Greta Thunberg and 11 fellow activists have boarded a vessel bound for Gaza with the unlikely goal of “breaking Israel’s siege.”

According to organisers, the group set off on Sunday from the Sicilian port of Catania aboard the Madleen, a sailing boat operated by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition.

Speaking at a press conference before departure, the activists said the mission aims to deliver limited humanitarian aid and draw global attention to the ongoing situation in Gaza.

“We are doing this because, no matter what odds we are against, we have to keep trying,” Thunberg said, holding back her tears.

“Because the moment we stop trying is when we lose our humanity,” she continued.

”And, no matter how dangerous this mission is, it’s not even near as dangerous as the silence of the entire world in the face of the livestreamed genocide.”

Activist Greta Thunberg says silence is more dangerous than sailing to Gaza, as she boarded a vessel that will try to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

The Gaza Freedom Flotilla had to abandon its last attempt on May 2 when it was bombed. pic.twitter.com/ieecZ8ps0E

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) June 1, 2025

Among the passengers aboard the Madleen are actor Liam Cunningham, known for his role in Game of Thrones, and Rima Hassan, a French MEP of Palestinian heritage.

Avec @GretaThunberg nous appelons à la mobilisation citoyenne pour soutenir massivement le navire humanitaire de @GazaFFlotilla ! C’est le seul moyen de garantir notre sécurité. pic.twitter.com/5DUJbkRdPZ

— Rima Hassan (@RimaHas) June 1, 2025

Hassan has previously been prohibited from entering Israel due to her fervent opposition to their military campaign.

Greta Thunberg.

“To stand with Palestine is to be human” pic.twitter.com/pyqHY2bDQc

— Dr. Yousef (@yousef_ki1) June 1, 2025

Thunberg, who gained notoriety for her hardcore climate activism, was originally scheduled to join an earlier Freedom Flotilla mission in May.

However, that voyage was aborted after one of the coalition’s ships, the Conscience, was reportedly struck by two drones while navigating international waters near Malta.

The group blamed the attack on Israel, claiming the drone strike caused significant damage to the vessel’s bow.

The post Greta Thunberg Sets Sail to Gaza on ‘Freedom Flotilla’ With Goal of ‘Breaking Israel’s Siege’ — Then Bursts Into Tears (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Illegitimate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky opened his comments at the peace negotiations in Turkey by gloating about Sunday’s surprise attack deep inside Russia and begging the West (NATO) for more weapons to hurl at Russia.

Zelensky’s comments come the day after Ukraine and its Western allies pulled off a massive attack deep inside Russia.

Ukrainian drones on Sunday took out an estimated 36% of all Russian strategic aviation! $2 billion worth of damage!

Volodymyr Zelensky announced that 117 drones were used in the strike inside Russia that wiped out dozens of nuclear “doomsday” bombers and other aircraft.

President Trump WAS NOT NOTIFIED of the attack before it took place – because Trump wants peace and the globalists want World War and the annihilation of Russia.

On Monday, President Zelensky opened his remarks by begging for more weapons from Western NATO countries.

This took some balls, considering Ukraine and its Western friends just destroyed Russian bombers in a sophisticated attack a thousand kilometers from the Russian border.

Volodymyr Zelensky: Thank you, first of all, for your invitation. Thank you for your support. This is a special moment. On the one hand, Russia has launched its summer offensive, but on the other hand, they are being forced to engage in diplomacy. This is both a challenge and a real opportunity for us all, a chance to try to end this war. First, as before, our top priority is supporting our defense, and I’m grateful for all the support packages and for every investment in weapons production in Ukraine, and for the development of production in your countries as well. Europe, together with America, has better weapons than Russia. We also have stronger tactical solutions. Our operation, Spider Web, yesterday proved that Russia must feel what its losses mean. That is what will push it toward diplomacy. When Russia takes losses in this war, it’s obvious to everyone that Ukraine is the one holding the line, not just for itself, but for all of Europe. Ask your intelligence, what is Russia planning this summer in Belarus. If they’re are bold enough to prepare attacks from there, then we need more strengths together. Right now, that means strengthening Ukraine so we can stop this war and prevent it from spreading.

