Around Our Network

A new filing in a defamation lawsuit filed by Georgia poll workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss against the conspiracy theory website Gateway Pundit reveals that workers at the site feared for their credibility, reported The Guardian — and their own attorney warned them that the source for their claims was not to be trusted.

The site's founder, Jim Hoft, has earned the nickname "The Dumbest Man on the Internet" for years of strange and sloppy claims. Despite this, former President Donald Trump has been reported to be an avid reader of the site.

"Attorneys for Freeman and Moss ... said in their filing that John Burns, a lawyer for Gateway Pundit, had warned the site about relying on Kevin Moncla, a source in Georgia who fed the site information on Freeman and Moss, including their non-public personnel files, according to the filing," said the report.

"'Moncla is a known fabricator. I wouldn’t touch/publish anything he produces,” Burns reportedly wrote, while also calling Moncla “a g-------d fraud."

ALSO READ: Read this powerful GOP senator’s pay-to-play 'benefits package' for lobbyists

As if that weren't enough, Freeman and Moss’s attorneys also unearthed messages from Moncla said in which he said of their clients, "I will help you nail these b----s."

According to the report, Moncla was charged with voyeurism and ordered to pay $3.25 million after filming guests in the bathroom at his house.

Earlier this week, Gateway Pundit filed for bankruptcy amid the litigation against them.

Moss and Freeman, who counted ballots in Atlanta in 2020, have become a focus of numerous MAGA conspiracy theories, spread in part by Trump allies like Rudy Giuliani, who claimed that they were stuffing ballots — based in part on a supposed "flash drive" one passed to the other that turned out to be a ginger mint. Giuliani was found liable for $148 million in a defamation default judgment for his role in these claims.

In addition to the defamation cases, efforts to harass the two workers form part of the election racketeering case against Trump's allies in Fulton County.

Donald Trump's second administration will find itself unable to rely on a key restraint that prevented the former president from pursuing bad federal policy during his first term, a one-time staffer warned Wednesday.

Former Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Matthews appeared on CNN to share her fears that Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, will surround himself with easily swayed staffers should he regain the White House in 2025.

"It's going to be a bunch of yes men and women who will do and say what he pleases," Matthews warned. "It's extremely worrisome because I think that competency and experience are gonna be out the window."

Matthews issued this warning on the heels of a Time Magazine exposé detailing the actions Trump hopes to take as commander in chief, among them prosecuting President Joe Biden, mass deportations and government pregnancy monitoring.

The former press secretary suggested the threat Trump presents would not be evaded should he lose the presidential election on Nov. 5.

"We know with Donald Trump that an election is only fair if he wins," Matthews said. "It almost sounded like a threat of political violence if he loses."

ALSO READ: Noem book describing dog killing is a donation perk at upcoming GOP fundraiser

Matthews then argued future "yes" staffers will not be able to rely on a key tactic Trump's former White House team successfully used to dissuade him from pursuing bad policy: raising the specter of reelection.

The argument will be rendered moot by presidential term limits, she explained.

"If he is elected president again, that won't be a concern," Matthews said. "You're not really going to be able to steer him off of some of these bad policies."

Finally, Matthews expressed her outrage that Trump has suggested pardons for people convicted on criminal charges related to the Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021.

"He calls them hostages and patriots," Matthews said. "It's really just disgusting to me."

Watch the video below or click here.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced Wednesday she's refusing to vote for a bill on antisemitism awareness, arguing it would see Christians arrested for their faith.

Greene made this announcement on X the same day the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (H.R. 6090) — crafted to combat the problem on college campuses — was slated to go to a vote in the House of Representatives.

"Antisemitism is wrong, but I will not be voting for the Antisemitism Awareness Act," Greene explained. "[It] could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews."

Greene backs up this claim with two images; the first a screenshot of the bill's definition of antisemitism and the second a printout Greene doesn't source.

The bill uses the definition crafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, of which the U.S. is a member, and adopted by the State department, congressional records show.

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews," the IHRA definition states. "Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The IHRA website page on which this definition appears also includes a bulleted list of 11 contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life that does not appear in the legislation's text.

But this appears to be the document Greene references in her refusal to back the bill.

"Read the bill text and contemporary examples of antisemitism like #9," Greene demands of her readers.

Number nine, in both the IHRA list and Greene's, reads as follows: "Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis."

ALSO READ: Former FBI official accuses Marjorie Taylor Greene of spreading foreign propaganda

These claims, according to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, were commonly repeated by the Nazis.

"The term blood libel refers to the false allegation that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish, usually Christian children, for ritual purposes," the definition states. "The Nazis made effective use of the blood libel to demonize Jews, with Julius Steicher's newspaper Der Stürmer making frequent use of ritual murder imagery in its antisemitic propaganda."

Greene is not alone in refusing to support the bill, but her reasons differ widely from those cited by the American Civil Liberties Union in their letter in opposition to House representatives.

"Federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities," the ACLU argues. " H.R. 6090 is therefore not needed to protect against antisemitic discrimination; instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism."

As this important debate on a complex issue unfolded in the House of Representatives, Greene's social media followers took the opportunity to remind readers of the Georgia lawmaker's history.

"BREAKING NEWS," wrote X user Mr. Newberger. "Woman who key noted a Nazi rally won't vote for Antisemitism bill."

This likely references Greene's decision to speak at a White Nationalist event in 2022.

"This you?" asked Travis Matthew, sharing an article entitled "Republicans blast Marjorie Taylor Greene's Holocaust remarks" about her likening COVID-19 masks to the Nazi's mass murder of Jewish people.

"This is absolutely nuts," wrote Hadar Susskind. "MTG is just mad that they didn’t accept her space laser amendment."