Mediaboss Marketing

Activists from The Center for Popular Democracy chase down Sen. Rand Paul over about his stance on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Courtesy The Center for Popular Democracy

A federal judge on Wednesday ordered a man accused of threatening to chop up U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and his family with an ax to receive medication so that he can regain competency and stand trial.

Nathanial B. Luffman, 33, was accused in 2018 of threatening Paul, his family and an unnamed Oregon state official in phone calls and emails, according to court records.

Luffman appeared Wednesday before U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman, who is in Oregon, via video conference from a federal medical center in Springfield, Missouri, according to court records.

Luffman, 33, previously lived in Murray, Kentucky, and he was arrested in Berkeley, California, in June 2018 after he allegedly left a threatening email and voicemail for several Oregon state employees and a U.S. Capitol Police special agent, according to a criminal complaint.

In the email, Luffman allegedly threatened to gut Paul, his wife and children like (a) hog and included the hashtag ObamaForLife, according to the federal complaint.

Background: Man allegedly threatens to chop up Rand Paul and his family with an ax

The same morning he sent the email, Luffman allegedly left a voicemail at the office of an Oregon state official who works in a Portland federal building, the complaint stated.

Luffman introduced himself in the voicemail as Senator Nathaniel Blaine and threatened to hack to pieces Pauls children, according to federal authorities.

Paul first mentioned the threats publicly in July 2018 at an event in Leitchfield and said his Bowling Green office also received the threats.

"It's just horrendous that we have to deal with things like this, Paul said at the time.

Luffman had been living in Portland before his arrest in California, The Oregonian reported.

A review of law enforcement databases showed Luffman also had a history of threatening U.S. government officials, according to the criminal complaint.

Investigators reviewed a Facebook account for Luffman and found it had several posts originating from Berkeley.

He was arrested in the California city and later transferred to Oregon to face a four-count federal indictment.

More news: Billboard warns McConnell: Impeach Trump or 'lose your job'

Luffman is represented by a federal public defender and has pleaded not guilty to charges of threatening a federal official, threatening the family of a federal official and two counts of interstate communication.

He was ruled not competent to aid in his defense in February and ordered to be sent to the federal medical center in Springfield, according to court records.

Psychiatrists at the center diagnosed Luffman with schizophrenia, finding he suffers from delusions, hallucinations and has displayed disruptive and bizarre behavior, and Luffman believes the charges hes facing are based on a conspiracy to silence him,The Oregonian reported.

The Portland newspaper also reported that apsychologist said Luffman has stridently and adamantly refused to take medication to help restore his competency.

Mosman, the federal judge in Oregon, granted the U.S. Attorneys Office request that Luffman be medicated involuntarily to restore his competency.

A new competency hearing is scheduled for Feb. 24, according to court records.

Matt Bevin on recanvass:'I'm not gonna contest these numbers that have come in'

Reach Billy Kobin at bkobin@courierjournal.com or 502-582-7030. Support strong local journalism by subscribing today: courier-journal.com/subscribe.

Read or Share this story: https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/rand-paul/2019/11/14/judge-orders-treatment-nathanial-luffman-threatened-ax-murder-rand-paul/4189011002/

Here is the original post:
Man accused of threatening to 'gut' Rand Paul with an ax ordered to take meds - Courier Journal

In a hearing Wednesday for the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul said banning flavored vaping products would be counterintuitive to solving a variety of health problems. The practice of vaping has come under fire in recent months as doctors attribute lung-related illnesses and deaths to vaping. But Paul was quick to point out that most, if not all of these issues, are caused by illegal THC vaping products. I have kids and Ive warned them about the vaping of illegal products, he said. But it seems to be primarily deaths and horrific medical problems from vaping illegal products. So what were going to do in response to that is make more vaping illegal. It seems kind of counterintuitive. It seems like if you make more things illegal maybe you get more people vaping illegal products and you have more problems.Paul suggested that rather than banning flavored products that are often connected to teenage usage, lawmakers should consider going after the people selling to those teens. Now you say, 'Well its not a good idea to have kids vaping for one reason or another.' well, yeah, thats probably true, but its already illegal for kids to vape. If you want kids not to vape, why dont we increase the penalty of people selling to kids? Paul asked his peers. The senator also pointed out that many adults use vaping as a smoking cessation tool.You know, 480,000 people die from smoking each year. Two-thousand people are dying from vaping illegal products, and I dont want to discount thatwe should do something about it. But we get all strung out on these things, and we want to react, react, react really quickly, but nobody is really asking one important question how many lives are being saved?... I think there are estimates that hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved over the past 12 years from vaping instead of smoking. Paul implored the committee to consider all aspects of the issue before making a decision. They say politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies, he said. Im afraid we could get into the same problem here in this discussion.

In a hearing Wednesday for the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul said banning flavored vaping products would be counterintuitive to solving a variety of health problems.

The practice of vaping has come under fire in recent months as doctors attribute lung-related illnesses and deaths to vaping. But Paul was quick to point out that most, if not all of these issues, are caused by illegal THC vaping products.