That’s why weapons production matters. Ukraine can cover up to 40% of its weapons needs with domestic production, but this requires stable funding. Our operation shows how much impact investments, especially in drones, can have. We still urgently need air defense, especially Patriot systems and missiles. For them, each of you knows what we need and what you can do to help. Decisions are needed.

So Zelensky opened up the peace meetings gloating about yesterday’s surprise attack deep inside Russia and begging for more weapons of mass destruction.

Does anyone really believe Zelensky wants peace?

Via Karli Bonne.

The post Zelensky Opens Peace Talks with Russia by Gloating about Sunday’s Bomber Attack Deep Inside Russia and Begging the West for More Weapons (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Appearing on State of the Union Sunday morning, President Trump’s former OMB Director and top budget strategist Russ Vought demolished the corporate media spin that only Congress can green-light Trump’s game-changing federal workforce cuts.

Vought dropped a constitutional truth bomb: Trump doesn’t need Congress to gut the bloated, woke federal bureaucracy—he already has the executive tools to do it.

Dana Bash clumsily invoked the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, attempting to trap Vought with the tired claim that Congress alone controls the purse strings. But Vought, unfazed, counterpunched with constitutional clarity and historical context.

When Bash tried to smear Vought as cruel for wanting to “traumatize” federal workers, Vought turned the tables—exposing the rot at the heart of the bureaucracy.

Transcript:

Dana Bash: Let’s talk about the budget. That was the budget to come, but I want to talk about what has been going on with DOGE and what Elon Musk has already done. He says it was $175 billion in cuts, and these are cuts to funding and programs that Congress already passed—already signed into law, the law of the land—before you took office. You say that you’re going to submit about $9 billion in cuts this week for Congress to approve, to make those cuts that you’ve already done official, largely in foreign aid and public broadcasting. But you’re hearing from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle that they want you to submit approval for all of the cuts that you’ve done through DOGE. Will you?

Russ Vought: We might. We want to see how this first bill does. We want to make sure it’s actually passed. It’s the first of many rescissions bills. We may not actually have to get Congress to pass the rescissions bills. Why? Some we have executive tools. We have impoundment—that for 200 years, presidents had the ability and the recognition that they had the ability—to spend less than the ceiling. If you have $100 million that Congress says, “We want you to go and use for a particular use,” and you can do it for less, for 200 years that was totally appropriate. Since the 1970s, that has changed and has led to massive waste, fraud, and abuse.

Secondly, the very Impoundment Control Act itself allows for a procedure called pocket rescissions later in the year to be able to bank some of these savings without the bill actually being passed. It’s a provision that has been rarely used, but it is there, and we intend to use all of these tools. We want Congress to pass it where it’s necessary. We also have executive tools, and that is something we’re going to be working with Congress on. But it’s very important to pass this bill and to see whether there is a will on both the House and the Senate to secure the vote for it.

Dana Bash: Let me just unpack a couple of things that you said. First, you said that there is 200 years of precedent of presidents taking what Congress passed. And of course, people who are watching this know that the Constitution says that it is Congress that has the power of the purse, which is why we’re even having this discussion.

Russ Vought: They have the power.

Dana Bash: Well, that’s what I want to ask you about. So there’s some dispute about the 200 years. But most importantly, a law passed in 1974 because of this dispute that you mentioned—the Impoundment Control Act. And so, because of that law, which has now been in place for more than 50 years, it is the requirement of the executive branch—except for in situations where you’re having discussions with Congress—to implement what is signed into law. I know you don’t believe that that is constitutional. So are you just doing this in order to get the Supreme Court to rule that unconstitutional?

Russ Vought: We’re certainly not taking impoundment off the table. We’re not in love with the law. It’s the law that came after 200 years of precedent and history, at the lowest moment of the executive branch. But even the very Impoundment Control Act—notice it’s not called the Impoundment Elimination Act—even Congress at the time realized that impoundments were perfectly legal and appropriate. They were saying the Impoundment Control Act. Even the Impoundment Control Act allows for procedures that both require their assent on a rescissions bill—that’s the one that we’re sending up early this week—and also allow for pocket rescissions for those that come later in the next week.

Dana Bash: Congress says that you’re just breaking the law.

