Tag: 6 January 2021

If Democrats will do this type of injustice to fellow Democrats, what have the 6 January defendants had to endure?


What first caught my eye was this report from Fox Digital that made the Sylvia Gonzalez case seem non-partisan

On 18 March 2024, Fox News Digital released the following video consisting primarily of the words of one of the lawyers from the firm supporting Sylvia Gonzalez before the Supreme Court.

In the deep-blue part of San Antonio, a city councilwoman carries a petition for her constituents and gets arrested

The Texan reported in a 23 October 2023 article on the case of Castle Hills Councilwoman Sylvia Gonzalez and the way the mayor, police chief, and city manager worked to squash the petition that got her elected, get rid of her First Amendment rights, and jail her.

The story contained in the alarming allegations raised by former Castle Hills City Councilwoman Sylvia Gonzales is fit for a movie plot. Now, the 76-year-old grandmother’s tale will be reviewed by justices of the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether she may sue several officials who she says violated her constitutional rights.

According to court documents, Gonzales was concerned about the direction of Castle Hills, her small municipality surrounded by the larger City of San Antonio, and not only decided to run for city council but also started a citizen-led petition calling for the removal of the city manager.

The filings describe how Gonzales faced hostilities from incumbents in the city government and their political allies, beginning with an attempt to oust her immediately after being sworn into office by claiming her oath of office was not properly administered by the county sheriff.

Gonzales secured a court order preventing them from removing her from office, but the battle raged on.

At a city council meeting after the citizen-led petition calling for the removal of the city manager was presented, Gonzales says she briefly stepped away from the council dais. When she returned, Mayor JR Trevino asked her where the petition was, and after looking she found it inside her binder lying on the dais.

Gonzales says she doesn’t know how the petition came to be placed in her binder.

Trevino then instructed Chief of Police John Siemens to conduct an investigation into the seemingly innocuous moment.

After a Castle Hills police officer did not find any wrongdoing in his investigation,  Siemens hired a local attorney, Alex Wright, who also holds a police commission with Castle Hills to conduct another investigation.

After a month of investigating, Wright obtained an arrest warrant for Gonzales, charging her with tampering with a government record — a misdemeanor, for which she was booked into jail as opposed to receiving a citation.

The efforts against her continued to pile up, with a group of citizens described as being “politically aligned” with Trevino filing a lawsuit seeking her removal from office, citing “incompetency” as the basis for their petition.

After beating back the criminal charges and the multiple attempts to remove her from office, Gonzales says that her reputation was destroyed and she was forced to spend thousands in legal bills.

Joining forces with the Institute for Justice (IJ), Gonzales filed a federal lawsuit against Trevino, Wright, and Siemens, alleging they violated her First and 14th Amendment rights.

The IJ, which is a public interest law firm, defeated a motion to dismiss at the trial court level but failed at the U.S. 5th Circuit after a multi-judge panel ruled that binding case precedent favored the defendants.

(Read more at the conservative source, The Texan)

For bringing the petition her consituents signed, they jailed her

Likewise, the San Antonio Express News reported in a 16 Octover 2023 article on the case that once involved both Sylvia Gonzalez and then-Alderwoman Lesley Wenger on what seem now to be trumped-up charges of evidence tampering.

Four years ago, a bitter political dispute in the small suburban city of Castle Hills landed a city council member in jail. The resulting lawsuit now is headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court on Friday agreed to consider an appeal by the former alderwoman, Sylvia Gonzalez, who was arrested by Castle Hills police in July 2019 and charged with tampering with a public document.

She spent a day in the Bexar County Jail but the charge was dismissed by the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office. Gonzalez filed a lawsuit in 2020 accusing other officials of retaliation.

The Supreme Court will decide whether Castle Hills officials, particularly the mayor and high-ranking police, can claim government immunity against lawsuits. The affluent North Side community along Loop 410 has about 4,000 residents.

Gonzalez, now 76, has said she was embarrassed by the arrest. She was placed in an orange inmate uniform, forced to sit on a cold metal bench and had her booking photo released to the media. Her lawsuit sought about $70,000 in legal fees and compensation for stress, harm to her reputation and loss of future job opportunities.

The lawsuit alleged violation of her rights under the First and Fourteenth amendments of the U.S. Constitution. She is represented by the Institute for Justice, a national law firm based in Virginia that bills itself as a guardian of basic American rights.

Senior U.S. District Judge David A. Ezra ruled in her favor, saying the city could have issued a summons for the nonviolent misdemeanor but got an arrest warrant instead, “which ensured that she would spend time in jail rather than remaining free and appearing before a judge.”

A three-member panel of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, reversed the district court, determining Gonzalez failed to prove her arrest was retaliatory and upholding the defendants’ claim of immunity.

Lawyers for Gonzalez have said she was the first Hispanic councilwoman ever elected in Castle Hills and was responding to concerns from residents when she “championed a nonbinding, citizen-signed petition calling for the removal of the city manager.”

“This act of political speech and petition, protected by the core of the First Amendment, was met with a coordinated campaign of retaliation by Castle Hills officials,” the institute said in its release.

Anya Bidwell, an attorney with the institute, said the appeals court’s decision “sets an impossible standard for victims of retaliatory arrest and punishment to prove their cases.”

“We are taking this case to the Supreme Court to ensure that government officials are held accountable when they violate the Constitution and that we stop this censorship by retaliation,” Bidwell said.

Castle Hills Mayor JR Treviño, listed as a defendant, along with Police Chief John Siemens and police Detective Alex Wright, declined to discuss the case.

“We can’t comment on pending litigation,” said Treviño, who also is chief operating officer of Treco Enterprises and interim president and CEO of the San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

In a release, the Institute for Justice called Gonzalez a “Texas grandmother” and retiree who endured “harassment, false charges, and even imprisonment, all stemming from her efforts to hold Castle Hills city officials accountable for their actions.”

Also arrested the same day, July 18, 2019, was then-Alderwoman Lesley Wenger, 77 at the time. She was charged with tampering with evidence and fraudulent use or possession of identification information.

Gonzalez and Wenger both were part of a three-member council majority that criticized City Manager Ryan Rapelye. They were accused in arrest affidavits of engaging in a yearlong effort to get him fired or force him to quit.

According to one police affidavit, Wenger copied information from Rapelye’s personnel file, including his Social Security number, driver’s license number, date of birth and information about his daughter, then later tore up the yellow sheet on which she’d written it — what police considered evidence. But the DA’s office also dismissed the charges against her.

Gonzalez was accused of illegally taking possession of petitions titled “Fix Our Streets” that called for Rapelye’s removal during a May 2019 council meeting, after a citizen said she’d been misled to sign one of the petitions “under false pretenses.”

The arrests also followed a 3-2 council vote supported by Wenger and Gonzalez a few weeks earlier to restrict residents from speaking until the end of regular council meetings. A new state law took effect in September 2019 that negated that vote, allowing the public to speak on individual agenda items during meetings of governmental bodies.

(Read more at the San Antonio Express News)

It’s odd how nobody brings to the conversation that this is all between Democrats

With the ways that both the press and political figures like Joe Biden regularly demonize Republicans, it’s odd that not one Republican has been involved in this fiasco.

Likewise, on the other end of the conversation, since Republicans are always demonized by the press and political figures, it would seem that either:

  • Democrats would jealously guard their reputations and not let them get stained by rapscallions like Senator Bob Menendez, Mayor JR Trevino, or Hunter Biden’s loving daddy
  • Or they would at least defend the weak that got them elected.

However, neither of these seem to be the case.

So, why hasn’t the Texas Democrat Party come out and excoriated this mayor and his compartriots? Why hasn’t Joe Biden come out and taken a stand for the little person who stood for what was right? Why hasn’t Kamala Harris hashed up some word salad on how this woman stood in the breach?

Could it be that they see us all as pawns to shuffle around? Are they currently unsure of which ones they will sacrifice before the game ends?

…

Gosh, I wonder why the Democrats never harped on the 6 January 2021 bombs.


Could it be that their assets in the “intelligence” community were involved in an operation on home soil?

Records show that the CIA deployed bomb technicians and dog teams to DC on 6 January 2021

Judicial Watch lets loose about the text messages they found revealing the facts that CIA bomb technicians and dog teams were deployed to Washington, D.C. on 6 January 2021.

Judicial Watch announced today it received 88 pages of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records from the Department of Justice in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) deployed personnel to Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021.

Judicial Watch forced the release of the records through a June 5, 2023, lawsuit that was filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to an August 10, 2023, FOIA request for records and communications regarding shots being fired inside the U.S. Capitol, as well as requests for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Special Response Team assistance on January 6, 2021 (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-01608)).

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records include a series of text messages under the heading “January 7 Intel Chain” in which two separate references to participation by the CIA are made. One states that “two CIA bomb techs” are assisting with “a pipe bomb scene on New Jersey and D ST SE.” Another references “several CIA dog teams on standby.”

Group texts contain a 4 p.m. hour message by persons whose names are redacted regarding two explosive devices found at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) building and one at the Republican National Committee (RNC): “Train traffic is stopped.” “It appears the powerplant is unfounded….” “Upper west Terrance of the capital breached by protesters.” “USCP is sending out a Mutual Aid request.” “Capital Police may be moving resources inside.” “Protesters are cutting tarp at bottom of scaffolding and moving up through that.” “FYSA-FC1, WASH1, SAC, ASAC responded to Capitol….” “2 explosive devices at DNC.” “One at rnc one at dnc.”

