DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Fox Business host Charles Payne called out the alleged “huge double standard” of President Joe Biden’s family Tuesday by revealing that his brother, who struggles with a crack addiction, is currently serving a jail sentence. Payne said his brother, who is getting out of jail on Friday, is likely one of the first Americans to struggle with an addiction to crack cocaine and may likely start using the substance again once he is free. He accused Biden of participating in elitism in order to save his son from jail time while everyday Americans struggling with addiction have had to face the consequences for their crimes. “Hearing Democrats try to justify what Biden is doing with his son because his son has a drug habit is just heartbreaking,” Payne said on “America’s Newsroom.” “I’m gonna tell you something right now, and I probably shouldn’t say this. My brother’s getting out of jail on Friday. My brother was among the first 100 crack addicts in America. At least the first 1 out of 200. In the hood, when he came upstairs and told us about crack and how great it was, I had never heard of it before. I kind of don’t want him to come out of jail because before he went in, he stopped by my aunt’s house and he didn’t have shoes on in the middle of winter.” WATCH: Payne accused black Democrats of remaining silent on the pardoning of Hunter despite the crack issue being a detriment to their community. “What’s happening with the Biden’s, and this is the ultimate sign of elitism, and just of entitlement gone amok … Where are black Democrats saying this is such a huge double standard? That if this was Donald Trump and anyone in his family, there would be people in the streets screaming. Now if you want to use this as a way of saying ‘hey, we need to find more ways of reforming and helping everyone out and not just Hunter Biden,’ but this has hurt our community so badly and no one’s immune from it,” Payne continued. “And listen, I wish I could be there waiting for [his brother] when he gets out on Friday, but I can’t,” he added. “I wish I could be there to hold his hand and everything, I can’t. We talked about this. He’s probably going to go back to smoking crack even though he hasn’t had it for a year. He was the smartest one in my family growing up, he’s a great person in his heart, and he could’ve been a great American. It’s a slap in the face to everyone that Joe Biden gets to do this. It really is, it’s a slap in the face for anyone whose family members had gone to jail for doing stupid stuff.” Biden issued a “full and unconditional” pardon for his son on Sunday regarding any crime he is charged with or may have committed from Jan. 1, 2014 to Dec. 1, 2024. The president alleged that his political opponents “singled out” Hunter by charging him for crimes that almost no American allegedly gets prosecuted for having committed, including writing false information on a gun purchase form and paying back their taxes past the deadline. A Delaware jury convicted Hunter in June on three felony charges related to his purchase of a gun in 2018 while knowingly being addicted to drugs and for writing false information on a gun purchase form. He faced up to 17 years in prison over nine charges relating to his alleged failure to pay $1.4 million in taxes between 2016 and 2019 in California. The pardon further protects Hunter from facing any potential charges regarding an alleged influence peddling scheme in his overseas business dealings in Ukraine, China, and Romania. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post ‘Where Are Black Democrats?’: Charles Payne Tells Personal Story to Call Out ‘Huge Double Standard’ of Biden Family appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Former Obama deputy-turned-acting attorney general during the first days of the first Trump Administration, Sally Yates is the poster child of Justice Department politicization. She famously made herself a martyr by forcing Trump to fire her after she ordered the department not to enforce his travel ban order. Still, when Yates traveled over to Comedy Central on Monday, The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart asked her if the Bush-era DOJ was the one to blame for politicization. Yates insisted that the department is full of high-minded individuals who simply care about justice, leading Stewart to ask: Did you see in your time when you were there? Did you see the mission begin to change? Did you see it become politicized? While we were there? When you first started, was it much more nuts and bolts? Because I guess that is not the part of the Justice Department, Department of Justice, that I also think about. I also think about after 9/11, you know, John Yoo getting the Department of Justice to justify torture or, you know, is there another hallway, where, like, there’s another Department of Justice, where, like, you guys are working on human trafficking, but they’re there trying to justify other maybe less, what you would say, high-minded things?     