Connect with us

Nation

Sen. Rand Paul confirmed U.S. attorney declined to investigate alleged financing behind ‘THUGS’ who rioted in Washington D.C.

Published

on

Screen Shot 2020 08 28 at 8.53.59 AM
Listen to “Sara Carter & Liora Rez: Why we’re joining forces to combat hate and antisemitism” on Spreaker.

Sen. Rand Paul said Monday that he was informed that the U.S. Attorney in Washington D.C. has declined to pursue an investigation into alleged financing behind the organized mobs that attacked Paul, his wife and put a D.C. Police Officer in the hospital in August, after a White House event.

In a tweet on Monday Paul revealed that “The DC U.S. Attorney today confirmed to me that they will not pursue an investigation of who is funding the thugs who attacked my wife and me and sent a DC police officer to the hospital.”

Sen. Paul told Fox and Friends host Steve Doocy in August after the attack that he believes “there is interstate criminal traffic being paid for across states lines…they flew here on a plane, they all got fresh new clothes, and they were paid to be here. It is a crime to do that and it needs to be traced.”

He said, however, the failure of the D.C. Attorney’s Office led by acting U.S. Attorney Michael R. Sherwin has declined to investigate the incident that took place after he left an event at the White House in August, following President Trump’s Republican convention speech.

In August large groups of rioters poured into the city. According to Paul there was cause and enough evidence to open an investigation into how the rioters were organized and financed. It also appeared that many rioters and protesters had been bused in from outside of Washington D.C. in an effort to target President Trump and his supporters.

That night the situation escalated those who attended the event at the White House and chose to walk back to their vehicles or hotel were met outside by the mobs and targeted.

Paul told Doocy in August, “I truly believe this with every fiber of my being, had they gotten at us they would have gotten us to the ground, we might not have been killed, might just have been injured by being kicked in the head, or kicked in the stomach until we were senseless.”

You can follow Sara A Carter on Parler @SaraCarterOfficial or on Twitter @SaraCarterDC

Continue Reading

Nation

Minnesota farmer’s lawsuit prompts removal of race and sex-based grant program

Published

on

GettyImages 2059551148 scaled

Five months after Minnesota farmer Lance Nistler filed a federal lawsuit with the help of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), the state has removed race- and sex-based preferences from its Down Payment Assistance Grant Program. This significant policy change followed Nistler’s legal challenge, which highlighted the discriminatory nature of the program’s selection process.

Pacific Legal Foundation writes involvement in Nistler’s case drew attention and criticism from Minnesota progressives. Writing in the Minnesota Reformer, Sigrid Jewett accused PLF of using Nistler “as a pawn in a larger culture war game.” She questioned why a California-based legal firm with numerous Supreme Court victories would be interested in representing a small Minnesota farmer pro bono.

PLF opposes all race- and sex-based preferences in the law, and that’s the real reason the firm chose to represent Nistler. The foundation stands against discrimination in various domains, including government board selections, school admissions, government contracts, and grant distributions, such as in Nistler’s case.

Here are the facts: Minnesota’s Down Payment Assistance Grant Program offers up to $15,000 toward the purchase of farmland. Recipients are chosen through a lottery system. However, before the policy change, even if a recipient was among the first picked through the lottery—as Nistler was, being selected ninth—they could be bumped to the back of the line if they were not a racial minority, female, LGBTQIA+, or otherwise designated as an “emerging” farmer by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.

Despite being chosen ninth in the lottery, which awarded grants to 68 applicants, Nistler did not receive a grant. He was moved from ninth to 102nd on the waitlist because he is a white male.

Nistler grew up on his family farm, milking cows. “They would lose money every year,” he says of the family operation. After he left for school, his family sold the cows and switched to farming soybeans, oats, and wheat. Lance’s father and uncle now run the farm, but they’re getting older. Lance, who has a degree in electronic engineering and worked in HVAC, is interested in buying a 40-acre chunk of the family farm, becoming the fourth-generation farmer in his family.

The land isn’t just going to be given to Lance. This is a working farm, and the Nistlers aren’t a wealthy family that can transfer land from one generation to the next without consideration. “My dad and uncle, they don’t have 401(k)s or anything,” Lance says. “I mean, the land and the equipment, that’s their retirement. This stuff isn’t given away. I’m not just going to get it handed down to me and inherited. It has to be purchased, and it is not cheap.”

Despite being from a farming family, Lance considers himself a new farmer—he has never owned farmland before, and he has an electronics background. Buying these 40 acres would be a huge step for Lance, planting him firmly in the farming world, which is what Minnesota’s grant program aimed to do. The idea that he would have qualified as an emerging farmer if only his skin were a different color struck Lance as wrong.

“The country we live in, the idea is it’s equal opportunity for everyone,” he says. “And if that’s what it is, then well, why shouldn’t I have the same chances?”

When Lance filed his lawsuit in January, the complaint argued that the discriminatory process violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. The complaint stated:

“Nistler brings this lawsuit to vindicate his constitutional right to equal protection of the law. He brings it to give all Minnesotans a fair chance at a difference-making grant program. He brings it in the hope that he will be able to own that small farm in the near future. He brings it because he is not giving up on his dream.”

In May, after Lance called attention to the unconstitutional policy, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed legislation removing the race and sex prioritization from the program. Now, Minnesota will treat farmers equally—as the Constitution promises.

Continue Reading

Trending