weaponiz jordan 3
SEE FOUR 11 26 MINORITY LEADER BLU TSU
NOW THREE 1 24
MERRI OK
see mtg 3 doge oversight bs
field error 3 23
see 2ndary grn 12 23
fascism on weaponization of lawfare
see legal suppression eg Fani Willis DA
SEE LAWFARE TRUMP
projection is confession
see retaliation
see biden laptop
see benghazi BS
see comer,
see leo
see jamie raskin ~
---
-=-=
AN 11 26
On Tuesday, a host at Fox News asserted that the latest move by Republican lawmakers in the House makes it clear that they’re “not interested” in moving on from the MAGA agenda that proved to be historically unpopular in the midterms. According to Fox anchor Gillian Turner, the breaking news that House Republicans had just elected MAGA-oriented Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) minority leader for the upcoming term suggests that President Donald Trump and his allies are preparing to aggressively double down on the policies that dealt the party a historic electoral disaster — an assessment co-host Tomi Lahren enthusiastically seconded.
“He's a great messenger,” asserted Lahren, who herself is a longtime defender of MAGA policies. “And if the GOP, Republicans, MAGA, whatever you want to call them, learned anything from last Tuesday, it should be that they need great messengers out there that are able to articulate a viewpoint, a direction, an agenda.” Lahren’s claim comes despite the fact that voters just overwhelmingly rejected MAGA governance, with Trump-endorsed candidates frequently defeated by wide margins as polls show Americans are sick of his administration’s tariffs, deportation campaign, attacks on democracy, and corruption. Jordan — an avid Trump ally — defeated current House Speaker Steve Scalise (R-LA) by a vote of 106 to 73.
“He is certainly a fighter,” noted Turner, saying Jordan was the “more pugilistic choice” compared to Scalise, who himself is pro-MAGA, but prone to less antagonistic methods of pushing its policies. According to Turner, “This certainly signals, at least on the part of the Republicans who voted for him, that they are not interested in modifying their platform in response to the midterms.” While Turner had a note of skepticism in her voice, Lahren was more eager with her assertion that Republicans should “stick to their guns.”
As many commentators have noted, House Republicans’ decision to go with Jordan won’t likely thrill anyone outside Trump’s more fundamentalist supporters. “This will excite the (quickly dwindling) MAGA base,” noted Zeteo political columnist Justin Baragona. “But it is unclear how this helps the GOP House minority over the next two years.” As Democratic strategist Matt McDermott pointed out, this follows a questionable trend in post-midterm GOP appointments: “Seriously not sure Democrats could have scripted a better Republican response to last week’s historic midterm defeat than Stephen Miller becoming White House chief of staff and Jim Jordan taking over House Republican leadership.” According to National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin, “Electing Jim Jordan as caucus leader is a pretty clear sign that House Republicans intend to do nothing the next two years but fight investigations of the executive branch.” And in the estimation of former presidential appointee Andrew Weinstein, “Electing Jim Jordan as minority leader suggests the House GOP has learned exactly the wrong lesson from its defeats.”
Regardless, predicted Lahren, over the next two years, Republicans will be “drilling down on their America First agenda.” It was that agenda, she claimed, that won Trump the presidency in 2024 and created the “new” Republican Party, which she refers to as the “America First” Republican Party. “Even though President Trump will not be in office at the end of this term,” concluded Lahren, “I think that the MAGA agenda will move forward.”
-=-=-
---
05/20/2026
by
At a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol Wednesday morning, Rep. Clay Fuller (R-GA) may have unwittingly revealed a basic truth about recent right-wing attacks on the Southern Poverty Law Center: they are part of a broader authoritarian assault by the Trump regime on civil rights groups and the progressive community, or in Rep. Fuller’s words, “this nonprofit-industrial complex that is seeking to destroy our country each and every day.”
The press conference was a prelude to the House Judiciary Committee hearing in which Republicans accused the SPLC of “manufacturing hate.” Speaking to a handful of right-wing media outlets were representatives of right-wing organizations complaining about having been designated as hate groups or included in extremism reporting by the Southern Poverty Law Center, including the Family Research Council, Alliance Defending Freedom, Moms for Liberty, Turning Point USA, and Awake Illinois. Joining them was right-wing journalist Tyler O’Neil, author of an anti-SPLC book.
