A witness corroborated the claim that Rep. Matt Gaetz was told in 2017 he'd had sex with a minor

A witness has confirmed to federal prosecutors that Rep. Matt Gaetz was informed in 2017 that he'd had sex with a minor, sources told The Daily Beast.

In a letter obtained by The Daily Beast in April 2021, Gaetz's associate Joel Greenberg said he discovered a girl he and the congressman had engaged in "sexual activities" with was 17 at the time.

"Immediately I called the congressman and warned him to stay clear of this person and informed him she was underage," Greenberg wrote, according to the outlet. He added Gaetz was "equally shocked and disturbed by this revelation" and that "there was no further contact with this individual until after her 18th birthday."

According to The Daily Beast, someone else was in the room when Greenberg called Gaetz to convey that information: Joe Ellicott, Greenberg's close friend and a former employee at the Seminole County tax office. Both men are now cooperating with federal investigators in the sex-crimes probe into Gaetz.

Ellicott's decision to cooperate is likely bad news for the embattled Florida congressman, who has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in connection to the sex-trafficking probe.

"After nearly a year of false rumors, not a shred of evidence has implicated Congressman Gaetz in wrongdoing," his chief of staff told Insider on Thursday. "We remain focused on our work representing Floridians."

Among other things, Ellicott and Greenberg reportedly exchanged text messages via the encrypted messaging app Signal, in which Ellicott disclosed that a woman they both were associated with "knew [the minor] was underage the whole time, had sex with her, and they both went to see other guys."

Greenberg pleaded guilty to sex trafficking in May and agreed to cooperate fully with the government on other investigations. Ellicott agreed to cooperate this week and will plead guilty to two federal crimes — conspiracy to commit wire fraud and distribution of a controlled substance — in a case separate from the Gaetz investigation, ABC News reported.

No charges have been brought against Gaetz, but several recent developments indicate the investigation is heating up. Among other things, Gaetz's ex-girlfriend testified before a federal grand jury earlier this month. NBC News reported that the ex, whose name Insider is withholding to protect her privacy, has been talking to prosecutors for months and was granted immunity in exchange for her testimony.

NBC also said prosecutors are investigating whether Gaetz sex-trafficked the 17-year-old; if he violated the Mann Act, which prohibits the transportation of "any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose" across state lines; or if he obstructed justice. Gaetz has denied all three claims.

With respect to the obstruction probe, investigators are said to be scrutinizing a three-way call after the investigation started between Gaetz, his ex, and another woman who was cooperating with federal authorities and who was reportedly recording the phone call. NBC reported that authorities suspect Gaetz of obstructing justice during that conversation; he's denied the allegation.

An attorney for Ellicott declined to comment on reporting about his client's cooperation deal. A spokesperson for Gaetz and a lawyer representing Greenberg did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Novak Djokovic and being above the law

MIAMI, FL - In times of a world pandemic still going on and a very strong polarization and politization of trivial topics, being anti-vaxxer is definitely a concept I not only don’t understand, but ultimately, I don’t agree upon and most importantly, one which I’m actively against to.

At this point into the pandemic, I don’t want to fall into the temptation of explaining what experts in the field of science, biology, virology, immunology, etc, have said during all this time regarding the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine against COVID-19 but, well, here I go: it is safe and it is highly effective. For details, go to the experts’ platforms all over the specialized Internet portals.

Said that, to me is absolutely unthinkable that a professional athlete, a number one in his sport, an example for the youth, a role model in all what the word entails, is so vocal about his position against science. As a matter of fact, it’s sad, very sad.

Fortunately, he doesn’t represent the majority of the top athletes in the world; unfortunately, he is the top athlete in his sport.

Now, Australia has shown a principle that, directly or indirectly we break more than it should be broken and that is: nobody is above the law, period. You can be good in what you do, or you can be the best in what you do, or you can be even be the cream of the top in what you do, which is the case with Djokovic, with lots of fame and fortune, but, you’re not above the law and Australia has shown that’s the case.

Thanks, Australia, for leading by example, for letting everybody know that the law is the law no matter who you are.

Kudos for the land of kangaroos!

