Rent Strikes Being Used as a Strategic Tactic in Mid Sized Cities Against Rising Housing Costs

The rent strike is part of a strategy that housing activists have started to replicate in midsize cities across the country. Tenant organizing is more common in liberal coastal metropolises like Los Angeles and New York — which recently elected Zohran Mamdani, a former tenant organizer, as its mayor.

But rent strikes have been almost unheard of in places like Kansas City, Missouri, where according to Zillow the median rent increased 4.4 percent in the last year, twice the rate of the national average. Now, tenants in at least three buildings around the city have formed unions. Similar groups have popped up in Bozeman, Montana; Louisville; and New Haven, Connecticut.

The country’s renters are at a “total breaking point,” said Tara Raghuveer, founding director of the Kansas City Tenants Union, also known as KC Tenants, an activist group. “When you get displaced from Chicago as a tenant, you might end up in a place like Kansas City. When you get displaced from Kansas City, you might end up in a Raytown, Missouri. When you get displaced in Raytown, Missouri, I do not know where … you’re supposed to go.” [MORE]

DPIC Report says US Juries Increasingly Rejecting Death Penalty

From [HERE] The Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) released its annual report Monday, finding that, while the number of executions in the US increased last year, the number of new death sentences decreased. The following is an overview of the report’s key findings.

Death Sentences Decline, Executions Rise

The report drew a contrast between new death sentences and number of executions, with the former totaling 22 and the latter 48. The executive director of the DPIC, Robin Maher, commented that this suggests “new death sentences are becoming vanishingly rare.”

Executions Concentrated in a Few States

Four states—Florida, Alabama, South Carolina and Texas—imposed the majority of death penalty sentences (72 percent). Florida enacted by far the most, increasing from one execution in 2024 to 19 in 2025, which made up over a third of executions overall.

The death penalty is legal in 27 states in total.

Public Opinion Increasingly Against the Death Penalty

Polling demonstrates that support for the death penalty is at an all-time low, with 52 percent being in favor. This figure is lower amongst those under 55. A shift in public opinion is also suggested by the actions of capital juries, with 56 percent proposing a life sentence over a death sentence when given the choice (from a study of over 50 juries.) [MORE]

Trump Takes Positive Step by Changing Marijuana Classification from Schedule I to Schedule III- as Drug is Less Dangerous than Alcohol

From [HERE] President Trump recently signed an executive order changing marijuana’s Controlled Substances Act classification from Schedule I to Schedule III. Schedule I is supposed to include especially dangerous drugs that are likely to be abused and have no medical purpose. Whatever one thinks of the wisdom and morality of using marijuana, the fact is it is less addictive, and quite possibly safer, than alcohol. Many Americans who live in one of the 40 states that have legalized medicinal marijuana use it for a variety of ailments.

Reclassifying marijuana does not repeal federal laws criminalizing its use. The reclassifying does, though, facilitate research into marijuana’s medical benefits. It also enables marijuana businesses that are legal under state laws to take ordinary deductions on their taxes. While President Trump’s executive order is a step forward, those who support advancing liberty must continue to press for repeal of all federal drug laws.

The Constitution does not give the federal government any authority to outlaw marijuana or any other “illicit” substance. At least supporters of alcohol prohibition understood that a constitutional amendment was needed to impose a national ban on alcohol. The war on drugs has been a primary excuse for violations of liberties including unconstitutional searches and seizures, “no-knock raids,” bank reports to the federal government on those making large cash deposits, and draconian mandatory minimum sentences. The drug war has also been used to justify foreign interventions — such as President Trump’s current actions against Venezuela.

Defenders of the drug war say it is necessary because the drug trade is controlled by violent criminals — even though this is the inevitable result of outlawing a product people wish to consume. The most important reason to end the drug war is that government has no moral right to stop adults from engaging in a peaceful (even if unwise) behavior like smoking marijuana. Laws prohibiting drug use have no place in a free society. These laws are rooted in the idea that our rights are merely gifts from the government conditioned on our “good “behavior. A government that can stop people from smoking marijuana is a government that can also mandate what vaccines we receive and how our children are educated.