Russ Vought: Well, they’re wrong. We are not breaking the law. Every part of the federal government—each branch—has to look at the Constitution themselves and uphold it. And there’s tension between the branches. I don’t doubt that Congress is going to make accusations. Some of them come by their own watchdogs, but those watchdogs have been historically wrong. And that’s not going to stop us from moving forward to bank the DOJPAs.

Dana Bash: I want to bring this up in a bigger picture, because this is part of a very clear strategy that you have had for years and years in order to really cut the federal government and do it in any way you can—and also to pull as much power into the executive branch as possible. You’re very open about that. One of the things that you said in 2023 was specific to federal workers. I want to play that for our viewers.

Russ Vought (Flashback): We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want to put them in trauma.

Dana Bash: Is that your goal as OMB Director?

Russ Vought: Look, I love how you cherry-picked the quote on “trauma.” What I was referring to there was the bureaucracy. We do believe there’s a weaponized bureaucracy. We do believe that there are people who have been part of administrations that are fundamentally woke and weaponized against the American people. When you have the EPA put a 77-year-old Navy veteran named Joe Robertson in jail for doing ponds to fight wildfires on his lawn—that’s not just the FBI, it’s the EPA. And we do want to defund and put those bureaucracies out of business.

But I have great people at OMB. There are great people at the FAA. There are great people at the NIH who are doing hard work and important public service activities. I think it’s important to provide the full context of what people like me have said in the past. But we’re not going to receive pushback from the notion that we’re going to dramatically change the deep, woke, weaponized administrative state.

Dana Bash: Again, you’ve been very, very open about that being your goal. That’s what we have seen.

WATCH:

Russ Vought is DEMOLISHING Dana Bash.

Every second of this is a master class.

Vought does not come to play around. pic.twitter.com/tKwdQypwFe

— Gunther Eagleman (@GuntherEagleman) June 1, 2025

The post Russ Vought Wrecks CNN’s Dana Bash in Budget Showdown — Says Trump Has Constitutional Tools to SLASH Federal Workforce Without Congress appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Just 100 miles off the coast of Florida, the communist Cuban regime—backed by the Chinese Communist Party—is building and upgrading at least eight intelligence-gathering bases equipped with advanced signal interception technology. This alarming development poses a direct threat to U.S. national security, right in the heart of the Caribbean.

Names like Bejucal, Calabazar, Wajay, and El Salao are no longer just small Cuban towns. According to a recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), they are now critical surveillance hubs capable of intercepting U.S. military, civilian, and aerospace communications—from Cape Canaveral to Guantanamo Bay.

The threat grew under Biden, but Trump is taking bold action

Under Joe Biden’s administration (2021–2025), this threat was ignored. Red flags were downplayed by weak leadership more focused on appeasing authoritarian regimes than confronting them. Biden’s policy of “normalization” with Cuba allowed Beijing to solidify its presence through covert agreements, Chinese technology, and a silent expansion strategy.

That all changed with the re-election of President Donald J. Trump. Under his strong and patriotic leadership, the White House has launched a clear, strategic response to restore national security and defend the Western Hemisphere from communist encroachment.

“Under the previous administration, our enemies were allowed to set up just off our shores. Today, under my presidency, we are taking decisive action to dismantle this spy network and protect the United States,” President Trump stated during a press conference in Palm Beach.

Chinese surveillance: eyes and ears on the U.S. from the Caribbean

The Cuban facilities are equipped with cutting-edge SIGINT (signals intelligence) systems, including high-sensitivity satellite dishes, telecom towers, and tools capable of intercepting encrypted phone calls, satellite transmissions, and tactical military operations. Some can even monitor drone activity and space launches.

These capabilities go far beyond military risk—they threaten the privacy of millions of citizens and create dangerous national vulnerabilities. Experts warn that if left unchecked, this surveillance could lead to digital sabotage, cyber warfare, and internal interference.

China’s technology helps Cuba suppress its own people

While these spy bases target the U.S., they also fuel the Cuban regime’s internal oppression. Backed by Chinese tech giants like Huawei, Cuba has installed an integrated surveillance state: facial recognition cameras, cellphone tracking, social media censorship, and widespread monitoring of dissidents.

Cuba has become a testing ground for authoritarian control, merging Chinese communism with the Castro regime’s repressive tactics. President Trump has condemned this model and reiterated his commitment to defending freedom at home and abroad: “Freedom is contagious. We will protect it here and inspire it across the region.”