The “Intel Chain” also reports on the shooting of Ashli Babbitt: “Shots fired house floor. 1 civilian down with a gun shot [sic] wound to the chest on the 2nd floor. Gunshot victim has been extracted. Shooting was officer involved.”

A separate series of text messages is included in the records provided to Judicial Watch. In the 2 p.m. hour on January 6, 2021, the texts read: “West Terrace has been breached [redacted] … Explosion reported on the rotunda steps [redacted]. Shots fired at rotunda.”

Shortly thereafter, another set of texts report: Party 1: “VP stuck inside last I heard.” Patry 2: Copy.” Party 1: “Capitol PD shot someone dead on house floor. Dead.” Party 2: “Christ. What was the final in the devices real or not [redacted].” Party 1: “Clearing Capitol now with bomb techs. Lots of damage.” Party 2: “Damn that’s scary. So sad. Thx for keeping me in the loop brother. I was able to get I [sic] go to my team and the Director before they heard it from outside sources.”

The “Intel Chain” also reports that members of Congress are being evacuated to Fort McNair, which is located about two miles south of the Capitol: “Capitol has been transferred to Fort McNair.” “It’s an alternate location so they can continue their work.”

A heavily redacted series of text messages from redacted sources state, “Command post is at JERSEY and D St SE.” Three additional recipients are added to the text group at 1:21 p.m., one of whom reports: “Just made contact with [redacted] FBI is reporting an additional 3 possible devices for a total of 5 now.” A response follows: “Do you have the locations of the other devices?” The reply is: “Not yet, the FBI is going to pass it on. I believe one was located at the gates to the Power Plant.” The following text states: “LEO’s [Law Enforcement Officers] being attacked on the west side of Capitol with pieces of the restraining fence. Some officers injured.”

“These striking records show that CIA resources were deployed in reaction to the January 6 disturbance,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

(Read more at Judicial Watch)

There is so much wrong with this

This is wrong on so many levels, since:

  • The CIA is not supposed to operate domestically.
  • Since their bomb technicians and dog teams were involved (as part of a supposed clean up, possibly), had they been planning some sort of coup? We know that Clapper, Brennan, and much of the top brass identify as communist. Was this a move to keep President Trump from assuming office?
  • “Bombs” were found at the RNC headquarters and the DNC headquarters on 6 December 2021, but nobody was held to account. In fact, evidence was destroyed.
  • Although the bomber was clearly caught on video, the phone evidence of the bomber got corrupted.
  • Despite the clarity of the video evidence, there are large, unexplained gaps in that video evidence.
  • A sweep by the Secret Service and a D.C. bomb-sniffing dog did not detect the bomb at the DNC.
  • Kamala Harris was in the DNC headquarters (instead of the Capitol, as she reported several times later) when the riots were occurring. Considering that her party was on the receiving end of surges of “votes” duing November 2020, why was she not at the Capitol?

It seems that this might have been a back-up plan had President Trump actually overcome the 4 a.m. surges in the polling places where Republican poll watchers were not allowed. It just looks like our own CIA and its leadership (with its likely ideological clones of John Brennan) might be willing to bomb the RNC and DNC to derail a Trump presidency.

Therefore, for us to dismiss the idea that the Democrats are coordinating with RINO’s like Ken Buck and others to gain the gavel and deny the American people their choice — maybe is a bit premature.

…

Additionally, please consider the most recent incendiary comments of Chuck Schumer

For a party that has spent almost four years jailing, blocking, condemning, and otherwise harming anyone they deem as an “election denier,” Chuck Schumer’s message to Israel’s electorate rings hollow

The Guardian outlines the caustic words of the Democrat “leader” and the sharp response to those words.

Chuck Schumer, the US Senate leader and a top ally of Joe Biden, on Thursday broke with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, over his handling of the invasion of Gaza and called for Israel to hold new elections, in comments that upset its ruling party and allies on Capitol Hill.

The shift by Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader and the highest-ranking Jewish official in the United States, came as he continued to press lawmakers to pass a military assistance package for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, the countries Biden has named as America’s top national security priorities.

In remarks from the Senate floor, Schumer said he had a longstanding relationship with Netanyahu but believed he “has lost his way by allowing his political survival to take precedence over the best interests of Israel”.

Noting the prime minister’s inclusion of far–right officials in his government, Schumer said Netanyahu “has been too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza, which is pushing support for Israel worldwide to historic lows. Israel cannot survive if it becomes a pariah.”

Israel’s ruling Likud party responded to Schumer by defending the prime minister’s public support and saying Israel was “not a banana republic”.

“Contrary to Schumer’s words, the Israeli public supports a total victory over Hamas, rejects any international dictates to establish a Palestinian terrorist state, and opposes the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza,” it said in a statement.

“Senator Schumer is expected to respect Israel’s elected government and not undermine it. This is always true, and even more so in wartime.”

The Republican Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, struck a similar tone. “Israel is not a colony of America whose leaders serve at the pleasure of the party in power in Washington. Only Israel’s citizens should have a say in who runs their government,” he said from the chamber’s floor, shortly after Schumer spoke.

“Either we respect their decisions, or we disrespect their democracy.”

The Republican speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, who has refused to allow a vote on the military assistance package despite its passage in the Senate, said Schumer’s remarks were “highly inappropriate” and accused him of playing “a divisive role in Israeli politics”.

(Read at the Guardian about the unreported issues that these comments exacerbate)

If the party that has focused so heavily on the sanctity of elections will do this to an ally, what will they do to their supposed enemy?

Although we have to realize that a major pull for the Democrats is their newly-imported Islamic voting block (created some time around the Somali and Afghan crises), we also have to think about the effect of Chuck’s words on our own Jewish population and the only democracy in the Middle East.

You know, if Chuck doesn’t watch his words, he might find that he has “released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you, if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

But then again, Chuckie and Dementia Joe have a compliant press to shield them. So who cares?

…

All sorts of Democrat narratives change


A hidden 6 January 2021 transcript comes to light

NTD News reports how previously-hidden transcripts of the “January 6 Commission” have shed light on the actual events leading up to the day of the riot. Oddly, these events contradict the official Democrat narrative.

A previously hidden transcript of an interview conducted by a U.S. House of Representatives panel that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol has been revealed, undermining a committee claim.

Anthony Ornato, who was the White House deputy chief of staff during the breach, told the committee that he overheard Mark Meadows, who was then chief of staff, on the phone with Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. According to the transcript, Mr. Meadows wanted to ensure Ms. Bowser “had everything she needed.”

Mr. Meadows “wanted to know if she need[ed] any more guardsmen,” Mr. Ornato testified. “And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’ I remember that number. Now that you said it, it reminded me of it.”

Ms. Bowser said that “she was all set,” Mr. Ornato recalled.

Mr. Ornato was speaking to the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.

The committee said in its final report that it “found no evidence” supporting the idea that former President Donald Trump ordered 10,000 troops to be ready for Jan. 6.

“The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who released the transcript, said in a statement.

“Mr. Ornato’s testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along, President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down,” Mr. Loudermilk, the chairman of the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, added.

Speaking to Fox News, Mr. Meadows previously said, “As many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of defense. That was a direct order from President Trump.”

(Read more at NTD News)

Even the New York Times has something to admit: Testimony fleshes out the account of Trump’s demand to go to Capitol on Jan. 6 (where “fleshes out” means “exposes as a lie”)

Even the >New York Times felt it necessary to set the record straight in their crooked own way on the lie that President Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of “The Beast.” (Bold and red are mine for emphasis.)

President Donald J. Trump had just delivered his fiery speech at the Ellipse early on the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021, setting in motion the attack by his  supporters on the Capitol.

When he got into his armored vehicle after the speech, Mr. Trump immediately brought up a topic he often broached after his public appearances: How big was the crowd?

But within 30 seconds, his conversation with his lead Secret Service agent took a more contentious turn, according to a transcript released on Monday of an interview by House investigators of another Secret Service agent who was driving the car. Mr. Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, but his lead agent, Robert Engel, said no, telling him there was no plan in place.

“The president was insistent on going to the Capitol,” recounted the driver, whose name was not disclosed. “It was clear to me he wanted to go to the Capitol. He was not screaming at Mr. Engel. He was not screaming at me. Certainly his voice was raised, but it did not seem to me that he was irate — certainly not, certainly didn’t seem as irritated or agitated as he had on the way to the Ellipse.”

But, the driver said, Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel or physically accosted the agents, contradicting one of the most sensational and hotly disputed elements of testimony given to the House Jan. 6 committee by a White House aide. The transcript of the driver is the first extensive eyewitness account of what happened in the armored vehicle to be made public.

“I did not see him reach,” the Secret Service driver told investigators for the House panel. “He never grabbed the steering wheel. I didn’t see him, you know, lunge to try to get into the front seat at all. You know, what stood out was the irritation in his voice, more than his physical presence.”

The driver’s transcript adds detail to one of the most scrutinized episodes of Jan. 6, 2021. The transcript was never released publicly by the House Jan. 6 committee, which entered into an agreement with the Secret Service regarding 12 interviews to avoid disclosing “privacy information, for-official-use-only information, intelligence and law enforcement sensitive records and raw intelligence information.

(Exploit your New York Times subscription and read more, if you like liberal bilge)

When the fraudulant testimony by Cassidy Hutchinson aired saying that Trump lunged for the steering wheel, the main stream press was all over it.

The press covered the words of Cassidy Hutchinson (who, if the testimony of these two independent sources in this Congressional record are correct, lied under oath). However, now that two pieces of information come out exhonorating President Trump (the testimony of Mr. Ornato and that of the driver), those same sources don’t want to cover it.

…

Special Counsel Hur rebuts the White House

Just The News opens the words of Special Counsel Hur to us in the unwashed masses (letting us know how Joe “willingly” held classified materials in as many as seven locations like Biden’s UPenn offices, his University of Delaware offices, his vacation home, and his garage).

Special Counsel Robert Hur directly disputed the White House narrative on Joe Biden’s retention of classified documents, insisting in nationally televised testimony to Congress on Tuesday that the president did “willfully” keep nationally secrets but that prosecutors did not believe they could prove it to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Republicans led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan questioned Hur in testimony certain to influence the 2024 election and argued Biden kept the materials because it will help him write a book that earned him $8 million. Hur confirmed to lawmakers Biden did in fact share classified information with the ghost writer for the book.

Hur reaffirmed the primary conclusion from his report that reportedly frustrated the White House. Spokesman for the White House Counsel’s office Ian Sams wrote a letter to the White House Correspondents’ Association criticizing the media coverage of the special counsel’s conclusions. Though the report said Biden “willfully” retained classified material, Sams stressed Hur concluded “that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“We obtained evidence President Biden willfully retained classified information,” Hur said in his opening statement. The evidence includes recorded conversations with his ghostwriter where he shared classified information. However, Hur concluded the information was not enough to prove any violations beyond a reasonable doubt.

(Read more at Just The News)

So is Joe Biden an unfit president or a fit criminal?

Once we have reviewed the facts of the case presented by Robert Hur, there are only two options: either Joe Biden is an unfit president or a fit criminal.

Which is Joe Biden now?

I am sure we know why the press has not gone full bore after Joe Biden: it’s their DEI

The reason the press will not ask Joe why he lied about giving his ghost writer classifed documents (for the book that Joe got an $8 million advance) can be wrapped up in this: it’s their policy of Discrimination, Exclusion, and Investment in socialist ideology. Joe won’t be investigated because he is a Democrat and a flaming liberal. If he were the moderate he ran as, he might get at least some review, but since he is to the left of Hillary …

…

We are choosing our future now


Is this the “equity” we can look forward to?

Israel releases 200 prisoners convicted of terrorist acts,

Hamas releases 100 Israeli citizens captured and then has their gunman kill three and injure eight at a Israeli bus stop

Breitbart illustrates the inequity of the left by shining a light on one of the elements that soft-headed “progressive” Republicans and Democrats Socialists have foisted on America in droves over the past 50 years.

Terrorist gunmen killed three people and wounded eight more in Jerusalem on Thursday, Israeli police said, just minutes after a six-day truce between Israel and Hamas was extended to a seventh day, and just hours after an American hostage was freed.

Both attackers were shot dead at the scene, near a bus stop on the western side of Jerusalem, where there are no checkpoints guarding the city entrance.

“Two terrorists arrived in a car, one of them armed with an M-16 and the other with a pistol,” and opened fire during the morning rush hour, Jerusalem police chief Doron Torgeman told reporters at the scene, AFP reports.

The two gunmen were shot dead “after the attack by two off-duty IDF soldiers and another civilian who fired at them”, police said in a statement.

A security search of the vehicle found large amounts of ammunition.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, at a meeting with visiting U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, called the attack an example of the “endless war that we are fighting against terror organisations, especially Hamas”.

Blinken similarly said the shooting is another reminder of the threat “Israelis face every single day.”

According to police, the attackers were two brothers in their 30s affiliated with the Hamas terrorist group who had been jailed by Israel in the past.

(Read more at Breitbart)

There are a number of things to learn from this attack

Among the things we can learn:

  • Releasing terrorists doesn’t always produce the result that duplicitous liberals would have you think they expect
  • You cannot hold a scorpion to your chest and not expect to be stung
  • If Israel, with its tight border, still gets stung by terrorists — What can America expect since Mayorkas yesterday admitted that 12 million “undocumented” aliens have passed our borders (including who knows how many from terrorist nations)?
  • America has long been known by Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism, as the “Big Satan” while Israel has been known by them as the “Little Satan.” If these attacks and wars occur against Israel, is there any wonder why so many “Palestinians” flood our streets protesting our government? Is this a prelude to war?
  • However, by the barbed wire, fenses, National Guard at the Inauguration, maybe Biden did expect a response like this
  • By the multiple arrests of Biden’s primary opponent, maybe Joe does expect a response like this
  • Since Biden’s presidency has widely been called Obama’s third term, let us notice:
    • During Obama’s first term, Barack presented himself as a centrist and even campaigned in a few somewhat-conservative churches (as Saddleback Church seeemed at the time).
    • During his second term, somehow gay marriage, transgenderism, and other tangential views started to appear.
    • Now, with a majority of Obama’s staff in Biden’s crew, this third term for Barack seems to be taking us toward the path of the Islamic attacks that occurred on American soil in his first two terms.

…

It’s been a cover-up: MTG comments on 6 January 2021 footage

Just The News covers the comments by Marjorie Taylor Greene regarding what seems to have been a large-scale cover-up.

The Georgia Congresswoman says, “America deserves the truth, and the real big lie was the lie that was told about January 6th being an insurrection.” Additional interviews with former Congressman Rodney Davis on whether the previous January 6 Select Committee should be investigated for possibility of purposely spreading mistruths or misinformation and North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Michael Whatley on the gear up to picking the Republican Party’s nominee for President in 2024.

(Read and hear more at Just The News)

The many videos out there seem to just cement in the idea that we have been lied to by Biden

Surely we should have seen that, by the barbed wire, fences, and National Guard selectively weeded out to be only Kool-Aid-drinking liberals, that we have been lied to by the Biden regime. The degree to which only God and Biden know. I would guess that the Devil might also have a number of hints about the events, as he may have been in on the planning.

…

The Border Patrol president lambasts Biden for forcing CBP to police pronouns

Just The News quotes Border agent union president Brandon Judd on his opinion of Joe Biden directing CBP agents to police pronouns.

The Biden Homeland Security Department’s new pronoun rules for illegal immigrants is getting lambasted by the union for border patrol agents as an unnecessary distraction during the nation’s border and fentanyl crises.

A Customs and Border Protection (CBP) memo obtained by the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project and made public last week imposed new requirements on an already stretched thin team of border patrol agents.

“DO NOT use ‘he, him, she, her’ pronouns until you have more information about, or provided by, the individual,” the memo instructed agents.

Brandon Judd, the president of the National Border Patrol Council, confirmed to Just the News that the memo was sent to agents and he considered the requirement to be an unnecessary distraction for an agency swamped by millions of illegal immigrants under President Joe Biden.

“We can’t be worrying about whether we’re going to hurt somebody’s feelings,” Judd told the Just the News, No Noise television show.

“Now we have to be cognizant of their civil rights. But this is not a civil rights issue. This is simply a matter of preference. And, and, you know, again, taking the time to deal with that rather than deal with the actual laws that were supposed to be enforcing. This is the woke mob.”

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has defended the department’s new gender identity policies, insisting they are aimed at “ensuring that everyone, regardless of gender identity, is treated with respect” and are part of a “whole-of-government effort to promote equity and inclusion” in government.

(Read more at Just The News)

This is all about the control

If Joe can get you to look at a 250 or 300 pound guy with a beard and say that you will call that guy “her,” “she,” “ze,” or anything but the truth, then they can bend your mind to do anything.

This is all about breaking your will.

…

Can you spot the conservative or liberal?


Can you pick the conservative out of these stories?

First we have the case where the FBI raided a home and opened a gun safe over civil misconduct

The New York Post describes the backlash resulting from Liberty gun safe’s having provided keypad codes to the FBI over a case centering on civil misconduct on 6 January 2021. Notice that the man charged was hunted down in 2023 for a 2021 event that does not include the descriptors “Antifa” or “BLM.” That may give you a clue as to who might be the central conservative.

Calls are mounting for a Bud Light-style boycott of gun safe manufacturer Liberty Safe after it gave the FBI access to an alleged Jan. 6, 2021, rioter’s firearms.

The manufacturer acknowledged the widespread conservative backlash after it complied with a federal warrant that led to the Aug. 30 arrest of an Arkansas man for his alleged involvement in the Capitol riots.

Liberty Safe said it only gave the feds an access code to 34-year-old Nathan Hughes’ gun safe after receiving proof of the warrant.

“Our company’s protocol is to provide access codes to law enforcement if a warrant grants them access to a property,” the company said in a Tuesday statement.

“After receiving the request, we received proof of the valid warrant, and only then did we provide them with an access code.”

Liberty Safe added that it wasn’t aware of any case details when it handed over the code.

Hughes was later charged with felony civil disorder in connection to the siege on the US Capitol.

The backlash against the popular gun-safe manufacturer was fast and furious — with many MAGA supporters and fellow conservatives threatening to return or cancel orders with the company.

“Liberty Safe is an enemy to gun owners,” Charlie Kirk, founder, and CEO of Turning Point USA, wrote on X. “They could have fought the warrant — like Apple did — instead they buckled and bent over. Your guns are not safe with @libertysafeinc Boycott. Ridicule. Ruin their company.”

Others called for a Bud Light-style boycott, referring to the conservative war waged against the beer brand because of its ties to transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney.

(Read about actions planned against Liberty Safe at the New York Post)

The Washington Examiner‘s article on the story also includes a human angle

In the Washington Examiner article on this story, we learn that not only did Biden’s FBI again choose to circumvent the Constitution by not obtaining a warrant to access the gun safe, they did so in such a violent manner as to induce a miscarriage in the accused man’s girlfriend.

The last time I checked, there was no provision in the FBI charter where they got to kill the firstborn (or unborn) child of an accused. However, considering the excesses proven by the Louisiana court on Biden FBI’s actions against the First Amendment, we should expect this sort of thuggery.

Maybe we should change the metal nameplate in front of that Hoover building to read “Fascist-Booted Investigations.”

…

Next, we have the case of a man convicted and given the harshest prison sentence while not in the city where the riot occurred

The Washington Examiner reports on the situation of Enrique Tarrio, who was not in Washington, D.C. on 6 January 2021 and certainly did not have more influence on getting people motivated on that day than Ray Epps or John Sullivan (neither of whom have been charged).

Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, former national chairman of the Proud Boys, was sentenced Tuesday to 22 years in prison over his role in organizing a large group for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, the longest sentence of the hundreds handed out so far in connection with the attack.

Tarrio, who was not physically in Washington on Jan. 6, was convicted of a rare seditious conspiracy charge, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and three other related charges.

Tarrio was arrested and ordered to leave Washington a couple of days prior to the riot for burning a Black Lives Matter flag and carrying two large-capacity magazines, according to court filings.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly spoke at length about his considerations in calculating Tarrio’s sentence, emphasizing what he said was the seriousness of seditious conspiracy, a charge established during the Civil War.

“Mr. Tarrio was the ultimate leader of that conspiracy. I don’t really think this is super debatable,” Kelly said.

Tarrio was “the ultimate person who organized, who was motivated by a revolutionary zeal,” Kelly said, noting the group Tarrio recruited consisted of about 200 people leading breaches that day.

The court filings stated that on Jan. 6, Tarrio shared messages to his tens of thousands of followers on the social media platform Parler that included instructing those at the Capitol not to leave while it was being overtaken and calling them “revolutionaries.” He also shared a photo of lawmakers hiding in the House chamber, and in the days after the riot, he posted messages that included “I’m not denouncing s***” and “f*** the system” in all capital letters.

Tarrio was convicted in May alongside four co-defendants, three of whom were also found guilty of seditious conspiracy.

Kelly handed out hefty sentences to the four others last week spanning 10 to 18 years, a sign that Tarrio’s sentence would be equally as lengthy.

Tarrio had been scheduled to receive his sentence last Wednesday, before the rest of the co-defendants, but Kelly canceled all of his hearings at the last minute that day. He returned to the courthouse the following day and clarified that he had called out sick. Tarrio’s sentencing hearing was rescheduled to occur last instead of first.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

So what if he voiced opposition to this regime! So what if he used expletives! Until Biden, this was America.

Yes, from Balitmore, this man took images and made memes. Some of those memes included curse words. Until Biden, we had free speech that included expletives applied against our leaders.

In Biden’s odd response, this Afro-Cuban immigrant has been accused of the worst thing that Dementia Joe can come up with: being a White-supremacist. However, it seems more likely that he just disagrees vehemently with Joe’s socialist-flavor of government. That should not surprise any conservative, since it seems that many considerations have changed within this nation that have moved it toward the USSR of old.

For example, consider these changes to our political environment:

If it has become accepted that the broadcast press can only report the Democrat talking points (and from viewing the ABC, NBC, PBS, and CBS news broadcasts, that seems to be the case), then this is no free republic.

If political opponents (like Ken Paxton and Donald Trump) can be indicted without substantial charges and put through expensive trials, this is not the framers’ America.

If the son of the demented guy in the Oval Office can receive millions from foreign institutions while he holds no marketable skills (and he pays no income taxes on those millions while the investigations on those millions lapses into the sunset), there is no equal protection under the law.

If Latin-mass Catholics or parents who speak out at school board meetings have to fear the FBI, this is no America.

Shall I continue?

…

Can you pick the liberal out of these stories?

The case where a judge goes below guidelines, gives 10-year term to man who set deadly Lake Street fire during unrest

The Star Tribune tells us how an Antifa member who killed a pawn shop employee by burning down the shop during a BLM riot.

A federal prosecutor told the judge he saw the defendant as a protester, not a rioter, and argued for leniency for a Rochester man who was accused of setting a deadly fire in a Lake Street pawnshop soon after George Floyd’s death.

The 10 years of prison time given to Montez T. Lee Jr., 26, in U.S. District Court in St. Paul last week fell well below federal guidelines and follows his guilty plea to arson in connection with the fire that engulfed the Max It Pawn store in the 2700 block of E. Lake Street on May 28, 2020, three days after Floyd was killed while in police custody in south Minneapolis.

The remains of Oscar Lee Stewart Jr., 30, of Burnsville were recovered from the rubble nearly two months later. An autopsy found that Stewart died of smoke inhalation and excessive burns. He was one of two people who died during the civil unrest in the Twin Cities that followed Floyd’s murder.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Calhoun-Lopez’s presentence filing said that Lee was in Minneapolis not to loot or destroy property but was “in the streets to protest unlawful police violence against [Black] men, and there is no basis to disbelieve his statement.”

“[There were] many people who felt angry, frustrated and disenfranchised, and who were attempting — in many cases in an unacceptably reckless and dangerous manner — to give voice to those feelings. Mr. Lee appears to be squarely in this … category.”

(Read more at the Star Tribune)

Asking you to find the liberal in this article was a trick question, since both the judge and the defendant were obviously left-wing

Yes, I gave you a trick question. However, in response to this situation (ignored by most of the mainstream media where a left-wing judge came to a left-wing murderer and lightened his sentence), what would happen if this were all in a conservative mirror?

Yes, it might be interesting to see the reaction from the Left if someone demonstrably on the Right was let off similarly. And I don’t mean a release of Trump or Paxton from their “free speech” violations. I mean having a demonstrably right-wing person participate in a right-wing real riot (not a walk-fest) and have them burn down a building with a person in it. Would the reaction of the demented Left that has sanctioned the above by their silence be the same? I think not.

…

The case of a governor’s violation of the Bill of Rights

Newsmax comments on the constitutionality of the executive order by the governor of New Mexico.

Democrats need to take steps to curb violence in their states, perhaps, but they are doing it by taking away constitutional rights of the law-abiding under the guise of public health emergencies, as in the case New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, legal expert Jonathan Turley warned.

Grisham issued an emergency public health order that suspends the open and permitted concealed carry of firearms in Albuquerque for 30 days amid violence, but that will not stand up to legal challenges and will ultimately weaken public emergency powers forever, according to Turley.

“The order, in my view, is flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent. It could also be a calculated effort to evade a ruling by making the period of suspension so short,” Turley posted on X, linking to a column on his website, rebuking Grisham’s missteps.

(Read more at Newsmax)

Democrats could cease their many wars on the police

Among other things, Democrats could stop their continual wars on police. They could stop defunding police. They could recognize that redirecting dollars from police departments to Democrat-affiliated companies on parks projects does not build a sense of safety or community.

But that may just be my opinion.

…

The case of a group repeatedly stopping U.S. House operations by taking over government property

The Washington Stand outlines two of the most recent times that two LGBTQIA+ groups disrupted business at the Capitol by taking over government property. Oddly, unlike the 6 January 2021 protesters, these anarchists were not charged with sedition, insurrection, or even rioting.

Far-left activists barged into House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) office Monday, linking arms and chanting, “Pass PEPFAR now, McCarthy!” The protest briefly interrupted staffers’ typically quiet Monday morning before Capitol police arrived and arrested seven protestors who refused to leave. The protest appears to be part of a larger media campaign by far-left groups, including abortion groups, to boost PEPFAR.

PEPFAR, or the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, is among America’s largest foreign aid programs, aiming to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, primarily to women and children, in impoverished areas of the world. First passed 20 years ago under President Bush, PEPFAR has enjoyed widespread bipartisan support. But pro-life organizations recently raised concerns that the Biden administration is seeking to use the program as a way to promote abortion and have called for additional safeguards. PEPFAR’s five-year funding authorization expires at the end of the month.

Two far-left groups, Housing Works and Health GAP, took credit for the protest in a joint press release, proudly identifying the names and titles of the seven arrestees. Among the arrestees were Asia Russell, executive director of Health GAP, and six employees of Housing Works, including Charles King, CEO, and Matthew Bernardo, president.

Besides their AIDS advocacy, both organizations share a pro-abortion policy stance. Health GAP’s Asia Russell called the Mexico City Policy “cruel and anti-science” in a 2021 article which concluded, “the U.S. must never return to this deadly policy.” Russell was arrested while wearing a t-shirt that said “HIV positive” in rainbow-colored letters.

On June 30, 2022, seven Housing Works staff were among 181 activists bused into D.C. to protest the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade and arrested for attempting to blockade the Supreme Court garage entrance. On May 2, 2022, the homelessness and AIDS organization responded to the leak of a draft opinion for Dobbs by posting, “#Abortion is healthcare, and healthcare is a human right.”

Health GAP advertised the protest on X, formerly known as Twitter, “We’re proud to be with @HealthGAP occupying the D.C. office of @SpeakerMcCarthy.” They declared, “Never in the twenty-year history of @PEPFAR have lawmakers pulled such outrageous stunts. Activists showed up today to demand a 5-year reauthorization of PEPFAR in its current form and full funding for US HIV programs #ProudofPEPFAR.”

