Candace Marie Claiborne, a former employee of the U.S. Department of State, pleaded guilty today to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States, by lying to law enforcement and background investigators, and hiding her extensive contacts with, and gifts from, agents of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), in exchange for providing them with internal documents from the U.S. State Department.
“Candace Marie Claiborne traded her integrity and non-public information of the United States government in exchange for cash and other gifts from foreign agents she knew worked for the Chinese intelligence service,” said Assistant Attorney General Demers. “She withheld information and lied repeatedly about these contacts. Violations of the public’s trust are an affront to our citizens and to all those who honor their oaths. With this guilty plea we are one step closer to imposing justice for these dishonorable criminal acts.”
According to the plea documents, Claiborne, 63, began working as an Office Management Specialist for the Department of State in 1999. She served overseas at a number of posts, including embassies and consulates in Baghdad, Iraq, Khartoum, Sudan, and Beijing and Shanghai, China. As a condition of her employment, Claiborne maintained a TOP SECRET security clearance. Claiborne also was required to report any contacts with persons suspected of affiliation with a foreign intelligence agency as well as any gifts she received from foreign sources over a certain amount.
Despite such a requirement, Claiborne failed to report repeated contacts with two agents of the People’s Republic of China Intelligence Service, even though these agents provided tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits to Claiborne and her family over five years. The gifts and benefits included cash wired to Claiborne’s USAA account, Chinese New Year’s gifts, international travel and vacations, tuition at a Chinese fashion school, a fully furnished apartment, a monthly stipend and numerous cash payments. Some of these gifts and benefits were provided directly to Claiborne, while others were provided to a close family member of Claiborne’s.
In exchange for these gifts and benefits, as stated in the plea documents, Claiborne provided copies of internal documents from the State Department on topics ranging from U.S. economic strategies to visits by dignitaries between the two countries.
When Earth Day was founded, they made a bunch of dire climate predictions that were promoted as the ‘consensus’ of climate scientists. Sound familiar? None of these predictions came true. They were complete nonsense.
Every year, Casey goes over a short list of these failed predictions to remind everyone that the so-called ‘consensus’ on climate issues has routinely been a lie and their fear-mongering predictions have all not come to pass.
Here we go again. Another story where students wearing pro-Trump gear are clashing with administrators.
Heidi Jones told AZ Central that her daughter, Logan Jones, was suspended after school let out that Friday. The students were taking pictures in their gear after school, when they noticed a police resource officer was taking photos of them.
The resource officer asked Logan for her name, but she refused to answer any questions until her mom was with her. She was taken to the administrators’ office.
Tori Farris, a student who was also there at the time, told AZ Family that the police officer approached them while they were taking pictures and said: “We would like you to take off the merchandise and get off the campus.” When they asked “why” and started leaving the campus, he started taking photos and asked them to come the office.
Heidi Jones said that when she arrived, she was told that her daughter Logan had been suspended for 10 days.
To be fair, this is after school was over. So they let them wear the MAGA gear throughout the day. Or did they…?
Heidi Jones, one of the moms, said that everything was fine until lunchtime, when administrators asked anyone wearing MAGA gear to remove it. She said the students all did what they were asked.
Jennifer Farris, another mother of a student involved, confirmed with AZ Centraal that assistant principals were asking students to remove pro-Trump gear. Farris wrote on Facebook:
Wow. Today was USA Day at Perry High School. A bunch of kids wore things that said Make America Great Again hats, shirts and brought banners. ALL those kids were asked to leave school property!!! When the kids said no and defended themselves saying they were allowed to wear things to support their PRESIDENT the kids were SUSPENDED for 10 DAYS!!! Channel 3 and 5 are on their way to do a story it but please help support these kids and spread this information .. we can’t let our kids be censured this way!!!
That isn’t good.
It looks like 8 students were sent to the office according to AZ Family.
Here’s the interaction between mom Jennifer Farris and the school’s principle:
“You’re going to ask my daughter to leave school because she was wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ sweatshirt?” Farris asked Serrano in the video.
“Nope. That’s not what happened,” he responded.
Farris then questioned why a flag would not be allowed on campus, referencing the ‘Trump’ flag the students had carried.
“She’s not the one that had the Trump flag,” Farris said, referring to her daughter. “And even if she did, why can’t she have a flag on America day for school that says Make America Great Again?”
Serrano responded in the video.
“To carry a flag around is not a good use of the flag, it’s disrespectful,” Serrano responded.
