Connect with us

Politics

German Judge Calls Trump Admin “Fascist” as German Government Raids Homes, Files 50 Hate Speech cases A DAY

Published

2 weeks ago

on

Donald Duck in military attire humorously waves beside framed caricatures of a dictator, satirizing propaganda in a classic animated scene.The author was nearly raided by German police for posting a satiric image of Donald Duck as a Nazi from the 1942 Oscar-winning Disney one-reeler “Der Fuehrer’s Face”

A German court ruled the Trump administration is “openly far-right” with “fascist tendencies” as German police raided several prominent conservative critics for alleged “Hate Speech” last week. Firing back, the US Embassy in Berlin warned of “censorship and oppression of political opponents in Germany”, which is “threatening to ban the opposition”. Notably, President Trump has yet to even nominate an Ambassador to Germany, a diplomatic slight usually reserved for antagonistic countries.

A judge at Bonn Circuit Court described the Trump administration as “openly far-right extremist-populist” and claimed it had “fascist tendencies”, Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger reported. The Circuit Court 13th Civil Chamber complained of “deeply anti-democratic, anti-justice, autocratic or fascist tendencies in the Trump administration,” the judge said in a ruling on a suit by an internet user complaining of US access to his data.

The bureaucratic, anti-free market EU has generated no successful Internet platforms of its own, but it frequently complains about US internet platforms.

The judge called Vice President JD Vance’s historic speech at the Munich Security Conference in February, calling out censorship and political oppression in the EU, “ridiculous” in light of alleged “fascism” in the USA.

ICYMI: Here’s Vice President J.D. Vance’s Full Speech on Free Speech and Tyrannical Censorship That Sent European Elites Into a Total Meltdown at the Munich Security Conference (FULL TRANSCRIPT)

A spokesman for the US Embassy in Berlin was “taken aback”, Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger reported, expressing worry about “censorship and persecution of political opponents" in top NATO ally Germany: The US government is "concerned about the potential for a democratic blackslide in Germany due to steps to ban popular opposition parties,” the spokesman said.

On June 29, 2025, the ruling Social Democrat party voted to ban the most popular party in Germany, the right-wing AfD, which is currently polling at 26%, ahead of Chancellor Merz’s Christian Democrats at 24% and the failing Social Democrats at 15%. A possible AfD ban would have to be decided by Germany's supreme court, which has become notoriously political since Chancellor Angela Merkel installed fellow party member Stephan Harbarth as chair, ridiculously claiming the 1949 German Constitution requires carbon net-zero policies, for example. The Social Democrats have further been packing the court with leftist judges this year to ensure an AfD ban will go through because they cannot beat the party at the polls.

As the recession in Germany heads into its fourth year due to insane “climate transformation” polices, and migrant stabbings and gang rapes have become a daily occurrence, the German government is now resorting to more and more repressive measures to keep a lid on dissent, including banning Ludwigshafen mayoral candidate Joachim Paul from the ballot for crimes including liking "The Lord of the Rings."

This week, police in Hamburg raided the home of renowned media professor Norbert Bolz for a satiric post comparing the “woke” agenda to the Nazi slogan “Germany awaken!” (Deutschland erwache!). The almost 2-year old post was reported by state-funded “hate speech tracker” HessenAgainstHate to the “Hate Speech Desk” ZMI at the German FBI Bundeskriminalamt BKA.

Liberal journalist Jochen Bittner called for the Judge and DA who approved the raid to be tried for abuse of the law.

Free speech lawyer Joachim Steinhöfel called for German Minister of the Interior Alexander Dobrindt to “issue clear guidelines on how to take context into account in free speech cases, on strict proportionality in digital evidence, and on safeguarding academic and press freedom. Whoever criminalizes criticism confuses justice with revenge and security with censorship." Steinhöfel called the search and seizure of a renowned professor because of an obviously legal tweet a “scandalous infringement of basic civil rights.”

German prosecutors obviously have instructions to find reasons to raid, prosecute and intimidate political critics, journalists and  opposition leaders. They frequently exaggerate the threat posed by harmless tweets, such as taking any mention of the Nazis as a literal endorsement of the Nazis. On Michael Shellenberger’s website Public, I described how the Munich police nearly raided my home for a Donald Duck meme and criticizing Hamas uses of the swastika, for example. This was also reported to the police by state-funded HesseAgainstHate.

