Merriam–Webster, Associated Press Change Literal Definitions to Push Democrat Talking Points

Contributing Author
-
0
Merriam–Webster, Associated Press Change Literal Definitions to Push Democrat Talking Points

Webster’s Dictionary updated its definition of the word “preference” on Tuesday to include a caveat that states the word is “offensive” to LGBT individuals when used in relation to sex.

“The term preference as used to refer to sexual orientation is widely considered offensive in its implied suggestion that a person can choose who they are sexually or romantically attracted to,” the new definition reads.

The update came just hours after Senate Democrats attacked Judge Amy Coney Barrett for using the term “sexual preference” in the context of gay marriage during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week.

“Let me make clear, ‘sexual preference’ is an offensive and outdated term,” Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, told Barrett.

“It is used by the anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. It is not,” she ranted. “Sexual orientation is a key part of a person’s identity. … So if it is your view that sexual orientation is merely a ‘preference,’ as you noted, then the LGBTQ community should be rightly concerned whether you will uphold their constitutional right to marry.”

This change follows on the heels of the Associated Press’s decision to adopt Democrats’ language on the issue of court-packing.

The term was thrust into the news cycle after radical progressives suggested that Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden might add additional seats to the Supreme Court to offset the three conservative appointees under President Donald Trump and tip the balance to the Left.

Both Biden and running mate Kamala Harris resisted giving straight answers over their support it during recent debates, although Biden later claimed that he was “not a fan.”

But fringe progressives pushed back by trying to reframe and revise the semantics surrounding the unpopular measure.

In a story about a debate between Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., and Democrat Gov. Steve Bullock, the AP wrote: “Bullock said that if Coney Barrett was confirmed, he would be open to measures to depoliticize the court, including adding judges to the bench, a practice critics have dubbed packing the courts.”

But as critics pointed out, court-packing would not “depoliticize” the Supreme Court. That’s just language Democrats have adopted to make court-packing seem less menacing.

The AP edited its article after facing criticism and added a note that said, “This story has been edited to make clear that it is Bullock’s opinion, rather than a fact, that adding justices to the Supreme Court would depoliticize the court.”

Now the story reads: “Bullock said that if Coney Barrett was confirmed, he would be open to measures including adding justices to the bench, a practice critics have dubbed packing the courts.”

EMAILS: Hunter Biden’s Chinese ‘Consulting’ Deal Worth 10x Burisma; 10% Cut for Joe?

Ben Sellers
-
0
EMAILS: Hunter Biden’s Chinese ‘Consulting’ Deal Worth 10x Burisma; 10% Cut for Joe?

In what was sure to be the first of many explosive follow-up stories tied with the trove of data gathered from Hunter Biden‘s abandoned laptop, the New York Post revealed that Hunter sought to reap profits more than 10 times as big as his controversial Burisma deal from a Chinese energy firm seeking access to the Obama administration.

Backing up earlier allegations made in a report by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Post reported that Hunter also sought to bring other family members and business associates in on the deal with CEFC China Energy Co.

That likely included his father, current Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden, possibly in violation of federal laws prohibiting public servants from profiting off foreign entities.

According to a May 13, 2017 email with the subject line “Expectations,” which was authored by James Gilliar of the international consulting firm J2cR, Hunter and his business associates planned to establish a separate company for their venture.

Gillar outlined “remuneration packages” that included the amount of “850” for a person identified as “Hunter.”

In addition, they discussed the division of equity shares in the company, which included 20 percent for “H.”

The initials listed in the payment amounts appeared to correspond with those of the four men included in the email.

Two other unidentified men not included in the email were mentioned: one going by the name “Jim” and the other being referred to as “the big guy.” These likely referred to Joe Biden and his brother James.

The plan was to reserve 10 percent of the profits for “the big guy,” although the funds were to be “held by H,” according to the email.

Joe Biden, was vice president at the time, which would have made him subject to restrictions under the Constitution’s emoluments clause and other laws governing ethical conflicts of interest.

The terms of the CEFC arrangement once again surfaced in an Aug. 2, 2017 exchange that referenced Ye Jianming, the company’s former chairman who has since vanished after being arrested by Chinese authorities.

The email, authored by “Robert Biden”—which is Hunter’s first name—said Ye sought to renegotiate the terms of a three-year consulting contract that initially had offered Hunter $10 million a year “for introductions alone.”

