Connect with us

Arrests Expected ‘By End Of Week’ In Philadelphia Anti-Gay Hate Attack

Published

on

There could be arrests in the Philadelphia anti-gay hate crime as early as today, or by the end of the week.

Philadelphia could see arrests “by the end of the week,” in the Sept. 11 anti-gay hate attack that landed two men in there hospital, according to a local Philly LGBT paper.

Philadelphia Gay News told The New Civil Rights Movement this afternoon that their law enforcement sources believe arrests could be made today, but more likely it will be between now and Friday.

LOOK: Brian Sims Attacking Violent Pennsylvania Anti-Gay Hate ‘Crime’ Head On

In a report originally dated Sept. 17 but just updated to reflect new information, PGN reports their police source said “they were nearly ‘ready to go’ in terms of making arrests and said charges are expected ‘this week.'”

A key witness, the source said, was due in for an interview Monday, “the girl who was right in the middle of it all.” After that, the source said, the District Attorney’s Office will review all of the evidence collected in the case and make a decision about charges.

“People are going to get locked up,” the source said.

And the Philadelphia Inquirer just reported that “Philadelphia police have finished their investigation of the assault of a gay couple in Center City and submitted an investigative file to the District Attorney’s Office, which will determine whether to press charges, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey said Monday.”

“We feel that there is sufficient evidence to have charges placed against some of the individuals there,” Ramsey said.

That decision, however, is up to prosecutors.

Meanwhile, attorneys for some members of the gang of about 12 twenty-something year olds who are accused of beating the same-sex couple Sept. 11 so badly that one will have his jaw wired shut for two weeks, have been claiming their clients acted in self defense, and that one of the gay men threw the first punch.

 

Image: YouTube screenshot

 

Related on The New Civil Rights Movement:

Digital Sleuths Use Twitter, Facebook To Help Solve Violent Assault On Gay Philly Couple

Philadelphia Archbishop Statement On Anti-Gay Attack Offers No Support For Victims

Catholic High School Coach Fired For His Role In Beating Of Philadelphia Gay Couple

Philly Anti-Gay Hate Attack: Federal Officials At Dept. Of Justice Watching

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Danish MP Follows Profane Message to Trump With Warning to Greenlanders on US Civil Rights

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s desire to acquire Greenland from Denmark isn’t going over well with some Danes, including one of Denmark’s politicians who used vulgarity to express his opposition earlier this week, and is now citing a century-long historical record to issue a warning to Greenlanders on America’s refusal to grant full voting rights to its citizens in U.S. territories.

Anders Vistisen, a Danish Member of the European Parliament, reminded Trump earlier this week that “Greenland has been part of the Danish Kingdom for 800 years,” and “is not for sale.”

“Let me put it in words you might understand: Mr. Trump. f*** off,” Vistisen said.

Thursday night on CNN, Vistisen, a member of a right wing populist party, expanded his battle against Trump’s aspiration to annex Greenland.

READ MORE: Trump’s J6 Pardons Are ‘High Crime’ and ‘Abuse of Power’ Legal Expert Says

Addressing what he called the “argument that America can make a great deal,” an apparent reference to Donald Trump, Vistisen said, “we actually have some historical precedence for this. A hundred years ago we sold you what you call the U.S. Virgin Islands. Today, that territory still doesn’t have voting rights for your presidential elections.”

“That place doesn’t have a voting member of your parliament, the Congress — or the House of Representatives, and the Senate, and when I visited, when we had the hundred years commemoration, there was not a great lot of enthusiasm about the way the U.S. is handling that.”

“So I think if the Greenlandic people are looking carefully at this and they are looking on the U.S. overseas territories,” Vistisen continued, “looking at how Indigenous people are treated in the U.S., it’s very hard to make a compelling argument that they will have a better deal from the United States than what they have within the Danish realm, the kingdom of Denmark, where they have full voting rights in the Danish parliament are actually are overrepresented, and as you clearly stated, they have a very beneficial agreement, economically with Denmark.”

The Atlantic’s David Frum, a former Bush 43 White House speechwriter, responded to Vistisen’s remarks.