On Oct. 21, Covid-critical attorney Stefan Homburg received a summons for his court date Jan. 8, 2026, for “insulting” prominent German Covid “ethics czar” Alena Buyx, notorious for pronouncing vax mandates “ethical”. On April 12, 2024, Homburg had accused Buyx of endorsing “forced measures”, which she feels is an illegal insult. The prosecution files show that the D.A. in Hanover considers the case a “political prosecution”, which is apparently a category of crime now in Germany.

That same week, rabid Israel critic Jürgen Todenhöfer announced he is being investigated for “hate speech” for comparing the Israeli government to the Nazis, and for criticizing German support for Ukraine, in light of claims Ukraine blew up the Nord Stream pipelines. “The court ordered a search of my apartment, my office, my car, and also me personally, as well as to seize all my cell phones, iPads, and storage media.”

Contrary to media reports, the raid has not been executed so far because the authorities could not find him, Todenhöfer posted.

“At any moment, security forces could storm my apartment, search it, and seize my electronic devices. If one is no longer allowed to criticize Netanyahu, if one is no longer allowed to speak openly about war and genocide, then freedom of opinion in Germany is at an end. Without freedom of opinion, democracies cannot survive”, Todenhöfer stated, melodramatically announcing he would not pay a fine if sentenced and go to prison instead.

The Central Reporting Desk of the Bundeskriminalamt BKA has received 59,010 reports since 2021, of which 85% were deemed to be actionable, it reports, including 5186 reports in the 1st quarter 2025, 6241 reports in the 2nd quarter 2025, and 5256 reports in the 3rd quarter 2025, a total of 16,683 reported "hate speech crimes" 2025 so far. Assuming the 85% actionability rate applies, that means approximately 14,000 "hate speech crimes" have been pursued this year in Germany, or approximately 50 per day.

JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference Feb. 20:

"I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns or worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections or shutting people out of the political process protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy. Speaking up and expressing opinions isn’t election interference.

Even when people express views outside your own country, and even when those people are very influential – and trust me, I say this with all humour – if American democracy can survive ten years of Greta Thunberg’s scolding you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.

But what no democracy, American, German or European will survive, is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief, are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t. Europeans, the people have a voice. European leaders have a choice. And my strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future."

The post German Judge Calls Trump Admin “Fascist” as German Government Raids Homes, Files 50 Hate Speech cases A DAY appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

What Does Accountability Look Like for Service Members Affected by the COVID-19 Shot ?

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Image: Wikimedia Commons (U.S. Department of Defense, February 2025)

Dozens of service members currently serving in the military have offered their thoughts on how to hold accountable those military leaders who violated the law by implementing and enforcing the COVID-19 shot.

A startling report released by The Gateway Pundit recently highlighted the findings of a small, independent survey carried out by J.M. Phelps. Sadly, 89 percent of over sixty respondents stated that they would not advise their children, family members, or friends to join the military.

As previously reported, 80 percent attribute their reason to “the lack of accountability for the implementation and enforcement of the 2021 military shot mandate.”

Out of 66 participants in the fall 2025 survey, 64 respondents, or 97 percent, believe that leaders within the Department of Defense should be held responsible for how the mandate was put into action and enforced in August 2021.

While the survey only represents a small fraction of a much larger population, 63 out of the 66 participants, or 95 percent, expressed that accountability is essential for them to restore their trust in the military. This perspective has been echoed by hundreds of service members and veterans in discussions with the author over the past four years. And as of now, no one has faced consequences.

In the latest findings presented below, individuals actively serving in the various branches of the military also shared their perspectives on what accountability would look like to them. Each emphasized that his or her views to not reflect those of the War Department or their respective branches of the military.

To summarize, here’s what the participants in the survey conveyed about the accountability of military leaders responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the shot:

Subjectively, most survey participants indicated that their violations of the law should be categorized into different levels, including low-level, moderate-level, and severe-level violations. Although these categories would need to be clearly defined, “low-level” infractions would require mandatory training on the unlawful components of the mandate, with no repercussions for the violator’s career.

In the case of what would be considered “moderate” infractions, those who violated the law should encounter negative administrative actions that may affect their career. Lastly, “severe” violations would warrant Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) action, which could lead to the end of their career through courts-martial, dishonorable discharges, and more, including complete forfeiture of rank, benefits, and pension.

Numerous individuals advocated for General Officer Memorandums of Reprimand (GOMOR) to be included in their records. Some even proposed prohibiting federal service and future political appointments. One person even recommended that leaders face treason charges and time in jail.

Participants in the survey also advocated for public apologies to the American people through testimonies presented to Congress that would be included in the congressional record.

One respondent expressed concern that any form of punishment might be perceived as “authoritarian” by those on the Left. This same service member proposed offering “ribbons, medals, or awards [for] the brave few” who opposed the illegal enforcement of the shot mandate.