On one hand, the Bush Administration wanted to get information out of terrorist detainees, on the other Yates thought the Constitution revolved around her unelected self. For Stewart, the former is somehow worse. As for Yates, she gave a non-answer and instead tried to wax poetic about the department, “Yeah. Look, the vast majority of folks of the Department of Justice are what they call career employees. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily—” After some quips from Stewart about the “deep state” being “a state that is very deep,” Yates continued, “There literally are maybe 100, well, if you count U.S. attorneys, there are a few hundred political appointees out of 113,000 employees at the Department of Justice.” Still trying to convince everyone she’s not a partisan figure, she added, “So, yeah, the hallways there are filled with people who don't even know—I mean, I worked for over 20 years in the Atlanta U.S. Attorney's office, I had no idea whether the folks next to me were Democrats or Republicans.” Later in their discussion, Stewart tried to summarize, “I think what you were getting to is it's a system that has flaws but that every day, we have worked towards, boy, you hate to say a more perfect union, but that you've worked towards making it more just.” After Yates affirmed that, Stewart wondered, “So, why is this a threat, when you just said, like, the threat now?”     Yates replied that “The threat now, and this is not because he's a Republican, Donald Trump poses a unique threat to our criminal justice system, and to that concept of equal justice. He’s made really clear, over and over again, that he views the Department of Justice as his own personal goon squad… he wants to use the power of the state to literally criminally investigate them and try to send them to prison and he’s been really clear about that.” Stewart tried to play devil’s advocate, “Wouldn't he say that is what was done to him? That, because he was a candidate for president, that, in his mind, and I am not suggesting I’m in his mind, but that's what he believes the Russia investigation, that is what he believes all of these cases, whether we believe them to be meritorious or not, what he would suggest is, an unprecedented use of the Department of Justice is how they have been operating against him, and so that firewall is already been breached.” Yates was unsympathetic, “Well, first of all, if he thinks that, and I'm not 100 percent convinced he genuinely thinks that, but even if he does, that doesn't make it true. Are you telling me that when someone fomented in insurrection as he did, that DOJ should just look away from that and not investigate it?” Of course, history did not begin on January 6, and if the left wants to make the case that Trump is a threat to the rule of the law, the woman who tried to use the DOJ to obstruct Trump and make herself famous because she didn’t like his immigration plans is the worst possible person to make that case. Here is a transcript for the December 2 show: Comedy Central The Daily Show 12/2/2024 11:25 PM ET JON STEWART: Did you see in your time when you were there? Did you see the mission begin to change? Did you see it become politicized? While we were there? When you first started, was it much more nuts and bolts? Because I guess that is not the part of the Justice Department, Department of Justice, that I also think about. I also think about after 9/11, you know, John Yoo getting the Department of Justice to justify torture or, you know, is there another hallway, where, like, there’s another Department of Justice, where, like, you guys are working on human trafficking, but they’re there trying to justify other maybe less, what you would say, high-minded things? YATES: Yeah. Look, the vast majority of folks of the Department of Justice are what they call career employees. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily – STEWART: I’ve heard of the deep state. Deep State. I know what this is. YATES: I'm not even entirely sure what the deep state is, but— STEWART: It is a state that is very deep! Don't play dumb with us! YATES: But that is — there literally are maybe 100, well, if you count U.S. attorneys, there are a few hundred political appointees out of 113,000 employees at the Department of Justice. STEWART: There's 113— YATES: Thousand. Because understand, this includes not just the folks who are prosecutors and lawyers there. It includes investigative agencies like the FBI and the ATF and the DEA and the Marshall service. It includes all of the Bureau of Prisons. It's a lot of people. So it's a very, very small number of people who change with administrations and change depending on who the party is. So, yeah, the hallways there are filled with people who don't even know — I mean, I worked for over 20 years in the Atlanta U.S. Attorney's office, I had no idea whether the folks next to me were Democrats or Republicans. … STEWART: I think what you were getting to is it's a system that has flaws but that every day, we have worked towards, boy, you hate to say a more perfect union, but that you've worked towards making it more just. YATES: Absolutely. And that has been the goal. And so,— STEWART: So, why is this a threat, when you just said, like, the threat now? YATES: Yeah. The threat now, and this is not because he's a Republican, Donald Trump poses a unique threat to our criminal justice system, and to that concept of equal justice. He’s made really clear, over and over again, that he views the Department of Justice as his own personal goon squad, for lack of a better term here, to go after the people that he wants to retaliate against, whether those are folks who have crossed him politically, whether it is people who just disagreed with him, whether it is people who wouldn't carry his water. That he wants to use the power of the state to literally criminally investigate them and try to send them to prison and he’s been really clear about that. He— STEWART: As devil's advocate — YATES: I figured this was coming. STEWART: Alright. Wouldn't he say that is what was done to him? That, because he was a candidate for president, that, in his mind, and I am not suggesting I’m in his mind, but that's what he believes the Russia investigation, that is what he believes all of these cases, whether we believe them to be meritorious or not, what he would suggest is, an unprecedented use of the Department of Justice is how they have been operating against him, and so that firewall is already been breached. In his mind. YATES: Well, first of all, if he thinks that, and I'm not 100 percent convinced he genuinely thinks that, but even if he does, that doesn't make it true.  STEWART: Right. YATES: Are you telling me that when someone fomented in insurrection as he did, that DOJ should just look away from that and not investigate it? STEWART: No.

MRC founder and president Brent Bozell appeared Tuesday morning on the D.C. talk radio show "O'Connor & Company" to discuss media coverage of President Biden pardoning his son Hunter on gun and tax charges. Larry O'Connor said he had "nothing but contempt for the propagandists who call themselves 'mainstream media,' Brent. but I have to say it's been so amusing watching then deal with this....trying to continue to perpetuate this myth that Joe Biden is a man with such great integrity and honesty." Bozell agreed: "He's making them look like fools and they know it! They've spent years denying that there was a Hunter Biden problem," suppressing the Hunter laptop in the 2020 campaign. He underlined Hunter had about 20 LLCs or shell companies to obscure all his ill-gotten gains from foreign business partners. He said when Joe pardons Hunter, he's also pardoning himself. "If the media had a lick -- a lick! -- of decency, they would have said this [pardon] was outrageous, would have said this guy had escaped justice, and the entire family has escaped justice, but instead they call it a part of his legacy!" That this is a "great family thing to do." When asked about all the controversy over Kash Patel's nomination to run the FBI, Bozell said Trump means business when he wants to rein in the deep state, and the media are going to resist it.  O'Connor humorously wrapped up by protesting that Bozell was forcing our Nick Fondacaro to watch every minute of The View on a daily basis. "This is cruel! This is inhumane! Then he has to put out the videos so the rest of us can hate-watch it as well!" He asked Brent to thank Nick for "taking one for the team."  

