Good morning, and welcome to The Epoch Times News Brief for Friday, May 17, 2024. I’m Bill Thomas, and today, we’re covering a range of important topics including new legislation aimed at changing court gag orders, a Supreme Court decision on financial regulation, emerging national security concerns, and recent revelations about COVID-19 guidelines. Stick around as we explore the details and implications of these very important developments.
House Panel Advances Contempt Resolution Against AG Garland
House Republicans are moving forward with their plan to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress. Their move follows President Joe Biden’s decision to invoke executive privilege, blocking access to his recorded interviews with special counsel Robert Hur. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a resolution by an 18–15 vote to pursue contempt charges against Mr. Garland for not complying with congressional subpoenas to release these recordings.The controversy centers around recordings made during Mr. Hur’s investigation into President Biden’s handling of classified documents. Although Mr. Hur concluded that President Biden had unlawfully retained and disclosed classified materials, he decided against prosecution, citing public sympathy that might arise from President Biden’s age and memory issues. Republicans are keen to hear these recordings themselves to verify Mr. Hur’s findings and evaluate President Biden’s competency.
While the Justice Department has provided the committee with transcripts of the recordings, Republicans are skeptical, arguing that transcripts could potentially be altered and might lack nuances such as tone of voice. For their part, Democrats claim that there is no evidence of tampering, and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) suggested that Republicans are using this push to criticize President Biden’s speech impediment.
The debate has also touched on partisan tensions, with some Democrats accusing Republicans of using the contempt proceedings to indirectly support former President Donald Trump. Republicans counter by saying they’re concerned about President Biden’s capability to govern, dismissing the references to President Trump as mere distractions.
In defending his refusal to release the tapes, Mr. Garland cited concerns about how this might adversely affect future law enforcement efforts. With President Biden’s backing of executive privilege, Mr. Garland is likely shielded from prosecution while the matter is legally contested. Meanwhile, the Oversight and Accountability Committee is preparing to conduct its own review of a resolution to hold Mr. Garland in contempt.
‘Let Trump Speak Act’ to Ban Gag Orders Proposed in US House
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) has introduced a bill titled the “Let Trump Speak Act” in the U.S. House of Representatives. This proposed legislation seeks to restrict the ability of judges to issue gag orders on defendants.It’s a direct response to a gag order that New York Judge Juan Merchan imposed on President Trump.
According to the bill, judges would be prohibited from issuing gag orders except to protect confidential information, ensure the privacy of minors, or as part of a plea agreement.
Mr. Ogles believes the bill is crucial for defending the free speech rights of all Americans, including high-profile figures like the former president.
The bill has already gained the backing of ten other Republican lawmakers. It also includes a provision allowing individuals subject to gag orders to seek relief through civil action.
This legislative push comes after a New York appeals court affirmed Judge Merchan’s gag order on President Trump, which bars him from making public comments about potential witnesses, court staff, and the judge’s family. This decision followed incidents where the former president violated the order through his comments and social media postings.
President Trump first appealed the gag order in April, claiming it infringed on his free speech rights while he was campaigning and fighting criminal charges at the same time.
His legal team continues to argue that the gag order violates his constitutional rights.
Supreme Court Issues Major 7–2 Ruling
The High Court has just ruled in favor of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), upholding its funding mechanism with a 7–2 decision.The federal agency was established by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) after the 2008–2009 financial crisis, and it regulates consumer financial products such as credit cards, mortgages, and car loans. Democrats say that it is a crucial check on corporate abuses, while Republicans and conservatives view it as overly powerful.
The crux of the issue was the CFPB’s funding process, which is designed to ensure its independence by bypassing the regular congressional appropriations process, instead receiving its funds directly from the Federal Reserve. This arrangement was previously ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for violating the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, found that the funding structure did adhere to constitutional norms, overturning the lower court’s decision and holding the case for additional proceedings.
The ruling drew mixed responses. Bill Himpler, president and CEO of the American Financial Services Association, raised concerns about the decision’s implications for clarity and transparency. On the other hand, Richard Dubois, executive director of the National Consumer Law Center, praised the ruling for allowing the CFPB to continue its mission of consumer protection.
This decision marks the second time the Supreme Court has addressed challenges to the CFPB’s constitutionality. In a previous case, the court adjusted the bureau’s internal structure but affirmed its legal foundation.
Sen. Cornyn Forewarns of Terror Threat on US Soil as ISIS-Linked Network Confirmed at Southern Border
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) has expressed serious concerns about potential terror threats within the United States, particularly highlighting a human smuggling network with ties to ISIS. This issue came to light during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, where Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines confirmed the presence of this network. While she could not divulge all the details in an open session, her acknowledgment added weight to existing security worries.During the hearing, Mr. Cornyn questioned Ms. Haines about the number of illegal immigrants connected to ISIS that might have crossed the southern border. While specifics weren’t provided in the public forum, the discussion pointed out a significant threat. This concern is echoed in the Homeland Threat Assessment, which indicates that foreign terrorists are actively seeking travel routes to infiltrate the United States.
FBI Director Christopher Wray has also acknowledged the reality of criminals crossing the border. Adding to the security agencies’ warnings, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have alerted the public to potential ISIS threats targeting events during Pride Month, which is coming up in June. Customs and Border Protection data revealed that 196 individuals on the FBI’s terrorist watch list have been encountered trying to enter the United States this fiscal year, with 81 caught between official ports of entry.
Republican lawmakers expressed their concern about whether the Biden administration’s “catch-and-release” program was resulting in more people on the terror watch list entering U.S. communities.
During President Biden’s first full fiscal year in office, 351 people on the terrorist watch list were apprehended while attempting to enter the United States illegally—a sharp increase from the figures recorded during the Trump administration, where only about a dozen were arrested.
6-Foot Social Distancing Rule During COVID Not Based On Scientific Evidence, Ex-NIH Director Testifies
Former NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins recently shared in testimony that there wasn’t scientific proof to support the six-foot social distancing rule recommended during the COVID-19 pandemic.This revelation came to light when Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) released a transcript of an interview with Dr. Collins, which covered various pandemic-related topics including the lab leak hypothesis and the effectiveness of social distancing measures.
Dr. Collins expressed uncertainty about the existence of any scientific evidence backing the six-foot distance guideline at the time it was being promoted. This admission has sparked questions about the basis for some of the pandemic decisions made by health officials.
Various officials involved in making the U.S. pandemic response, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, have said that they were making good-faith decisions based on the available data at the time and that once new information emerged, they adjusted their recommendations accordingly.
Originally, the CDC advised the public to maintain at least six feet of distance from others to help prevent the spread of the virus. However, recent studies and the CDC’s updated guidance now suggest that no single distance can guarantee safety, as the risk of virus transmission varies with different factors.
While general CDC guidelines have evolved, the six-foot recommendation still remains in some specific settings, like dental facilities. The Epoch Times has reached out to the CDC for further explanation on the scientific grounds for maintaining this distance in situations like this.
You should also know, the CDC has recently adjusted its isolation guidelines for individuals who test positive for COVID-19, stating that a five-day isolation period is no longer deemed necessary.
The conversation around the pandemic’s handling also touches on the broader impacts of prolonged isolation, such as significant personal and societal costs. Studies have pointed out the potential negative effects on physical and mental health due to lockdowns, suggesting that the public health costs might surpass the benefits.
Additionally, widespread censorship of dissenting opinions about lockdowns has hindered the scientific community’s ability to correct mistakes and damaged public trust in science, according to a study’s researchers.
Our time together today is quickly coming to an end, so we’ll make that one our final story on this, the Friday edition of The Epoch Times News Brief. Finally a Friday.
From Janie Byland: “We love the NewsBreak program. Please keep it going.” Actually Janie, it’s the News Brief program, but News Break was close enough.
From Carol Postel: “You guys are awesome and provide such good and varied information! Keep up the great work!”
Now, because we’re always trying to grow the News Brief family, we’d sure appreciate it if you could tell some folks you know about our program (friends, family, co-workers, and more) Also, while you’re at it, please tell everyone you know that you are an official News Brief family member.
Now, as we do each and every day on this program, we wrap things up with a very “notable” quote.
It was basketball great Michael Jordan who said: “To be successful, you have to be selfish, or else you will never achieve. And once you get to your highest level, then you have to be unselfish.” I think he’s saying you’ve got to share the ball! A little give and take.
Jordan is regarded as one of the greatest basketball players of all time. He was a six-time NBA Champion, five-time NBA MVP, 14-time All-Star, two-time Olympic Gold Medal winner, and so much more. I’m not a big basketball fan, but even I know who Michael Jordan is. Michael Jordan and the late Kobe Bryant—two basketball legends!
For all of us here at The Epoch Times News Brief, I’m Bill Thomas, and we greatly appreciate you being here today. Enjoy your Friday, have a stellar weekend, and we’ll see you right back here tomorrow for the Saturday edition of the Epoch Times News Brief. Have an outstanding day today.