By comparison, Hunter received an estimated $1 million a year for his consulting services as a Burisma board member.

“The chairman changed that deal after we me[t] in MIAMI TO A MUCH MORE LASTING AND LUCRATIVE ARRANGEMENT to create a holding company 50% percent owned by ME and 50% owned by him,” Hunter reportedly wrote.

He said that the new deal was more appealing to him and his “family” since it offered the prospect of an ongoing revenue stream.

“Consulting fees is one piece of our income stream but the reason this proposal by the chairman was so much more interesting to me and my family is that we would also be partners inn [sic] the equity and profits of the JV’s [joint venture’s] investments.”

The data also included a hand-drawn picture of a rudimentary flowchart for the proposed firm, Hudson West, which indicated that both stakeholders planned to funnel the profits through separate shell companies, with Hunter’s not yet named in the Aug. 1 chart.

His law firm, Owasco PC, was later named as one of the two owners of Hudson West, which has since been dissolved.

According to the recent Senate report, Hudson West opened a line of credit in September 2017 and issued credit cards to Hunter, as well as his uncle James and aunt Sara, allowing  them to purchase more than $100,000 in “extravagant items” including travel and Apple products

Rudy Giuliani, the attorney for President Donald Trump who received the trove of data from a Delaware computer shop owner and later conveyed it to the Post, revealed a text-exchange involving members of the Biden family that offered further insights into their money-making operations, American Greatness reported.

“I love you all but I don’t receive any respect, and that’s fine, I guess,” the 50-year-old Hunter allegedly wrote in the text to his daughter Naomi. “Works for you, apparently. I hope you all can do what I did and pay for everything for this entire family for thirty years.”

The text chain also seemed to acknowledge that part of Hunter’s role in the family dealings was to hold Joe Biden’s cut of the money.

“It’s really hard, but don’t worry, unlike pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary,” he wrote.

Despite the damning implications of the evidence, left-wing media such as the Washington Post and social-media platforms including Twitter and Facebook were scrambling to suppress and discredit the information as of Thursday morning.

Biden campaign press secretary Jamal Brown claimed that the media blackout was proof that the allegations were false.

C-SPAN Suspends Would-Be Moderator Scully After He Lied About Hack

Editor 1
-
0
C-SPAN Suspends Would-Be Moderator Scully After He Lied About Hack

(Headline USA) C-SPAN suspended its political editor Steve Scully indefinitely Thursday after he admitted to lying about his Twitter feed being hacked when he was confronted about a questionable exchange with former Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci.

The news came on the day of what was supposed to be a career highlight for the 30-year C-SPAN veteran.

Scully was to moderate the second debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden, which was canceled after Trump would not agree to a virtual format because of his COVID-19 diagnosis.

Scully worked as an intern for Biden, and in the media relations department for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, when he was in college.

A week ago, after Trump had criticized him as a “never Trumper,” Scully tweeted “@Scaramucci should I respond to Trump.”

Scaramucci, a former Trump communications director and now a critic of the president, advised Scully to ignore him.

Scully said that when he saw his tweet had created a controversy, “I falsely claimed that my Twitter account had been hacked.”

He had been frustrated by Trump’s comments and several weeks of criticism on social media and conservative news outlets about his role as moderator, including attacks directed at his family, he said.

“These were both errors in judgement for which I am totally responsible for,” Scully said. “I apologize.”

He said he let down his colleagues at C-SPAN, fellow news professionals and the debate commission.

“I ask for their forgiveness as I try to move forward in a moment of reflection and disappointment in myself,” he said.

C-SPAN said Scully confessed to lying about the hack on Wednesday.

“He understands that he made a serious mistake,” the network said. “We were very saddened by this news and do not condone his actions.”

The debate commission did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Scully has led the network’s presidential election coverage since 1992, but the suspension means he won’t be part of C-SPAN’s election night programming.

Scully has been the moderator of “Washington Journal,” the weekly call-in program, and regularly hosted other C-SPAN programs.

The network said Scully has consistently demonstrated fairness and professionalism, and built a reservoir of good will.

“After some distance from this episode, we believe in his ability to continue to contribute to C-SPAN,” the network said.

Adapted from reporting by Associated Press.