Before the event started, a correspondent for the Real America’s Voice network could be heard falsely telling listeners that SPLC had “staged” the 2017 Unite The Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, a claim commonly heard in right-wing propaganda promoting and going well beyond the claims in the Justice Department’s bogus indictment of the SPLC for using paid informants to infiltrate extremist groups.
Speaking for the Family Research Council was its executive vice president Jerry Boykin, who falsely claimed that SPLC’s hate map is based on “no criteria” except what might help make money for the group. In reality, whether or not you agree with any particular designation SPLC makes, you can find their reasoning on the website—for example, its report on FRC’s demonization of LGBTQ people and more.
While most of the speakers complained that there were dire consequences for being placed on SPLC’s hate map, the representative of TPUSA’s George Washington University chapter was a bit off-message, dismissing it as a “silly little map” and vowing that his group would not be intimidated by the “lunatic left.”
At the hearing itself—the second one focused on the SPLC—Republican members of the Judiciary Committee trotted out expected claims about SPLC’s paid informants being used to “manufacture hate” and to allege that the SPLC smears Christians and “good pro-family organizations,” in Rep. Jim Jordan’s words. Reflecting that level of discourse was Rep. Glenn Grothman, who sighed, “They just hate Christianity, don’t they?” Rep. Michael Baumgartner said he had favorable memories of the SPLC playing a role in helping people in eastern Washington respond to an Aryan Nations compound, but he charged that the group has now become “an almost militant weaponized arm of a progressive Marxist political project.”
Right-wing witnesses also made clear that their goal is broader than taking down a single organization. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins argued that investigations should not stop with the SPLC, which he called a “hub,” but should expand to other organizations and companies that made decisions about groups based on their SPLC designations—the “spokes.” Tyler O’Neil, a reporter at The Daily Signal, which started as the Heritage Foundation’s news and commentary platform, called for a broader investigation of SPLC “and its offshoots,” naming specifically the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, which was started by a former SPLC staffer.
Judiciary Committee Democrats, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin, portrayed the DOJ prosecution as outrageous political persecution, in the memorable words of Rep. Lucy McBath, “charges so flimsy they would make Bull Connor and George Wallace blush.”
While Republicans suggested that the SPLC was somehow responsible for the violence in Charlottesville, several Democrats noted that before the Unite the Right rally, the SPLC gave the FBI a 45-page dossier warning that violence could erupt, and that SPLC had also shared information from informants that led to the conviction of members of the neo-Nazi Atomwaffen Division.
Committee Democrats also effectively used some of their time to focus on the scandalous corruption revealed this week: the DOJ’s creation of a nearly two billion dollar slush fund for the president to dole out to insurrectionists and other allies; and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s apparently related agreement in connection to Trump’s bogus lawsuit against the IRS to drop any current audits or investigations and grant a permanent blanket of immunity for any wrongdoing by Trump, his family, or their massive business networks at any time in the past. Rep. Raskin moved for the committee to subpoena administration officials involved in the creation of the slush fund, but Republicans voted to table his motion.
More than one Democratic member of Congress referred to Monday’s shooting at a San Diego mosque, in which teenagers who bonded online over white supremacist hatred killed three people before killing themselves, as evidence that far-right violent extremism deserves more attention from the committee.
Maya Wiley, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, was the witness called by Democrats. She delivered a powerful opening statement calling the campaign against the SPLC part of “a coordinated attack on civil rights non-profits that work to ensure voters can vote, children can learn history, and unions can protect workers,” and she deftly responded to GOP members’ often ridiculous questions. Here’s more from her opening statement:
But this case and today’s hearing aren’t about how to protect people from violent hate and extremist groups or better understand how we can prevent hate and bias. They are about using the powers of prosecution as a weapon, with the sole aim of stopping speech and activities that this administration dislikes and denying the real threats that we should all be concerned about.