We’ve heard the ‘flags are disruptions argument before.’ Usually referring to rebel flags.
Remember, the students allege the school resource officer approached them after school and told them to “take off the merchandise and get off the campus.” That contradicts the principal alleging that this was only about the flag. If it was only about the flag … why were 8 students sent to the office over it? And let’s not forget they are alleging faculty ordered students to remove MAGA items?
Sidebar: You should give your name to officers. However, the student alleges the officer called her “darlin.” That’s a serious #MeToo offense. I’d expect the feminist groups to defend her (hahaha) after the patriarchy spoke to her in such a belittling way.
“I am writing to clear up misinformation circulating on social media and media, specifically that students have been disciplined for expressing their political viewpoints or wearing political attire. This is false.”
He then said the issue was that the political signage (Trump flag) was causing a disruption and was creating a “safety concern.” He then says the school resource officer asked the kids to leave campus but they refused. This statement contradicts the students who say they were complying.
The Chandler Unified School District claimed the issue with the MAGA flag:
“was related to the interactions it was causing, not that carrying a flag in itself was disrespectful.”
There is no express ban on political signage in the handbook but the school has the discretion to deal with such issues.
In all of the articles and videos I’ve seen of the incident, none allege there was a violent encounter between students or anything of the sort. On the surface, it looks like faculty tried to get the students to remove MAGA gear during lunch then were ready for them to get off of campus as soon as possible after school let out. No real reason has been given by either side to justify it. So, naturally, it looks like faculty didn’t approve of the clothing since they didn’t highlight any potential threat arising from MAGA gear being worn by students.
Former FBI General Counsel James Baker thought then-candidate Hillary Clinton should face criminal charges for her use of a private email server but was talked out of it “pretty late in the process.”
The news comes out just now as Baker’s testimony to House investigators in 2018 was provided to award winning investigative journalist John Solomon, who is also an executive vice president at the Hill. Solomon was given a preview of Baker’s testimony, which has yet to be publicly released. For years, Solomon wrote, the FBI claimed the Bureau was in agreement that Clinton shouldn’t face charges, but Baker’s testimony shows that wasn’t the case – at least not until just before ex-FBI Director James Comey made his July 5, 2016 announcement not to charge Clinton on the basis that she didn’t intend to violate the law (even though intention was not part of the law).
Obviously, this isn’t surprising or new information. However, it’s always nice to have empirical data to back up your case.
It’s no secret that Twitter censors and shadow-bans conservatives. The Gateway Pundit has reported on this extensively over the past few years. We reported in July 2018 that Twitter has long been accused of censoring conservatives. Twitter was indeed censoring and shadowbanning the President of the United States, Donald Trump’s twitter account, @realDonaldTrump. Twitter is […]
Luckily, through the use of standard statistical methods—similar to those commonly applied to calculate confidence intervals in the physical and social sciences—one may determine that the underlying population disparity (i.e. the disparity between liberal and conservative behavioral norms) would have to be quite large in order for there to be any significant likelihood of observing a randomly constituted 22-point data set characterized by the above-described 21:1 ratio. Indeed, assuming some randomness in enforcement unrelated to bias, one would have to assume that conservatives were at least four times as likely as liberals to violate Twitter’s neutrally applied terms of service to produce even a 5% chance (the standard benchmark) that a 22-data point sample would yield a result as skewed as 21-1.
Left-wing activists on college campus regularly engage in the practice of de-platforming—including the use of violence or the threat thereof as a means to prevent someone from speaking. Victims of this practice typically are conservative figures such as Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter. At Berkley, when Milo Yiannopoulos tried to give a speech, a large mob threw stones and fireworks at police officers, and attacked members of the crowd. Around the same time, commentators noted that during the 2016 president campaign, when Bernie Sanders visited Liberty University, the evangelical institution run be Jerry Falwell, Jr., his message was met with “polite skepticism.”
Are we to believe that while prominent figures on the left encourage uncivil and even violent tactics, both on an off college campuses, their online behaviour is, with the solitary exception of Rose McGowan, universally exemplary?
Harassment and the advocacy of violence are serious issues, and there is nothing morally objectionable about social media companies removing this kind of content from their platforms. However, such laudable objectives should not be used as cover to prosecute ideological campaigns. While social media platforms are private companies, anti-discrimination laws generally allow legislators avenues to address businesses that exhibit unacceptable biases in how they treat the public.