Originally reported by Ricardo Martinez

Three Georgia men sentenced to life in prison for 'chilling' Arbery murder

Jan 7 (Reuters) - A Georgia judge sentenced Travis McMichael and his father Gregory McMichael on Friday to life in prison without the possibility of parole for what he called the "chilling" 2020 murder of Ahmaud Arbery, a Black man running through their mostly white neighborhood in the southern U.S. state.

Judge Timothy Walmsley also gave a life sentence to their neighbor William "Roddie" Bryan but ruled that he could seek parole after 30 years in prison, the minimum sentence allowed for murder under Georgia law.

Echoing comments made by Arbery's anguished relatives earlier in the hearing at Glynn County Superior Court, the judge condemned the three men for what he described as their mistake of failing to see Arbery as just another neighbor.

He said he gave the McMichaels the harshest sentence available in part because of their "callous" words and actions captured on a cellphone video that sparked national outrage when it became public in the summer of 2020.

"It was a chilling, truly disturbing scene," the judge said of the frame in the video where McMichael begins to lift his shotgun at Arbery while the 25-year-old is about 20 feet away. "I kept coming back to the terror that must have been in the mind of the young man running through Satilla Shores."

In November, a jury found Gregory McMichael, 66, his son Travis McMichael, 35, and their neighbor Bryan, 52, guilty of murder, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal intent to commit a felony.

The judge agreed with prosecutors and Arbery's relatives that the three men, who are white, had "assumed the worst" about Arbery, who he said was "hunted down and shot, and he was killed because individuals here in this courtroom took the law into their own hands."

Earlier, Arbery's family told the court they believed that racial stereotyping led to the killing of the avid jogger, who grew up and still lived across the highway from the Satilla Shores neighborhood where he died. Defense lawyers had pleaded leniency, saying none of the three men ever intended for Arbery to be killed, and that the maximum punishment should be reserved only for the "worst of the worst" offenders.

Before the judge's ruling, Jasmine Arbery addressed the court in a quavering voice to offer a poetic celebration of her younger brother's Blackness, which she said was mistaken for something frightening by his attackers.

"He had dark skin that glistened in the sunlight like gold. He had curly hair; he would often like to twist it. Ahmaud had a broad nose and the color of his eyes was filled with melanin," she said. "These are the qualities that made these men assume Ahmaud was a dangerous criminal. To me, those qualities reflected a young man full of life and energy who looked like me and the people I love."

JUDGE QUOTES ARBERY'S MOTHER

Linda Dunikoski, the lead prosecutor, had argued for the maximum sentence for just the two McMichaels for what she called "a demonstrated pattern of vigilantism." Pointing to Gregory McMichael's former work as an investigator in the local prosecutor's office, she said father and son acted as if they were above the law.

Defense lawyer Kevin Gough had argued for leniency for Bryan because he was the only one of the three who was unarmed when he pursued Arbery.

Attorneys for the three men have said they will appeal the convictions. The men also face a federal trial in February on hate-crime charges, accused of violating Arbery's civil rights by attacking him because of his "race and color."

The state case hinged on whether the defendants, under a now-repealed Georgia law permitting citizen arrests, had a right to confront Arbery on a hunch he was fleeing after committing a crime. In the end the jury was not swayed by tearful testimony from Travis McMichael, the only defendant to take the stand, that he shot only in self-defense.

Arbery was jogging through the leafy Satilla Shores neighborhood on the afternoon of Feb. 23 when the McMichaels decided to grab their guns, jump in a pickup truck and give chase.

Bryan joined the chase in his own pickup truck after it passed his driveway, and pulled out his cellphone to record Travis McMichael firing a shotgun at Arbery at close range. Arbery had nothing on him besides his running clothes and sneakers.

The video fueled national protests against racism in the criminal justice system when it emerged months later and it became clear that none of the men involved had yet been arrested after a local prosecutor concluded the killing was justified.

"They chose to target my son because they didn't want him in their community," Wanda Cooper-Jones, Arbery's mother, told the court on Friday. "When they couldn't sufficiently scare him or intimidate him, they killed him."

In his sentencing, the judge quoted the mother's remarks, saying they struck him as "very true."