In the past year, we have seen countless examples of this weaponization. This administration is coercing law firms, universities, and media companies. It is threatening to brand advocates as “domestic terrorists.” It is cutting off billions in federal grants to non-profits that do important work to track and prevent hate and bias. It is letting law enforcement off the hook for systemic misconduct that violates rights of people who need protection. It is letting violence and even extrajudicial killings by federal agents go unpunished. In all of this and more, the President has not even tried to hide his motives. And for the past year, he has also been open about his willingness to weaponize criminal law. So cases like this were inevitable. And our concern is that no organization seen as dissenting from administration policy, large or small, will ultimately be safe. …
Each year, the SPLC issues a report on hate and extremism in our country. This report is so important because it tracks organizations promoting the ideologies that brought us the Charlottesville riot that left Heather Heyer dead, and the massacres at the Tree of Life synagogue, the Emanuel AME church, and the El Paso Walmart. It is sadly part of the reason SPLC is being targeted. It is uncomfortable for an administration that has backed away from and cut grants for tracking white nationalism, which the Department of Homeland Security in the first Trump administration defined as our greatest domestic threat.
The SPLC is far too busy fighting hate to “manufacture” it. You don’t have to like or agree with all of its strategies for doing so. But the fact that SPLC is now being criminally charged for its work only shows how much more work it has to do.
---
===}:
an 3 26
Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson is being targeted by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), CNN reported Friday.
Loudermilk is known for being the lawmaker who gave tours to Jan. 6 attackers casing the U.S. Capitol ahead of the attack. After years of allegations against him, he was appointed chair of the Republican Party's investigation into the Jan. 6 committee.
Hutchinson was the aide who said that U.S. Secret Service agents faced off against President Donald Trump, lunging at the steering wheelof the security vehicle, trying to get them to take him to the Capitol to march with his MAGA supporters. Normally, the president rides in a limousine, but on that day, he delivered a speech from the White House Ellipse and rode in an SUV.
Hutchinson also witnessed former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows burning documents in his office fireplace. At one point, he was burning so many documents that Meadows' wife noticed a smell in his clothing and said it was costing them a hefty dry cleaning bill.
Loudermilk is demanding that the Justice Department bring charges against Hutchinson for lying to Congress about these incidents. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) signed off on the demand.
It will be a catch-22 for Loudermilk, however, because a trial claiming Hutchinson lied under oath would mean that Hutchinson would have access to information and witnesses who would be forced to answer questions under oath. She could call the Secret Service agents, Meadows and even Trump himself. Thus far, there has never been a trial for Trump on Jan. 6, only an investigation by the Justice Department. While there were charges ultimately filed, they were dropped after Trump won the 2024 election.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has been concerned about Loudermilk's efforts, it was reported last year. He fears that subpoenaing Hutchinson could bring to light "embarrassing information" as well as sexually explicit text messages she allegedly received when she was working in the White House during Trump's first presidency.
For years, Republicans have alleged that Hutchinson lied about her account and in her book about what she experienced on Jan. 6 and beyond. Johnson has been the one worried about the can of worms it might open.
---
---
an 1 25
The Washington Post Editorial Board is standing up for President Donald Trump, arguing that the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol falls under his First Amendment rights. And the board, in its argument, adopted many of Trump's own talking points.
Writing on Friday, the Post walks through questions from far-right Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who probed Smith for specifics of Trump's case.
Smith told Jordan that Trump's First Amendment doesn't protect him when the purpose of the statements is something illegal: “Absolutely not. If they are made to target a lawful government function and they are made with knowing falsity, no, they are not. That was my point about fraud not being protected by the First Amendment.”
What the Post didn't include was Smith's full comments.
“There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case. As we said in the indictment, he was free to say that he thought he won the election,” Smith said. "He was even free to say falsely that he won the election. But what he was not free to do was violate federal law and use knowing — knowingly false statements about election fraud to target a lawful government function.”
The Post rejected the Harvard Law School graduate's assessment.
The Board claims, "Political speech — including speech about elections, no matter how odious — is strongly protected by the First Amendment. It’s not unusual for politicians to take factual liberties. The main check on such misdirection is public scrutiny, not criminal prosecution."