(Read more at the Washington Stand)

Odd that none of these people who stopped two branches of government from work have been charged with insurrection or sent to prison for 22 years

These people were actually in the offices of Speaker of the House McCarthy. Therefore, if we were to follow the example of the sentencing of those who took over the office of Speaker of the House Pelosi, we would need to put them in solitary confinement for several years in D.C. jails before sending them before a biased judge and sentencing them to years in prison.

We need to get on this. Especially since Biden’s FBI thugs are still hunting down his opponents.

…

Biden continues to make himself an international spectacle


Biden’s Democrat machine weaponizes the judicial system

In a movement that did not exist before, Biden has enabled “America last” as an international movement

The Wall Street Journal reports on the banana republic judicial system created by Joe Biden’s Democrat party. You know, the same one that delivered 4 a.m. surges of ballots across multiple states.

Exact charges against former president aren’t known; case centers on hush-money payments to porn star

Donald Trump was indicted for his role in paying hush-money to a porn star on the eve of the 2016 election, marking the first time in American history that a former president has faced criminal charges.

The grand jury returned the indictment of Mr. Trump after a vote on Thursday, kicking off a process in which the former president is expected to come to New York to face the charges. The indictment, sought by the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, isn’t public.

(Read as much as you can afford at the Wall Street Journal)

Thanks to Matt Taibbi, we know Biden has used the FBI to rig the “instant press” (Twitter and other social media). We know the main stream media ignores big stories for Biden

We know the judicial system now is under Democrat control. Thugs get out by bending a knee to BLM, Antifa, or just the judge. However, Biden started his political prisoner system with the 6 January 2021 persecution and now has his prize.

Considering that Biden already crippled the social media (which should be considered an “instant press”) by using his FBI to push them into their already liberal tendencies, this is sad.

Knowing that Biden has killed two banks by allowing a “woke” group to go more-or-less unregulated, maybe we should expect Democrat mindlessness. Knowing that Biden then dumps the bailout of the billionaire Chinese and billionaire American investors on common American bank account holders, we know to expect Democrat selectiveness. Equity? That’s just a Democrat catch phrase for the weak-minded.

And seeing that Biden has sent his IRS to intimidate journalists like Taibbi, we know we have re-entered a banana republic. Hopefully, Dementia Joe hasn’t learned too much from the oppressive ways of Obama and Lois Lerner.

One thing that I wonder: are the Democrats setting us (or the more easily angered among us) up for another 6 January riot?

Biden and Harris funded the bails of Antifa and Black Lives Matter thugs who burned blocks of businesses during 2020. But who cares for capitalists among the Democrats? That wsa only the life savings of those capitalists.

But when 6 January came and a few people broke windows and a greater number of people walked between the ropes set up in the Capitol — that was a “real” insurrection.

What has me wondering is this: since the Democrats would rather investigate common people who did not burn down cities, are they going to do more of the same with this trial of President Trump?

Does anyone care to retweet this?

…

Due to Biden’s weakness, Russia has built a large and growing following

In a movement that did not exist before, Biden has enabled “America last” as an international movement

The Wall Street Journal exposes Biden’s method of restricting money to banks dealing in a perfectly legal (but currently uncontrolled by government) market: cryptocurrency.

Some financial regulators appear to have seized on a series of high-profile meltdowns to go around Congress and try to freeze an entire industry out of banking services.

I spent more than a decade as a federal prosecutor on some of the worst threats our country faces—organized crime, the opioid epidemic, political corruption and terrorism. In my final years at the Justice Department, I shifted to cases involving emerging technology, including the then-nascent crypto category, from the Mt. Gox hack to the corrupt Silk Road agents. Years later, the space continues to attract crime and fraud, but it has also drawn some of the brightest engineering talent in the world. Public blockchains, the foundational technology of the ecosystem, are an important set of tools that reflect breakthroughs in cryptography and distributed computing. In addition to early financial-use cases, this sector provides new ways to develop, monetize and govern all kinds of software.

(Read as much as you can afford at the Wall Street Journal)

If BRICS follows the way that Russia has planned, our dollar is sunk

All becuase of Democrat weakness, specifically Dementia Joe’s weakness, we might see the end of the petrodollar. That would mean the end of the dollar as the reserve currency for most of the world. That would mean much of the money being held across the world would be traded in for other currency. That would mean that our inflation woes have only begun.

Thanks, Joe. Thanks, Democrats that have us set for a multi-trillion dollar debt. Thanks, Democrats who prioritize the nebulous “climate change” agenda over jobs.

…

After almost a decade of seeing Obama’s tricks and over two years of practicing tricks on oil and gas, Biden branches out

Biden threatens to withhold money from banks dealing in crypto just as Obama withheld finances from banks dealing with gun manufacturers

Bloomberg quotes Jim O’Neill as he urges the anti-American alliance BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) to expand and throw off American dominance (and Saudi Arabia, Iran, and numerous Middle Eastern countries have since joined).

Jim O’Neill, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. chief economist who coined the acronym BRIC, said the bloc of nations that later adopted the name should expand and work to counter the dollar’s dominance.

In a paper published in the Global Policy journal on March 26, O’Neill called on the group to apply strict criteria to ensure the addition of any new members to its ranks helps further its aims and urged it to focus on climate finance, improving healthcare and boosting trade.

(Read more at a cost if you pay up at Bloomberg)

Crypto does not interest me because it does not have anything to back its worth; however, it also does not fall under government control

Since there is a chance to park money into a venue that escapes the intrusive eye of the government, it seems to have the Biden regime riled up. It seems that Biden has embraced his inner dictator.

…

Biden upgrades to gaffes after entertaining us with his up-the-stairs trips

Canadian lawmakers laugh after Biden accidentally applauds China: “You can tell what I’m thinking”

Fox News reports on Biden’s gaffe of applauding China in front of the Canadian Parliament and those politicians’ resulting laughter.

President Biden accidentally commended China instead of Canada while praising the nation’s stance on migration on Friday.

Biden made the gaffe during a speech at the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa while he was discussing U.S. immigration policies.

“In the United States, we’re expanding legal pathways for migration, to seek safety and humanitarian…humanitarian basis, while discouraging unlawful migration that feeds exploitation and human trafficking,” the president began.

“So today, I applaud China for stepping out…excuse me, I applaud Canada,” Biden stumbled while Canadian Members of Parliament laughed.

(Read more at Fox News)

Biden must have been thinking on to the next payment to the “Big Guy”

We now have the bank records in Congress for a few of the transactions. When will we start with impeachment?

…

In a bizarre shell game of shuffling illegal aliens to a Red state that has bussed illegals out, Biden keeps up a petty show

Biden flies illegals caught at Canada border to Texas

VOA News touches on the issue of Biden flying illegal aliens (who have chosen to detour through Canada) into Texas. Although VOA News takes the stance that this act constitutes a deterrance to illegals, I think it to be a slap in the face of Texas (whose governor has been busing illegals to Blue States for years, now).

U.S. authorities have been flying migrants caught illegally crossing the U.S.-Canada border to Texas as part of a deterrence effort to tackle a rise in crossings, according to authorities, flight records and a Reuters witness.

U.S. Border Patrol has quietly transported about 100 migrants this month on two charter flights from Plattsburgh, New York, near the border with Canada, to the Texas cities of Harlingen and El Paso.

The southbound flights from the northern border are a break from past practice as the United States deals with a sharp rise in migrants crossing illegally from Canada, current and former officials told Reuters.

At the same time, asylum-seekers have been crossing from the United States into Canada in record numbers, straining resources. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has pledged to raise migration issues with U.S. President Joe Biden during meetings in Ottawa on Thursday and Friday.

U.S. Border Patrol apprehended nearly 2,900 people crossing illegally from Canada into the United States in the five months since October, more than all of fiscal year 2022. About half of those were Mexicans, who do not need a visa to travel to Canada.

Gil Kerlikowske, a former commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Border Patrol’s parent agency, said he could not recall the agency using charter flights for migrants caught crossing from Canada.

“The whole northern border issue wasn’t nearly as much on the radar,” he said.

(Read the Biden line at VOA News)

Surely, part of this is a poke in the eye for Governor Abbott for having bussed illegals to points liberal

Certainly, part of Joe’s reasoning for sending illegals to Texas rests in payback. Otherwise, if he wanted to present a deterent to the illegals, he would drop them off in the downtown districts of Democrat hell-holes of crime like New York City (where 4-year-old girls are shot in Times Square) or Chicago (where we are up to 161 shot during the first three months of 2023).

…

Biden’s is not the normal cross-border illegals

Biden has allowed in illegals from 147 nations between October 2022 and February 2023

Fox News informs us of the illegal aliens from 147 nations that entered America between October 2022 and February 2023.

Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said this week that his agents have encountered hundreds of thousands of migrants from more than 140 countries — in the same week he told lawmakers that DHS does not have “operational control” of the southern border.

“So far, in FY23, U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 900,590 individuals from 147 countries,” Ortiz said. FY 2023 began in October.

The top five countries for apprehensions were Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, Colombia and Guatemala.

Ortiz’s announcement came as Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced that there were 154,998 migrant encounters overall at the southern border in February, down from the 166,010 encountered in February 2022 and down slightly from the 156,770 encountered in January 2023. In February 2021, there were 101,099 encounters and 36,687 encounters in February 2020.

__

Don’t forget the people and contraband we never saw

Thank Biden for all of the fentanyl and other contraband (drugs, human, terrorist, and other) that made it over the border and into your city.