"At minimum, Ahmaud Arbery should force us to consider expanding our definition of what a neighbor may be and how we treat them," the judge said.

Originally reported by Jonathan Allen in New York for Reuters®; Additional reporting by Rich McKay in Atlanta; Editing by Alistair Bell and Daniel Wallis

Judge resigns over racist home video capturing N-word use

Lafayette City Court Judge Michelle Odinet resigned Friday, weeks after a video surfaced that depicted her using racist remarks as she and her family watched security footage of an attempted burglary at their home.

“I take full responsibility for the hurtful words used to describe the individual who burglarized the vehicles at my home. I am sorry for the pain that I have caused my community and ask for your forgiveness, as my words did not foster the public’s confidence and integrity for the judiciary,” Odinet said in a letter submitted to the Louisiana Supreme Court filed by her attorney Dane Ciolino.

Ciolino told HuffPost Odinet “understands that this is the end of her public service, but only the beginning of what she must to do to earn the forgiveness of the community.”

Odinet confirmed the video, published by The Current on Dec. 13, was shot in her home. It depicts a television showing security footage of a burglary as several voices laugh and recap the incident while repeatedly using the N-word. Ciolino told The New York Times Odinet was one of the voices heard using a slur in the video.

After the video surfaced, Odinet asked for "forgiveness and understanding", claiming she had taken a sedative at the time of the video and had “zero recollection” of the incident. She requested an unpaid leave ob absence before being temporarily disqualified from the bench.

Ciolino told HuffPost Odinet, who has four adult children, is “humiliated, embarrassed and sorry for what she has done and the trouble that she has caused to her community.”

This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.

New laws in 2022 address chained pets, among other things

As of January, it will be illegal to chain up a dog in Texas. Any outdoor restraint must be lighter and more flexible, and dogs must have adequate shelter, shade and water. Fines can go as high as $500 for first offenses, and repeat offenders could get jail time.

“Too many dogs are seen like burglar alarms or some sort of security device instead of the living beings that they are, and they’re kept in chains,” said Rachel Wolf of VOICE for Animals, an animal rights group.

Gov. Greg Abbott, who first vetoed the law, signed a new version after he was hit by a blizzard of tweets with the hashtag #AbbottHatesDogs.

A new law in Nevada makes it illegal for insurance companies to deny coverage to homeowners or charge more based on their dogs’ breeds. Insurers say they need to be able to account for the potential liability brought on by potentially aggressive animals, but supporters said the law protects pet owners from “breed discrimination.”

by Pete Williams | NBC NEWS

California man allegedly planned to drive to White House, kill Joe Biden and Anthony Fauci

DES MOINES, Iowa — An armed California man was arrested recently in Iowa while allegedly on his way to the White House.

Police say the man, identified as 25-year-old Kuachua Brillion Xiong, had an assault rifle and ammunition in his possession, as well as a "hit list" that named President Joe Biden; Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president's chief medical advisor; Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, formerly known as Facebook; and former presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Xiong was pulled over on Dec. 21 after police observed him driving aggressively, according to a criminal complaint. Police suspected he could be planning criminal activity due to the man’s behavior. During the traffic stop he “began talking about his disapproval for government due to the sex abuse of children, some of which that has occurred by President Biden," he said.

Xiong was taken to the Cass County Sheriff’s Office for further questioning.

During an interview, Xiong allegedly told authorities he'd worked at a grocery store in Merced, California, until two months ago – and that his employment was a “cover until called upon by God to combat evil demons in the White House,” according to the criminal complaint.

Police say Xiong said he allegedly began gathering equipment to carry out the deed, including an assault rifle with magazines, ammunition, body armor, medical supplies, dark clothing, a grappling hook, food and cash, according to the complaint.

Xiong allegedly told to police that he left his home in Sacramento on Dec. 18 to drive straight to the White House to kill people in power, and added that he would not have stopped if he had not been pulled over by the authorities, the complaint details.

Police say he allegedly compiled his “hit list” of “evil” people to kill via videos on TikTok. Xiong allegedly stated he would kill Biden unless the president promised to comply with his demands, the complaint added.