A new Cold War in the Caribbean

Pentagon officials and international analysts agree: this is the beginning of a new Cold War, this time with China at the helm. The Cuban installations are part of a broader plan that includes Chinese investments in Latin American ports, telecom infrastructure in South America, and covert military deals in Africa and the Pacific.

This expansion seeks to undermine U.S. influence and make the region dependent on Chinese tech and money. Cuba now serves as a logistical center for intelligence, misinformation, and strategic intimidation—playing the same role it did during the height of the Soviet Cold War.

Trump leads hemispheric defense strategy

Unlike his predecessors, President Trump has launched a set of concrete measures to counter this threat, including:

• The full reinstatement of economic sanctions on Cuba.

• The expulsion of Chinese tech firms from U.S. territory and restrictions for their presence in allied nations.

• A naval buildup in the Caribbean and renewed intelligence cooperation with regional allies.

• The creation of a new hemispheric defense and tech alliance.

The Trump administration has also started negotiations with key partners like Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and Panama, to build a united front against China’s expansion and ensure a future of freedom—not totalitarianism—in the Western Hemisphere.

Conclusion: Strength, not surrender, defines the U.S. in 2025

This is not just about U.S. sovereignty—it’s about the balance of power across the continent. The presence of Chinese spy bases in Cuba is an open provocation, a national security threat, and an affront to everyone who believes in liberty.

The good news is that under President Donald Trump, the U.S. will not back down, will not kneel to communism, and is ready to defend its people and its allies. History has taught us that weakness emboldens tyrants. This time, the message is loud and clear: with Trump in the White House, U.S. sovereignty is non-negotiable.

The post Chinese Spy Bases in Cuba Threaten U.S. National Security appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered a powerful speech Saturday at the prestigious Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore — signaling a dramatic Trump-era shift in U.S. foreign policy, one that places deterrence, sovereignty, and peace through strength at the center of America’s Indo-Pacific strategy.

Hegseth, a veteran and warrior-statesman with zero patience for woke foreign policy fluff, made it crystal clear: The United States will not bow to communist China — nor will it tolerate the bullying of our allies in the region.

According to Defense.gov:

The future vision for the Indo-Pacific is one “grounded in common sense and national interests,” Hegseth said, where the U.S. and its allies work together while respecting their mutual self-interests and engaging on the basis of sovereignty and commerce, as opposed to war.

The secretary pointed out, as President Donald J. Trump continues to lead European allies to step up in their self-defense, the U.S. can then focus more resources on the Indo-Pacific region.

“This enables all of us to benefit from the peace and stability that comes with a lasting and strong American presence here in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said.

“These benefits, they only multiply when our allies and partners are also strong,” he added.

Regarding American influence in the region, Hegseth said the U.S. isn’t interested in the approach to foreign policy of the past.

“We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt our politics or ideology; we are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues; [and] we are not here to impose our will on you. We are all sovereign nations,” Hegseth said, adding the U.S. seeks to work with its allies in areas where mutual interests align for peace and prosperity.

“On this sure foundation of mutual interests and common sense, we will build and strengthen our defense partnerships to preserve peace and increase prosperity,” he said.

Pivoting to the threat China poses to the region, Hegseth made clear the U.S. is not actively seeking conflict.

“We do not seek conflict with communist China. … But we will not be pushed out of this critical region and we will not let our allies and partners be subordinated and intimidated” he said.

Noting China is “credibly preparing to use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said any attempt by China to conquer neighboring Taiwan would result in “devastating consequences” not just for the Indo-Pacific, but the entire world.

While once again reiterating the U.S. seeks peace as opposed to war, Hegseth said the U.S. must also be prepared for armed conflict.

“If deterrence fails — and if called upon by [the] commander in chief — we are prepared to do what the Department of Defense does best: to fight and win, decisively,” he said.

Not surprisingly, China’s communist regime responded with the usual tantrums, propaganda, and gaslighting.

In a statement, the Chinese Foreign Ministry accused Hegseth of “Cold War mentality” and claimed the U.S. was “the only hegemonic power” in the region.

Beijing even had the audacity to say America was “turning the region into a powder keg”—despite being the very regime militarizing artificial islands, threatening Taiwan with invasion, and building a surveillance state that spans the globe.