“In 1917, Denmark (legally neutral but sympathetic to the Allies) sold the [Virgin] islands to the USA to prevent Germany from seizing them for a submarine base. Also, the islands were economically desperate, and war-isolated Denmark could not aid them. As part of the deal, the US guaranteed Danish sovereignty over Greenland. Another reason that seizing Greenland would be an act of US bad faith,” Frum wrote.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Is Trump Using Project 2025 to Eliminate FEMA?

 

Image by Elekes Andor via Wikimedia Commons and a CC license

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s J6 Pardons Are ‘High Crime’ and ‘Abuse of Power’ Legal Expert Says

Published

on

At least four well-respected current and retired federal judges have spoken out to denounce President Donald Trump’s sweeping, unilateral pardons of over 1500 people convicted of numerous crimes related to the January 6 insurrection and attack on the Capitol, and his commutations for “14 members of far-right extremist groups.” A constitutional scholar and retired Harvard law professor has suggested Trump’s acts of clemency could be considered a “high crime and misdemeanor,” worthy of impeachment.

“No stroke of a pen and no proclamation can alter the facts of what took place on January 6, 2021,” wrote U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, the latest judge to denounce the pardons, as Politico’s senior legal affairs reporter Kyle Cheney reported. “When others in the public eye are not willing to risk their own power or popularity by calling out lies when they hear them, the record of the proceedings in this courthouse will be available to those who seek the truth.”

Judge Jackson pointed to “the hundreds of law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line against impossible odds to protect not only the U.S. Capitol building and the people who worked there,” and noted that those workers “were huddled inside in terror as windows and doors were shattered.”

She wrote of “those valiant officers who fulfilled their oaths to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'”

READ MORE: Is Trump Using Project 2025 to Eliminate FEMA?

“They are the patriots. Patriotism is loyalty to country and loyalty to the Constitution –  not loyalty to a single head of state.”

A second jurist also denounced Trump’s pardons.

Trump “said the clemency would begin a process of ‘reconciliation’ and correct a ‘grave national injustice’, but in a scathing order on Wednesday the US district judge Beryl Howell disagreed,” The Guardian reported.

“No ‘national injustice’ occurred here, just as no outcome-determinative election fraud occurred in the 2020 presidential election,” Howell wrote.

“No ‘process of national reconciliation’ can begin when poor losers, whose preferred candidate loses an election, are glorified for disrupting a constitutionally mandated proceeding in Congress and doing so with impunity,” she added. “This court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.”

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who presided over Trump’s January 6 attack and election subversion case prosecuted by Special Counsel Jack Smith, delivered one of the more scathing denunciations.

She wrote that the pardons “cannot whitewash the blood, feces, and terror that the mob left in its wake,” as The Guardian also reported.

“It cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power,” Chutkan continued.“In hundreds of cases like this one over the past four years, judges in this district have administered justice without fear or favor. The historical record established by those proceedings must stand, unmoved by political winds, as a testament and as a warning.”

On Wednesday, a well-known retired U.S. District Judge, who served on the federal bench for over three decades, also condemned Trump’s pardons.

“Former U.S District Judge Shira Scheindlin agrees with the judges who sentenced the Jan. 6 rioters and are criticizing Trump’s pardons,”  CNN’s Kaitlan Collins noted.

“They had a trial before a jury and the jury convicted them,” Judge Scheindlin said (video below). “This is all nonsense. These people are not hostages. They’re not heroes. They’re not political prisoners. They’re criminals. They attacked people. They assaulted people.”

Repeatedly calling Trump’s acts of clemency “overly broad,” Judge Scheindlin told Collins, “I know the views of probably every judge, no matter who appointed that judge, or Republican president, Democratic president, it doesn’t matter. The process worked, the trials were fair. As you said, many of these people pled guilty. There there’s really no excuse for this.”

“They sat through trials, they worked hard on those trials,” she said of the judges. The people who were convicted “had a chance to tell their stories.”

