Connect with us


Pelosi allocates $1 million for ‘Courage Museum’ that lauds Blasey Ford



Christine Blasey Ford

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) proposed funding $1 million towards a “Courage Museum” with plans to laud Dr. Christine Blasey Ford to the House Appropriations Committee. All proposals were due to the committee on Friday but made public on Monday.

The organization behind the museum is Futures Without Violence, an organization dedicated to social justice. FWV has previously released statements to express their “strong support and appreciation of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford for her willingness to speak out” regarding her sexual assault allegations against Justice Brent Kavanaugh. On their website, it reads “we believe that it is both Dr. Ford’s right and a public service for her to tell her story in a public forum and have it heard and judged on its merits.”

RELATED: Christine Blasey Ford’s Father Supported Kavanaugh

In February, FWV gave Ford a “Courage Award.” Ford also spoke at a fundraiser for the organization and was met with a standing ovation. Since the Kavanaugh hearings, Ford has rarely made public appearances. In a press release, she said she stepped into the spotlight because she believed in FWV’s mission.

“There are some organizations with values that align with mine,” Ford said. “I learned about the work of Futures and the Courage Museum, I am very honored to be here.”

RELATED: Christine Blasey Ford Featured On Time’s ‘100 Most Influential People of 2019’

Since FWV proposed the museum to the city of San Fransisco in February, the organization has promised to “honor” Ford.

Jake Barton, who designed the National 9/11 Memorial and Museum and Legacy Museum, will design Futures Without Violence’s latest project. It would be his first project on the West Coast.

The committee will review all proposals after the Biden administration publishes its budget.

You can follow Jenny Goldsberry on Twitter @jennyjournalism

Continue Reading


BREAKING: Trump ordered to pay over $350M, barred from operating his business in NY in civil fraud case ruling



Former President Donald Trump and his business empire faced a significant setback as a New York judge ruled against them in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The 92-page ruling, handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron, barred Trump from operating his business in New York for three years and imposed over $350 million in damages.

The case, which unfolded over months of trial proceedings, stemmed from allegations that Trump inflated his assets and engaged in fraudulent practices. Engoron’s ruling cited a litany of charges, including persistent fraud, falsifying records, issuing false financial statements, and conspiracy to commit fraud.

Moreover, the judge imposed restrictions on key figures within the Trump Organization, including Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, barring them from serving in certain corporate roles in New York for a specified period.

Engoron’s scathing assessment of Trump’s testimony during the trial further undermined the former president’s credibility. The judge criticized Trump for evasive responses and irrelevant digressions, highlighting the detrimental effect on his credibility.

In response to the ruling, Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, lambasted the court’s decision, alleging political bias and a disregard for established legal principles. Kise argued that the evidence presented during the trial failed to support the allegations of fraud and emphasized Trump’s substantial net worth.

Kise’s assertions were echoed by Alina Habba, another attorney representing Trump, who denounced the verdict as a “manifest injustice” resulting from a politically motivated witch hunt.

Throughout the proceedings, Trump consistently dismissed the trial as politically motivated, accusing both Engoron and James of partisan bias. His legal team also criticized the absence of a jury in the trial, questioning the fairness of the proceedings.

Attorney General Letitia James, who spearheaded the lawsuit against Trump and his organization, portrayed the ruling as a victory for accountability and transparency in business practices. The lawsuit alleged fraudulent conduct and sought substantial financial penalties, a portion of which would contribute to the state treasury.

The fallout from the case extends beyond Trump and his business interests, with implications for the broader business community and the rule of law. The contentious nature of the trial and its outcome underscored deep divisions and raised questions about the integrity of the legal system.

Trump vows to appeal the decision.

Continue Reading