The loss of careers, the loss of promotions, the strains on marriages, and so much more have left many service members feeling resentful. Given the incredible challenges they faced in opposing an “unlawful as implemented” shot mandate, their anger may be justified.

Is there a middle ground that can be reached between those adversely affected and the Department of War? That’s a decision for War Secretary Pete Hegseth and his department to make.

Here are a few additional points for the Department of War to consider:

Out of 66 participants in the survey, 59—equating to 89 percent—reported knowing someone who has been separated or compelled to leave military service due to the COVID-19 shot mandate. Additionally, 61 individuals, or 92 percent, indicated that they know someone who has suffered physical harm from the shot. Furthermore, eight of the 66 participants reported experiencing physical harm themselves.

Is it any wonder why they may never cease seeking accountability? War Secretary Hegseth, what’s holding you back? That’s the question on everyone’s mind.

The post What Does Accountability Look Like for Service Members Affected by the COVID-19 Shot ? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Embattled BBC Apologizes to the Public for Misleading Edit of Trump J6 Speech, as US President Demands Retraction, Threatens Legal Action Seeking $1 Billion in Damages

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Will Trump take legal action against the BBC?

The ‘Beeb’ is in the crosshairs of Trump’s legal team for one billion dollars.

A day after the resignation of Director-General Tim Davie and the ousting of Chief News Executive Deborah Turness, the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) is dealing with the fallout of the accusations of institutional biases and the scandal over the deceptive editing of Donal J. Trump’s J6 speech.

Today (10), BBC Chairman Samir Shah has publicly admitted the corporation made what he called an ‘error of judgment’.

Shah admitted that the editing of separate comments by Trump created the manufactured impression that the US President had called for violence on January 6 2021.

Shah made these comments in a written statement to Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

BBC reported:

“He writes: ‘Since the publication of Mr. Prescott’s memo, this issue has led to over 500 complaints. These are now being dealt with in the normal way. It has also prompted further reflection by the BBC’.

‘The conclusion of that deliberation is that we accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologize for that error of judgement’.”

A spokesman for failing Prime Minister Keir Starmer says that he ‘does not believe the BBC is institutionally biased’.

“He added: ‘It is important the BBC acts to maintain trust and corrects mistake quickly when they occur… for any public service broadcaster – accountability is vital’.”

Dramatic AI-generated image of London skyline with burning buildings and smoke, featuring the iconic Big Ben and BBC logo in the foreground.AI image by Grok: BBC in complete meltdown.

This comes as BBC News has reported that Trump has sent a letter to the BBC threatening legal action.

UPDATE: Trump’s legal team demands a retraction from the BBC, threatening to sue for $1 Billion if the Broadcaster does not respond by Friday (14).

Text discussing legal action and potential damages involving President Trump and the BBC.

Read more:

JUST IN – Embattled BBC Head Tim Davie Resigns Over Trump Deceptive Documentary Edit and Widespread Bias – Chief News Executive Deborah Turness Also Out – UPDATE: Trump Reacts

The post Embattled BBC Apologizes to the Public for Misleading Edit of Trump J6 Speech, as US President Demands Retraction, Threatens Legal Action Seeking $1 Billion in Damages appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

“America Against America”: Iran Hardliners Emboldened by Mamdani’s Election Win

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Image collage featuring a man in a "Free Palestine" hoodie, a political cartoon of Zohran Mamdani winning, and a video clip of Mamdani waving, all provided by MEMRI.Images taken from screenshots of Iranian sources, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, courtesy of MEMRI, a media which opposes the Iranian regime.

Hardliners and conservative commentators in Iran celebrated Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York’s first Muslim mayor as a symbolic victory for Islam over the West and a sign of America’s decline.

State-affiliated outlets such as the conservative daily Hamshahri and Nour News framed the win as “America Against America,” interpreting it as proof of deep divisions within the U.S. establishment and the “collapse of the old order” marking the beginning of the end of “Trumpism.”

Conservative and state-run media emphasized that Mamdani’s win reflected both a moral and political defeat for America and Israel, with Asr-e Iran describing the election as a “crossing of the mental barriers” created after 9/11 and the erosion of the “Jewish lobby’s” power over U.S. politics.

The IRGC Qods Force Telegram channel called it “the defeat of Trump and Zionism” and “a joyful event” marking America’s changing identity.

In Iran’s parliament, lawmaker Abolghasem Jarareh declared that Mamdani’s victory “shows the strength of the slogan ‘Death to Israel,'” prompting fellow MPs to chant it on the floor.