With Matt Gaetz having stepped down from attorney general consideration almost two weeks ago, the liberal media have turned their ire toward decorated Army veteran, best-selling military author, and former Fox News host Pete Hegseth. On Tuesday, they giddily passed along the “troubling” “new allegations” against him, including those peddled by far-left smear merchant Jane Mayer of The New Yorker (which they trumpeted as gospel) ludicrously painting Hegseth as a danger to women and our tax dollars. CBS Mornings hailed from the get-go. In the Eye Opener, featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers peddled the “[n]ew allegations of drinking and sexual misconduct against Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth.” Co-host and Democratic donor Gayle King had the “troubling” line and shared the CBS at least “confirmed Pete Hegseth was forced to step down from a veterans’ nonprofit after being accused of alcohol abuse, sexual misconduct and mismanaging the group’s money.” Chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes had quite the approach to Hegseth, taking a condescending tone: Gross. CBS’s Nancy Cordes all but mocks @PeteHegseth facing allegations of drinking and financial mismanagment... “Hegseth has been tapped by the President-Elect to run one of the largest bureaucracies in the world, the U.S. military, and yet, CBS News has confirmed now that he… pic.twitter.com/zSt7UCwcKl — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 3, 2024 After airing a clip of congressional correspondent Nikole Killion chasing down Hegseth and asking him about being “drunk...on the job” and Hegseth scoffing he wouldn’t “dignify that with a response,” Cordes seemed to play up comments from Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) as a way to mock the GOP and play up the allegations. ABC’s Good Morning America found time for this as part of their Trump-hating agenda, but not a second for the continued blowback over President Biden lying to the American people by deciding to pardon son Hunter. Trump-hating correspondent Rachel Scott boasted “these new allegations” — which took over a minute to disclose — “could set the stage for a bruising confirmation battle.” After summarizing attorney general pick Pat Bondi’s trip to the Capitol, she turned to Hegseth, touting Mayer’s piece despite the admission ABC hasn’t confirmed its validity or a separate-but-also-gross New York Times piece: ABC’s Trump-hating correspondent @RachelVScott on ‘Good Morning America’ smearing @PeteHegseth: “But Pete Hegseth is fending off allegations of financial mismanagement and sexual misconduct which he denies. According to The New Yorker, Hegseth was forced to step down from… pic.twitter.com/YRqKidaVr9 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 3, 2024 NBC’s Today spent only 63 seconds on the confirmation hubbub, and even less on Hegseth. Capital Hill correspondent Garrett Haake boasted Hegseth won’t face “a fairly easy path to confirmation” like Bondi, who “lack[s]...any serious scandal[.]” Haake touted “the steady drip of reports about personal issues around him related to alleged drinking or mismanagement of funds at previous jobs, alleged mistreatment of women” as a millstone as if they just organically came out of the woodwork instead of a coordinated smear campaign. After admitting he’s “denied” “some of” the claims, Haake said he will have “a lot of tough questions answer to lock down support from Republicans that he’ll need.” To see the relevant transcripts from December 3, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

President-elect Donald Trump's sweeping deportation plan could "quickly" eradicate Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua from the United States, according to former Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Ronald Vitiello.Department of Homeland Security data revealed that TDA has a confirmed presence in at least 16 states and is rapidly expanding its territory. The agency has warned that its gang members have "violent tendencies."'Even if 1% of them were here to do harm to the United States, they have a real advantage in this scenario.'The transnational group has been tied to a multitude of crimes across the country, including apartment takeovers, retail theft, assaults, and sex trafficking.Vitiello, who previously served as a former acting deputy commissioner for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, told Newsweek that TDA's presence in the country could be wiped out before it is able to secure a strong foothold."In the case of Tren de Aragua, they can be dismantled quickly and definitively because their presence in the United States, although dangerous, has just begun," he explained. "They are particularly vulnerable to removal and deportation, and so the United States could end their lawlessness as quickly as it began."Vitiello continued, "We've seen deadly examples where illegals who have committed crimes and then went on to do terrible things, as in the case of Laken Reilly near Atlanta, who was killed by an individual from Venezuela who was here illegally and was arrested."During a separate interview with Fox Business on Monday, Vitiello stated that the current administration's open border policies require Trump's incoming office to make drastic corrections.Vitiello explained, "Under the Biden-Harris administration, we went through the worst border surge probably in the history