Daily Caller
You Might Have Missed It, But Ray Epps’ Lawsuit Against Tucker Went Down In Flames

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Adam Pack
A federal judge dismissed a January 6th defendant’s defamation lawsuit against Fox News and its former primetime TV anchor, Daily Caller co-founder Tucker Carlson on Wednesday.
Delaware Federal District Court Judge, Jennifer Hall, ruled that Carlson’s reporting on Epps was protected under the First Amendment because Epps’ lawyers did not prove Carlson had acted with “actual malice.”
“For the reasons announced from the bench today, it is hereby ordered that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is granted,” Hall, a Biden appointee, wrote.
Members of the corporate media claimed that Epps would win his lawsuit against Fox News and prove Carlson had acted with “actual malice” in his reporting on the Jan. 6 defendant, according to an MSNBC discussion on the defamation case led by former Republican National Committee chairman and MSNBC political analyst Michael Steele on July 16, 2023, following news of Epps’ lawsuit.
“I think what Dominion ushered in this question of actual malice and we saw the $800 million settlement has really ripped open if you will, the opportunity for others to go at Fox News,” former Florida Republican Rep. David Jolly said during the clip.
“They better get out a really big check book because they’re gonna pay heavily,” former Democratic Maryland Rep. Donna Edwards also said.
Judge Hall, however, sided with Fox News’ lawyers and dismissed the lawsuit before it could proceed to trial.
“It is especially clear that any conclusions were only opinions, because the statements were replete with ‘cautionary language’ that signal opinion and interpretation,” Fox News’ lawyers wrote in a memorandum in support of the network’s motion to dismiss Epps’ lawsuit. “In one segment, after showing a video of Plaintiff, Mr. Carlson squarely stated: ‘Once again, you can draw whatever conclusions you like from that video. We have ours and we shared them with you’. Fox opinion hosts were clearly providing their interpretations that listeners could accept or reject based on their own assessment of the fully disclosed facts.”
“First amendment protection for such commentary is essential for our democracy,” the memorandum also stated.
“Epps and his wife have clearly been through a nightmare of threats and innuendo,” Jonathan Turley, Fox News legal commentator wrote on his personal website following the judge’s ruling. “However, this public controversy was discussed by various networks and the Jan. 6th Committee. It was also a matter of legitimate public debate and commentary, with people on both sides expressing their views on the evidence and underlying allegations.”
Epps sued Fox News in July 2023 following Carlson’s comments that suggested Epps may have been a government agent after video footage surfaced showing him the night before Jan. 6, 2021, encouraging Trump supporters to go inside the Capitol the next day, leading to speculation that he may have been an FBI informant.
“We’re far beyond that. In fact, tomorrow—I don’t even like to say it because I’ll be arrested—we need to go into the Capitol. We’re here to defend the Constitution,” Epps could be heard saying in the video.
“I’m going to put this out there. I’m probably going to jail for it. Tomorrow, we need to go into the Capitol. Into the Capitol. Peacefully,” Epps added. Someone in the crowd responded by calling Epps a “fed,” the video showed.
Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia James Boasberg sentenced Epps to just 12 months probation on Jan. 9, three years after Epps encouraged Trump supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol.
Other Jan. 6 defendants received much longer sentences than Epps. Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors offered Epps a misdemeanor plea deal for cooperating with federal authorities and expressing remorse for his actions, and recommended he serve six months in jail for his conduct on and preceding the Jan. 6 riot. Epps was sentenced to twelve months probation in January.
“It’s amazing Ray Epps gets mere probation after there is video evidence he helped incite the January 6th riot, while Trump supporters get sent to prison for months — even years — for trespassing and taking selfies on the Senate floor,” Mike Davis, founder and president of the Article III Project previously told the DCNF. “The FBI protects its own.”
Carlson also accused Epps of lying in his testimony to the January 6th Committee.
“Following the dismissals of the Jankowicz, Bobulinski, and now Epps cases, Fox News is pleased with these back-to-back decisions from federal courts preserving the press freedoms of the First Amendment,” Fox News told the Daily Caller News Foundation in a written statement.
Epps’ lawyer did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.
Business
Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Andi Shae Napier
Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan are turning their attention to Google over concerns that the tech giant is censoring users and infringing on Americans’ free speech rights.
Google’s parent company Alphabet, which also owns YouTube, appears to be the GOP’s next Big Tech target. Lawmakers seem to be turning their attention to Alphabet after Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta ended its controversial fact-checking program in favor of a Community Notes system similar to the one used by Elon Musk’s X.
Cruz recently informed reporters of his and fellow senators’ plans to protect free speech.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!
“Stopping online censorship is a major priority for the Commerce Committee,” Cruz said, as reported by Politico. “And we are going to utilize every point of leverage we have to protect free speech online.”
Following his meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai last month, Cruz told the outlet, “Big Tech censorship was the single most important topic.”
Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent subpoenas to Alphabet and other tech giants such as Rumble, TikTok and Apple in February regarding “compliance with foreign censorship laws, regulations, judicial orders, or other government-initiated efforts” with the intent to discover how foreign governments, or the Biden administration, have limited Americans’ access to free speech.