…

 

Proof positive the press has their heads pushed so far up Joe Biden’s backside as to give him an upper endoscopy (part 2)


On COVID, what happened to the debate on the right and the pressure on the left?

At the Right’s Wall Street Journal: Intelligence on sick staff at Wuhan lab fuels debate on Covid-19 origin

The Wall Street Journal points out a debate on the right during 2021 where some were duped by the Biden line and others saw the logic of a Wuhan virus having come from a Wuhan lab.

Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the Covid-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.

The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 “with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and common seasonal illness.”

The disclosure of the number of researchers, the timing of their illnesses and their hospital visits come on the eve of a meeting of the World Health Organization’s decision-making body, which is expected to discuss the next phase of an investigation into Covid-19’s origins.

Current and former officials familiar with the intelligence about the lab researchers expressed differing views about the strength of the supporting evidence for the assessment. One person said that it was provided by an international partner and was potentially significant but still in need of further investigation and additional corroboration.

Another person described the intelligence as stronger. “The information that we had coming from the various sources was of exquisite quality. It was very precise. What it didn’t tell you was exactly why they got sick,” he said, referring to the researchers.

November 2019 is roughly when many epidemiologists and virologists believe SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind the pandemic, first began circulating around the central Chinese city of Wuhan, where Beijing says that the first confirmed case was a man who fell ill on Dec. 8, 2019.

The Wuhan Institute hasn’t shared raw data, safety logs and lab records on its extensive work with coronaviruses in bats, which many consider the most likely source of the virus.

(Read more woo-hoo from China and their friends as repeated by the Wall Street Journal)

Ok. There are a hew more steps in the logic chain than stating the Wuhan virus came from a Wuhan lab

To condense the creation of the COVID virus through the help of Dr. Redfield’s testimony before the House COVID-19 panel (and the summarizing skills of the Daily Signal), here are six take-aways concerning COVID’S origin:

The House on Wednesday held its first hearing investigating the origins of COVID-19 after two federal agencies suggested the pandemic likely began when a new coronavirus escaped China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. 

(continued)

Here are six highlights from testimony before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee’s subcommittee on the pandemic. 

  1. What’s Ahead?

    Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, chairman of the select subcommittee, provided a glimpse of what his panel will delve into during future hearings.

    (continued)

    “Unfortunately the question of the origins [of COVID-19] has been politicized,” Wenstrup said. “That’s no secret. It has driven most people to their corners, rather than driving apolitical scientific debate or discussion.”

  1. ‘No Doubt’ US Tax Dollars Funded Gain-of-Function Research

    The key witness was Dr. Robert Redfield, who was director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the Trump administration when the pandemic emerged. 

    (continued)

    The term “gain of function” describes a risky process of making a disease more dangerous or contagious for the purpose of studying a response.

    “Do you think that Dr. Fauci intentionally lied under oath to Sen. Paul when he vehemently denied NIH’s funding of gain-of-function research?” Malliotakis asked Redfield. 

    Redfield responded: “I think there is no doubt NIH was funding gain-of-function research.”

    The former CDC director didn’t address whether Fauci was truthful under oath. 

    Malliotakis then asked: “Is it likely American tax dollars funded the gain-of-function research that created this virus?”

    Redfield responded yes, but that the NIH wasn’t the only factor. 

    “I think it did, not only from the NIH but the State Department, from USAID, and from DOD,” Redfield said, referring to the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Department of Defense. 

    (continued)

    The subcommittee chairman then asked: “Has gain-of-function research stopped a pandemic, in your opinion?”

    Redfield: “No, on the contrary, I think it probably caused the greatest pandemic our world has seen.”

    (continued)

  1. ‘Three Things Happened in That Lab’

    Wuhan Institute of Virology officials deleted chronological logs of past research data, put the lab under military control, and redid the ventilation system in fall 2019, months before the rest of the world became aware of a new coronavirus and COVID-19, Redfield noted. 

    Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., asked Redfield: “Do you believe that we can have certainty that the virus did not come from the Wuhan lab, and that U.S. funding was not used for COVID-19-related research? 

    Redfield responded that the public can read recently unclassified information that shows those in charge of the Wuhan lab engaged in unusual conduct. 

    “The declassified information now shows in September 2019, three things happened in that lab,” Redfield said. 

    “One is they deleted the sequences,” he said, referring to sequencing, a laboratory technique used to determine the exact order of nucleotide bases, which compose individual genomes. 

    “That’s highly irregular. Researchers don’t usually like to do that.”

    “The second thing they did is they changed command and control of the lab from civilian control to military control. Highly unusual,” Redfield said. 

    “The third thing they did, I think is really telling, is they let a contractor redo the ventilation system in that laboratory,” Redfield added. “So, I think clearly, there is strong evidence that a significant event happened in that laboratory in September. It has now been declassified. You can read it.”

  1. ‘Donald Trump’s Culpability’**

    Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., ranking member of the full House Oversight Committee, argued that regardless of the origins of the pandemic, it happened on former President Donald Trump’s watch. (Read below at **A double asterisk to the baseless accusations by the Democrats on this committee)

    (continued)

  1. ‘Bunch of Yokels Are Eating Bats’

    (continued with numerous biased Democrat memes on the Chinese equivalent of Walmart shoppers)

  1. ‘Antithetical to Science’

    Fauci, who became the face of the nation’s fight against COVID-19, has said that “attacks on me quite frankly are attacks on science.” 

    However, Redfield said actions taken by Fauci and other officials to shut down discussion of the pandemic was “antithetical to science.”

    (continued)

(Read the whole thing, including the Democrat excuses, at the Daily Signal)

**A double asterisk to the baseless accusations by the Democrats on this committee

First, regarding trying to link Trump to the major effects of COVID, let us remember that:

However, it was Biden who:

  • Mandated the shut-down of the “non-essential businesses” (as if this geezer with an orbit of inexperienced socialists would know an essential business if their lives depended on it)
  • Mandated wearing of masks (something proven in many studies to be ineffective) in public
  • Used his war-time powers to mandate the manufacture of masks, swabs, and other equipment
  • Ramped up free COVID testing (which always seemed to be for the previous variant and which had an inflationary effect similar to giving out free money)
  • Pushed through the American Rescue Plan (largely a money hand-out — spell that: inflationary)
  • Required all military personnel to get vaccinated (though most fell within the age range that easily developed natural immunity and a number had developed natural immunity through recovery from the virus)
  • Announced his attempt to use OSHA to require businesses with more than 100 employees to get those employees vaccinated
    • By announcing this, he bullied a number of large companies into forcing the jab
  • Essentially confiscated personal property by announcing his Eviction Moratorium

The New York Times formerly shamed us with: The Lab-Leak Theory

The New York Times tried to school all of us Walmart shoppers on 27 May 2021 in how it was non-scientific and racist to believe anything but the bat soup theory of COVID origin.

Suddenly, talk of the Wuhan lab-leak theory seems to be everywhere.

President Biden yesterday called on U.S. intelligence officials to “redouble their efforts” to determine the origin of Covid-19 and figure out whether the virus that causes it accidentally leaked from a Chinese laboratory. Major publications and social media have recently been filled with discussion of the subject.

Today, we offer an explainer.

What are the basics?

The origin of the virus remains unclear. Many scientists have long believed that the most likely explanation is that it jumped from an animal to a person, possibly at a food market in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. Animal-to human transmission — known as zoonotic spillover — is a common origin story for viruses, including Ebola and some bird flus.

But some scientists have pointed to another possibility: that it escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. As in other laboratories, researchers there sometimes modify viruses, to understand and treat them.

“It is most likely that this is a virus that arose naturally, but we cannot exclude the possibility of some kind of a lab accident,” Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, told senators yesterday.

Why now?

The subject is getting more attention because some scientists who were once skeptical of the laboratory theory have expressed new openness to it.

Two weeks ago, 18 scientists wrote a letter to the journal Science calling for a new investigation and describing both the animal-to-human theory and the lab-leak theory as “viable.” And three scientists who last year dismissed the lab-leak explanation as a conspiracy theory have told The Wall Street Journal that they now consider it plausible.

Among the reasons: Chinese officials have refused to allow an independent investigation into the lab and have failed to explain some inconsistencies in the animal-to-human hypothesis. Most of the first confirmed cases had no evident link to the food market.

What changed?

In some ways, not much has not changed. From the beginning, the virus’s origin has been unclear. All along, some scientists, politicians and journalists have argued that the lab-leak theory deserves consideration.

Almost 15 months ago, two Chinese researchers wrote a paper concluding that the virus “probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.” Alina Chan, a molecular biologist affiliated with Harvard and M.I.T., made similar arguments. David Ignatius and Josh Rogin, both Washington Post columnists, wrote about the possibility more than a year ago. Joe Biden, then a presidential candidate, didn’t mention the lab-leak theory in early 2020 but he did argue that the U.S. should “not be taking China’s word” for how the outbreak started.

But these voices were in the minority. The World Health Organization initially dismissed the lab-leak theory as implausible.

(Read more “take the word of Chinese Socialists” at the New York Times)

By the way, Apoorva was/is the COVID reporter for the New York Times.

…

 

 

Proof positive the press has their heads pushed so far up Joe Biden’s backside as to give him an upper endoscopy


The press refuses to report on nine boxes of material moved to Boston from the Penn-Biden Center

Biden’s document story keeps changing, this time by nine boxes

Just the-News addresses the nine boxes of unknown Biden documents that have been moved from the Penn-Biden Center.

