#Legal Subcommittee

[humanspaceflightday]

Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session, 1071 meeting.

Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session.

Watch Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session, 1071 meeting!

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Walter Einenkel at Daily Kos:

During the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan invited several witnesses to testify, including former Trump attorney James Trusty, Trump ally Robert Costello, and the executive director of right-wing activist group America First Legal, Gene Hamilton. All three testified that the numerous legal cases against Donald Trump amounted to a weaponization of our government to practice “lawfare,” a term the GOP has bandied about since Trump was indicted four times last summer. Since the facts of the cases against Trump are allegedly damning, the MAGA rationalization seems to be that the indictments are simply political revenge. Democratic Rep. John Garamendi used his time during the hearing to shove this hypocrisy back in the GOP’s face. He began by directing a question toward the Democratic witness at the hearing, former General Counsel of the Army of the United States Jill Wine-Banks. He asked her whether or not statements made by Trump—including various public threats to “appoint” a prosecutor to go after President Joe Biden (if Trump is elected), as well as threats to use the FBI to go after his political enemies—would be considered “lawfare.”

“I believe it would,” Wine-Banks responded. “That is definitely a violation of everything that the Department of Justice stands for. It is lawfare. You need to have some evidence to begin an investigation. And the president himself has no role in directing who the Department of Justice will investigate or prosecute.” Garamendi then asked the three “lawfare” extraordinaires whether they would disagree that those things are inappropriate for a president to say.  “I don't accept the premises fully, so I'm having a hard time,“ Trusty responded. When pressed by Garamedi, he just said, “I don’t have an answer for you.” 

Happy to see Jim Jordan being made a clown.

[darkeagleruins]

US Government trying to pass 2024 Bill ‘HSB 737’ which will grant immunity to pesticide manufacturers for poisoning Americans ‌

“I came out of this subcommittee hearing on HSB 737, which would give pesticide companies immunity for citizens trying to file lawsuits against them for damages.” ‌

“This bill just passed the subcommittee, and it will take away farmers' rights to pursue legal action after damages are caused to their families and themselves.” ‌

“The basic argument presented by Bayer and other chemical companies is that the law lawsuits that are being brought up by them about the damages caused by their products is going to put them out of business.”

Status Pending: House Ways and Means Committee Current Status: Subcommittee recommends passage. Vote Total: 2-1

[unityrain24]

email i got today not sure if this is news??:

----

Breaking news: a top Democrat in the House has highlighted the problem with the “duty of care” model in the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).1

During the markup last week, Rep. Frank Pallone said, “adopting the duty of care could cause social media companies to over-filter content out of an abundance of caution about legal risk, and as a result some young people could lose access to helpful and even life-saving content.”2

This is exactly what dozens of human rights, civil liberties, racial justice, and LGBTQ+ groups have been saying for years about why KOSA’s duty of care is so dangerous.3

Our grassroots campaign is working and it's getting the attention of top lawmakers. Can you help us continue the fight to ensure that KOSA is only passed if it gets fixed?

Donate

Pallone rightly went on to say that he doesn’t trust Big Tech companies to make determinations about what types of content recommendations cause mental health disorders, noting that our understanding of the science in this area is still evolving.

Here’s what this means:

It’s working. Your phone calls, emails, the videos you’ve made and shared, the small $5 and $10 donations that enable us to run online campaigns, display your comments on billboards in DC4, and keep the media and lawmakers staff as informed as possible about our concerns have made KOSA less likely to pass, at least not without major changes. The top Democrat on the House committee is speaking out against it,  and that wouldn’t have happened without all of our work together.

We still have a ton of work to do. Rep. Pallone’s alternative proposal is to try to address the harms of Big Tech by going after Section 2305, which would lead to many of the same harms he’s worried about with KOSA’s duty of care. So we still have to work to educate his staff and other members on and off the committee, and drive emails and phone calls urging Congress to adopt strong privacy and antitrust protections instead of stalling out again and again with bills like KOSA and EARN IT that raise serious human rights concerns. APRA, the privacy bill that also advanced at the hearing, has some positive features, but there’s a lot of work needed to make it strong enough to actually protect the most vulnerable people.

