Freedom of speech lawyer. Standing counsel to Rupert Lowe MP. Known to some as The Duke.
Covent Garden, London, UK
Joined November 2023
- Tweets9.9K
- Following1.8K
- Followers1.9K
- Likes935
TheNewLitigation retweeted
I invited @EvaVlaar to Britain to attend a Restore Britain event - the Home Office has not allowed that to happen. My thoughts on a dark day for free speech in our country...
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Sometimes, letting Muslim Brotherhood Islamists win elections in the West may be the harshest lesson democracy can teach its own voters. Let people discover the true face of the ideology they voted for: the intolerance disguised as tolerance, the extremism dressed up as progress, and the backwardness sold as a brighter future.
Look at the turmoil in France. Look at the political battles unfolding in Britain, or “Britainstan,” as some now call it. One day, those who voted for extremism may discover that the ballot they cast in the name of progress became a vote against their own freedoms.
The tragedy of democracy is that people sometimes have to experience the consequences of their choices before they understand the value of what they had.
Civilization is easy to take for granted until you realize what it takes to defend it.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
The Muslim Brotherhood told Europe its plan years ago, and Hamburg's intelligence service has now written it down for anyone still pretending not to hear. Its 2025 report says the Brotherhood's late chief ideologue, Yusuf al Qaradawi, set the goal for Europe as a conquest "without sword and without battle", built step by step through social engagement and by posing as the partner every official should call.
So in Western democracies the Brotherhood plays moderate ON PURPOSE to fit in, uses democratic rules only as tactics, and works for a slow transformation, not a coup. Hamburg counted about 60 followers at the end of 2025.
They promised a conquest without a sword. Europe keeps handing them the keys instead.
BTW, the Muslim Brotherhood is banned in the UAE.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
The greatest consequence of social media is that people like you have had your influence reduced to dust.
You are the DVD player of modern media.
Utterly obsolete.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
No, it isn’t.
If you go to bed on election night and don't know who won a midterm congressional race, that's normal. And if you wake up the next morning and find that a candidate who was behind hours earlier has since pulled ahead, that's normal, too. (via @PolitiFact) to.pbs.org/4zqnWBa
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Various journalists asking why I signed the 'racist' Save Europe Act.
It isn't particularly complicated.
I want tens and tens of millions of illegals, freeloaders and criminals removed from our continent.
The only way to Save Europe.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Following today’s announcement of new legal refugee routes, I’ve never been more convinced that a large number of people ‘working’ in the Home Office need to go to prison.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Rupert Lowe agrees that Tommy Robinson has been unfairly treated by the establishment.
Tommy called out the Muslim rape gangs decades ago and the establishment who were desperately covering up the mass rapes of underage white girls. They had to silence him and discredit him they did this through lawfare and the false controlled media narrative that he was a racist.
I have always respected Tommy Robinson for his work on the rape gangs - he gave evidence to our inquiry, and it was remarkable to hear his level of knowledge. It contributed massively to our findings.
Tommy was fair and balanced. I learnt a lot.
He has not been treated fairly by our establishment for many years, and today is the latest example of that.
To be honest, I believe it is a disgrace.
He was right on the rape gangs. The state was wrong.
They want to vilify him for that.
The media, the justice system, Labour, the Tories, Farage. It was made very clear to me when I was in Reform that I was not to praise Tommy Robinson publicly. I did regardless.
The entire establishment is against him.
My view is this - he has done more than any politician to uncover the rape gangs, and for that I thank him.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
It’s been declared baselesss, people
Although Brazil's presidential election took place more than 4,000 miles away, the baseless conspiracy theory that it was stolen raced through the American right-wing media. nbcnews.com/tech/misinformat…
TheNewLitigation retweeted
This is MASSIVE!
Every corporate media outlet in America owes @PatrickByrne an apology.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Exemplo simples: 985 votos extras, cada um com ~66,7% de chance de ir pro Flávio (proporção do 1º turno entre os dois). O esperado seria ~657 pra ele.