of the world, certainly in the history of the United States. So a correction needs to be made.""What are they [migrants] all doing here? Even if 1% of them were here to do harm to the United States, they have a real advantage in this scenario. That's why the deportation efforts are important," he added.When asked whether he thinks Trump's administration will be successful in deporting millions of illegal aliens, he replied, "We must do it.""We have almost 20 million people that have gotten here in the last four years," Vitiello said.He noted that Trump and his incoming border czar, Tom Homan, have stated they plan to deport "the worst first," including criminals and gang members."Let's start with all those criminally involved people; let's get all those convicts out of here and then work our way down the list and protect America," Vitiello remarked.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

In a since-deleted post on X, Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee mocked Americans who are struggling to afford high grocery costs. The account responded to an article on X that found that consumers had spent a record $10.8 billion on Black Friday online shopping. Despite the economic hardship many Americans have endured over the last four years, Democrats dished out a tone-deaf response. Much of the inflationary spending came from the Biden-Harris administration and Democrat-approved legislation. "And here we were thinking y'all couldn't afford eggs!" the account said in the now-deleted post. Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee just deleted this tweet mocking Americans who are struggling to afford groceries: pic.twitter.com/8eVNhoU7On— TheBlaze (@theblaze) December 3, 2024 The post failed to mention the economic turmoil many Americans have actually experienced. For example, the cost of eggs jumped from $1.74 per dozen in 2020 to $3.82 in 2024, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Eggs are not the only commodity that has been affected by cost increases and inflation. The cost of groceries overall has skyrocketed over the last four years. In 2020, food inflation increased by 3.9%, compared to 6.3% in 2021, 10.4% in 2022, 2.7% in 2023, and 2.1% in 2024, according to the BLS. Inflation affected not just the cost of food, but also the cost of living. Monthly inflation peaked under the Biden-Harris administration at 9.1% in June 2022. Although it has since subsided, inflation reached a multi-decade, record-breaking high of 8% in 2022. Much of the inflationary spending came from the Biden-Harris administration and Democrat-approved legislation. In July of this year, the national debt surpassed $35 trillion for the first time in American history. The Biden-Harris administration at the same time approved the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act, which respectively approved $1.9 trillion and $750 billion in spending. The consequences were felt by Americans. Poll after poll leading up to the election showed that the most important issue for voters was the economy and inflation. At the same time, respondents indicated that they were worse now than they were four years ago and overwhelmingly trusted former President Donald Trump to handle the economy over his Democratic challenger. This sentiment was ultimately reflected at the polls where Trump secured a historic landslide victory. Despite the tremendous loss Democrats endured, it appears they have not yet learned from their mistakes. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Conservative CNN contributor Scott Jennings could not hide his annoyance during Monday's episode of "News Night with Abby Phillip" after a liberal guest claimed President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on having firing squads.The panel was debating about President Joe Biden's decision to pardon his son Hunter Biden and whether he lied to the United States since he claimed for months that he would not do that. Jennings has been on the warpath against Biden and his defenders, suggesting the lying has been obvious since this first became an issue.'That is false. As the President said last night, he made the decision this weekend.'Host Abby Phillip asked liberal social media influencer Leigh McGowan whether Biden's previous denials about the pardon, given in multiple statements from him and members of his administration, were lies."No, I believe the circumstances have changed. I think we now have a president coming into office talking about firing squads, who's talking about running around the country and making sure everyone who is his enemy is going to be punished," McGowan said.Jennings rolled his eyes at McGowan as she continued her long-winded rebuttal."And Hunter Biden lied about his drug use on a government form when he was buying a gun, and he failed to file and pay taxes when he was a drug addict. He paid back those taxes with interest," she added, going on to say that criticizing the younger Biden is unfair because Trump, with all his legal troubles, was elected president.During the same segment, outgoing Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) also said Biden did not lie because "the context has changed" since Trump won the presidential election."Of all the defenses of the Biden pardon I’ve heard, 'because Trump firing squads' might be the most creative," Jennings later said on X about the segment.The questionable statements from the Biden administration about the pardon have not stopped since news broke on Sunday evening. In response to reporting from NBC News, which said Biden had been talking as early as June of this year about giving his son a pass for many of his alleged crimes, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre replied on X, "That is false. As the President said last night, he made the decision this weekend."An overwhelming majority of comments on Jean-Pierre's post are negative, with many saying the White House has no credibility on the topic. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