KOSA could still pass, and we need to keep up the pressure. Despite the surprise blowback KOSA faced at last week’s hearing, the subcommittee still voted to advance it to a full committee vote. That means it’s one step closer to passing, and there is still a very real possibility that it could be snuck into a “must-pass” funding bill like the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). There is a big push from backers of KOSA including full page ads, op-eds in major papers, and several large tech companies have already come out in support of it. We have to take it seriously as an ongoing threat.

There is also still a chance that KOSA could be amended to address our concerns. Senator Wyden has proposed some helpful amendments. One of the good parts of KOSA is its ban on targeted advertising to kids. That could be imported into a strengthened version of APRA, for example, while leaving the harmful duty of care model behind. There are lots of ways Congress can address the harms of Big Tech and protect kids without enabling censorship and surveillance.

So, we gained some ground, but the fight is far from over. If you’ve read this far, you must understand how important this is. If you’re in a position to donate, please click here.

Help stop KOSA

If not, seriously don’t worry about it. We’ve all been there. Thank you so much for being part of this movement demanding Internet policies that don’t throw marginalized people under the bus. We can fight for an Internet where kids aren’t just safe, but have basic human rights, and the ability to speak out and shape the world around them. 

Let’s do it,

Evan at ❤️ Fight for the Future

https://energycommerce.house.gov/events/innovation-data-and-commerce-subcommittee-markup-of-three-bills

https://www.techpolicy.press/house-energy-commerce-subcommittee-markup-of-the-american-privacy-rights-act-kids-online-safety-act/

https://www.stopkosa.com/

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/news/2024-05-22-listen-to-kids-billboard-outside-house-hearing-raises-up-voices-of-lgbtq-youth-who-oppose-kosa/

https://touchgrass.fightforthefuture.org/unserious-attempt-1-562-to-rollback-section-230/

Fight for the Future, PO Box 55071 #95005, Boston, MA 02205  Don't like these emails? Unsubscribe.

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Fight for the Future, please click here.

[saywhat-politics]

Jan. 2, 2025, 7:21 PM MST / Updated Jan. 2, 2025, 7:53 PM MST

By Zoë Richards

A judicial organization that sets national policy for federal courts has rejected a request from two Democratic lawmakers to refer Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to the Justice Department over free travel and gifts from wealthy benefactors that were largely omitted from his financial disclosure forms.

The group, the Judicial Conference, sent identical letters Thursday to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., who chairs the Judiciary subcommittee on federal courts, and Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., the ranking member of the Judiciary subcommittee on courts, who asked it in 2023 to refer Thomas to the attorney general for investigation following a ProPublica report on free travel and gifts to Thomas by billionaire Harlan Crow and others.

Judicial Conference Secretary Robert J. Conrad Jr. said Thomas had filed amended financial disclosures "that address several issues identified in your letter" and argued that there is legal uncertainty over whether the Judicial Conference has the authority to refer complaints about Supreme Court justices.

[writing-with-olive]

How to call your representatives in 10 minutes or less

1: Pick a bill you want to call about. If you don't have one off the top of your head, go to your state's legislature website or congress.gov and type in a keyword about a topic you're interested in, and pick one that looks of note to you.

2: Check if the bill is in the house or senate (HB means house bill unless it's already passed and is now in the senate, vice versa for SB)

3: Figure out who's your representative(s) in that chamber. State sites will have a "who's my representative" field somewhere, and you can find your federal reps here. Put their contacts into your phone so you don't have to do this step again

4a: If you want to, you can stop here and go ahead and call your representative. You can come up with an elaborate script if you want, but my conversations often go like this if I have not checked whether or not my rep is on the subcommittee where the bill's probably sitting at. It rarely goes over 2.5 minutes