Smith's comments focused on using those words to "target a lawful government function" as the key piece.
The board argues that the exception in his case with Trump applies only to that case. The Post, however, thinks that if one exception is made, it will be "exploited by prosecutors."
The editors then pivoted to complain about Smith trying to impose a gag order on Trump. It claimed that Smith was pressing to broadly limit Trump's First Amendment rights during a 2024 presidential campaign. It's a claim that was similar to the argument that Trump's own lawyers made in court.
The facts are that the gag order was narrow. October 17, 2023, the court issued a gag order saying Trump couldn't make “any public statements, or directing others to make any public statements, that target (1) the Special Counsel prosecuting this case or his staff; (2) defense counsel or their staff; (3) any of this court’s staff or other supporting personnel; or (4) any reasonably foreseeable witness or the substance of their testimony.”
The Editorial Board say Trump won his cases to eliminate the gag order, but neglected to mention the specifics of what the court said when it did rule.
The ACLU was part of the suit opposing the law suit, saying the gag order was too broad, and the court "agree[d] with the district court that some aspects of Mr. Trump’s public statements pose a significant and imminent threat to the fair and orderly adjudication of the ongoing criminal proceeding, warranting a speech-constraining protective order" but held that the district court's "sweeps in more protected speech than is necessary" and therefore must be narrowed to comport with the First Amendment.
The appeals court accordingly vacated the order except insofar as it "prohibits all parties and their counsel from making or directing others to make public statements about known or reasonably foreseeable witnesses concerning their potential participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding" and "to the extent it prohibits all parties and their counsel from making or directing others to make public statements about — (1) counsel in the case other than the Special Counsel, (2) members of the court’s staff and counsel’s staffs, or (3) the family members of any counsel or staff member — if those statements are made with the intent to materially interfere with, or to cause others to materially interfere with, counsel’s or staff’s work in this criminal case, or with the knowledge that such interference is highly likely to result."
At the time, the concern was Trump's constant social media posts attacking key people involved in the case from lawyers to even staff. Smth argued it was creating a security risk for DOJ lawyers on the case.
Trump could talk about himself, his innocence, and he could tell his story. He could not target specific people, including witnesses. The Editorial Board ignores these details, only saying in passing, "some restrictions were appropriate." The Board concluded that Trump had a right to attack Smith personally
The Post closes by saying that Smith lost the cases, which isn't accurate either. After Trump was elected in Nov. 2024, Smith withdrew the case, knowing that a valid prosecution would never happen while Trump was in office.
Smith, who previously worked for the U.S. Department of Justice's public integrity section, made it clear in his testimony that they had proof beyond a reasonable doubt that would have convicted Trump.
---
---
n y eve news dump
Jack Smith humiliated Jim Jordan during closed-door hearing: newly-released documents
an 1 26
//
Release of Jack Smith interview shows 'why Jim Jordan didn’t want public testimony': experts
---
---
rww
12/12/2025
by
- Rep. Chip Roy says that Republicans in the House of Representatives will be holding hearings to expose how George Soros, NGOs, and the United Nations have been using the SPLC and antifa to promote "Marxists and Islamists who want to take this country over."
- "Prophet" Mark Taylor fumes that "Susie Wiles and her people are the ones responsible for single handedly KILLING the America First Agenda!": "She is a demonic infiltrator in the highest order sent in to destroy the President and the America First Agenda."
---
ref
tony perkins
Rep. Chip Roy Highlights the latest on the Defense Bill & Looks Ahead to 2025 Agenda
0:00
And here we have Texas Congressman Chip
0:02
Roy who has joined us here in the media
0:06
center at the Family Research Council.
0:09
Uh a familiar face and voice on
0:11
Washington watch. Uh Congressman, thanks
0:13
so much for running off the hill and
0:15
coming down here and joining us.
:{...
about something. You are hosting or
4:06
actually you're chairing, I should say,
4:07
a subcommittee hearing next week. You
4:09
chaired the constitution committee in
4:12
the judiciary committee on the southern
4:14
poverty law center that has in fact when
4:18
you walk out the door of this room you
4:20
will see the bullet holes in the wall
4:21
that was inspired a gunman to come into
4:24
this building. Uh Congress is ready to
4:27
act on that. They're ready to move to
4:29
expose these this long-term relationship
4:32
that SPLC was had has had with
4:34
government agencies.
4:35
Well, I'm certainly ready to do that. I
4:37
think uh Congressman uh and chairman
4:39
Jordan uh rightly agreed that we should
4:42
have this hearing in the subcommittee on
4:43
the Constitution. And so we're going to
4:44
be doing this next week. Uh Tony will be
4:46
one of the witnesses. Uh uh Tyler Boyer
4:49
from TPUSA is going to be one of the
4:51
witnesses. Uh as well as an individual
4:54
who's pretty knowledgeable here in town,
4:55
a journalist named Tyler O'Neal about
4:57
all of the dot connecting of all the
4:59
money. Now, there's a lot to unpack
5:01
here, which we probably don't have
5:02
enough time to do in full, but the short
5:04
version is anybody who loves and is
5:06
familiar with with with F FRC knows what
5:09
Southern Poverty Law Center meant with
5:11
respect to the attack here over a decade
5:12
ago uh here in this building. Um, but
5:16
and now we've seen the connection to
5:18
what happened with Charlie and and the
5:20
extent to which your, you know,
5:21
crosshairs are put on you. Heck, my name
5:23
is now getting put in the crosshairs
5:25
because I'm daring to call out the
5:26
Islamification of America. So what we're
5:29
going to do in this hearing is expose
5:30
that, demonstrate what's actually
5:32
happening, but I want to take that a
5:34
step further so people understand the
5:35
vast array of networks that are funding
5:37
all of it. The Soros operation, uh,
5:40
Arabella, all of the groups and all of
5:42
the operatives that are involved, the
5:43
Islamification funding, the open borders
5:45
groups, the NOS's, the United Nations,
5:48
your taxpayer dollars, all of it coming
5:50
together in this vast network to have a
5:52
red green alliance where you've got the
5:54
Marxists and the Islamists who want to
5:56
take our country over. and it's all
5:58
related and SPLC is right at the center
6:00
of it. Antifa is at the center of it.
6:02
All of these groups need to be exposed
6:04
and we're going to be doing that next
6:05
week and we're just getting started and
6:06
I've had some great conversation with
6:08
Secretary Bessant with people in the
6:09
administration. Um I think there's a
6:11
hunger to go break this network down
6:14
because it's attacking our way of life.
6:15
Well, it's it's
6:18
finninging violence and it's and it's
6:20
it's leading to death. Yep.
6:22
And it's chilling our First Amendment
6:24
freedoms. Chip Roy, always great to see
6:26
you. Thanks so much for joining us. Look
6:27
forward to seeing you next week.
6:28
Absolutely.
---}:
---
AN 11 25
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) has referred former Jack Smith prosecutor Thomas Windom to Attorney General Pam Bondifor criminal investigation, reports MSNOW.
The House Judiciary Committee has formally accused Windom, a former senior assistant special counsel to Smith, of obstructing a congressional investigation by declining to answer questions, and has referred him to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1505.
Jordan has been actively scrutinizing Smith and his team's handling of the prosecutions against President Donald Trump, demanding testimony and documents, and referring a former aide for criminal prosecution for allegedly obstructing a congressional investigation.
"I think it's very serious in what it signals about this administration's willingness to go after people associated with Jack Smith's investigation," says MSNOW senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin.
"Tom Windom, who's the subject of today's referral, was really the public face of thefederal election interference case brought against President Trump in D.C. He was the lead prosecutor that you saw in court every day, and they're accusing him of obstructing a congressional investigation by claiming privilege and otherwise not being responsive to their questions," Rubin continues.
"The idea that he could be prosecuted for that when he is really trying to protect himself and the prerogatives of the special counsel's office is really flabbgergasting to me," she adds.
MSNOW legal analyst Catherine Christian agrees, saying, "I agree. It's part of the retribution agenda."