Q: It’s reported that in his speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue on May 31, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth repeatedly warned of the so-called “threat” China poses and made negative comments on Taiwan, the South China Sea and so on. What’s China’s comment?

A: Hegseth deliberately ignored the call for peace and development by countries in the region, and instead touted the Cold War mentality for bloc confrontation, vilified China with defamatory allegations, and falsely called China a “threat.” The remarks were filled with provocations and intended to sow discord. China deplores and firmly opposes them and has protested strongly to the U.S.

No country in the world deserves to be called a hegemonic power other than the U.S. itself, who is also the primary factor undermining the peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific. To perpetuate its hegemony and advance the so-called “Indo-Pacific strategy,” the U.S. has deployed offensive weaponry in the South China Sea and kept stoking flames and creating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, which are turning the region into a powder keg and making countries in the region deeply concerned.

The Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affair. No country is in a position to interfere. The U.S. should never imagine it could use the Taiwan question as leverage against China. The U.S. must never play with fire on this question. China urges the U.S. to fully abide by the one-China principle and the three China-U.S. joint communiqués, and stop supporting and emboldening the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces. On the South China Sea, there has never been any problem with regard to freedom of navigation and overflight there. China has always been committed to working with countries concerned to properly handle differences through dialogue and consultation, while safeguarding China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in accordance with laws and regulations. It is the U.S. who is the primary factor that is hurting the peace and stability in the South China Sea.

China urges the US to fully respect the efforts of countries in the region to maintain peace and stability, stop deliberately destroying the peaceful and stable environment cherished by the region, and stop inciting conflict and confrontation and escalating tensions in the region.

The post China Responds After Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Vows U.S. Will NOT Surrender Indo-Pacific to Communist China appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Today, months after President Donald Trump issued pardons to hundreds of individuals who were overcharged and politically targeted in the aftermath of January 6, one unsung victim of politically motivated prosecution remains behind bars.

His name is Travis McMichael. For five years now, McMichael has lived in solitary confinement, in a 12-by-12-foot cell, in Hays State Prison in Trion, Georgia. He hasn’t stepped outside in all that time due to constant threats on his life.

Like many of the January 6 defendants, McMichael was subjected to the full force of “woke justice” under the Biden administration – prosecuted not based on facts or law, but in response to racial activism and an effort by Democrats to endear themselves to black voters by portraying whites as racist.

Travis McMichael’s conviction came months after the explosive trial of Derek Chauvin and the massive national unrest that followed George Floyd’s death. In this highly charged environment, jurors across America were made acutely aware that rendering a not-guilty verdict for white defendants in incidents involving black “victims” could place them in the crosshairs of woke justice mobs.

During the Derek Chauvin trial, lynch mobs had demonstrated outside the courtroom and called for Chauvin’s blood. Literally.

Despite the absence of evidence that Chauvin’s actions led to the death of a man with major heart issues who had ingested lethal amounts of drugs, Chauvin was found guilty.

The jurors worried more about survival than justice. Their way to achieve personal security was to accept a compromised sense of justice: “I’ll just vote guilty and let the appeals court deal with it.”

Jurors in the McMichael case were no different than those in Minnesota. They knew the prospect of violence and vengeance after the trial hung over them. This climate made justice impossible.

The jurors simply didn’t want to risk their lives. “Let the appeals court deal with it!”

Travis McMichael’s case also had many comparisons to that of George Zimmerman in 2012. Both men observed suspicious activity in their neighborhoods, and out of a desire to protect their communities and be good citizens, called the police and tried to keep eyes on the individuals in question until law enforcement arrived.

In fact, McMichael recognized Ahmaud Arbery from four video tapes a neighbor had shown him where Arbery could be seen rummaging through his house under construction just before $ 2,500 worth of electronic equipment had gone missing.

Seeing Arbery running by their home, McMichael and his father Greg decided to pursue. Travis pulled his truck up to Arbery and asked him to stop and wait for police to arrive. Abery turned and walked the other way. A few blocks later, the McMichaels parked their truck in the street – only for Arbery to suddenly approach.

McMichael had no way of knowing that a year earlier, Arbery was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia with auditory hallucinations to steal and hurt people, nor that Arbery did not take his medication. Arbery was at the time on probation for stealing a TV from Walmart. The judge allowed none of this into the trial.