Staffer: Hello, this is the office of [lawmaker]. Me: Hi, I'm calling as a constituent of [lawmaker] about [house/senate bill, bill number, bill name]. I wanted to express my [support/lack of support] for it, and was hoping you could pass along the message to [lawmaker] that as [his/her] constituent I would like [her/him] to vote [in favor/against] [bill name]. Staffer: Thank you so much for calling and voicing your opinion. I will let you know that the bill is currently [insert information about what subcommittee it's stuck in], but when it comes down for a floor vote, I'll be sure your voice is heard in the discussion. Can I get your name, and a phone number or email address? Me: My name is [name], my phone number is [number I called them from] Them: Alright, well thank you again for calling in today, and I'll be sure to pass this along Me: Thank you so much. Have a good day Staffer: You too, bu-bye *hangs up*

note: they are legally obligated to tally a yea/nae count of constituents calling/writing in and have to share it with reps

4b: If you want to call about bills that your representative currently has some direct sway over, check what subcommittees they're a part of. If you type their name in to this site and scroll down, you can find a list.

5: On the bill, there will be a line (or tab) that says activity, and says where it was most recently referred to, and see if one of your rep's subcommittee assignments is on there

6a: If they're on that subcommittee, great! go ahead and call using the same script as above

6b: If they're not on that subcommittee, click the "get alerts" button to get automatic updates if movement happens, or set a reminder to check back later and see if it's moved

[angst-fairy]

HEY, Important! READ!

KOSA is a national bill in the USA getting ever closer to passing. This bill is not being thoroughly discussed, but is still passing through voice votes. This bill has a lot of important parts in it that are not properly defined, which would make it very easy for major Tech Companies to abuse it, especially by attacking marginalized communities with it. We all know many communities typically discriminated against, are home to people, especially youth, who face mental health problems and/or abuse. This bill could cause tech companies to censor content that gives support to at risk people, whether out of fear or purposeful discrimination against such people. KOSA as it is could cause an incredible amount of harm, and not just to ones who live in the USA. Companies would likely censor content that could be considered "controversial" in any place there content is seen, not just the US. Suicide rates among marginalized communities have shown to be considerably higher than that among the general population time and time again. If KOSA passes, I believe it is extremely likely that the current suicide rate will rise even higher, especially among youth. KOSA would also result in many challenges for small businesses, as they would have to navigate through the legal walls and censorship that will be placed in front of them. Politicians have tried to threaten big companies, especially tech companies, for many years and KOSA has been made with similar purpose. Small businesses could very easily be caught in a tug-of-war they do not have the ability to navigate correctly.

The government is meant to help and protect civilians, but have proven to do the opposite many times before. WE have a voice, and it is not too late to use it! There are some politicians who want to and have listened to us before, we just need to keep telling them.

Please read the websites below for more information, especially the highlighted ones:

https://energycommerce.house.gov/events/innovation-data-and-commerce-subcommittee-markup-of-three-bills

https://www.techpolicy.press/house-energy-commerce-subcommittee-markup-of-the-american-privacy-rights-act-kids-online-safety-act/

https://www.stopkosa.com/ GO HERE TO HELP FIGHT WITH AN EMAIL AND CALL TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVE!

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/news/2024-05-22-listen-to-kids-billboard-outside-house-hearing-raises-up-voices-of-lgbtq-youth-who-oppose-kosa/

https://touchgrass.fightforthefuture.org/unserious-attempt-1-562-to-rollback-section-230/

[darkmaga-returns]

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) released a second interim report on Tuesday addressing the events surrounding January 6, 2021.

The report not only highlighted widespread failures but also issued damning allegations against key members of the now-disbanded January 6 Committee.

“This interim report reveals that there was not just one single cause for what happened at the U.S. Capitol on January 6; but it was a series of intelligence, security, and leadership failures at several levels and numerous entities,” Loudermilk said.

The most explosive revelation from Loudermilk’s report pertains to the conduct of Liz Cheney. The report alleges that Cheney personally coached the committee’s so-called “star witness,” Cassidy Hutchinson, to alter her testimony—without Hutchinson’s attorney present.

Witness tampering is a federal crime.

Now we know why the sham committee deleted their communications from the public.

They all should be looking at prison time.

[mightyflamethrower]

What's a Little Creepy About the FBI's Arrest Warrant for a Blaze News Reporter

We have another instance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation going off the reservation. A Blaze News reporter who has done a couple of stories on the January 6 riot, which embarrassed the Justice Department, will be forced to turn himself in on Friday. Steve Baker has cooperated with the Justice Department, which has had Baker on their radar for months.  

The creepy part about this story is that this reporter doesn’t know what charges he’s facing. The FBI has instructed him to wear clothing that suggests he’ll be forced to wear an orange jumpsuit. However, the Justice Department told Baker and his legal team that misdemeanors were the only charges facing the journalist. The outlet had all the details about the legal drama in a lengthy post, including the stories that might have painted a target on Baker’s back 

"They didn’t have to go this route," Baker told Blaze News on Tuesday evening. "We have been told that my charges are only misdemeanors. And my attorneys have been assured that this will be an ‘in and out’ affair with 'no intention' to detain me. But rather than issuing a simple order to appear, they went the 'arrest warrant' route."  What's more, Baker said he still does not know what the charges against him are, noting to Blaze News that the powers that be won't tell his attorney about the charges because they believe Baker will post them on social media.  Baker's Dallas attorney, James Lee Bright, added to Blaze News that withholding the nature of the charges against his client is a "really unusual" move. Bright also said he's hoping to get a copy of the complaint against Baker as early as possible Friday morning.  […]  Bright told Blaze News that he's "disturbed" about what's transpiring with his client, especially given that Baker has been "in full compliance" all this time. Bright also said the federal government "three-plus years later going after people who were legitimate functioning journalists that day" appears designed to have an "absolute chilling effect."  […]  Baker added that when he asked his other attorney, William Shipley, why the federal government is treating him like this, Shipley replied, "You know why. You've been poking them in the eye for three years" 

Baker's first Jan. 6 analysis for Blaze News came last October, following countless hours in a House subcommittee office looking at frame after frame of Jan. 6 closed-circuit video — and it had him wondering: did Capitol Police Special Agent David Lazarus perjure himself in the Oath Keepers trial? 

Soon after, the slow pace of getting an unrestricted look at everything recorded on video prompted Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson's appeal to House Speaker Mike Johnson to release all the videos. On Nov. 17, Johnson did just that. 

Baker's investigative efforts also resulted in two additional analyses, both focusing on Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn: "January 6 and the N-word that wasn't" and "Harry Dunn's account of January 6 does not add up. At all." 

In December, Baker alleged he uncovered major irregularities involving Dunn, Capitol Police, the press, and U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland). 

In January, Baker asserted that just-released U.S. Capitol closed-circuit TV video clips from Jan. 6 show Lazarus gave false testimony in the Oath Keepers trial. 

Like Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Alex Gutentag, Baker also touched upon the curious case of the January 6 pipe bomber and the alleged targeting of the Republican National Committee, wherein new evidence suggests that the RNC was not the target. The FBI might have misrepresented the location of the supposed explosive device, which a then-FBI contractor discovered. 

The FBI has harassed and targeted pro-life activists, so going after reporters who have questioned their narratives about some highly politicized stories isn’t shocking. The Obama CIA and DOJ colluded to manufacture a fake narrative about Russian collusion against Donald Trump. The FBI made up evidence to justify an illegal FISA spy warrant against Trump campaign officials. The FBI and the Secret Service appear to be engaged in a cover-up regarding the ever-elusive pipe bomber who cannot be found. They can find hundreds who entered the Capitol building that day, but not this guy.  

[yusuke-of-valla]

Hey there might be some good news in this shitty shitty AI week.

Ah wait shit first let me:

Per author Kate Nibbs:

"Today, at a Senate hearing on AI’s impact on journalism, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle agreed that OpenAI and others should pay media outlets for using their work in AI projects. “It’s not only morally right,” said Richard Blumenthal, the Democrat who chairs the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law that held the hearing. “It’s legally required.”