Of course, in a free society, an individual who uses drugs would be responsible for the consequences of his choices, and those who oppose drug use could exercise their right to try to persuade others to abstain from drug use. [MORE]

Dr Vernon Coleman: Obedience will Destroy us All

From [HERE] For more years than most people realise, the conspirators have been training the masses to obey and to comply. They have used endless threats (such as global warming and the fake covid pandemic) to terrify populations around the world.

We cannot fight back with force because the enemy controls our armies.

Throwing apple crumble and custard at the crown jewels, delaying traffic, interrupting sporting events and throwing dye onto the stones of Stonehenge either annoy or trigger contempt. (All of these have been tried.) Such pathetic stunts will not change anything.

We cannot fight back through the ballot box because elections are fixed and the political parties are interchangeable.

So what can we do? Things are now moving very quickly – especially in Britain, where the massive rise in local property taxes means that banks have an excuse to close the remainder of the branches – making online banking inevitable.

A programme of non-compliance is our only choice – the only route to victory.

Here’s how the modern defender of freedom does not comply with the system created by the conspirators (please replace “he” with “she” where appropriate):

He doesn’t vote for any political party. He will always prefer to vote for an entirely independent candidate outside the system.

He refuses to bank online. He insists on using cash and paper cheques as often as possible.

He refuses to accept a digital identity.

He has never worn a face mask in private or in public.

He refused the covid vaccine (and other vaccines he is offered).

He writes regularly to politicians explaining why they should oppose “death by doctor” legislation. (I send them my free book `The Kill Bill’, which is available on my website).

He does not participate in the absurdly wasteful recycling programmes run by local councils.

He does not have a smart meter for electricity or water. (If you have a smart meter, you are vulnerable. If you annoy the authorities, they can cut off your electricity in an instant.)

He does not have a doorbell with a camera (most such bells merely provide the authorities with yet more surveillance cameras).

He will never have a dash camera and if he rides a bike, he won’t have a helmet camera (these are part of the surveillance of the people).

He does not have a TV licence, and if anyone comes from the BBC (“if you don’t give us money for something you don’t want, we will harass you to death”), he will refuse to let them through the door (as is his right).

He uses cash whenever he can. [MORE]

US Supreme Court Blocks Trump's Unlawful Deployment of National Guard to Chicago; "no credible evidence that there is danger of rebellion in the state of Illinois”

From [HERE] The US Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago.

In an unsigned order, the court rejected the administration’s petition to overturn a Temporary Restraining Order(TRO) issued in October by Judge April Perry of the Northern District of Illinois. Perry wrote that there is “no credible evidence that there is danger of rebellion in the state of Illinois” when issuing the TRO that originally blocked the National Guard deployment.

The Trump administration appealed the TRO to the Supreme Court after an appellate court refused to overturn the order later in October. In its petition, the administration argued that:

Federal immigration-enforcement efforts have encountered significant resistance, as well as some violence, in Chicago… [F]ederal officers have been obstructed, threatened, and assaulted as they attempt to perform their duties [and] an Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing facility in Broadview, Illinois, has been the site of frequent and sometimes violent protests, damaging federal property and threatening the safety of federal officers.

In the unsigned order the Court responded: “At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois. The President has not invoked a statute that provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act.” The administration has sought to circumvent the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the president’s ability use the military as a domestic police force.

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker called the ruling “an important step in curbing the Trump Administration’s consistent abuse of power and slowing Trump’s march toward authoritarianism.”

The deployment of National Guard troops has been one of the more controversial elements of the administration’s response to illegal immigration.

The administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court was filed after the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the part of Judge Perry’s order that blocked the administration from deploying the National Guard within Illinois. [MORE]

MD General Assembly Overrides Wes Moore’s Veto on Reparations Commission. Nations Only Black Governor Promotes the On Going Smiling Face while Opposing Restitution Owed to Blacks for Unjust Enrichment

From [HERE] Studies on reparations and climate change in Maryland now won’t have to clear major state legislative hurdles, thanks to the General Assembly’s override of a slew of bills on Tuesday.

The overrides took place after the Maryland General Assembly convened to elect Del. Joseline Peña-Melnyk, D-Anne Arundel and Prince George’s counties, the new Speaker of the House of Delegates. The lawmakers reconsidered various bills vetoed by Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, before ultimately overriding 18, including notable legislation to establish the Maryland Reparations Commission. 