MUST WATCH: Rudy Giuliani Explains Biden Crime Family’s Split of Corrupt Proceeds

Editor 1
-
0
MUST WATCH: Rudy Giuliani Explains Biden Crime Family’s Split of Corrupt Proceeds

As the New York Post published blockbuster evidence collected from an abandoned computer that showed Hunter Biden traded on the influence of his father, former Vice President Joe Biden, to win lucrative contracts with suspect companies in Ukraine, Russia, China and Iraq (in the case of James Biden, Joe’s brother), Rudy Giuliani produced a 16-minute video that explained the grift in detail. Watch above.

Senate Judiciary to Vote Oct. 22 on Barrett’s Nomination; Dems Go Nuts

Editor 1
-
0
Senate Judiciary to Vote Oct. 22 on Barrett’s Nomination; Dems Go Nuts

(Headline USA) With a vote date set, the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday debated the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court, Democrats objecting to Republicans’ “rush” to confirm President Donald Trump‘s pick before the Nov. 3 election.

The committee set an Oct. 22 vote to recommend Barrett’s nomination and send it to the full Senate for a vote by month’s end.

“If anybody in America is ready to go to the Supreme Court” it’s Barrett, said Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Democrats tried, and failed, as the minority party to halt the process.

According to Fox News:

Their actions — which included initially only Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., showing up to the committee’s initial markup and making a motion to end the meeting because there are two minority members needed for a quorum — appear to fulfill a promise from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., that Democrats “will not supply the quorum. Period,” and that they will do everything they can to delay Barrett’s confirmation.

“Under the rules of this committee you cannot proceed with the business of the committee, even with a quorum present, unless there are two members of the minority present as well,” Durbin told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., at the start of the meeting. “I want to take official note of the fact that I am the only member of the minority that is here.”

Graham introduced the motion anyway and scheduled a vote on Barrett for 1 p.m. on Oct. 22 before other Democratic senators began to filter in.

After they arrived, the Democrats whined about moving forward on the nominee.

“This is a sham,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., arguing the Senate should wait until after the election and allow the winner of the presidency to chose the nominee for the vacant seat.

“I believe that this rush, sham process is a disservice to our committee,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

“It’s going to create a lot of bad will that doesn’t need to be created,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein of California.

The session on Thursday is without Barrett after two long days of public testimony in which she stressed that she would be her own judge and sought to create distance between herself and past positions critical of abortion, the Affordable Care Act and other issues.

Her confirmation to take the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems inevitable, as even some Senate Democrats acknowledged.

Graham pushed past Democratic objections and procedural moves to set the panel’s Oct. 22 vote on recommending her confirmation even before final witnesses testify before and against her nomination.

In the minority, Democrats acknowledge there is little they can do stop them from shifting the court toward more conservatism for years to come.

Republicans insisted they were well within norms with Trump as president.

Democrats called it a “power grab” and violation of Senate traditions.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said there “is nothing wrong with confirming a devout pro-life Christian.”

Adapted from reporting by Associated Press.

One Million Mail-In Ballots Projected to be Invalid

Joshua Paladino
-
0
One Million Mail-In Ballots Projected to be Invalid

An election model estimates that election officials could reject more than one million mail-in ballots this presidential election, The Epoch Times reported.

Columbia Journalism Investigations conducted the analysis on the premise that the ballot-rejection rate for the 2020 election will be about the same in each county as it was in the 2016 election.

There were 300,000 mail-in ballots rejected in 2016, when Americans cast only 41 million votes through the mail, which shows a 0.7 percent rejection rate.

But in the 2020 election, about 80 million Americans have requested to vote by mail.

If there were 1.03 million rejections, as the modelers estimate, then 1.2 percent of all votes would not be counted.

“This assumption is likely problematic,” the authors said, noting that many poorer and younger demographics, who are more likely to incorrectly complete their ballots, will vote by mail in 2020 than in 2016, so the rejection rate could rise this election.

Other factors this election could cause a major uptick in rejected ballots, which could foment trouble.

There are three main reasons that election officials reject ballots.

In 27.5 percent of cases, the signature on the ballot does not match the registered voter’s signature.

Another 23.1 percent of ballots missed the deadline for submission.

Voters did not sign 20 percent of the discarded ballots.

The remaining 14.8 percent of ballots were rejected for other reasons.

Accordiing to Logan Churchwell, a spokesman for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, there have been more ballots rejected in the 2020 primary season than in the 2012 and 2016 general elections together.

“Voting by mail should never be thought as a superior replacement to polling places,” he said.