Josh Hawley, a Republican working with Blumenthal on AI legislation, agreed. “It shouldn’t be that just because the biggest companies in the world want to gobble up your data, they should be able to do it,” he said."

Try and keep an eye on this story, if it's gonna cost them money to steal other people's work that will put a significant dent in AI

[dertaglichedan]

Here Are The Top 10 Lies Of Liz Cheney And The January 6th Committee

A look at the top 10 lies of Liz Cheney and the January 6th Committee four years after the Capitol demonstrations.

Disgraced ex-Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney was awarded one of the highest civilian honors last week after House Republicans referred the vice chair of the since-disbanded Select Committee on Jan. 6 to the Justice Department for criminal charges.

On Thursday, President Joe Biden presented Cheney with the Presidential Medal of Freedom along with Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who chaired the Democrats’ Soviet-style inquisition on the Capitol riot, for their work running the probe. In December, however, the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight led by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., released a nearly 130-page review of the Jan. 6 Committee���s work, concluding Cheney should face a criminal investigation for “witness tampering.”

“Evidence uncovered by the Subcommittee revealed that former Congresswoman Liz Cheney tampered with at least one witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, by secretly communicating with Hutchinson without Hutchinson’s attorney’s knowledge,” the report said. Cheney had coordinated to circumvent Hutchinson’s attorney even as the vice chair of the Jan. 6 panel threatened legal action against anyone who attempted to influence witness testimony. The textbook case of projection was just one in a series of episodes wherein House investigators deputized by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi concealed truths surrounding the riot on Jan. 6.

1. January 6th Was An ‘Insurrection’

FULL STORY

[humanspaceflightday]

Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session, 1070 meeting.

Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session.

Watch Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, 63rd session, 1070 meeting!

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Brandi Buchman at HuffPost:

A four-part appendix detailing more about former President Donald Trump’s alleged criminal attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election hit the public record on Friday. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan approved the public release on the federal criminal docket in Washington, D.C., late Thursday, following weeks of Trump requesting to keep the appendix out of the public eye. Trump told the judge on Oct. 10 he needed more time to weigh his “litigation options” if she decided to admit the source materials publicly, arguing they could be damaging to jurors and the integrity of the case. Chutkan agreed to give him one week to respond and make his arguments at blocking the release. He filed a last-ditch motion early Thursday asking for more time, but was denied.

The appendix is split into four parts with sensitive information redacted. The four volumes total more than 1,800 pages. Volume I is mostly transcripts of interviews with witnesses who testified before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. There is a new detail in this first volume that stands out, however: testimony before the Jan. 6 committee from a White House valet to Trump. The valet told the committee that on Jan. 6, when Trump was preparing to watch playback of his speech as violence erupted, Trump asked him if his “speech was cut off.” The valet told the committee that he tried to explain to Trump that it had been. [...]

The version published in March by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), the chair of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, redacted the section where the valet tells investigators that after Trump said “let’s go see” when he was told that his speech was cut off, the valet took off Trump’s outer coat, got a television ready for him and handed him a remote. “And he starts watching it. And I stepped out to get him a Diet Coke, come back in, and that’s pretty much it for me as he’s watching it and like, seeing it for himself,” the valet testified, according to Smith’s version.

The Republican version of the transcript also redacted when congressional investigators next asked the valet: “So, you set up the TV. Did you set it up for him to watch his speech or live coverage of what was happening at the Capitol?” “Typically, that’s — a lot of times he’s in that back dining room a lot,” the valet said. The contents of the transcript with the valet cut off here in Smith’s appendix once investigators asked the valet if he knew, in fact, whether Trump was watching the events at the Capitol. Volume I also contains a previously public transcript in which Jan. 6 committee investigators ask a witness about whether Trump’s Jan. 6 speech draft was something his staffers categorized as “political” or “official.”