The bill, a priority of the Legislative Black Caucus during the 2025 regular legislative session, would establish the commission to take two years to delve into research to determine if Marylanders whose families were impacted by slavery or unjust government policies should receive reparations.

Moore shocked the legislature when he, the state’s first Black governor, vetoed the legislation, which passed with overwhelming Democratic approval in both chambers. This move was part of a broader break from his norm: In past years, he only vetoed a handful of bills after each session. In 2025, though, he prevented 29 from becoming law.

“I will always protect and defend the full history of African Americans in our state and country,” Moore said in his May letter vetoing the reparations commission bill. “But in light of the many important studies that have taken place on this issue over nearly three decades, now is the time to focus on the work itself: Narrowing the racial wealth gap, expanding homeownership, uplifting entrepreneurs of color, and closing the foundational disparities that lead to inequality — from food insecurity to education.”

Arguing for the override in his chamber, Sen. Charles Sydnor, D-Baltimore County, said reversing Moore’s veto “does not stop the governor from acting on those topics he has expressed support for.”

“The recommendations will ensure that, when Maryland acts specifically in the name of reparations, it does so with clarity, credibility and permanence,” he said. “If the legislature or community leaders want a durable, defensible roadmap for redress, a focused commission remains the appropriate mechanism to convert fragment studies into coordinated recommendations.”

No further debate took place in the chamber after Sydnor sat down. The veto was overridden on a margin of 31-14. [MORE]

More Symbolic Politics from Elite White Liberals: San Francisco Mayor Creates a Fund for Reparations but Government Has No Money to Fund It

From [HERE] The mayor of San Francisco has signed a city measure to create a fund that could grant each of the city’s eligible black residents $5 million in reparations.

The new ordinance, signed by Mayor Daniel Lurie just before Christmas, establishes a reparations fund, as proposed by the city’s African American Reparations Advisory Committee (AARAC) in 2023 – a measure that would cost an estimated $50 billion.

The legislation merely establishes the fund but does not allocate any money to it - setting up the framework for any future contributions, whether they be through the city or privately donated.

The AARAC is tasked with developing 'recommendations for repairing harm in our black communities,' according to its website.  San Francisco journalist Erica Sandberg was among the first to highlight what Mayor Lurie had done. 

Per the 2023 report, every eligible African-American adult in San Francisco should be handed a $5 million lump sum to 'compensate the affected population for the decades of harm that they have experienced.' Approximately 50,000 black people live in San Francisco, and the qualifying requirements remain unclear.

But Mayor Lurie said the city is bracing for a $1 billion budget deficit next year.

'That means identifying key priorities for funding so we can continue delivering those services well,' he explained. 

'Given these historic fiscal challenges, the city does not have resources to allocate to this fund.'

He noted that his administration has always been open to outside donors, so 'if there is private funding that can be legally dedicated to this fund, we stand ready to ensure that funding gets to those who are eligible for it.' [MORE]

DOJ Sues Virgin Islands Police Over its Purposeful Gun Permit Delays

From [HERE] The Department of Justice has slammed another police agency for dragging its feet on issuing gun permits, this time in the Virgin Islands, declaring in a 12-page federal complaint, “Despite the Supreme Court’s unequivocal and repeated endorsement of an individual right to keep and bear arms…the VI Defendants have continued to obstruct and systematically deny law-abiding American citizens this fundamental right by systematically delaying the processing of applications and imposing unconstitutional conditions on the exercise of this constitutional right.”

Named as defendants in the action are the government of the Virgin Islands, the Virgin Islands Police Department (VIPD) and Police Commissioner Mario Brooks, in his official capacity.

In a prepared statement announcing the lawsuit, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said, “This Civil Rights Division will protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The newly-established Second Amendment Section filed this lawsuit to bring the Virgin Islands Police Department back into legal compliance by ensuring that applicants receive timely decisions without unconstitutional obstruction.”

Earlier, the DOJ sued the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for essentially the same thing: deliberately delaying the issuance of carry licenses, sometimes for more than a year. This new action suggests the new 2A Section will be focusing attention on the permit processes, although gun rights organizations, such as the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, have recommended the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division take on some bigger issues, such as state laws which do, or will, require permits-to-purchase before law-abiding citizens can exercise their right to buy and own a firearm.