President Joe Biden strongly condemned former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified materials following the FBI’s Aug. 8, 2022 raid on Mar-a-Lago, yet an ever-growing number of document discoveries appears to undercut his criticisms.

The National Archives and Records Administration in a March 7 letter to GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin confirmed that it had recovered a further nine boxes of materials from the Boston office of Biden’s attorney, Patrick Moore.

Moreover, despite claiming possession of them in November and storing the materials in the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Boston, “NARA has not reviewed the contents of the boxes found at Mr. Moore’s Boston office,” acting Archivist Debra Steidel Wall told the lawmakers.

This trove of materials was previously housed at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, the site at which a lawyer cleaning out Biden’s former office discovered classified materials that reportedly included intelligence on the U.K., Iran, and Ukraine. Biden said in January that he was “surprised” to learn of the discovery.

Reports of the discovery first emerged in January of this year and prompted Biden staff to comb facilities and offices he occupied for additional sensitive materials. That search turned up more materials, including multiple batches of documents marked classified at his Delaware home. Biden indicated he had been aware of at least one such batch, defending his storage of documents inside his locked garage alongside his Corvette.

Attorney General Merrick Garland, facing intense GOP criticism, eventually appointed special counsel Robert Hur to handle the Department of Justice’s Biden-related dealings.

(Read more at Just the-News)

Not one question by the press or one news segment on ABC news

While my wife had the broadcast from the ABC World News Tonight blaring in the living room and neither of us were giving it full attention, at least I gave it enough attention to not that there was never a mention of the nine boxes. Likewise, there was no mention of the moral conflict created by Biden’s having contributed to the bail funds of so many Antifa outlaws while he holds numerous 6 January protesters on charges like parading and obstructing an official proceeding.

…

 

The press goes into overtime regarding its denial of actual events on 6 January 2021

Footage shows Capitol cop Brian Sicknick uninjured on 6 January

The Federalist points out how Officer Sicknick has been shown walking around the Capitol buildings long after Democrats in the press and office allege him to have been beaten to death during the 6 January riot.

New footage from the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021 shows Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick walking around the complex after Democrats and the media claimed he was brutally murdered. The clips aired on Monday’s edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and were reportedly viewed previously by “investigators working for the Democratic Party,” according to Carlson.

Sicknick’s Jan. 7 death was immediately exploited by the left. The New York Times reported directly that Sicknick died—according to the paper’s headline—“From Injuries in Pro-Trump Rampage.” One month later, the Times quietly corrected its reporting.

CNN later linked Sicknick’s death to a chemical irritant such as pepper spray or bear spray used by rioters. His family told ProPublica on Jan. 8 that Sicknick “texted them Wednesday night to say that while he had been pepper-sprayed, he was in good spirits.” Two men were charged in March of 2021 for spraying the officer.

A report from the D.C. medical examiner’s office published a month later concluded Sicknick died of natural causes.

The surveillance tapes aired by Carlson on Monday night show Sicknick walking around after altercations with the alleged murderers. Carlson’s program published the footage upon review of more than 40,000 hours of tape handed over to his team by Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy several weeks ago.

“To this day, media accounts describe Sicknick as someone who was ‘slain’ on Jan. 6,” Carlson said. “The video we reviewed proves that was a lie… By all appearances, Brian Sicknick is healthy and vigorous. He’s wearing a helmet, so it’s hard to imagine he was killed by a head injury.”

(Read more at The Federalist)

Like a dog trained to bark on cue, Karine Jean-Pierre doubled down on her claim that the 6 January 2021 riot “cost police officers their lives”

The four officers who committed suicide cannot be proven to be the victims of this riot any more than they can be proven to have been killed because they would “spill the beans” on the game of Pelosi and Biden.

Biden’s lackeys in the DOJ have denied justice to 6 January defendants

The Daily Mail details how the attorney of the QAnon Shaman was denied exculpatory evidence vailable to the January 6 Commission.

The lawyer who represented the ‘QAnon Shaman’ in his trial for storming the Capitol on January 6 has called for his client to be released after Tucker Carlson aired previously unseen footage from the riot.

Carlson on Monday night used his Fox News show to broadcast clips showing the so-called Shaman, Jacob Chansley, inside Congress.

Chansley appears to be escorted through the building by Capitol Police officers, while other officers allow the chest-baring, horn-wearing Trump supporter to pass. Carlson used the footage to argue that the rioters were ‘sightseers’, and ‘mostly peaceful’.

Chansley pleaded guilty in September 2021 to civil disorder and violent entry to the Capitol, among other charges. He was sentenced two months later to three and a half years in prison, with the new footage leading to claims he was unfairly portrayed as a violent intruder. 

On Wednesday night, Chansley’s former lawyer said he had not been shown the footage broadcast by Carlson, which the conservative news anchor said was ‘clearly exculpatory’.

(Read more at the Daily Mail)

Will this exonerate Chansley? Whether it does or doesn’t is for lawyers and higher court judges to mete out

Whether or not being lead into the chambers of Congress by Capitol Police would exonerate Jacob Chansley from a charge of obstructing a congressional proceeding falls into a range above my pay grade. Still, isn’t the defense supposed to get all the evidence in the case against the defendant?

Therefore, this will all be decided in a court one step up from the D.C. courts where this skewed view of justice has been sent out. I hope this results in a resignation of a judge or two.

…

The press ignores hearings on Biden’s Afghan failure

Congress investigates deadly withdrawal and current threats from Afghanistan

The Washington Examiner details the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s review of the evacuation of Afghanistan during August 2021.

Congress revisited the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and the current threat level from the country where the United States was at war for 20 years in a pair of hearings Wednesday.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee heard from six witnesses in a hearing that focused on evacuation efforts during the final two weeks of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan in August 2021.

Two witnesses had been at Hamid Karzai International Airport, where the evacuations were taking place, when a suicide bomber killed 13 U.S. service members and roughly 170 Afghan civilians. Three others were among the hundreds of veterans who participated in ad hoc groups helping to get Afghan allies out of the country. The sixth witness was the executive director of an immigrant nonprofit group that has helped Afghans resettle in the U.S.

Marine Sgt. Tyler Vargas-Andrews emotionally recounted the Aug. 26, 2021, bombing, in which he lost an arm and a leg. Although he had identified a suspect he still believes to be the bomber beforehand, he was not given the green light by his superiors to take out the threat.

“Throughout the entirety of the day on August 26, 2021, we disseminated the suicide bomber information to ground forces at Abbey Gate. … Over the communication network, we passed that there was a potential threat and an attack imminent. This was as serious as it could get,” he explained. “Eventually, the individual disappeared. To this day, we believe he was a suicide bomber. We made everyone on the ground aware. Operations had briefly halted but then started again. Plain and simple, we were ignored. Our expertise was disregarded. No one was held accountable for our safety.”

He called the withdrawal a “catastrophe, in my opinion” and said “it was an inexcusable lack of accountability and negligence,” while Aiden Gunderson, a former Army combat medic who was deployed twice to Afghanistan and assisted with the evacuation, told the committee the withdrawal was “an organization failure at multiple levels.”

Both relived the painful and tragic memories of the bombing, also describing the desperation and fear of the thousands of Afghans that swarmed the airport gates every day for those two weeks despite tremendous heat and overcrowding, hoping and praying to be selected by U.S. forces to get on a plane out of Afghanistan.

Francis Hoang, Lt. Col. Scott Mann, and Peter Lucier worked with separate groups that worked tirelessly to navigate Afghan allies through Kabul and into the confines of the airport. Each spoke about the deep emotional strife they felt, which they said was a feeling shared by countless veterans, as the U.S. military left on Aug. 30, 2021, with an untold number of Afghan allies at risk under the Taliban regime left behind. They frequently referenced the thoughts and feelings of veterans at large who were left mentally wounded by how the end of the war played out.

Mann referenced a friend who ended his life a few months ago, saying the friend’s wife “confirmed to me that the Afghan abandonment reactivated all of the demons that he had managed to put behind him from our time in Afghanistan together.”

Members of both parties thanked the witnesses for their tireless work. There was a nearly complete partisan divide about blaming the Biden administration for what happened. House Republicans have been eager to hold hearings on the withdrawal since regaining the majority this year. Democrats frequently pointed to the longevity of the war and argued that previous administrations set up untenable conditions.

The special inspector general for Afghan reconstruction, which has provided oversight to the U.S. mission in Afghanistan for more than a decade, substantially blamed the Trump administration’s deal with the Taliban for a negotiated withdrawal in February 2020.

On the other side of the Capitol, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, CIA Director William Burns, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Scott Berrier, National Security Agency Director Paul Nakasone, and FBI Director Christopher Wray testified on their current threat assessments globally to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Berrier acknowledged that his agency’s “reach and grasp into that nation since the fall of the government has eroded over time, but we still have some access, and I would say, based on what we know right now from the threat of al Qaeda, they’re trying to survive basically without a real plan to at least, or intent to, attack the West anytime soon,” though he warned, “ISIS-K poses a bit of a larger threat, but they are under attack from the Taliban regime right now, and it’s a matter of time before they may have the ability and intent to actually attack the West at this point.”

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

What? Current threats? Just like the border, Biden assures us this all is secure.

During what should have been the slowest month of illegal entry for the year (January 2023), America experienced the apprehension of over 128,000 known illegal aliens coming over our Southern border. That does not count the thousands who have discovered how porous our Northern border is and have started taking rides into Canada in order to then come South.