I have kids and Ive warned them about the vaping of illegal products, he said. But it seems to be primarily deaths and horrific medical problems from vaping illegal products. So what were going to do in response to that is make more vaping illegal. It seems kind of counterintuitive. It seems like if you make more things illegal maybe you get more people vaping illegal products and you have more problems.

Paul suggested that rather than banning flavored products that are often connected to teenage usage, lawmakers should consider going after the people selling to those teens.

Now you say, 'Well its not a good idea to have kids vaping for one reason or another.' well, yeah, thats probably true, but its already illegal for kids to vape. If you want kids not to vape, why dont we increase the penalty of people selling to kids? Paul asked his peers.

The senator also pointed out that many adults use vaping as a smoking cessation tool.

You know, 480,000 people die from smoking each year. Two-thousand people are dying from vaping illegal products, and I dont want to discount thatwe should do something about it. But we get all strung out on these things, and we want to react, react, react really quickly, but nobody is really asking one important question how many lives are being saved?... I think there are estimates that hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved over the past 12 years from vaping instead of smoking.

Paul implored the committee to consider all aspects of the issue before making a decision. They say politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies, he said. Im afraid we could get into the same problem here in this discussion.

Link:
Sen. Rand Paul's solution to youth vaping epidemic: Go after the sellers - WLKY Louisville

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

A notable Kentucky politician has weighed in on the apparent defeat of Republicanincumbent Gov. Matt Bevin to Democratic challenger Andy Beshear in last week's gubernatorial election.

Appearing on "Meet the Press"Sunday, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul said that the "teachers' anger came out" in the election and swung the election in favor of Beshear.

The Kentucky senator was referring to Bevin's longstanding dispute with teachers across the commonwealth, which was sparked by the governor's overhaul of the pension system.

"I think the teachers were very unhappy," Paul said."(Bevin)tried to fix the pension, but got crossways with the teachers. And I think the teachers' anger came out."

'I knew he was in big trouble': An inside look at 24 crazy hours in Bevin vs. Beshear

Paul said that Bevin "was trying to do the right thing" with pension overhaul. But the governor's lack of popularity with teachers runs much deeper than policy differences. Bevinrepeatedly criticized educators who opposed his efforts and said teachers' decision to protest en masseat the state Capitol one day in April 2018led to children being sexually assaulted orotherwise harmed.

"I guarantee you somewhere in Kentucky today, a child was sexually assaulted that was left at home because there was nobody there to watch them," Bevin said. "I guarantee you somewhere today, a child was physically harmed or ingested poison because they were left alone because a single parent didnt have any money to take care of them."

Overall, Paul said that Bevin's loss is not indicative of a problem forthe Republican Party in the Bluegrass State and pointed to GOP candidates winning five of six statewide races.

"(Republicans) beat a lot of other candidates that no one expected us to," Paul said."So actually, in many ways, there was sort of a red wave in Kentucky."

The election drama is still ongoing.Alleging "a number of significant irregularities," Bevin formally requestedan official recanvass last week of the results ofKentucky's election for governor. That process will take place on Thursday.

No Bevin-Beshear recount?: These are the possible next steps under Kentucky election law

Contact Ben Tobin at bjtobin@gannett.comand502-582-4181 or follow on Twitter @TobinBen.Support strong local journalism by subscribing today:subscribe.courier-journal.com.

Read or Share this story: https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/rand-paul/2019/11/11/rand-paul-teachers-anger-cost-bevin-kentucky-governor-election/2560458001/

Read the original here:
Rand Paul: 'Teachers' anger' cost Matt Bevin the Kentucky gubernatorial election - Courier Journal

This article was featured in our weekly newsletter, the Liberator Online. To receive it in your inbox, sign up here.

Political theater is rarely entertaining but Senator Rand Paul stole the show when he forced an early curtain call on senators pushing a phony whistleblower resolution. Paul introduced a bill that retroactively protects Edward Snowden and applies the Sixth Amendment to the president.

On October 30, Senate Democrats showed that they will support or reject legislation based on a single factor of whether or not it helps impeach President Donald Trump, even if its a symbolic gesture.

Thats why Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii were so perturbed when Paul blocked their move to reach unanimous consent to pass a resolution that purports to honor the contributions of whistleblowers.

Not one of these people who fake outrage over this whistleblower and President Trump and the impeachment, not one of them will stand up for Edward Snowden, Paul stated. They would still put him in jail for life if they could.

In response, Hirono didnt dare name Snowden but instead called Pauls bill laughable because it restored the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution to the president, who under current rules is being prevented from facing his accuser, an ex-CIA agent who worked for Vice President Joe Biden on Ukraine.

This whistleblowers name, Eric Ciaramella, is known widely in Washington, D.C., and has been printed in RealClearInvestigations, but he is both closely guarded and highly praised by many in power who hypocritically turned their backs on Snowden or even favored the death penalty in his case.