“Glitches and errors are cured in a polling place by people trained to help. Here again, the cure is proving worse than the ailment. Millions of Americans (or their elected officials) were conned into thinking that mass mail balloting was the safe and effective answer in the face of the pandemic.”

Wisc. Man Admits He Fired First Shot on Night That Rittenhouse Killed Two

Contributing Author
-
0
Wisc. Man Admits He Fired First Shot on Night That Rittenhouse Killed Two

A Wisconsin man charged by police for his role in the Kenosha riots admitted to authorities that he fired the first shot right before the fatal shootings involving 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse.

Joshua Ziminski, 35, and his wife both admitted to detectives that Ziminski fired a “warning shot” into the air on the night of Aug. 25, immediately before Rittenhouse allegedly shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum during a night of riots, according to the New York Post.

Rittenhouse has been charged with first-degree murder, but his attorneys have argued he acted in self-defense.

Ziminski’s admission may prove that Rittenhouse is telling the truth.

Video footage of that night shows Rittenhouse appearing to flee an increasingly agitated mob of rioters until he was cornered in the lot of a car dealership.

In the video, obtained by the New York Times, there appears to be a muzzle flash and gunshot sound coming from Rosenbaum’s direction as Rosenbaum begins to move toward Rittenhouse.

That gunshot was fired by Ziminski, according to Wisconsin detectives.

Authorities now have video evidence that Ziminski was “holding a black handgun” immediately before the attack, and he was also seen walking into the Ultimate Gas Station lot, which is adjacent to the car dealership where Rittenhouse had been cornered.

The video of the shooting shows Rittenhouse turning towards the sound of Ziminski’s gun shot, then turning to see Rosenbaum running at him, and then firing several close-range shots.

Ziminski’s shot was what caused Rittenhouse to believe that his life was in danger, Rittenhouse’s attorneys argued.

This was the “pivotal moment” that led Rittenhouse to believe that he had “no way out,” since he had “no way to know who fired that shot.”

Police arrested Ziminski last week on charges of disorderly conduct and use of a dangerous weapon, according to online court records.

He pleaded not guilty on Friday and was released on a $1,000 cash bond.

His pre-trial hearing has been scheduled for Dec. 4.

NBC Faces Backlash After Agreeing to Trump Town Hall

Editor 1
-
0
NBC Faces Backlash After Agreeing to Trump Town Hall

(Headline USA) NBC News faced a sharp backlash to its decision to host President Donald Trump for a town hall Thursday in direct competition with ABC’s event with Democrat Joe Biden, including a social media call to boycott the network.

MSNBC’s biggest star, Rachel Maddow, made two oblique references to the matter on her show Wednesday. During an interview with Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, Maddow asked whether she was “as mad as everybody else” about the Trump town hall.

“I’m not touching that,” Harris replied.

In a second reference to the town hall as her show ended, Maddow spoke as the words “Apparently They Are Not Kidding” were shown on the screen behind her.

NBC said it agreed to set up the dueling town hall after Trump was administered a coronavirus test Tuesday by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Anthony Fauci and NIH clinical director Dr. Clifford Lane reviewed the test and Trump’s medical records, concluding with a “high degree of confidence” that the president was not shedding infectious virus.

Trump tested positive for COVID-19 on Oct. 2 and spent three days at the Walter Reed military hospital. NBC would not say whether Trump was still testing positive Tuesday.

The president and Biden were supposed to meet Thursday for their second debate hosted by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates. Following the president’s diagnosis, the commission switched it to a virtual meeting, but Trump declined to participate. Biden then agreed to appear on ABC.

Previous town halls on both ABC and NBC were staged by the networks to boost Biden.

In a previous Trump town hall hosted by Stephanopoulos on ABC, some of the “undecided” voters who toughly questioned him were later discovered to be Biden backers.

And on a previous NBC town hall for Biden, he was lobbed softball after softball that embarrassed even some liberal commentators.

Critics of NBC questioned why the network scheduled Trump for the same time, making viewers have to choose if they were interested in seeing both candidates react live in a similar format.

Veteran journalist Jeff Greenfield called it “indefensible” on Twitter, where a call to boycott NBC was a trending topic.

“They rewarded Trump by giving him this time,” Greenfield said in an interview.

Katie Couric, former host of NBC’s “Today” show, said on Twitter that NBC’s decision was “bad for democracy.” NBC actress Shakina Nayfack, whose comedy series “Connecting” will be preempted Thursday by the Trump town hall, criticized her employer.