“They had a trial before a jury and the jury convicted them. So, this is all nonsense. These people are not hostages, they’re not heroes, they’re not political prisoners. They’re criminals, they attacked people, they assaulted people, they committed property damage. They committed so many crimes, of course, the seditious conspiracy that you mentioned, and they were convicted and sentenced. So I understand there’s a pardon power, but this was overly broad.”

READ MORE: ‘Civil Rights Canon in American Law’: Trump Rescinds Historic LBJ Nondiscrimination Order

“All these people, I thought [Trump] was going to separate them, violent and the nonviolent. That’s what JD Vance told us…It didn’t happen. He just pardoned all of them because he can.”

Retired Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe, a well-regarded constitutional scholar, responded:

“Absolutely right, Judge Scheindlin. These pardons are legally authorized but constitutionally unpardonable. Their issuance is a ‘high crime and misdemeanor’ within the meaning of the Impeachment Clause because it is a clear abuse of presidential power.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump May Invite J6 Pardoned Convicts to the White House: CNN

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘Ask Russia’: Trump Refuses to Say if Ukraine War Will End in a Year Despite ’24 Hours’ Vow

Published

on

One of President Donald Trump’s several broken campaign promises was highlighted by a question Thursday as he spoke at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where he refused to say if Russia’s illegal war against Ukraine would be over in a year.

On the campaign trail, Trump infamously vowed that he would end the war, started by Russian President Vladimir Putin, within “24 hours,” and at one point he suggested he would end it if re-elected — even before being sworn in as president.

“I would fix that within 24 hours, and if I win, before I get into the office, I will have that war settled. 100% sure,” Trump said on Fox News in March 2024, according to HuffPost.

“Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, shortly after we win the presidency, I will have the horrible war between Russia and Ukraine settled — we’re going to get it settled and stop the death,” Trump adamantly told supporters in June 2024.

READ MORE: Is Trump Using Project 2025 to Eliminate FEMA?

“If I’m president, I will have that war settled in one day, 24 hours,” Trump said again just months later, at a CNN town hall in May 2023, as TIME reported. “It will be over. It will be absolutely over.”

But on Thursday, Trump had a very different response.

“Mr. President, when you’re back here in Davos next year, will there be then a peace agreement with Ukraine and Russia by then?” World Economic Forum President and CEO Borge Brende asked Trump, who appeared virtually (video below).

“Well, you’re gonna have to ask Russia,” was Trump’s response, completely sidestepping his multiple campaign promises.

“Ukraine is ready to make a deal,” he offered, before shifting the blame. “This is a war that should have never started. If I were president, it would never have started. This is a war that should have never, ever been started. And it wasn’t started during my — there was never even talk about it. I knew that it was the apple of President Putin’s eye, but I also knew that there was no way he was going in and he wasn’t gonna go in.”

“And then, uh, when I was out, uh, bad things happened, bad things were said. And a lot of stupidity all around and you end up with what you have.”

Putin’s war against Ukraine started in 2014. The February 2022 incursion was an escalation, but Russia was unlawfully occupying parts of Ukraine during Trump’s first presidency.

Recently, Trump has used his social media platform to levy threats of levying tariffs against Russia if Putin does not end the war. It is unclear if the incoming Trump administration has done more than that.

“Responding to the threat of harsher sanctions, the Kremlin said it remains ‘ready for an equal dialogue, a mutually respectful dialogue,'” the BBC reported Thursday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, reportedly said, “We’re waiting for signals that are yet to arrive.”

READ MORE: ‘Civil Rights Canon in American Law’: Trump Rescinds Historic LBJ Nondiscrimination Order

BBC reports, “He added that Russia sees nothing new in Donald Trump’s threats to impose sanctions.”

“He likes these methods, at least he liked them during his first presidency,” Peskov said.

On Wednesday, Trump had written a lengthy missive pleading with and threatening Putin to end the war.

“I’m not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin – and this despite the Radical Left’s Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX,” Trump claimed. “We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I’m going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don’t make a ‘deal,’ and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries.”

“Let’s get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way – and the easy way is always better. It’s time to “MAKE A DEAL.” NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump May Invite J6 Pardoned Convicts to the White House: CNN

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.