Paul educated a reporter from The Hill on the legality of naming the whistleblower last week. The whistleblower is also a key witness to the alleged corruption of Biden, and his son Hunter, who received $50,000 a month from a Ukrainian energy firm under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor who Biden had removed in a quid pro quo arrangement.

Its always a good time to remind the U.S. government and the American people of the injustice done to Snowden, the greatest whistleblower of our time, who revealed illegal mass surveillance conducted on virtually all Americans.

Tired and debunked shameful smears against Snowden erupted on Twitter after Paul invoked his name. Snowden isnt a true whistleblower, they claim because he didnt go through proper channels.

Forget that Snowdens peers other whistleblowers charged under the Espionage Act, like Thomas Drake, did go through proper channels and were still denied an opportunity to present their case to a jury. Snowden, as a government contractor, didnt have access to even the same protections that people like Chelsea Manning or Daniel Hale had.

Pauls brilliant move left the Democrats openly choosing style over substance. The Trump-Ukraine whistleblower, a Democrat himself, is held up as a hero while Snowden is left exiled from the country he served with honor, all because the political show must go on.

Here is the original post:
Rand Paul Exposes 'Fake Outrage' Over Trump Whistleblower With Bill to Protect Snowden - The Liberator Online

Impeachment has dominated the news cycle in recent weeks. As Republicans continue to defend President Trump and other administration officials, many conservatives have gone on the offensive and attacked the whistleblower that started it all.

Recently, Senator Rand Paul demanded that the whistleblower come forward under threat of public exposure of his or heridentity.

But this isnt the first time whistleblowers have made waves in American politics. Since the whistleblowers revelation came to light, historians have discussed the parallels between the Ukraine whistleblower and informants from past scandals.

In September, President Trump publicly condemned the DOJ whistleblower as close to a spy and insinuated that he or she should be executed. The article Whistleblower or spy? What the history of Cold War espionage can teach the US contrasts this modern controversy and the history of espionage in Cold War America.

According to Cold War historian Marc Favreau, Trumps accusation of treason is of particular note due to its inherent irony. Instead of serving as a conduit of information in conjunction with a foreign regime, the whistleblower merely followed established executive branch protocols in order to alert government officials that the president himself was doing just that. The article argues that this methodology precludes the use of the term spy, as an operative engaging in espionage would never risk exposure in this way.

Favreau continues with a critique of Trumps allusion to execution as a potential punishment, citing the controversy surrounding Americas only instance of spy executionthat of Soviet operatives Ethel and Julius Rosenberg in the 1950s. The death sentence served to the Rosenbergs was unprecedented in American history, and the decision remains controversial today. Although the Soviets were quick to execute citizens accused of espionage after holding them captive in the KGB dungeon in Moscow, execution was rarely an option for spies discovered in America.

Favreau concludes that Trump and his supporters clearly have an agenda in condemning the whistleblower in such a dramatic way, the president and his administration will find no support for their cause in the history of espionage.

Another piece, published in The American Prospect in October, presents a broad history of whistleblowing in America. Brittany Gibson writes in her piece All the Presidents Whistleblowers that the history of government whistleblowing is fraught with charges of espionage, inadequate protections, and real hardships for those who speak out. She cites scholar Allison Stanger to highlight the Obama administrations abuse of the Espionage Act of 1917 as a means of harshly punishing government whistleblowers.

Gibson uses individuals such as John Kiriakou, who blew the whistle on waterboarding practices perpetrated by the Central Intelligence Agency, and Edward Snowden, who highlighted abuses of power in the National Security Agency, as examples of this. Although both were charged under the Espionage Act, she explains that they also changed the national conversationand in some cases changed laws on these respective government actions.

To Gibson, these high-profile cases are a far cry from the Ukraine scandal. Unlike Snowden and Kiriakou, who braved government retaliation in order to make their disclosures through non-protected channels, Trumps whistleblower stuck to protocol established by the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (WPA) and the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA). The individual in question was also careful not to release any classified information in his statement, which was specifically meant for public consumption. Gibson concludes that while the whistleblower should not be subject to retaliation through the Espionage Act, history suggests theres no guarantee that they wont be.

A third article recently published in the Washington Examiner points out a likely parallel between Trumps whistleblower and FBI Associate Director Mark Felt (otherwise known as Deep Throat of Watergate fame). In the piece, whistleblower attorney and Watergate historian Mark Zaid argues that the DOJ whistleblower will likely follow in Felts footsteps and remain anonymous for decades to come.

Our ideal ending, Zaid told the Examiner, is that the identity of the whistleblower is never known and the individual continues on with their personal and professional life. Later on in the article, Zaid expounds upon Deep Throats commitment to privacy: Basically his identity remained secret until he decided otherwise. That was his right.

It is unclear whether, like Deep Throat, the Trump whistleblower will be able to maintain his privacy. If the past is any indication, however, his disclosures have the potential to alter the course of American history.

Excerpt from:
The History Briefing on Whistleblowers: Historical Perspective on the Ukraine Scandal - History News Network (HNN)