Additionally, Biden, you can’t have it two ways. You can’t say that four police who committed suicide after 6 January 2021 were “killed by the riot” and not take credit for the deaths of service men who, like the friend of Lt. Col. Scott Mann, took their lives due to the results of the Afghan withdrawal.

…

 

Six stories centering on the FBI’s dishonest dealings with Trump


FBI took three passports in raid of Mar-a-Lago

The Washington Examiner reports on how President Trump has claimed to have had three passports taken by the FBI.

Former President Donald Trump accused FBI agents of taking three passports in their search of his Mar-a-Lago home one week ago.

The accusation, made in a Truth Social post on Monday, comes four days after a judge unsealed a search warrant, including an inventory of items taken from Trump’s residence in Florida, which showed some classified materials.

“Wow! In the raid by the FBI of Mar-a-Lago, they stole my three Passports (one expired), along with everything else,” Trump said. “This is an assault on a political opponent at a level never seen before in our Country. Third World!”

There is some speculation surrounding the multiple Trump passports, as some individuals may possess more than one for diplomatic or official business travel.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

I do not inherently trust anyone. However, when it comes to the FBI’s Russian collusion hoax, the Democrat’s January 6 “insurrection,” or the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid — I will trust the words of Donald Trump over FBI Leftists

The Leftists in the FBI have proven to be more subversive and less trustworthy than Donald Trump and his associates. When the “golden showers” tale and the story from Christopher Steele came out, the FBI spent $32 million investigating before announcing Trump innocent of the accusations.

Although the 6 January inquiry has not come to an end (and will likely never do so), nothing has come out in a formal fashion that has implicated President Trump of involvement in wrongdoing.

Moreover, as the following article illustrates, when Trump suggested that passports were taken, the FBI (despite initial denials by the agency and its apologists in the media) soon admitted that they had taken those passports.

…

CBS says Norah O’Donnell’s tweets denying FBI confiscation of Trump passports do not measure up to CBS standards

The New York Post delves into the story of how CBS anchor Norah O’Donnell has so consistently gotten the story against President Trump wrong.

“CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell is rankling journalists at CBS News with her tweets about former President Donald Trump’s passports, with some griping that she played it fast and loose according to CBS News’ reporting standards.

O’Donnell tweeted Monday that she had been told by a “DOJ official” that the FBI was “not in possession” of Trump’s three passports, which contradicted the former president’s statement that his travel documents were taken by FBI agents who searched his Florida home last week.

But the anchor attributed the information to a single source — a big no-no at CBS News, which has a strict two-source protocol, angry CBS sources told The Post. They added that the tweets also made it sound like O’Donnell was calling the former president a “liar.”

“This is an embarrassment for CBS that the face of your network can’t even make a second call to a Justice Department rep,” one livid source said. “It’s Journalism 101.”

The FBI had returned the documents earlier in the afternoon, according to now-public correspondence between Trump’s camp and the DOJ.

(Read more at the New York Post)

Of course, the inherent trust of the Left with anything that advances their narrative leads us to the next two stories

The Leftists in the newsroom of CBS would rather believe the worst about Trump; therefore, they don’t bother to check their single sources for accuracy. Likewise, they want to believe the best about a group that has done nothing but attack Trump from his first days of campaigning; therefore, they support this agency (as shown in the next article).

…

Only liberals trust the FBI in significant numbers

The New York Post tells us how only liberals trust the FBI in significant numbers.

It is curious that the biggest fans of the FBI today are liberals. You hear them on MSNBC, singing from the same song sheet as former disgraced CIA and FBI operatives who have been transformed into esteemed and well-paid TV experts, shilling for whatever unseen forces motivate them, or creating confusing narratives to cover their tracks. 

At the same time, a majority of Americans, 53%, view the FBI as “Joe Biden‘s personal Gestapo,” according to a new Rasmussen poll out Thursday. 

The agency’s standing is at rock bottom among Republicans and conservatives, and not too healthy with independents and moderates. 

The poll, conducted on Monday and Tuesday, one week after the extraordinary FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s Florida mansion, shows just 50% of all voters hold a favorable view of the federal law-enforcement agency, down from 60% in May 2020. 

But while just 30% of Republicans and 45% of independents feel positive about the FBI, 75% of Democrats and 81% of liberals are big fans. 

Since the Mar-a-Lago raid, 70% of Republicans say they have less trust in the FBI than they used to, while 50% of Democrats trust it more. 

(Read more at the New York Post)

…

Trump and Obama both had procedures that reclassified documents taken as part of executive work

In the following issue of Facts Matter, Roman Balmakov points out that the Trump team issued the following regarding the accusation that Trump held classified documents:

The very fact that these documents were present at Mar-a-Lago means they couldn’t have been classified …  As we can all relate to, everyone ends up having to bring their work home from time to time. American presidents are no different. President Trump, in order to prepare for work the next day, often took documents including classified documents from the Oval Office to the residence. He had a standing order that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken into the residence were deemed to be declassified.

Back in 2009, Obama issued Executive Order 13526 in that order, he laid out a process by which all federal officials would follow to declassify documents; however, in that executive order, he explicitly exempted himself:

Information originated by the incumbent President or the incumbent Vice President, the incumbent President’s White House Staff or the incumbent Vice President’s White House Staff that solely advise and assist the incumbent President is exempted from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.

Likewise, John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence, said:

The president does have ultimate declassification authority. He can literally declassify — and President Trump had that authority, and could declassify anything you want while he was president.

Of course, the liberal-left portion of the Obama regime produced an ideologue who contradicted Obama’s own exemption for the President in the declassification process when he (Richard Immerman) said:

He can’t just wave a want and say it’s declassified. … There has to be a formal process. That’s the only way the system can work. … I’ve seen thousands of declassified documents. They’re all marked ‘declassified’ with the date they were declassified.

Luckily, it seems that the Trump team had a response for the Leftist’s banality:

The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the President of the United States. The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat, with the classification authority delegated by the President, needs to approve of declassification is absurd.

It would seem that Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s ruling on Bill Clinton’s sock drawer might have some effect

As recorded in an article at Just the News, a 2012 ruling by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on secret documents found with Bill Clinton.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington D.C. ultimately rejected Judicial Watch’s suit by concluding there was no provision in the Presidential Records Act to force the National Archives to seize records from a former president.

But Jackson’s ruling — along with the Justice Department’s arguments that preceded it — made some other sweeping declarations that have more direct relevance to the FBI’s decision to seize handwritten notes and files Trump took with him to Mar-a-Lago. The most relevant is that a president’s discretion on what are personal vs. official records is far-reaching and solely his, as is his ability to declassify or destroy records at will.

“Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion,” Jackson wrote in her March 2012 decision, which was never appealed.

“Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records,” she added.

(Read the full article at Just the News)

Tweets that illustrate the dishonest cooperation between the Democrat media, the political Democrats, and the Democrat FBI

By the way, these tweets were shamelessly stolen from Bunkerville during the light of day. Each of these illustrate the cooperation between the Democrat media, the Democrat FBI, and the Democrat politicians.

…

 

Lawless Democrats


Ted Cruz Asks DOJ Official Point Blank Why Protesters Outside SCOTUS Homes Not Prosecuted__

Fox News reports on the tug of war that occurred on the floor of the Senate between Senator Ted Cruz and Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew Olsen (speaking for the Department of Justice).

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz grilled a top Justice Department official Wednesday over the lack of arrests made by law enforcement while protesters were demonstrating outside the homes of Supreme Court justices earlier this year. 

“Congress has addressed this issue. It passed 18 USC 1507 making it a crime to protest at the home of a Supreme Court Justice while a case is pending,” Cruz told Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite, Jr. during a Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday. “Night after night after night, these protesters committed federal crimes on national television. Why has the Justice Department refused to enforce 18 USC 1507?”

Polite responded to Cruz by pointing out that one person has been charged with a crime by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland after demonstrating outside the home of a Supreme Court justice.

“So, one person?” Cruz responded.

“To date, there has been one prosecution,” Polite responded before Cruz jumped in again.

“What about the hundreds of others?” Cruz asked. “All of whom have violated the law. On the face of it, it’s not complicated. The law is very clear. Why does the Department of Justice pick and choose which laws to enforce, which criminal laws to enforce? Why does it seem to exactly follow the pattern of the partisan preferences of the Biden White House?”

Polite responded, “Politics shouldn’t play and does not play any role in our prosecutorial decisions. What I will also add is that our attorney general has increased the U.S. Marshal service resources … to protect our Supreme Court justices.”

Cruz then asked again why more people were not arrested for violating federal law and why the department is “refusing” to enforce the law.

“Respectfully senator, I disagree that we’ve chosen not to enforce it,” Polite said.

Polite added that he “cannot comment” on the “current status” of potential cases when pressed again by Cruz on the hundreds of protesters who picketed outside the homes of justices.  

Polite later said that he does not believe the one prosecution in Maryland he referenced was based on the criminal code that Cruz referenced.

(Read more at Fox News)

So, in effect, no prosecutions for breaking 18 USC 1507

However, in regard to the 6 January 2021 “riot,” a Black Trump supporter who got in a scuffle with police was sentenced to 63 months in prison and a White militia member was sentenced to 87 months for having admitted taking a gun to the capitol (although it was never unholstered).

Let me remind you that there were at least 25 murders of citizens (unless you include the 34 killed just in CHAZ). Protesters of all stripes (including rapists) got bailed out by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden staffers. Additionally, there were many more grim statistics.

…