- Oberlin College has been hit with $4 million in interest fees for refusing to pay the $36 million it owes to a family-run bakery
- Gibson's Bakery in Oberlin, Ohio is struggling to survive after Oberlin College students and faculty member Meredith Raimondo accused its staff of racism
- Despite the allegations being proven false, students continue to boycott
- The 137 year-old bakery continues to struggle financially because of the incident
- Owner Allyn Gibson and his son, David Gibson, have since passed while the family awaits a $33million settlement from Oberlin College
Oberlin College was last month told it must pay the additional fee - equivalent to around $4,000-a-day for each of the 1,000 days it has refused to pony up - to Gibson's Bakery, The Chronicle reported.
College led by one of its disgraced ex-deans, Meredith Raimondo, lied
that the bakery's staff had racially-profiled three black students in
2016, despite the trio later admitting shoplifting.
But Oberlin has refused to pay up, and asked for another stay in paying the Gibsons what they're owed because of a pending appeal against the ruling against them.
That appeal is set to be heard by the Ohio Supreme Court, after two lower courts rejected Oberlin's attempts to slither out of paying the Gibsons.
Lawyers for the Gibson family say Oberlin failed to file the correct paperwork to justify their latest delaying tactic, and must pay up. The legal stalemate continues for now.
Gibson family, who owns the 137 year-old bakery, won damages after a
jury found they suffered horrific stress as a result of Oberlin's lies
and involvement in the boycotting of the business.
by Jim Hoft
The videos show election officials admitting to each other that their
actions were illegal, even “a felony.” But the officials decided to
destroy the election evidence anyway.
An election whistleblower in Delaware County, Pennsylvania released video evidence of the destruction of election data, documents, and equipment by election officials in the 2020 presidential election on Wednesday night.
In one video James Allen, the Director of Elections Operations is seen in a backroom telling officials to destroy evidence knowing it was a felony.
in another video, Tom Gallager, a lawyer for Delaware County, is seen destroying election tapes — a felony.
We reported on this last night.
BREAKING VIDEO: Whistleblower Releases Video of Delaware County Pennsylvania Election Officials Destroying Evidence and Ballots in Backroom (VIDEO)
Of note — President Donald Trump was leading in Pennsylvania until the Delaware County Elections officials released their results. Delaware County was the last Pennsylvania county to report their numbers.
On Thursday reporter Brian Cates posted more on this explosive lawsuit–So right after a legal Right to Know request was filed, these Delaware County election employees marched straight to where they were hiding these election records and equipment and destroyed it all. And somebody got it all on camera. WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU???!!!
The videos are part of a larger lawsuit that will break the Pennsylvania voter fraud scandal wide open.
That’s what former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe just found out,
but he seems oblivious to the irony. The bureau figure who was fired for
leaking to the press is now complaining about how unfair it is that
there are leaks from the FBI, at the same time as he’s demanding immunity
in exchange for his testimony to the Senate committee investigating the
bureau’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
Call it cosmic payback or reaping what you sow — either way, life has a way of swinging back like a boomerang and hitting people with a strong dose of reality.
McCabe is one of the figures in the middle of several political bias
scandals at the FBI, including the discredited “Trump dossier” and apparent spying by the FBI against Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
A report from the Department of Justice’s inspector general explained
that McCabe was funneling details about a Clinton Foundation
investigation to The Wall Street Journal, and was then dishonest about
where the leak had come from… namely, himself.
That official report goes on to explain in detail how McCabe “lacked candor” — bureaucrat-speak for “lied” — about leaks at least three times, including under oath.
Now, showing just how tone-deaf the former bureau official truly is, McCabe is complaining about leaks from the FBI… yes, the same organization where he was fired for leaking like a sieve.
In a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee by McCabe’s attorney on his behalf, the disgraced former FBI deputy director essentially whined to lawmakers and declared that he was “outraged” that leaks about a criminal investigation of his alleged wrongdoings were taking place.
“(A)s the result of a stream of leaks from the Department of Justice, it is now well-known that the (Office of Inspector General) has made a criminal referral to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia,” the former deputy complained through his attorney.
“As you know, the grounds for such a referral is the very low standard of ‘reasonable grounds to believe there has been a violation of Federal criminal law,'” the letter continued, bizarrely implying that reasonable suspicion of a federal crime was a bad reason to investigate someone.
“Even so […] these leaks have forced us to acknowledge the criminal referral,” the letter admitted.
The complaining and finger-pointing over the same type of leaking that McCabe was fired for doing didn’t stop there.
“And, unfortunately, the stream of leaks has continued: As recently as last Thursday, additional leaks led to the reporting of specific investigative steps allegedly taken by the United States Attorney’s Office in response to the referral,” the document stated.
“We are outraged by these leaks and last Friday requested an investigation by the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility into the source(s) of the leaks,” McCabe’s attorney explained.
That’s right: Apparently, leaking information to the media and then lying about it is completely fine when it can damage Donald Trump, but McCabe is suddenly “outraged” when similar leaks start actually hurting him.
Maybe he’s just upset that he’s not the only snitch in town.
Incredibly, the former deputy director then demanded immunity from prosecution in order to testify to Congress about matters related to the crimes — leaking and lying — that he’s accused of committing.
“Mr. McCabe is willing to testify, but because of the criminal referral, he must be afforded suitable legal protection,” the letter declared. “Accordingly, we hereby request that the Judiciary Committee authorize a grant of use immunity to Mr. McCabe,” it stated.
If there was still any doubt about why cronies like James Comey and Andrew McCabe needed to go, this should clear it up.
They see themselves as special and above the law, and can’t seem to even comprehend that their own actions — and the culture of leaking that they created — have consequences.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
Being subpoenaed to appear in front of a judge is something most people want to actively avoid, but a report regarding the Obama-era FBI suggests dozens of agents want to have their day in court to expose government corruption.
During Sean Hannity’s Fox News program Friday, the conservative host said he has learned that more than two dozen FBI agents want to be subpoenaed in order to testify about widespread abuses and political bias that occurred at the bureau during the Hillary Clinton email scandal.
“We have an (Inspector General) report coming out, and I’m told as many
as 28 people that have knowledge of the Clinton email server scandal
want to be subpoenaed so they can tell the story of corruption at the
highest levels of the bureau at that they love,” Hannity said. It appears that Hannity isn’t the only one who sees a major rift between
top-level FBI figures, like former Director James Comey, and the
hardworking agents who want to see justice served.
Sara Carter, an investigative journalist whose reporting on Comey, the FBI and Clinton scandals has been proven correct with shocking accuracy, agreed with the Fox host.
“There are a lot of FBI agents that want to come out and speak,” Carter told Hannity. “A lot of them are current agents, which makes it very difficult for them, so they need to be subpoenaed. These are the things that Congress needs to act on.”
A growing stack of evidence backs up that claim.
The Daily Caller recently reported
that several FBI agents have quietly come forward and admitted that
many good people at the bureau are worried about speaking out because of
career and legal reprisals from above.
FBI agents concerned about corruption are “hunkering down because they see good people being thrown to the dogs for speaking out and speaking out does nothing to solve the problems,” the Daily Caller quoted one agent who communicated via a former White House official.
Those rank-and-file agents believe the upper levels of the agency think they can get away with anything, while middle-level personnel are left powerless to speak out.
“It’s a question of basic credibility — Congress, the executive, and
oversight are not seen to have any gravitas or seriousness,” The Daily Caller
quoted its FBI source, who for obvious reasons wanted to stay
anonymous. “The inmates have been running the asylum and they don’t
respect, much less fear, their overseers. We know we’ll be hung out to
So-called “whistle-blower protections” are supposed to shield witnesses of abuse, but these are not always as strong as they should be.
“I’ve worked hard to strengthen legal protections, especially for FBI employees,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley said.
You have a right to cooperate with Congressional inquiries, just as you have a right to cooperate with the Inspector General. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying,” Grassley added.
But FBI members are apparently not convinced.
“Even with the enactment of the new (whistle-blower protection) law, what is the deterrent for retaliation against Whistleblowers?” an FBI source told the Daily Caller.
“The FBI executives will just stall, ignore, and run out the clock until the victim runs out of money for legal fees or else retires,” the agent noted.
Being ordered to testify under oath could be a sort of long-shot “Hail Mary” play to shine a light on the truth. “That is why the new whistleblowers want to be subpoenaed,” the agent said, according to the Caller. “They simply don’t have the resources to fight the inevitable retaliation that will ensue, regardless of the new law.”
There is a clear hesitation for witnesses of “deep state” corruption to come forward — and that’s where Congress may come into play.
By subpoenaing FBI members who have direct knowledge of corruption
and political games within the bureau, lawmakers could give the good
people who are still with the agency the protection they need to expose
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources.
When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute
our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with
your friends and family. Thank you.