“Y’all sign my checks of late but I’m disgusted by my home network giving Trump a platform for fear mongering, bigotry and disinformation,” she wrote on Twitter.

NBC said in a statement that “the Trump campaign did not dictate or request the time slot nor express any preference.”

The network considered it important that Trump be given the same format, day of the week and length of time that Biden had on NBC last week — although he will have a different moderator. Savannah Guthrie will be Trump’s host after Lester Holt moderated the Biden event.

NBC said Trump would be at least 12 feet from Guthrie and the audience.

Both town halls will begin at 8 p.m. Eastern, but Biden will have the last word. The ABC event, moderated by George Stephanopoulos, will last 90 minutes with an additional half hour of analysis. Trump’s town hall on NBC is scheduled for an hour.

In addition to preventing viewers from getting a side-by-side comparison of the two men, the dueling events will likely be seen by far fewer people.

The first debate between the two men last month was watched by an estimated 73.1 million people, the Nielsen company said.

An estimated 6.7 million people saw Biden at an NBC News-sponsored town hall last week. Like the Trump event on Thursday will be, it was simulcast on MSNBC, CNBC and streamed online.

Trump’s ABC town hall with Stephanopoulos on Sept. 15 was seen by 3.8 million people, Nielsen said.

Adapted from reporting by Associated Press.

Republicans Defy Calif.’s Democrat Election Officials; Refuse to Remove Ballot Boxes

Editor 1
-
0
Republicans Defy Calif.’s Democrat Election Officials; Refuse to Remove Ballot Boxes

(Headline USA) With more than 1.5 million votes already cast in California, state Republican Party leaders on Wednesday said they will not comply with an order from the state’s chief elections official to remove unofficial ballot drop boxes from counties with competitive U.S. House races.

Secretary of State Alex Padilla and Attorney General Xavier Becerra, both Democrats, say these unofficial ballot drop boxes are illegal and have ordered Republicans to remove them by Thursday. They worry voters will confuse these Republican boxes with the official ballot drop boxes put in place and monitored by county election officials.

Party leaders have said they put these boxes in Orange, Fresno and Los Angeles counties. Wednesday, party leaders would not say where else they have put these boxes or how many ballots they have collected from them.

But Tom Hiltachk, the party’s general counsel, said these boxes comply with California’s “ballot harvesting” law, which lets people collect ballots from voters and return them to county election offices to be counted.

Hiltachk said all of the party’s drop boxes are indoors either at county party headquarters, churches or retailers that have agreed to participate. He says the boxes are locked and monitored by people.

“The fact that it is a box does not make it illegal,” Hiltachk said. “If we have to use a bag, then we’ll use a bag.”

Once a voter fills out a ballot, anyone can return it. Most people mail them in prepaid envelopes provided by their county election offices. But others place them in official ballot drop boxes spread throughout the county.

State law defines a “vote by mail ballot drop box” as a “secure receptacle established by a county or city and county elections official.” The Secretary of State has rules about the boxes’ design, how they should be labeled and how often ballots should be retrieved. But county election officials decide how many boxes to have and where to put them.

Political parties will collect ballots from supporters and return them to county election offices, a practice known as “ballot harvesting.” Some states have banned this practice, but it’s legal in California. The practice is easy to exploit for vote fraud, which happened in North Carolina in 2018, eliminating the result of a Congressional election and requiring a do-over.

Most of the time ballot harvesting is done by volunteers who go door to door to collect ballots from supporters. But this year, Republicans have set up boxes for people to drop off their ballots. Democrats, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, have decried these boxes as an attempt to confuse voters. A cease and desist order from the Secretary of State’s office noted some of these boxes were put in public places and labeled as official drop boxes.

Wednesday, Hiltachk blamed “perhaps an overzealous volunteer” for mislabeling some drop boxes as “official.” He said none of the boxes now carry those labels. Hiltachk said a photo distributed by the Secretary of State’s Office of a drop box on a public sidewalk was just a pastor photographing the box as it was being delivered. He said the box is actually inside the church.

“The letter from the Democrat Secretary of State is a voter suppression effort, aimed at intimidating California Republican Party officials and volunteers from gathering and delivering ballots,” said Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney and member of the Republican National Committee.

Padilla’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Becerra’s office said it had received the Republican Party’s response and is reviewing it.

