke civic religion. The elites who came into power in the 1960s made the nation a promise: that they would heal the long-running divisions in American culture. For many citizens‚ this was seen as a hopeful time full of opportunity. If we just allowed the new elite to change things‚ to change how society is organized‚ we can heal as a nation. But this was an impossible promise. Equality is a false god. And any promise based on that falsehood was doomed to fail. While this has always been the case‚ as time goes on and our elites spend more time in power‚ their initial promise rings more and more hollow. Sure‚ maybe in 1972 you could blame Klansmen and redlining for group differences. But in 1992? 2002? 2022? The claim that our elites‚ who have been in power for generations‚ are still the underdogs fighting against an oppressive system is clearly laughable. The attempt to shift blame to the racist “other” is less and less plausible. This is where the despair comes from. Our nation for 60 years has been on a crusade against difference. Not only has that crusade failed‚ but its consequences have been both obvious and dangerous. The emperor has no clothes‚ but he still has the power to punish naysayers. Derbyshire continued: Yet for a moralistic‚ optimistic people like Americans‚ this despair is unbearable. It’s pushed away somewhere we don’t have to think about it. When someone forces us to think about it‚ we react with fury. That little boy in the [Hans Christian] Andersen story about the emperor’s new clothes? The ending would be more true to life if he had been lynched by a howling mob of outraged citizens. I am not naïve. I believe that our ruling class knew their promises were false. In his heart of hearts‚ even the most committed progressive knows the lie is a lie. But what is easier‚ to admit that the civic religion is a lie or to punish those who point it out? Without honesty‚ the natural optimism of the American people is turning to despair.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis faces the possibility of disqualification from former President Donald Trump's Georgia election interference case over misconduct allegations. If Willis' preferred narrative and the timeline it hinges on fail to hold up in court‚ then the consequences could be more dire than a simple ouster. Attorneys for Trump and those of his co-defendants pinned their hopes on additional testimony from Terrence Bradley‚ the former partner of and divorce attorney for Nathan Wade. After all‚ Bradley previously indicated to Ashleigh Merchant‚ an attorney for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman‚ that Willis began her affair with Wade prior to appointing him top prosecutor in the Georgia case. However‚ during his testimony Tuesday‚ Bradley provided the defense with little more with which to professionally damn Willis. Bradley — alleged by an attorney for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman to have "non-privileged‚ personal knowledge that the romantic relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as the district attorney for Fulton County‚ Georgia in January 2021" — took the stand in Willis' misconduct hearing earlier this month. When pressed for details about the affair he may have gleaned from conversations with Wade‚ Bradley repeatedly cited attorney-client privilege. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee determined Monday after a closed-door meeting with Bradley that the divorce attorney must testify again‚ but this time without being able to withhold potentially damning revelations that may have cropped up in his communications with Willis' lover on the basis of attorney-client privilege. McAfee said in an email obtained by CNN‚ "Based on the in camera hearing with Bradley‚ the Court believes that the interested parties did not meet their burden of establishing that the communication(s) are covered by attorney-client privilege and therefore the hearing can resume as to Mr. Bradley's examination." Of particular interest to the defense is the timeline for the affair. A relationship pre-dating Wade's appointment could be seized upon to suggest conflict of interest and more. Shortly after taking the stand Tuesday afternoon‚ Bradley acknowledged he had previously asserted in a text message to Ashleigh Merchant‚ Roman's attorney‚ that Willis and Wade started their affair prior to November 2021. However‚ Bradley told the court that he had been "speculating" when confidently making assertions about Willis and Wade's relationship. Defense attorney Richard Rice suggested to Bradley that "'speculation' is a kind of weaselly lawyer word." Bradley ostensibly developed selective amnesia during the hearing‚ indicating he was unable to recall roughly when Willis and Wade starting seeing one another. "I do not have knowledge of it starting or when it started‚" said Bradley. Throughout Tuesday's hearing‚ CNN indicated Judge McAfee was taking note of when Bradley indicated he could not remember or could not recall information. Defense attorneys also pressed Bradley Tuesday about responding "looks good" to Merchant's January motion to disqualify Willis — a motion that made note of Bradley's insights into the affair. Bradley suggested his response was in reference to a section in the filing concerning money related to his law firm. "I think I remember there was a line of‚ about the accuracy of how much money that my office … had received and whether or not that was going to be in the motion or not‚" said Bradley. Defense attorneys underscored that Bradley also failed to flag what he now regards as speculation in the motion as such ahead of its filing. Hours of questioning Tuesday ostensibly yielded no substantial new insights. However‚ the defense may already have enough to cast doubt on Willis' preferred timeline. While Willis confirmed the affair in a Feb. 2 court filing‚ the filing suggested the "personal relationship between Special Prosecutor Wade and District Attorney Willis has never involved direct or indirect financial benefit to District Attorney Willis" and that "Willis has no personal conflict of interest that justifies her disqualification personally or that of the Fulton County District Attorney' Office." Included in the Feb. 2 filing was an affidavit from Wade stating the affair did not begin until after his Nov. 1 appointment as special counsel and that they did not begin dating until November 2022. When testifying in court earlier this month‚ the lovers suggested that their romantic relationship lasted from spring 2022 until summer 2023. There are some indications‚ however‚ that the Democratic DA and the Trump prosecutor may have misled the court. Blaze News previously reported that Robin Yeartie‚ a former "good friend" of Willis and Fulton County DA employee‚ told the court that it was her understanding that Wade and Willis were romantically involved as early as 2019. When asked whether the relationship was in fact romantic‚ Yeartie told Trump's attorney Steve Sadow that she observed them "hugging" and "kissing" long before Wade's 2021 appointment. Beside Yeartie's testimony‚ there is also apparently a mountain of phone records suggesting Willis and Wade had a closer relationship outside their timeline than they first let on. Citing data collected from Wade's cellphone‚ an affidavit submitted Friday by Trump's legal team claimed that Wade visited Willis' home between January and November 2021 at least 35 times‚ usually in the evening for "an extended period of time." On at least two occasions‚ Wade allegedly came over to the DA's Hapeville residence late at night then left early in the morning. Data collected from Wade's cellphone also indicated that he and Willis exchanged over 2‚000 phone calls and roughly 10‚000 text messages in 2021 prior to his appointment. Judge McAfee indicated that he will hear arguments Friday and determine whether to reopen evidence and explore the findings concerning the cellphone data. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!