Video evidence shows Travis McMichael standing with a shotgun pointed downward as Arbery rushed him. Arbery began striking him while attempting to wrestle Travis’ firearm away.

Although Tavyon Martin attacked Zimmerman unaware that he was armed, Arbery chose to attack a man holding a visible weapon, a suicidal attack. McMichael, taking blows to the head and fearing for his life, fired three shots during the struggle for survival.

As with the Zimmerman case, the local police investigated and classified the Arbery shooting as a case of self-defense.

Months later, however, the release of the video triggered a wave of woke outrage due to the fact that McMichael was white and Arbery was black.

The same woke justice characters who had previously led protests calling for Zimmerman’s arrest, Ben Crump and Al Sharpton, mobilized once more.

This time, they had the full weight of the Black Lives Matter movement and the federal government behind them. Public demands for an arrest intensified. Despite the video evidence which clearly supported McMichael’s self-defense claim, he and his father were charged with first-degree murder.

The media came out swinging against the McMichaels as well. Just as they had falsely portrayed the towering 6 foot three-inch 17-year-old street fighter Trayvon Martin as a smallish 12-year-old child on a candy run, they portrayed the fleeing Ahmaud Arbery simply as “a jogger”.

As documented in my 2019 film The Trayvon Hoax: Unmasking the Witness Fraud that Divided America, the prosecution in Zimmerman’s trial relied on a fake witness, Rachel Jeantel, who falsely claimed to be Trayvon’s girlfriend and to have been on the phone with him before the shooting.

In reality, Jeantel was two years older than Martin, 150 pounds heavier, and not even a student at Martin’s school.

After meeting with Ben Crump, the actual girlfriend, Diamond Eugene, refused to lie to police, and Jeantel was substituted in by Crump to play Trayon’s girlfriend.

Her testimony fell apart under cross-examination, leading to Zimmerman’s acquittal. But had Zimmerman been tried in the 2021 woke justice climate, like McMichael, he likely would have been convicted regardless of the evidence.

By contrast, the McMichael trial occurred during the apex of woke justice – where emotion, political activism, and jury fear of mob reprisal overruled legal standards. In 2012, McMichael might have walked free, just as Zimmerman did. But by 2021, the landscape had changed.

The judicial system had become captive to performative justice and racial politics.

The McMichael trial centered on Georgia’s citizen’s arrest law. At the time, the law permitted private citizens to detain individuals they reasonably believed had committed a crime. Travis and his father, both military veterans, believed Arbery fit that description based on prior incidents.

However, prosecutors argued that the McMichaels acted illegally in following Arbery, despite their behavior falling within the scope of the then-existing law. In fact, the Georgia legislature quickly changed the statute after the trial – a tacit acknowledgment that the law had allowed precisely what the McMichaels had done.

Adding to the injustice, the trial judge has since taken to the academic speaking circuit, delivering lectures on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

Following the state murder convictions and sentences of life without parole, the McMichaels were indicted federally for hate crimes.

The government claimed the motive was racial, based on one racial comment someone had sent Travis on Facebook, and Arbery’s race.

No direct evidence tied the shooting to racial animus. Nonetheless, both men received additional federal life sentences as well.

George Zimmerman was also investigated for hate crimes under the Obama Justice Department. After a yearlong probe, then-Attorney General Eric Holder issued a statement acknowledging there was no evidence linking Zimmerman to any racially motivated intent. Yet in the McMichael’s case, that standard of proof was seemingly abandoned.

While Donald Trump has pardon thousands overcharged and over prosecuted during Joe Biden’s woke justice era, Travis McMichael remains incarcerated, largely forgotten. As with Derek Chauvin, however, a Trump pardon cannot undo state charges.

Like George Zimmerman, Travis McMichael was railroaded. He was arrested and charged in a self-defense shooting only because of the color of his skin. As long as Travis McMichael and his father Greg remain imprisoned for life, none of us are free.

Joel Gilbert, is a Los Angeles-based film producer, and president of Highway 61 Entertainment. He is on Twitter: @JoelSGilbert.

The post Justice for Travis: “Woke Justice” Victim Travis McMichael Still Rots in Solitary Confinement in Georgia appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.