---}:
an 5 25an states
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio wanted to slip a sweeping measure into a spending bill that would gut the Federal Trade Commission. Critics say it’s no coincidence that the FTC is suing mammoth health care conglomerates and tech giants like Amazon.
Jordan is chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee. Last week, it released a version of a bill that included tax cuts, federal spending cuts and more spending at the border.
It also contained provisions that would give Trump sweeping new powers to gut government regulations. It would also transfer funds and personnel currently controlled by the FTC to the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department — without the FTC’s unique enforcement authority going with them.
The measure was abruptly nixed, but it would have effectively killed antitrust powers Congress created more than a century ago.
The FTC history
Amid abuses to consumers by big corporations, the Federal Trade Commission Act was passed in 1914. Antitrust enforcement by the Department of Justice dates back further, to 1903.
But the Justice Department is overseen by the attorney general, a presidential appointee. Attorneys general traditionally have had a high degree of independence, but Trump is said to be politicizing the Justice Department at a breakneck pace.
The FTC was created in part to be more independent. It’s governed by commissioners from both parties who are appointed to fixed terms that can be renewed.
Earlier this year, Trump tried to fire the two Democratic commissioners, but they say the move was illegal, and they’re fighting it in court. Antitrust advocates said Trump was doing that as a favor to his billionaire supporters such as Elon Musk.
The two Democratic commissioners, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter, acted to block the Kroger-Albertson’s mega-merger, and they voted to sue Amazon, saying it is “illegally maintaining monopoly power.”
Under Jordan’s leadership, the Judiciary Committee in 2023 attacked the FTC on behalf of Musk. He’s the world’s richest man, whom Trump is allowing to make deep cuts to federal programs for the elderly, veterans, the poor, and agencies that promote science and health.
“THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION: AN AGENCY’S OVERREACH TO HARASS ELON MUSK’S TWITTER,” read the all-caps title of the Jordan-led committee’s report.
A year earlier, the FTC had charged Twitter with using deceptively gathered data from users to target ads at them. If true, it would be added to the fact that an unofficial, Musk-run entity is now collecting much more sensitive government data. It’s raised concerns among several federal judges who said such collections invite abuse and likely violate the law.
“One of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency lieutenants working in the Social Security Administration has been pushing dubious claims about noncitizens voting, apparently using access to data that court records suggest (the so-called Department of Government Efficiency) isn’t supposed to have,” NPR reported earlier this month.
The proposal from Jordan to gut the FTC could have halted major initiatives to regulate giant health conglomerates that own powerful pharmacy middlemen, said Bedoya, one of the commissioners Trump is trying to fire.
Jordan’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment on this story.
PBMs
Each of the three conglomerates — UnitedHealth Group, CVS Health and Cigna-Express Scripts — is among the 15 largest corporations in the United States. Each owns a top-ten health insurer and each owns a pharmacy middleman known as a pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM.
Combined, the PBMs control nearly 80% of the insured drug transactions in the United States. They decide which drugs are covered and use that power toextractrebates from drugmakers. They also determine varying reimbursements to pharmacies — including ones owned by their parent companies as well as the pharmacies with which they compete. Critics — including four-fifths of state attorneys general — say they have a conflict of interest under the arrangement, and that they abuse it.
Last October, the FTC sued the conglomerates, saying they used their dominance in multiple parts of the marketplace to illegally jack up the price of insulin — a drug millions of diabetics need to survive.
The lawsuit comes after the agency in 2022 undertook a major investigation of the health conglomerates. In January, it released an interim report accusing the PBMs of using their dominance to instigate wild price hikes and possibly steer business to affiliated pharmacies.
Politico recently reported that Jordan said his move to consolidate the FTC into the Justice Department was meant to “address the cost of over-regulation.”
“Part of our jurisdiction in Judiciary deals with regulatory concerns and so we are looking at … spending and costs associated with certain regulations. That’s why that language is written the way it was,” Politico reported him as saying.
Many businesses facing regulation — and their advocates in government — have long focused only on the costs. But government regulation can also protect health, safety, the environment, economic stability and competition. Some researchers have said regulation can always be smarter, but its benefits far outweigh the costs.
