Is the Texas-Biden-SCOTUS Border Dispute a Constitutional Crisis? Plus: Interview w/ Omali Yeshitela, Facing 15 Years for “Pro-Russian Propaganda”
Feb 1, 2024
auto_awesome
Guest Omali Yeshitela, facing 15 years for alleged 'pro-Russian propaganda.' Topics include Texas-Biden-SCOTUS border dispute, criminalizing dissent, accusing critics of being Russian agents, and the founding and shift towards Black Power within the civil rights movement.
The legal battle over the Texas border fence highlights the conflict between state sovereignty and federal authority.
Criminalizing dissent through the indictment of left-wing political groups raises concerns about freedom of speech and political opposition.
Accusations of Russian ties towards activists protesting US support for Israel reflect the divisive impact of the Russia narrative within the Democratic Party.
The prosecution of individuals as Russian agents based on anti-war opposition and failure to register highlights the dangerous implications of the 'Russian agent' narrative within the Democratic Party.
Deep dives
Texas vs. Biden Administration on Construction of Texas Barbed Wire Fence
The state of Texas constructed miles of barbed wire along the border to reduce illegal immigration. However, the Biden administration ordered Texas to remove the fence, leading to a legal battle. A district court judge found in favor of Texas on factual grounds, emphasizing the effectiveness of the fence in reducing illegal border crossings. Yet, the court ultimately ruled in favor of the Biden administration on the basis of sovereign immunity, preventing Texas from suing the US government. The full fifth circuit of appeals overturned this ruling, allowing Texas to sue the federal government. However, the Supreme Court vacated the lower court's injunction and permitted the government to dismantle the Texas fence.
Criminal Indictment of African People's Socialist Party by Biden's DOJ
The Biden Justice Department criminally indicted the African People's Socialist Party, a left-wing political party, and its members for allegedly being Russian agents. The party opposes US foreign policy and wars, including the US involvement in Ukraine. The charges are based on the party's anti-war stance and alleged failure to file required forms when acting on behalf of a foreign government. The party denies any instruction from Russia and argues it acts autonomously based on its ideology. This prosecution, criticized for targeting political dissent, has received limited media coverage and has faced backlash from free speech advocates.
Nancy Pelosi's Accusation of Pro-Palestinian Activists Having Ties to Russia
Nancy Pelosi came under criticism for suggesting that pro-Palestinian activists protesting outside her home have ties to Russia. She called for the FBI to investigate these activists pressuring the Biden administration to support a ceasefire in Gaza. Pelosi's comments were condemned for insinuating a connection between activism and Russian interference, reflecting a broader trend of accusing political opponents of being Russian agents without evidence. This accusation comes amid ongoing debates regarding US support for Israel and highlights the divisive impact of the Russia narrative within the Democratic Party.
Criminal Indictment of American Leftists for Alleged Russian Connections
The US Department of Justice charged four American citizens, members of the African People's Socialist Party, alongside three Russians, claiming they conspired as Russian agents. The indictment associates their anti-war opposition to the US involvement in Ukraine with support for Russia's invasion. These charges allege that the defendants failed to register as agents acting on behalf of a foreign government. Critics argue that this prosecution uses the criminal justice system to suppress political dissent and curtail free speech. The case highlights the dangerous implications of the 'Russian agent' narrative within the Democratic Party.
The African People's Socialist Party and its History
The African People's Socialist Party was formed in 1972 as a response to the civil rights movement's shift towards self-determination. The party focuses on achieving self-reliance and self-determination for black people in the United States. It advocates for the rights of black people globally and aims to connect the struggle of African people in the US with other colonized peoples. The party has a long history of political activism, opposition to US foreign policy, including opposition to US involvement in Ukraine, and criticism of US wars. Despite claims of being Russian agents, the party emphasizes that its political statements and activities are driven by their own agency and not influenced by any foreign government.
The Criminal Case and First Amendment Rights
The party and its members face criminal charges under the rarely used statute 18 USC 951, which makes it a federal crime to act as an unregistered foreign agent. The case is based on allegations of political speech and activism, including giving speeches and publishing articles that allegedly contain Russian propaganda and disinformation. The defense argues that the charges violate the First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly. The government claims this is a content-neutral prosecution, but the defense argues that it is an attempt to criminalize dissent and stifle political opposition to US foreign policy. The defense also highlights the hypocrisy of prosecuting these individuals while powerful lobbyists and think tanks funded by foreign governments operate freely without registering as foreign agents.
Media Coverage and the Chilling Effect
The case has received limited media coverage, primarily from independent and non-mainstream sources. The lack of coverage from established media outlets is seen as a collaboration with or fear of the government's actions. The party believes that the limited coverage is due to the reluctance of media to defend a left-wing socialist group targeted by the Biden Justice Department. The case's impact extends beyond the party, as it could set a dangerous precedent in criminalizing dissent and free speech rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The defense is dependent on public support, and a defense fund has been established to help cover the costs of the legal proceedings.