Tehran mayor’s spokesman Abdolmotahhar Mohammadi praised the result as evidence that “the people of New York reject the influence of a genocidal regime in U.S. governance,” calling it a boost to pro-Palestinian and anti-racist movements worldwide.

Tehran University ideologue Foad Izadi described Mamdani’s rise as “the arrival of the message of 13 Aban in New York,” invoking the anniversary of the 1979 U.S. embassy takeover, a cornerstone of Iran’s revolutionary hostility toward Washington.

Former culture minister Mohammad Hosseini credited Mamdani’s campaign to inspiration from Imam Hossein and the spirit of Ashura.

For Iran’s hardliners, Mamdani’s Shiite background and anti-Israel rhetoric validated their long-standing belief that America is collapsing under its own hypocrisy and moral decay.

They celebrated the rise of a Shia Muslim to power in what they view as the center of Western capitalism, framing it as proof that Islam is advancing within the heart of the enemy’s political system.

Pro-regime commentators portrayed his win as both a political and spiritual triumph over the forces of “arrogance,” arguing that Mamdani’s faith, class-based rhetoric, and pro-Palestinian stance echo the Islamic Revolution’s principles of justice, resistance, and opposition to Zionism.

His victory was cast not merely as a local event but as a divine sign that the West’s liberal order is faltering and that the narrative of Islamic resistance is spreading inside the enemy’s own institutions.

According to The Tehran Times, Iranian commentators framed Mamdani’s election as proof that the American capitalist system is collapsing under its own contradictions.

The paper described his socialist platform, free childcare, rent freezes, public transit reform, and higher taxes on the wealthy, as a direct challenge to U.S. capitalism and evidence of growing anger among ordinary Americans toward an economic order that enriches elites while impoverishing workers.

It characterized the United States as a nation where “billionaires live next to people who can barely pay rent,” portraying Mamdani’s rise as evidence that Americans are rejecting inequality and searching for a fairer alternative to the capitalist model.

Founded in 1979 after the Islamic Revolution, The Tehran Times framed his election as part of a global political shift led by the oppressed and working classes against the “bullies and thugs in the White House.”

His criticism of Israel and defense of Palestinian rights were highlighted as marks of moral courage and proof that the Western narrative on Gaza is weakening.

Asr-e Iran presented the result as a sign of shifting attitudes toward Israel, particularly among younger Americans, and as evidence of the “Zionist lobby’s decline” in New York, home to the world’s second-largest Jewish population.

Mamdani’s pro-Palestinian stance was celebrated as a triumph for the “Axis of Resistance” and proof that revolutionary ideals are spreading into the heart of the United States.

By aligning his socialist and anti-Israel message with Iran’s own revolutionary rhetoric, The Tehran Times cast Mamdani’s victory not merely as a domestic American development but as a symbolic win for the oppressed, confirming that history is tilting toward Islam’s eventual victory over Western hegemony.

According to a report by the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs titled “Tehran Celebrates Mamdani: ‘A Political Earthquake, A Crack in the Pro-Israeli Hegemony,’” Iranian discourse now frames the Islamic Republic as a “demanding side” rather than a reactive one toward Washington.

Supreme Leader Khamenei’s remarks on the “Day of Struggle Against Global Arrogance” reaffirmed that the battle between America and Islam is ideological.

Mamdani’s victory is also expected to embolden the political left in America and across the West.

The Cleveland Jewish News reported that the win is being hailed as a watershed moment for the emerging “Red-Green” alliance between the radical left and Islamist movements, a coalition gaining traction in both Europe and the United States.

Fiamma Nirenstein, Italian-Israeli journalist, author and former politician, described Mamdani as the embodiment of this new ideological partnership: a politician who built his campaign on pro-Palestinian rhetoric, anti-Israel activism, and the rejection of Western democratic norms that once anchored New York’s Jewish and pluralistic identity.

Mamdani’s victory symbolizes how anti-Zionism has become a socially acceptable form of antisemitism, even in America’s most Jewish city.

His promises to cut ties with Israeli institutions, boycott city–Israel partnerships, and divest from Israeli funds are seen as steps toward normalizing hostility to the Jewish state under the banner of social justice.

Nirenstein warns that while Mamdani’s policies may or may not benefit ordinary New Yorkers, the greater cost will be moral and cultural, signaling a West drifting toward moral relativism, hostility to Israel, and the loss of its Judeo-Christian democratic foundations.

The post “America Against America”: Iran Hardliners Emboldened by Mamdani’s Election Win appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending