Another Hate Hoax: Oregon Politician Admits He Wrote Racist Letter to Himself

Oregon politician Jonathan Lopez admitted to police that he sent an “anonymous” hate-filled racist letter to himself in a bid to advance his political career. He lost the primary race and placed fourth when he was a candidate for county commissioner in May 2020. The incident will be sent to the Umatilla County District Attorney’s Office for filing a false police report. -GEG


From KOMO News, “Oregon politician wrote racist letter to himself, police say”:

A man who claimed he received a hate-filled, racist letter from an anonymous person allegedly wrote the letter himself, Hermiston Police say.

Chief Jason Edmiston tells KEPR-TV News that the criminal investigation for second-degree intimidation due to the racist, hate-filled letter received by Jonathan Lopez on June 23 has been closed. The matter will be referred this week to the Umatilla County District Attorney’s Office for initiating a false report – a Class A misdemeanor in Oregon.

Edmiston says the investigation has shown that Jonathan Lopez wrote the letter himself and made false statements to the police and on social media. The end result is a verbal and written admission by Lopez that the letter was fabricated.

Additionally, the Hermiston Police are sending the Office of the District Attorney verifiable information of potential election fraud as it pertains to the Stolen Valor Act of 2013 and other false credentials presented by Mr. Lopez during his run for county commissioner. This in conjunction with a lengthy criminal history record may result in the filing of additional charges.

Lopez is also being accused of lying about having served in the US Coast Guard in violation of the 2013 Stolen Valor Act.

Read full article here…

Additional source:

https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nation-world/national/article244080452.html




‘CAREN Act’ Would Make It a Hate Crime to Call 911 Based on Biases of Race, Class or Religion

San Francisco Supervisor Shamann Walton introduced an ordinance, the Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies Act (CAREN Act) that would make it a hate crime for people to call law enforcement based on bias against race, religion, gender, gender identity or sexual orientation, and could impose criminal charges. It comes after the name “Karen” became a popular term to describe white women who engage in racist behavior.

California Democrat state lawmaker Rob Bonta introduced Assembly Bill 1550, which also calls for consequences, including a fine in excess of $10K and possible prison time for those who call 911 based on discrimination. Lawmakers in New York, Oregon and Washington have introduced similar bills. It is already a crime to file a false police report and this bill could have a chilling effect on calling the police in a real emergency – especially if the crime or threat of crime is committed by someone of a protected minority. -GEG

With more people frivolously calling the police in incidents involving minorities — like what local skincare CEO Lisa Alexander did in June to a Filipino neighbor who wrote “Black Lives Matter” on his own property — SF Supervisor Shamann Walton has proposed an order that would outlaw “racially biased” police calls.

911 calls based on discriminatory impulses continue to be a problem not only in the Bay Area but throughout the country. In an effort to both curb their persistence and outlaw them all together, District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton introduced the CAREN (Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies) Act Tuesday, which would attach criminal penalties to an individual making “racially biased emergency reports” that are not actually emergencies.

The acronym, too, is no doubt a memeable home run — though more and more people named Karen across the U.S. are pushing back on this stereotype.

According to the Chronicle, Walton says that the legislation intends to “protect the rights of communities of color who are often targeted and victims of fraudulent emergency calls.” Walton later went on to add the CAREN Act will make it “unlawful for an individual to contact law enforcement solely to discriminate on the basis of a person’s race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity” — which would potentially have made Alexander and her accomplice’s 911 call against James Juanillo for stenciling a BLM message outside his home last month a punishable offense.

Per ABC7, Walton mentioned at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting that measures like the CAREN Act — and New York’s recently introduced “Amy Cooper Bill” — exist as “part of a larger nationwide movement to address racial biases and implement consequences for weaponizing emergency resources with racist intentions.”

Similarly, California Assemblymember Rob Banta introduced Assembly Bill 1550 in June which, if passed, would consider racially biased 911 calls on-par with other hate crimes, meaning such false reports could be punishable by a fine in excess of $10K and possible jail time.

Read full article here…




US Supreme Court Sides with Catholic Nuns in Obamacare Contraceptive Mandate

Nuns at The Little Sisters of the Poor, a religious nonprofit that operates homes for the elderly, won their Supreme Court case against the contraceptive mandate in Obamacare. The Trump administration’s broad rollback of Obamacare rules that required employers to provide free birth control to women now protects employers from being forced to participate in providing cost-free contraceptives to employees. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, saying the Court’s ruling “leaves women workers to fend for themselves.” Democrat Congressman Jerry Nadler said the regulations upheld by the Court can be reversed by a new President. -GEG

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled 7-2 upholding President Donald Trump‘s move to let more employers opt-out of the Affordable Care Act mandate guaranteeing no-cost contraceptive services for women.

The case involved a 2018 regulation from the Department of Health and Human Services exempting any employer with a religious or moral objection to contraception from a requirement that such coverage be included in an employee’s health insurance plan.

Seventeen states, led by Pennsylvania and New Jersey, challenged the policy as fundamentally unlawful and it’s rationale as “arbitrary and capricious.”

The Affordable Care Act requires insurers to include “preventive care and screenings” as part of “minimal essential coverage” for Americans, but it left to HHS to define what services qualify. Since 2010, all FDA-approved contraceptives have been included. Millions of women obtain birth control at no cost through their employer-sponsored health insurance plans under these rules.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing the majority opinion, concluded that a “plain reading” of the law gives the administration “virtually unbridled discretion” to decide what counts as required coverage and any religious and moral exemptions that may be necessary.

Read full article here…

Link for legislation:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&division=&title=11.6.&part=1.&chapter=1.&article=