[...] Another transcript in the first volume features testimony from Greg Jacob, former Vice President Mike Pence’s legal counsel. The transcript in the Smith appendix redacts Jacob’s name, but a side-by-side comparison by HuffPost of the Jan. 6 committee transcript and the one Chutkan published Friday, confirms it is him. Here the material Smith attaches to his immunity arguments zeroes in on testimony in which Jacob told the Jan. 6 committee about attempts by Trump darling and “coup memo” author John Eastman to convince Pence and Pence’s staff that a vice president had the constitutional authority to count slates and object to them. This meant, according to Eastman, that anything in the existing legislation that governed the count, like the Electoral Count Act, was unconstitutional.

[...]

Volume II is heavily redacted and primarily features tweets from Trump in which he said there had been pervasive voter fraud in battleground states and called on state and election officials to address it. In tweets from November 2020, including on and around Election Day, Trump calls on the Supreme Court to decide the outcome or alleges that fraud in those battleground states is an “unsolvable problem.” The records show how officials including Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt were forced to directly rebut Trump’s bunk claims online but often with demonstrably less effect on social media, given Trump’s reach on Twitter.

The tweets and retweets relate, in part, to Smith’s allegation that Trump was exacting a pressure campaign on election officials predicated on information he knew to be false and despite being told numerous times after Election Day that the election had been the most secure in history. Chris Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, made that announcement on Nov. 13. Former Attorney General William Barr would declare publicly on Dec. 1 that there was no evidence of voter fraud. None of that deterred Trump from pursuing his conspiracy theories, according to prosecutors. This volume also shows tweets in which Trump calls on people to come to Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, and not just the first time, Dec. 19, 2020, when he blasted out the invite to his “wild” rally. Smith’s appendix shows Chutkan that Trump sent out the call multiple times in December, including on Dec. 30, when he wrote, “JANUARY SIXTH, SEE YOU IN DC!”

[...] Volume III has sections from Pence’s book, “So Help Me God.” Prosecutors highlighted certain passages in which Pence’s describes trying to console a despondent Trump over his defeat and Pence’s own awareness at the time that if there had been any voter fraud, it wasn’t enough to cost Republicans the 2020 election. Other sections feature Pence’s recollection of Trump’s repeated calls to him on the eve of the U.S. Capitol attack. “You gotta be tough tomorrow,” Pence recalled Trump telling him. There are transcripts from court hearings in the third appendix, including a portion of one that took place in Arizona’s Maricopa County, where Trump and his cohorts peddled a fake elector scheme. Other transcripts come straight from political speeches Trump gave, including one on Jan. 4, 2021, when he endorsed Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue before a Georgia runoff election. Trump spent much of that rally talking about his own reelection campaign and claiming the presidential vote had been rigged.

[...] Volume IV contains information that is mostly already in the public record and was obtained through the House Jan. 6 committee. Much of this 384-page document is redacted and it doesn’t offer much new to pore over. There are letters and emails already on the record about the strategy to advance fake electors as well as Pence’s letter issued on Jan. 6, 2021, stating that he did not have unilateral authority to determine which electoral slates should be counted. It also includes a transcript of a town hall from May 2023 in which Trump defended his remarks made at the rally on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021, and denied telling people to march to the Capitol that day. The next big deadline Trump must meet in the election subversion case arrives Nov. 7, when he must reply to the 165-page immunity brief special counsel Jack Smith filed on Oct. 2. When he does, it is expected that Trump’s lawyers will emphasize that Trump genuinely believed there was widespread voter fraud and that he acted with the interest of the nation first to reverse his defeat.

[...] The Supreme Court’s ruling granted presidents absolute immunity for their core acts and “presumptive” immunity for all other official acts. But actions outside of core acts are not given this protection.

On Friday, more January 6th-related evidence that Insurrection-Inciter Donald Trump and his allies tried to keep from being revealed came out in the open in a 4-part appendix totaling more than 1,800 pages by Judge Tanya Chutkan.

See Also:

AP, via The Guardian: Judge in Trump election interference case unseals trove of documents

[beardedmrbean]

Thousands of Chinese migrants flew into Ecuador last year in hopes of walking into the US.