“When concluding the interview, (Xiong) stated that nothing would stop him from carrying out his plan of gaining access to the White House and killing the persons on his ‘hit list.’

Xiong allegedly said that if released from custody, he would immediately resume traveling to the White House in Washington, D.C. and ‘do whatever it takes’ to complete his plan,” Secret Service Special Agent Justin Larson wrote in the complaint. “(The man) stated that he has no intention of returning to California to see his family because he plans on dying while fighting evil demons at the White House.”

The defendant's attorneys filed a notice Thursday that he intends to rely on an insanity defense at trial.

The QAnon conspiracy theory holds the false belief that high-level government figures, Democrats and celebrities are secretly engaged in child sex trafficking.

Xiong has been charged with one count of threats to a former president, according to the criminal complaint, although it's possible additional charges could be added by a grand jury in a later indictment. Iowa court records show the man also was cited for speeding.

Reporter William Morris contributed to this report.

Science Says You Should Drink This Much Coffee in 2022

I know those two thoughts don't necessarily go together, so let me explain. We start with the fact that I'm all for self-improvement, but I'm not the biggest fan of New Year's Resolution.

Tying progress to the start of the year seems like a lot of unnecessary pressure. Also, for a lot of people (myself included), the 10 days or so before January 1 (the last few days of pre-Christmas planning and shopping, through a 7 or 10 day vacation period) are likely to be some of the least-self-improving days of the year.

So, if you're going to tie a resolution to the calendar like this, I think it makes sense to give yourself a chance to score a fast, easy, meaningful win.

I'd advise something that you can accomplish quickly, track easily, and that will provide both immediate and long-term advantages.

All of which leads us to coffee, and drinking more of it.

Why? Because study after study seems to suggest it has significant long-term health benefits. Among a few of the highlights:

A 2018 study of 500,000 British adults over a full decade showed that coffee drinkers were 10 percent to 15 percent less likely to die from any cause than non-drinkers, possibly according to the study authors, because, "coffee contains more than 1,000 chemical compounds including antioxidants, which help protect cells from damage."

In 2017, researchers funded by the American Heart Association and the University of Colorado School of Medicine found that every additional cup of coffee people drink each day drops their risk of heart failure or stroke by 8 percent.

A smaller study from Stanford University suggested that people who drink caffeinated coffee (but not decaf, sorry) live longer, perhaps because the caffeine counteracts naturally occurring inflammation, which is in turn associated with 90 percent of all noncommunicable diseases of aging, according to the study's author.

Another big study, from the Harvard School of Public Health, which 200,000 doctors and nurses over 30 years, found a correlation between increased coffee consumption and lower risk of death from heart disease, stroke, diabetes, neurological disease, even suicide.

Finally, drinking "even more coffee" provides an incremental benefit over drinking "more coffee," up to a surprisingly high count, according to a 10-year study of almost 20,000 people over 10 years. ("Our findings suggest that drinking four cups of coffee each day can be part of a healthy diet in healthy people", said one of the study's authors.)

Truly we could go on and on, but let's be sure to add one of the newest studies, which also suggests a short-term benefit many coffee drinkers might be familiar with: better moods.

A study of 5,000 European adults suggested that drinking a cup of coffee (containing about 75 milligrams of caffeine) every four hours can result in feeling better moods during the day.

In our enthusiasm, we should add a caveat: Stop at five cups. Once you get past that, according to a study of nearly 350,000 coffee-drinkers from the University of South Australia, you might start to increase the risk of heart disease.

"Based on our data, six [cups] was the tipping point where caffeine started to negatively affect cardiovascular risk," Hyppnen said.

Now, back to the New Year and the calendar. Because as new habits go, resolving to drink a bit more coffee probably isn't a heavy lift for a lot of people.

It's easy to add to your routine, doesn't cost a lot -- and doesn't require making a major lifestyle change. Plus, for a lot of people, it's actually quite enjoyable.

So, here's to 2022. Maybe you'll raise a glass of whatever your other favorite beverage might be to toast the new year, tonight.

But in the morning? Drink a bit more coffee. And start the new year with a resolution you can actually keep.

By Bill Murphy Jr.