“Nowhere in this country should a citizen be forced to get permission from a government entity in order to exercise a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution and delineated in nearly all state constitutions,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Nobody needs government permission to exercise a right.”

In a statement, U.S. Attorney Adam Sleeper, who filed the federal complaint in U.S. District Court of the Virgin Islands, St. Thomas and St. John Division, asserted, “The territory’s firearms licensing laws and practices are inconsistent with the Second Amendment. This lawsuit seeks to uphold the rights of law-abiding citizens to bear arms in the U.S. Virgin Islands.” [MORE]

Rep Pressley pushes AI Civil Rights Act, aimed to ‘especially’ protect Black, Brown and marginalized people

Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., helped advocate for the AI Civil Rights Act last week in order to prevent companies from using what Democrats describe as "biased and discriminatory AI-powered algorithms."

Pressley joined Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., and Reps. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., and Summer Lee, D-Pa., to reintroduce and advocate for the AI Civil Rights last week.

"As AI innovation grows, it is incumbent on us all to prioritize the safety, rights, and opportunity of all people — especially the Black, Brown, and marginalized communities who disproportionately bear the burden of biased and discriminatory systems," Pressley said in a statement on her website. "We cannot allow AI to be the latest chapter in America’s history of exploiting marginalized people. That is why the AI Civil Rights Act is necessary — to invest in an approach rooted in equity that safeguards all of our civil rights and liberties."

Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, was quoted in the same piece declaring his organization’s pride in partnering with the politicians pushing this legislation. [MORE]

Black Lawmakers in MD Seek to Create a Commission to Investigate the Deaths of Black Children Killed at a Juvenile Prison and Buried by Gov Authorities in an Abandoned Graveyard

From [HERE] A group of Black Maryland state lawmakers plan to propose a bill during the upcoming legislative session that would create an independent commission to investigate the deaths of hundreds of Black children who died at a segregated juvenile detention facility during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Members of the General Assembly‘s Legislative Black Caucus are drafting a bill that would create the investigative body and allocate $750,000 so the commission can assemble a full accounting of what happened at the House of Reformation and Instruction for Colored Children – where Black boys as young as 7 were committed, typically for minor offenses.

Boys who died at the facility were buried on state-owned land in Cheltenham, near the former House of Reformation. State Sen. William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery) and lawmakers who represent the area in Prince George’s County where the grave site is located, including Del. Jeffrie E. Long Jr. (D-Calvert) and state Sen. Kevin M. Harris (D-Prince George’s), said they will file the bill at the beginning of the legislative session in January.

The third-party nature of the commission is essential, Smith said, “because no agency and no entity can investigate itself.”

“The independent investigation will do a very thorough analysis and inquiry into some things that will ultimately and undoubtedly be uncomfortable to learn,” Smith said. “And to have that information presented in an unbiased and unvarnished manner is critical to the purpose of this project, which is to provide Marylanders an explanation and understanding of the tragedies that happened here.”

Long, who will sponsor the bill in the House of Delegates, said that since learning about the graveyard earlier this year, he has wanted to make it his “mission” to ensure the House of Reformation boys are properly memorialized.

A Washington Post investigation in September found that for decades, Maryland officials allowed the boys’ unmarked graves to remain dilapidated, even as they approved construction of a well-kept veteran’s cemetery yards away. The reporting also found that at least 230 children died at the facility between 1870 and 1939, far exceeding the 67 previously estimated by the state.

Staff members of Maryland’s Department of Juvenile Services rediscovered about 100 of the graves last year, finding them in an overgrown, wooded patch of state property – many marked only by cinder blocks. Without further forensic and anthropological work at the site, it’s impossible to determine exactly how many children are buried in the House of Reformation graveyard. [MORE]

Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Ordered to Testify in Dutch COVID Shot Injury Lawsuit

From [HERE] Bill Gates and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla will have to appear in person in the Netherlands to testify at a hearing in a COVID-19 vaccine injury lawsuit, a Dutch court ruled late last month.

The court order relates to a lawsuit filed in 2023 by seven people injured by COVID-19 vaccines. One of the victims has since died.

The lawsuit centers around the question “of whether the COVID-19 injections are a bioweapon,” Dutch newspaper De Andere Krant reported. In addition to Gates and Bourla, the suit names 15 other defendants, including former Dutch prime minister and current NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Dutch state, and several Dutch public health officials and journalists.

De Andere Krant said last month’s ruling “is a significant setback for the defendants, who are accused of misleading victims about the ‘safety and effectiveness’ of the vaccines.” However, it “remains to be seen” whether the defendants will comply with the court’s order and appear at next year’s hearing.

The defendants may face additional legal challenges in Dutch courts in the new year. A second lawsuit, filed in March by three COVID-19 vaccine injury victims in the Netherlands, presents a similar set of allegations and names the same defendants.

At a press conference last week, Dutch attorney Peter Stassen, who represents the vaccine-injured plaintiffs in both cases, earlier this month petitioned the courts in both cases to hear in-person testimony by five expert witnesses regarding the safety and efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

According to Stassen, oral hearings will be held in both cases next year, but hearing dates have not yet been scheduled. Stassen seeks to consolidate the cases.

The expert witnesses include:

• Catherine Austin Fitts, founder and publisher of the Solari Report and former assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

• Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical research and development executive.

• Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., a psychotherapist who is litigating to prohibit mRNA vaccines in Florida.

• Katherine Watt, a researcher and paralegal.

• Mike Yeadon, Ph.D., a pharmacologist and former vice president of Pfizer’s allergy and respiratory research unit. [MORE]

"A National Injustice." Large Study Finds that Vaccinated Black Infants Die at Double the Rate of White Infants and All Vaccinated Infants Have a Higher Mortality Rate than Unvaccinated Infants

SEE FULL GRAPH BELOW AND HERE

From [HERE] Infants vaccinated in their second month of life were more likely to die in their third month than unvaccinated infants, according to an analysis of data obtained from the Louisiana Department of Health. Female and Black infants died at higher rates than male or white babies.

Children’s Health Defense scientists Brian Hooker, Ph.D., and Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., conducted the analysis, which was published Monday on Preprints.org.

Depending on which vaccines they received, vaccinated children were between 29%-74% more likely to die than unvaccinated children. Vaccinated Black infants were 28%-74% more likely to die, and vaccinated female infants had a 52%-98% greater risk of death.

Overall, children who received all six vaccines recommended for 2-month-olds were 68% more likely to die in their third month of life, the data showed.

Hooker and Jablonowski determined the death rates by analyzing immunization and mortality records from the Louisiana Department of Health for children who died before age 3 months between 2013 and 2024.

“This very important paper represents one of the first studies on the cumulative effect of vaccinesgiven at 2 months of age following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommended schedule,” Hooker told The Defender.

He added:

“The highest infant mortality rates were seen when children received all six of the recommended vaccines in one visit. In addition to elevated mortality, the vaccination schedule also increased the likelihood that children were more likely to die of non-leading causes of death.

“This type of study is needed to guide the efforts of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and especially the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) as they revisit the recommended schedule.”

Hooker and Jablonowski compared infants vaccinated between 60 and 90 days of life — the window corresponding to the CDC’s recommended 2-month immunization visit — with children who were unvaccinated during that same period. Mortality was defined as death occurring between 90 and 120 days of life.

At the 2-month visit, during the period studied, a CDC-compliant infant would likely have received shots for respiratory syncytial virus or RSV; hepatitis B (Hep B); rotavirus; diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis; Haemophilus influenzae type B; pneumococcal; and poliovirus.

“It is the largest single-day antigenic assault a person is ever likely to encounter in their lifetimes, and may be accompanied with 1.225 mg [milligrams] of aluminum adjuvant … even though the … maximum per-dose limit allowable by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is 0.85mg,” according to the authors.

The infant mortality rate in the U.S. is about 1 in 200. However, “in what amounts to one of the greatest health hazards in the entire country, and a national injustice,” according to the authors, the mortality rate for infants born to Black mothers is approximately 1 in 100 — almost double the national rate.

Major departure from the standard narrative

Public health authorities have long maintained that childhood vaccines are safe and effective and that vaccination prevents far more deaths than it could plausibly cause.

However, some doctors and scientists, including some who spoke at recent ACIP meetings, are beginning to acknowledge that these claims are based on limited evidence, that many vaccines were recommended without sufficient safety data and that the expansion of the childhood schedule coincided with a rise in chronic illness among U.S. children.

The authors said their study — although limited to a few thousand children — is, to date, one of the largest studies of its kind. [MORE]

12 Studies Demonstrate that Unvaccinated Children are Far Healthier Than Vaccinated Children

The USDA Has Approved Dangerous Self-Amplifying mRNA Injections for Dogs & Cats, which can Shed to Humans

Federal Monitor Finds Cleveland Police Nearly Four Times More Likely to Stop Black Drivers, in city controlled by elite white liberals

From [HERE] Cleveland Police disproportionately stop, search and arrest Black Clevelanders compared to other races, according to a new assessment from the monitor overseeing the police consent decree.

“Citywide, Black drivers are stopped by police at nearly twice (1.97 or 197%) the rate you would expect based on their share of the driving population—making up 62.7% of traffic stops but only 31.8% of drivers,” the monitor, Christine Cole, wrote, adding that white drivers make up 31% of stops and 59% of drivers. “Black drivers are more than 3.7 times as likely as White drivers to be stopped by Cleveland police.”

The assessment additionally found Black people were more likely to be searched and more likely to be arrested after a stop.

The monitoring team analyzed documentation from all stops in 2024 and closely scrutinized the reasoning for stops. Subsequent searches or arrests in 376 traffic stops and 255 investigatory stops were also reviewed. [MORE]

San Bernardino DA Declines to Charge Cop who Struck a White Man 16 Times with his Baton, Claims Unprovoked Attack was Valid Violence

From [HERE] The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office has cleared a San Bernardino police officer of criminal wrongdoing after he struck a man 16 times with his baton during the videotaped arrest of a Crestline man in 2024.

Officer Javier Chavez’s “use of force was objectively reasonable and not excessive. It was therefore lawful,” said the DA’s 19-page report, which was released Tuesday, Dec. 2.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that “Reasonableness is an objective analysis and must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. It is also highly deferential to the police officer’s need to protect himself and others.”

Investigators reached their conclusion by reviewing audio and video recordings and written police reports. Investigators did not interview the officers, the suspect or witnesses, the DA’s report said.

That investigation was separate from the internal probe by the Police Department, which determined that Chavez violated department policy. Chavez was suspended and returned to patrol duty after additional training, Chief Darren Goodman said. Chavez was not disciplined for using excessive force, but for something else related to the investigation that Goodman said he could not disclose because it is a personnel matter, Goodman said.

The suspect, Billy Lee Hill, 39, has filed a lawsuit against the city and the three officers he encountered the night of June 6, 2024. Hill alleged excessive force and other civil rights violations. The city, in its response filed with the court, denied the allegations. A mediation session has been scheduled for Dec. 8. [MORE]

The Blight House Admits to Act of Piracy for its Attack and Seizure of Oil Tanker in Caribbean

Honduras Plunges Into Turmoil as Electoral Official Alleges “Monumental Fraud:” Trump’s Threats to Cut Aid and Pardon of a Convicted Drug Trafficker Manipulated Honduras' presidential election

From [HERE] and [HERE] Days removed from Sunday’s presidential vote, and still without a clear winner, Honduras’s post-election crisis became more contentious after a member of the country’s electoral authority denounced “monumental electoral fraud” on Thursday evening.

Marlon Ochoa, a representative for the Libre Party on the three-member National Electoral Council (CNE), alleged coordinated and deliberate electoral fraud carried out by the other council members, Cossette Alejandra López-Osorio of the National Party and Ana Paola Hall of the Liberal Party.

The CNE had claimed in a social media post on Tuesday that the delays in election results were due to technical issues. Two members of the council criticized Grupo ASD S.A.S, the company behind the Transmission and Dissemination of Election Results reporting system (known as TREP), for carrying out software modifications without the unanimous authorization of the council plenary.

But on Thursday, after repeated downtime of the TREP system continued to prevent the public from accessing real-time updates, the Honduran Center for Democracy Studies (CESPAD) issued an alert calling on CNE to take action.

López-Osorio and Hall represent the country’s traditional political parties, both of which were relegated to opposition status when Xiomara Castro won the general election for Libre in 2021. Salvador Nasralla of the Liberal Party has likewise alleged that irregularities may be affecting the results. [MORE]