But Ecuador is now cutting its yearslong visa-free access to Chinese citizens after a surge in migrants.

The number of Chinese people detained at the US border in 2023 surged to 10 times compared to 2022.

Ecuador is suspending visa-free access for Chinese travelers starting July 1, closing off a popular arrival spot used last year by thousands of Chinese migrants trekking to the US-Mexico border.

Since 2016, Ecuador has allowed Chinese nationals to enter its borders without a visa and stay for up to 90 days.

But in a statement on Tuesday seen by Business Insider, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Human Mobility said it was ending the program "due to the unusual increase in irregular migratory flows of Chinese citizens" who overstayed their 90 days.

It is only one of two nations in the Americas that offers visa-free access to Chinese nationals. The other is Suriname, a smaller country of about 618,000 people.

The Ecuadorian ministry noted that about 50% of all Chinese arrivals "have not left through regular routes and within the times established by law."

Many people have used the country as a "starting point to reach other destinations in the Hemisphere," the ministry added.

The Niskanen Center assessed in May that Chinese travelers entered Ecuador 48,381 times in 2023 but only left the country legally 24,240 times that year. The deficit was "by far the highest number of any nationality," the US think tank wrote.

It comes amid a surge in Chinese arrivals that year, with a 235% increase compared to the previous five-year average, per the Niskanen Center.

The visa-free access recently made Ecuador a major entry point into the Americas for Chinese migrants looking to travel through Central America and reach the US-Mexico border.

In response to Ecuador's Tuesday decision, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said the country "firmly opposes any form of smuggling activities."

"In recent years, Chinese law enforcement agencies have cracked down on crimes that hinder national border management and have maintained a high-pressure crackdown on various smuggling organizations and criminals engaged in smuggling activities, achieving remarkable results," the spokesperson said.

How Chinese migrants use Ecuador to get to the US

Thousands of migrants fly into Ecuador before traveling through Columbia, where they undertake a grueling trek through a perilous, cartel-run stretch of jungle called the Darién Gap.

If successful, they emerge in Panama. Over 15,500 Chinese migrants were counted exiting the Darién Gap in 2023, per Washington-based think tank The Wilson Center.

"This figure is nearly eight times as many from the same period in 2022 and more than 40 times that of 2021," wrote Joshua Peng, a program associate in refugee and displacement research at The Wilson Center.

Many migrants then travel to Mexico, attempting to reach the US through its southern border.

US border officials said they detained 37,000 Chinese migrants attempting to cross the border in 2023, or 10 times the number detained in the year before. The true number of those attempting to cross the border is likely higher.

The flow of Chinese migrants continued to surge in 2024, with CBS reporting in February that it observed 600 migrants, many of whom were Chinese, entering the US in a single day.

The House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability said in May that the number of Chinese nationals encountered by authorities at the US border in March had jumped 8,000% from the same period in 2021.

Illegal immigration from the southern border has been rising in political prominence in the US, with Republican leaders pushing for increased border security and saying southern states are unable to cope with a surge in migrants.

Data on Chinese arrivals in Ecuador give some clues to the demographics of migrants reaching the US. According to the Niskanen Center, Shanghai is the Chinese region with the highest per-capita rate of people leaving to reach Ecuador, with 274 arrivals for every 1 million people in Shanghai.

Hong Kong is second, with 257 arrivals per 1 million people, followed by Beijing, with 161 arrivals per 1 million people. Xinjiang is sixth, with 24 arrivals per 1 million people.

[importantwomensbirthdays]

Lesia Vasylenko

Lesia Vasylenko was born in 1987 in Kyiv, Ukraine. Vasylenko has been a member of Ukraine's Parliament since 2019, where she chairs the Subcommittee on Climate Change. She is the founder of Legal Hundred, an organization providing support and legal assistance to veterans. By 2016, Legal Hundred had grown into Ukraine's largest military law organization. It also worked with the Ministry of Social Policy on the rehabilitation of veterans. Since the war in Ukraine began in 2022, Vasylenko has become one of Ukraine's most prominent voices in international platforms.