Connect with us

Politics

QAnon Shaman Announces Plea Deal in Jan. 6th Case

Now to see just how he’s sentenced.

Published

on

There are no doubt a number of indelible images from January 6th, 2021, many of which will remain in the American psyche for decades to come…or longer.

This was a rare event in world history, and a first for the United States, and those who participated in the event are no doubt unique too.  Perhaps no single person inside the Capitol on that day is more recognizable than Jacob Chansley; better known as the “QAnon Shaman”.

Now after some bizarre legal wrangling by his lawyers, Chansley is set to announce his plea.

Jacob Chansley, aka the “QAnon Shaman,” pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of an official proceeding. He had been charged with a six-count indictment that included civil disorder, violent entry and disorderly conduct, as well as a felony count for obstruction of an official proceeding, which carries a maximum sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Under federal sentencing guidelines, he is likely to face between 41 and 51 months (about 3 1/2 to 4 1/4 years), minus time served for the the eight months he has already been detained. He also agreed to pay restitution of $2,000.

Sentencing is scheduled for November 17. The judge has taken under advisement Chansley’s request to be released prior to sentencing, though his last several requests for release were denied.

In recent weeks, a number of judges have spoken out about what they feel are lenient sentences in the January 6th cases, and one has to wonder if all that talk will effect the punishment handed down to Chansley.

Opinion

Biden Mandate Busted Again, This Time in Lone Star State

It was a BRUTAL smackdown at that!

Published

on

From the very moment that Joe Biden began to speak about a federal vaccine mandate, there were concerns about its constitutionality.  You see, this is a nation founded on the ethos of freedom, and there is nothing more authoritarian than forcing a population to undergo unwanted medical procedures.

And, thusly, in the weeks following the Commander in Chief’s declaration, a number of judicial bodies took up the argument, and with devastating results for the White House.

The latest smackdown comes to us from Texas.

A federal judge in Texas Friday blocked the federal government from enforcing President Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal employees, arguing that he didn’t have the authority to do so “with the stroke of a pen and without input from Congress.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Biden has pushed several different iterations of vaccine mandates in recent months, including one for large businesses which the Supreme Court blocked and another for healthcare workers which it allowed to go into effect.

There was no beating around the bush, either.

Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Friday ruled against the administration on a separate mandate generally applying to federal employees.

“While vaccines are undoubtedly the best way to avoid serious illness from COVID-19, there is no reason to believe that the public interest cannot be served via less restrictive measures than the mandate, such as masking, social distancing, or part- or full-time remote work,” Brown wrote. “Stopping the spread of COVID-19 will not be achieved by overbroad policies like the federal-worker mandate.”

And, given the narrowest of margins in Congress, there is little doubt that any attempt to ratify this mandate legislatively would fail.

From the very moment that Joe Biden began to speak about a federal vaccine mandate, there were concerns about its constitutionality.  You see, this is a nation founded on the ethos of freedom, and there is nothing more authoritarian than forcing a population to undergo unwanted medical procedures. And, thusly, in the weeks following the Commander in Chief’s declaration, a number of judicial bodies took up the argument, and with devastating results for the White House. The latest smackdown comes to us from Texas. A federal judge in Texas Friday blocked the federal government from enforcing President Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal employees, arguing that he didn’t have the authority to do so “with the stroke of a pen and without input from Congress.” Biden has pushed several different iterations of vaccine mandates in recent months, including one for large businesses which the Supreme Court blocked and another for healthcare workers which it allowed to go into effect. There was no beating around the bush, either. Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Friday ruled against the administration on a separate mandate generally applying to federal employees. “While vaccines are undoubtedly the best way to avoid serious illness from COVID-19, there is no reason to believe that the public interest cannot be served via less restrictive measures than the mandate, such as masking, social distancing, or part- or full-time remote work,” Brown wrote. “Stopping the spread of COVID-19 will not be achieved by overbroad policies like the federal-worker mandate.” And, given the narrowest of margins in Congress, there is little doubt that any attempt to ratify this mandate legislatively would fail.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Digital Dollar? Fed Begins Debate on New Way to Control Cash

WHOA.

Published

on

For decades, the American people have wondered about the safety of our currency.  Sure, the US Dollar has long been considered the “gold standard” of international fiat, but even using that phrase colloquially raises questions.  Specifically:  Is there still any gold backing our bucks?

On paper, no.  Our nation is now operating in the realm of “legal tender”, thanks to the regrettable decision to remove the actual, physical gold from the equation years ago.  But, worse still, is the sinking reality that even Fort Knox’s stash may not be what we believe it to be any longer.

All of this monetary meddling has Americans rightfully worried, and the latest news out of the federal reserve is even worse.

The Federal Reserve finally released a much-delayed paper yesterday opining on the pros and cons of developing its own central bank digital currency (CBDC), but without coming to any firm conclusions.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Around the world, there are now 23 CBDCs either in pilot or formally launched. They have morphed from a theoretical concept into real-world digital cash, changing the way governments and millions of people use money — but not in the U.S.

There was no telling which way the fed would lean as of yet.

Although the Fed’s paper doesn’t advocate one way or another on whether the U.S. should begin development, the language used in the paper indicates that it’s very open to the idea, Josh Lipsky, director at the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center, tells Axios.

But for a nation that is already mired in a number of financial schemes and scams, (the Federal Reserve and the stock market perhaps being paramount among them), the news certainly isn’t going to help any of us sleep better at night.

 

For decades, the American people have wondered about the safety of our currency.  Sure, the US Dollar has long been considered the “gold standard” of international fiat, but even using that phrase colloquially raises questions.  Specifically:  Is there still any gold backing our bucks? On paper, no.  Our nation is now operating in the realm of “legal tender”, thanks to the regrettable decision to remove the actual, physical gold from the equation years ago.  But, worse still, is the sinking reality that even Fort Knox’s stash may not be what we believe it to be any longer. All of this monetary meddling has Americans rightfully worried, and the latest news out of the federal reserve is even worse. The Federal Reserve finally released a much-delayed paper yesterday opining on the pros and cons of developing its own central bank digital currency (CBDC), but without coming to any firm conclusions. Around the world, there are now 23 CBDCs either in pilot or formally launched. They have morphed from a theoretical concept into real-world digital cash, changing the way governments and millions of people use money — but not in the U.S. There was no telling which way the fed would lean as of yet. Although the Fed’s paper doesn’t advocate one way or another on whether the U.S. should begin development, the language used in the paper indicates that it’s very open to the idea, Josh Lipsky, director at the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center, tells Axios. But for a nation that is already mired in a number of financial schemes and scams, (the Federal Reserve and the stock market perhaps being paramount among them), the news certainly isn’t going to help any of us sleep better at night.  

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week