State law requires ballot harvesters to also sign the ballot they are delivering, but there is no penalty for not doing this. Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School, said that means voters who put ballots in these Republican drop boxes will still have their votes counted. But that doesn’t mean the party couldn’t be held accountable, she said.

“California is not going to discard all those ballots,” she said. “Could you use that lack of penalty and essentially exploit it to your benefit? I guess my response is, it is still not what the law provides you should do.”

The Secretary of State’s Office reported Wednesday that more than 1.5 million vote-by-mail ballots have already been returned. In 2016, just 150,000 people had returned their vote-by-mail ballots at this point in the election cycle.

But this year, the coronavirus has changed how people vote. For the first time, California has mailed a ballot to every active registered voter before the election to encourage people to cast ballots remotely instead of in person during a pandemic.

“Californians are voting early in historic numbers,” Padilla said in a news release. “We knew the COVID-19 pandemic would pose significant challenges, but elections officials have prepared and voters have responded.”

Adapted from reporting by Associated Press.

St. Louis Couple Who Waved Guns at Marauders Plead Not Guilty

Editor 1
-
0
St. Louis Couple Who Waved Guns at Marauders Plead Not Guilty

(Headline USA) A St. Louis couple celebrated in some circles and vilified in others for waving guns at trespassing leftists marching on their private street pleaded not guilty to two felony charges at a brief hearing Wednesday.

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are both attorneys, were indicted by a St. Louis grand jury last week on charges of unlawful use of a weapon and tampering with evidence. They will appear in court again Oct. 28.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner originally filed the weapons charge in July. The grand jury added the evidence tampering charge. The indictment states that a semiautomatic pistol was altered in a way that “obstructed the prosecution of Patricia McCloskey” on the weapons charge.

The McCloskeys have blamed the leftist Democrats in St. Louis for their plight and have become folk heroes among some conservatives. They have received support from President Donald Trump and they spoke on video during the opening night of the Republican National Convention.

In fact, the McCloskeys’ attorney, Joel Schwartz, indicated that Trump remains interested in the case.

“They have spoken with the president,” Schwartz said after the hearing. “The president contacts them semi-frequently.”

He declined to elaborate and the McCloskeys declined to be interviewed.

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson has defended the couple’s right to protect their home and said he will pardon them if they are convicted.

The protest on June 28 came in the midst of national race riots that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. A few hundred marchers were on their way to St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home when they invaded a private street made up of million-dollar homes in St. Louis’s posh Central West End.

The McCloskeys claimed the protesters not only ignored a “No Trespassing” sign but also broke down an iron gate. Protest leaders said they did not damage the gate.

Mark McCloskey emerged from his home armed with an AR-15 rifle and Patricia McCloskey came out with a semiautomatic handgun. It wasn’t immediately clear if that gun was the same one that was the subject of the evidence tampering charge.

Cellphone video captured the tense confrontation between the McCloskeys and the protesters. The couple said they felt threatened but protest leaders said the demonstration was peaceful on their end. No shots were fired and no one was hurt.

Gardner, a Democrat, said the display of guns risked bloodshed. A police probable cause statement said protesters feared “being injured due to Patricia McCloskey’s finger being on the trigger, coupled with her excited demeanor.”

Schwartz called the charges a “travesty” and a “political prosecution,” citing as evidence Gardner’s ads in her successful Democratic primary campaign in August in which she referenced the case.

Schwartz said he will ask that Gardner’s office be disqualified so another prosecutor can take over the case.

Gardner said in a statement: “As in all cases prosecuted by the Circuit Attorney Office, we seek justice on behalf of the people of the city of St. Louis that ensures fairness while protecting the due process rights of the accused.”

Nine people involved in the protest were charged with misdemeanor trespassing, but the city counselor’s office later dropped the charges. The city counselor’s office handles lesser crimes and is not affiliated with the circuit attorney’s office.

Mark McCloskey, after a brief court hearing last week, expressed anger that he and his wife faced criminal charges while those who trespassed on his property did not.

“Every single human being that was in front of my house was a criminal trespasser,” McCloskey said. “They broke down our gate. They trespassed on our property. Not a single one of those people is now charged with anything. We’re charged with felonies that could cost us four years of our lives and our law licenses.”

Adapted from reporting by Associated Press.

1...3,5253,5263,527...3,826Page 3,526 of 3,826