On Sunday, December 1, President Biden did what he vowed repeatedly not to do and pardoned his son Hunter for his federal crimes and any additional crimes he might have committed over the last decade. Or — in the words of Dave Rubin — “Joe Biden, the elderly man pretending to be president, pardoned his crackhead son.” As upsetting as it might be that Joe Biden lied when he pledged to accept the jury’s decision and not use his executive power to pardon Hunter, the decision should not come as a shock. “Everything Joe Biden has done for the past four years has been a lie,” says Dave. However predictable Biden’s decision was, it doesn’t mean that the nation is going to stomach it well. Already, the backlash has been swift. Some of it has even been funny. Dave displays a tweet from Biden from several months ago with a recently added community note beneath it. “By pardoning his son Hunter, not merely for a single crime, but for all actual or potential crimes he may or may not have created over an eleven years period, Joe Biden has made it clear that some people are, in fact, above the law,” the note read. However, Elon Musk’s response to this community note was perhaps even funnier. Reposting Biden’s tweet with the note beneath it, the tech mogul wrote: “Community Notes slays.” Dave agrees — community notes does indeed slay. “The beauty of community notes, as you can see, [is that] they reference articles that you can then click into and see,” and then “you can rate it” based on its helpfulness,” says Dave. “This is sort of the fact-checking apparatus we've wanted for a long time.” To hear more, watch the episode above. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

A consortium of independent news outfits helped make sense of a possible skew on the part of a giant international journalism organization that had a hand in the first impeachment of President Donald Trump and in the targeting of perceived adversaries of the American political establishment, jointly reporting Monday that it is majoritively funded by the U.S. State Department. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project is a massive investigative journalism organization that has collaborated over the years with newsrooms on all continents, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, Rolling Stone, the Guardian, and the Times (U.K.). It has played a key role in the production of various consequential stories, including the Panama Papers, the Pandora Papers, the Swedish telecom bribery scandal, and the "Russian Laundromat" money laundering scheme. The OCCRP claims on its website that its investigations have so far contributed to over $10 billion in fines levied and seized assets; 430 official investigations; 251 "civil society reactions"; 820 governmental actions; 135 resignations and terminations; 736 indictments, arrests, and sentences; and 135 corporate actions. Drew Sullivan, the organization's co-founder and publisher, reportedly bragged to the news consortium that reported on the OCCRP's American backing — comprising the left-leaning Drop Site Substack and a handful of European news outlets — that the OCCRP has "probably been responsible for about five or six countries changing over from one government to another government," citing Bosnia and Kyrgyzstan, as well as two NATO countries, Montenegro and the Czech Republic, as examples. 'What is true is that OCCRP has accepted funding from USG. We understand that reasonable people may believe that's a bad idea.' Drop Site noted Monday that in many cases, the targets of the OCCRP's "game-changing exposés" were U.S. adversaries. It appears, however, that at least one adversary was a domestic critic of the American deep state: President Donald Trump. The OCCPR reports were cited four times in the whistleblower complaint regarding Trump's 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. According to Drop Site, the OCCRP has been less than forthright about its origins and funding. For instance, the OCCRP suggested on its website that it was launched initially with the help of funds from the United Nations Democracy Fund; however, that money reportedly made its way elsewhere and predated the formation of the OCCRP. Drop Site News indicated that it is "more accurate to say the first million dollars that made the creation of OCCRP possible came from the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs — known as INL, part of the State Department — in 2008." The OCCRP lists among its supporters the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development along with George Soros' Open Society Foundations and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Critics have suggested that while admitting to receiving funds from the U.S. government, the OCCRP has appeared reluctant to advertise that the U.S. was its primary backer. According to the