3 weeks ago
1
PULSE POINTS:
❓What Happened: Representative Maxine Waters’ 2020 congressional campaign was fined $68,000 for multiple violations of federal campaign finance laws.
👥 Who’s Involved: Maxine Waters (D-CA), Citizens for Waters campaign committee, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), and attorney Leilani Beaver.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
📍 Where & When: Violations occurred during the Democrat’s 2020 reelection bid; FEC investigation findings were published as part of the Conciliation and Settlement Agreements released on May 30, 2025.
💬 Key Quote: Waters’ attorney claimed, “The errors were primarily a result of limited staff availability and resources during the pandemic.”
⚠️ Impact: Waters’ campaign admitted errors, agreed to pay the fine, and will send its treasurer to FEC training.
IN FULL:
California Democratic Representative Maxine Waters’ 2020 congressional campaign has been fined $68,000 by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for violating federal campaign finance laws. The Conciliation and Settlement Agreements, released by the FEC on May 30, reveal that Waters’ campaign committee, Citizens for Waters, understated its contributions and expenditures by several hundred thousand dollars during the 2020 election cycle.
The FEC investigation found that Citizens for Waters, among other violations, accepted $19,000 in excessive contributions in 2019 and 2020 and improperly disbursed $7,000 in cash from a petty cash fund. The campaign has since agreed to pay the fine and committed to sending its treasurer to an FEC-sponsored training program for political committees.
Leilani Beaver, an attorney for the Waters campaign, stated in correspondence with the FEC that the errors were not “willful or purposeful,” attributing the missteps to limited staff and resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Beaver also noted that the campaign amended its financial reports and returned the excess contributions identified by FEC auditors.
This is not the first time Waters, who has served in Congress since 1991, has faced scrutiny over campaign finance and ethics issues. In 2004, she was criticized for employing her daughter in her campaign as a slate mailer, a practice that has resulted in over $1.2 million in payments to her daughter. Additionally, in 2010, Waters faced accusations of violating conflict of interest rules for allegedly assisting a bank tied to her husband, though the House Ethics Committee later dismissed the case.
Waters has also made headlines for her outspoken opposition to President Donald J. Trump. In 2018, she urged her supporters to confront Trump administration officials in public spaces, suggesting they were “not welcome” in restaurants, stores, or gas stations.
PULSE POINTS:
❓What Happened: A court in Britain has convicted a man for burning the Islamic Quran during a protest outside the Turkish consulate, igniting backlash from free speech advocates who say the ruling revives the country’s defunct blasphemy laws.
👤Who’s Involved: Hamit Coskun, Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Judge John McGarva, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Free Speech Union.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
🧾Key Quote: “This decision is wrong. It revives a blasphemy law that Parliament repealed,” said Robert Jenrick, Shadow Justice Secretary.
⚠️Fallout: Coskun’s conviction under the Public Order Act for “religiously aggravated disorderly conduct” drew sharp criticism from civil liberties groups and sparked plans for a legal appeal, potentially reaching the European Court of Human Rights.
📌Significance: The case underscores growing concerns over free speech in the United Kingdom, where critics argue religious sensitivities are being prioritized over basic protest rights—particularly when it comes to Islam.
IN FULL:
A British court has found 50-year-old atheist Hamit Coskun guilty of a “religiously aggravated public order offence” after he publicly burned a copy of the Quran during a political protest in central London. Coskun, an Armenian-Kurdish asylum seeker who fled Turkey citing persecution, was convicted on Monday at Westminster Magistrates’ Court after a one-day trial.
The February 13 demonstration took place outside the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge, where Coskun shouted “Islam is religion of terrorism” and “F**k Islam” while holding the burning Islamic text over his head. Moments later, he was violently attacked by a passerby who appeared to slash at him with a blade and kicked him to the ground. That man is due to stand trial in 2027.
Despite claims from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) that Coskun was not prosecuted for destroying the book in itself, but for the “disorderly” nature of burning the book, the case has reignited a fierce debate over whether the United Kingdom is reintroducing blasphemy laws by stealth. Initially, Coskun was charged with harassing the “religious institution of Islam,” with the charges being revised after public outcry.
Judge John McGarva acknowledged flaws in the original CPS charge, which referred to Islam “as if it was a person,” but upheld the revised charge. He rejected arguments from Coskun’s defense team that his protest was aimed at criticizing a religion, not its followers, and therefore protected speech.
“You don’t distinguish between the two,” McGarva insisted during sentencing. “I find you have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers.”
Coskun was fined £240 (~$325) and is currently in hiding.
The Free Speech Union (FSU) and the National Secular Society (NSS), both of which funded Coskun’s defense, condemned the ruling and announced plans to appeal. “This is deeply disappointing,” the FSU said in a statement. “Religious tolerance doesn’t require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers.”
Robert Jenrick, Shadow Justice Secretary and former immigration minister, said the court’s decision “revives a blasphemy law that Parliament repealed,” adding: “Free speech is under threat. I have no confidence in Two-Tier Keir [Starmer] to defend the rights of the public to criticise all religions.”
The United Kingdom repealed its last formal blasphemy statutes in 2008, but recent prosecutions under the Public Order Act—particularly those involving Islam—have alarmed critics who argue religious protections are being selectively enforced.
Coskun, who had fled Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Islamist regime, testified that his protest was a direct response to government oppression in his home country. His lawyer, Katy Thorne KC, said the ruling effectively criminalizes any public burning of a religious book, regardless of motive or message, warning that it “chills the right of citizens to criticise religion.”
The FSU has pledged to appeal the ruling all the way to the European Court of Human Rights if necessary.
show less
English (US) · 