“Throughout the previous Congress, the Committee expressed concern over YouTube’s censorship of conservatives and political speech,” Jordan wrote in a letter to Pichai in March. “To develop effective legislation, such as the possible enactment of new statutory limits on the executive branch’s ability to work with Big Tech to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users, the Committee must first understand how and to what extent the executive branch coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech.”
Jordan subpoenaed tech CEOs in 2023 as well, including Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Tim Cook of Apple and Pichai, among others.
Despite the recent action against the tech giant, the battle stretches back to President Donald Trump’s first administration. Cruz began his investigation of Google in 2019 when he questioned Karan Bhatia, the company’s Vice President for Government Affairs & Public Policy at the time, in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Cruz brought forth a presentation suggesting tech companies, including Google, were straying from free speech and leaning towards censorship.
Even during Congress’ recess, pressure on Google continues to mount as a federal court ruled Thursday that Google’s ad-tech unit violates U.S. antitrust laws and creates an illegal monopoly. This marks the second antitrust ruling against the tech giant as a different court ruled in 2024 that Google abused its dominance of the online search market.
Daily Caller
Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Emily Kopp
President Donald Trump could sign a sweeping executive order banning gain-of-function research — research that makes viruses more dangerous in the lab — as soon as May 6, according to a source who has worked with the National Security Council on the issue.
The executive order will take a broad strokes approach, banning research amplifying the infectivity or pathogenicity of any virulent and replicable pathogen, according to the source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the anticipated executive action. But significant unresolved issues remain, according to the source, including whether violators will be subject to criminal penalties as bioweaponeers.
The executive order is being steered by Gerald Parker, head of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which has been incorporated into the NSC. Parker did not respond to requests for comment.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!
In the process of drafting the executive order, Parker has frozen out the federal agencies that have for years championed gain-of-function research and staved off regulation — chiefly Anthony Fauci’s former institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.
The latest policy guidance on gain-of-function research, unveiled under the Biden administration in 2024, was previously expected to go into effect May 6. According to a March 25 letter cosigned by the American Society for Microbiology, the Association for Biosafety and Biosecurity International, and Council on Governmental Relations, organizations that conduct pathogen research have not received direction from the NIH on that guidance — suggesting the executive order would supersede the May 6 deadline.
The 2024 guidance altered the scope of experiments subject to more rigorous review, but charged researchers, universities and funding agencies like NIH with its implementation, which critics say disincentivizes reporting. Many scientists say that researchers and NIH should not be the primary entities conducting cost–benefit analyses of pandemic virus studies.
Parker previously served as the head of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), a group of outside experts that advises NIH on biosecurity matters, and in that role recommended that Congress stand up a new government agency to advise on gain-of-function research. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield has also endorsed moving gain-of-function research decision making out of the NIH to an independent commission.
“Given the well documented lapses in the NIH review process, policymakers should … remove final approval of any gain-of function research grants from NIH,” Redfield said in a February op-ed.
It remains to be seen whether the executive order will articulate carveouts for gain-of-function research without risks of harm such as research on non-replicative pseudoviruses, which can be used to study viral evolution without generating pandemic viruses.
It also remains to be seen whether the executive order will define “gain-of-function research” tightly enough to stand up to legal scrutiny should a violator be charged with a crime.
Risky research on coronaviruses funded by the NIH at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through the U.S. nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance typifies the loopholes in NIH’s existing regulatory framework, some biosecurity experts say.
Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2023 indicated that EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak submitted a proposal to the Pentagon in 2018 called “DEFUSE” describing gain-of-function experiments on viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 but downplayed to his intended funder the fact that many of the tests would occur in Wuhan, China.
Daszak and EcoHealth were both debarred from federal funding in January 2025 but have faced no criminal charges.
“I don’t know that criminal penalties are necessary. But we do need more sticks in biosafety as well as carrots,” said a biosecurity expert who requested anonymity to avoid retribution from his employer for weighing in on the expected policy. “For instance, biosafety should be a part of tenure review and whether you get funding for future work.”
Some experts say that it is likely that the COVID-19 crisis was a lab-generated pandemic, and that without major policy changes it might not be the last one.
“Gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens caused the COVID-19 pandemic, killing 20 million and costing $25 trillion,” said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University microbiologist and longtime critic of high-risk virology, to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “If not stopped, gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens likely will cause future lab-generated pandemics.”
-
Alberta18 hours ago
Premier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
Business2 days ago
Net Zero by 2050: There is no realistic path to affordable and reliable electricity
-
Business2 days ago
Ottawa’s Plastics Registry A Waste Of Time And Money
-
Addictions2 days ago
Four new studies show link between heavy cannabis use, serious health risks
-
Also Interesting2 days ago
Top Used Ford SUVs for Families and Adventurers
-
COVID-192 days ago
Former Australian state premier accused of lying about justification for COVID lockdowns
-
Automotive1 day ago
Major automakers push congress to block California’s 2035 EV mandate
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
Mistrial Declared in Junior Hockey Assault Trial. What Now?