joint report, 52% of the money spent by the OCCRP between 2014 and 2023 was provided by the U.S. government. Sullivan told the consortium that U.S. grant money redirected from the OCCRP to other organizations shouldn't be counted. Even then, U.S. government funds would reportedly account for roughly 46% of his organization's budget. The OCCRP's board of directors said in a statement obtained by the news consortium, What is true is that OCCRP has accepted funding from USG. We understand that reasonable people may believe that's a bad idea, especially since it is not the norm in journalism in the United States (although government support of journalism is not uncommon in Europe and elsewhere). This was thoroughly discussed years ago when OCCRP was founded. The Board at that time — which included several of us who remain on the Board and whose personal reputations as journalists and executives are impeccable — decided that it was worth the tradeoff for the investigative journalism OCCRP could produce with this financial support. Shannon Maguire, a former official with the National Endowment for Democracy who reportedly now runs the OCCRP file at the U.S. Agency for International Development, said that the U.S. government is proud of the work it has done supporting the organization. "We're proud that we're the first public donor, that USAID is the first public donor, and the U.S. government is the first public donor to assist OCCR," Maguire told the consortium. 'US government weaponizes @OCCRP reporting.' Maguire reportedly indicated that despite an alleged editorial firewall, the funding is conditional on the U.S. government's ability to veto senior personnel and editorial staff. If Sullivan wants to change key personnel, Maguire indicated he must first ask U.S. officials for permission. Democratic USAID administrator Samantha Power referred to the OCCRP as a "partner" at a Foreign Policy magazine event in November 2021. This "partner," which can apparently be controlled, unlike Wikileaks — deemed a security threat by the U.S. military — benefited from the Russian collusion hoax, securing significant funds as a result of bipartisan congressional efforts to fund the State Department's efforts to tackle "Russian disinformation." Drop Site indicated that between 2015 and 2019, the U.S. State Department dumped $2.2 million into the OCCRP with the stated aim of "Balancing the Russian Media Sphere." The State Department poured another $1.7 million into the organization between 2019 and 2023 for the supposed purpose of "Strengthening investigative Journalism in Eurasia." Similar initiatives executed by the OCCRP have also been fueled by millions of American taxpayer dollars in recent years. In other words, the supposedly editorially independent outfit receives money with the obligation to spend it investigating issues deemed priorities by the U.S. State Department. Yann Philippin, a co-author of the damning report who sits on the board of European Investigative Collaborations, noted on X that the "US government weaponizes @OCCRP reporting by paying the journalistic organization to launch judicial investigations, sanctions and lobbying actions based on the articles published. This program has been overseen at @OCCRP by a former US State Department official." 'The truth is we don't know how deep the influence goes in some newsrooms.' Extra to the perceived threat of internalizing American national biases, the OCCRP might also have to contend with domestic liberal biases from its veto-wielding benefactor. The Hill reported that ahead of the 2016 election, over 99% of contributions from employees at the State Department — which backs and apparently oversees the OCCRP — went to Hillary Clinton, who previously served as secretary of state. Speaking to Drop Site, a top editor in Latin America who has worked with OCCRP suggested that the news organization "doesn't have to provide the U.S. government with any info to be useful to them. It's an army of 'clean hands' investigating outside the U.S." "But it's always other people's corruption," said the editor. "If you're getting paid by the U.S. government to do anti-corruption work, you know that the money is going to get shut off if you bite the hand that feeds you. Even if you don't want to take U.S. government money directly, you look around and almost every major philanthropic funder has partnered with them on some initiative, and it gives the impression that you can only go so far and still get funded to do journalism. The truth is we don't know how deep the influence goes in some newsrooms." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

While we’ve seen some pretty horrendous FPS flops in the last couple of years, there are some truly brilliant newcomers that deserve your attention. I know it can be hard to pull yourself away from the familiarity of longer-running live service shooters like Call of Duty, Fortnite, or Counter-Strike 2 - believe me, I suffer from this too - but if there’s one you should definitely try (or return to, if you gave it a shot before) it’s The Finals. Embark’s debut game is one of the most slick and grin-inducing FPS games around, and this month is a big one for it - not only does The Finals Season 5 arrive, but it will celebrate its first birthday. Continue reading Underappreciated FPS The Finals heads to Mexico for Season 5 MORE FROM PCGAMESN: The Finals settings, The Finals servers, The Finals classes