A chance de sair 1 ou menos é ~10^{-467}. É como jogar uma moeda enviesada 985 vezes e quase nunca cair o lado favorito. Menor que 1 em 10^{400} universos cheios de átomos.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
LULA WINS IN BRAZIL !"“Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.”- Josef Stali
TheNewLitigation retweeted
The playbook will go something like this: 1) win back the House and Senate, and hopefully the Presidency in 2028; (2) admit DC and Puerto Rico as states, which doesn’t need a constitutional amendment, to gain 4 new Senate seats and cement control; (3) pack the Court, which only requires a change to the Judiciary Act of 1869, not a constitutional amendment; (4) eliminate the electoral college, which is unconstitutional, but not when you have a rigged court that finds the ‘loophole’; (5) flood the country with pliant migrants, swamp the natives, and hold power indefinitely.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
This is literally their plan to end democracy in America
The playbook will go something like this: 1) win back the House and Senate, and hopefully the Presidency in 2028; (2) admit DC and Puerto Rico as states, which doesn’t need a constitutional amendment, to gain 4 new Senate seats and cement control; (3) pack the Court, which only requires a change to the Judiciary Act of 1869, not a constitutional amendment; (4) eliminate the electoral college, which is unconstitutional, but not when you have a rigged court that finds the ‘loophole’; (5) flood the country with pliant migrants, swamp the natives, and hold power indefinitely.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Those who pick fights with me should understand that I will find out who is really pulling the strings and come for them, not just their puppets …
Capitol agenda: Dem gavels are coming for Elon Musk politi.co/4dPcGpd
TheNewLitigation retweeted
This is a threat. A sitting Democrat senator wants Americans to fear prosecution for serving in an administration she opposes.
TheNewLitigation retweeted
Obama knew Hillary Clinton’s plan was to falsely tie Donald Trump to Russia in 2016, he greenlit the hoax despite knowing it was a lie.
Here are then CIA Director John Brennan’s own notes proving it:
“Cite alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference from the Russian security services.”
Obama (POTUS): “Any evidence of collaboration between Trump campaign & Russia”
It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say. But that’s exactly what the Trump Administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.
To understand why this is so appalling, it’s important to know the facts. Congresswoman Omar came to this country with her father when she was 12 years old. Five years later, her father became a naturalized citizen. If Ilhan had been 18 at the time, she would have had to apply for citizenship separately. But because she was 17, she became a naturalized citizen automatically.
Congresswoman Omar went on to graduate from college, work as a community organizer, become the first Somali-American legislator elected to public office in the U.S., and win a seat in Congress. There, she has been one of the Trump Administration’s fiercest critics, which has led the president to repeatedly single her out as someone who he believes does not belong in this country.
Now the Administration is actively trying to deport Congresswoman Omar, seemingly based solely on the unsubstantiated theory that she was actually 18 when her father was naturalized, and therefore is not a citizen. Federal agents have raided her home, confiscated personal records, and seized her phone — all to try and uncover a nonexistent smoking gun from 20 years ago that will somehow make their case.
Think about that. The full weight of the federal government is being brought down on a law-abiding elected official because she has dared to criticize the president. And it’s not the first time this has happened. Under President Trump, the Justice Department has repeatedly gone after those he considers his political enemies — from the Attorney General of New York, to the former head of the FBI, to members of the Federal Reserve.
In those cases, the prosecutions either stalled or were dismissed for having no basis in law, and the same is likely to happen in this case. But not before Congresswoman Omar’s life has been turned upside down, her legal bills have piled up, and she’s been forced to spend time fighting unsubstantiated charges instead of serving the people of Minnesota.
The fact that any president, or any administration, is willing to engage in such transparent efforts to intimidate someone should outrage all Americans, regardless of how they feel about Congresswoman Omar’s political views. Because if this becomes the new normal, there’s no reason to believe it will stop with her — or that future presidents, in either party, won’t do the same.