In a social media post last week, Bedoya, the FTC commissioner, said Jordan’s proposed changes to the agency served another agenda.
“This will gut the FTC,” Bedoya wrote. “FTC is trying to finish a study that already showed how pharmacy middlemen mark up cancer drugs by up to 4,000%. It’s also suing them for allegedly competing to raise insulin prices. If this passes I have no idea what’ll happen to that study and lawsuit.”
Bedoya added, “Take the lawsuit. The draft bill purports to transfer FTC lawyers and lawsuits to DOJ — but it doesn’t transfer the laws that FTC enforces, or authority to enforce those laws. Look (at) page 98 — employees, assets, funding — but no authorities.”
Bedoya also said that when it created the FTC, Congress meant to augment the government’s antitrust powers. Jordan’s changes would remove the government’s ability to police “unfair methods of competition,” Bedoya said, implying that Jordan was trying to slash the government’s power to police wealthy corporations in an era when the political influence of the mega-rich is exploding and the wealth gap is yawning.
“The purpose behind the FTC’s creation in 1914 was to supplement the existing enforcement mechanism (and enforcement gap created by) the Department of Justice,” Bedoya said on X. “When FTC was created in 1914, it alone was authorized to stop something called ‘unfair methods of competition.’ DOJ did not get this” under Jordan’s proposal.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE. SUPPORT
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.
---
===
NOTE BS GOP REBOOT LOUDERMILK, RIGHT AFTER KIRK 5 SHOOT MILLER JIHAD SOROS
see retaliation LIE GASLT REVIS // FASCISM
OMFG
AN 9 25
WASHINGTON — At the insistence of President Donald Trump, U.S. House Republicans launched a new Jan. 6 investigation earlier this month. This time, though, the GOP is investigating the investigators, namely the bipartisan Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, which finished its exhaustive work two years ago.
“I want to see all the docs and find out how many lies were told by the people that were sitting on that committee,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) — who was referred to the Ethics Committee after refusing a request to testify from the first Jan. 6 panel — told Raw Story. “That's what I want.”
While the vote setting up the initial Jan. 6 select committee was bipartisan, earlier this month the new Select Subcommittee on January 6 was approved on a party line vote.
“Trying to rewrite history, that's just kind of clearly what they've done since January 6th, so this all fits the narrative,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA), who served on the initial committee, which disbanded before the GOP took the House in 2023, told Raw Story. “It’s dangerous.”
It’s not just Democrats waving warning flags. Moderate Republicans say their leaders are making a mistake.
“I just feel like both sides lost their minds, because having the debate again is kind of bad for the nation,” retiring Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) told Raw Story.
Regardless, Trump wants it.
Unlike a GOP-led J6 investigation in the last Congress, this time House Republicans have subpoena power and are promising to use it.
‘What are they looking for?’
Before releasing their 845-page report in 2022, the bipartisan Jan. 6 committee interviewed upwards of 1,000 witnesses and reviewed more than a million pages of documents.
That’s why its chair, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), and other former members decry the new GOP effort.
“The question is what are they looking for? We have no idea. We stand by the work of the committee. Anybody — whoever — wanted to come talk to us, we invited them,” Thompson told Raw Story before dismissing what he sees as an effort to change the narrative.
“They're trying to, but it doesn't change the facts,” Thompson said.
Republicans beg to differ.
“The sham committee did an injustice,” Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) told Raw Story. “The only thing they did is they wanted to blame Trump for everything. They weren't out there to seek the truth. We have an opportunity now to help kind of clear the air and let the American people know.”
On Jan. 6 2021, Trump told supporters to “fight like hell” in support of his lie that the 2020 election was stolen. They then marched from the White House to the Capitol, most seeking to block certification of Joe Biden’s win.
Nine deaths have been linked to the riot, including law enforcement suicides. After returning to power, Trump issued more than 1,500 pardons or acts of clemency, affecting convictions for offenses as serious as seditious conspiracy.
*Nehls is one of five Republicans on the new J6 subcommittee. He’s already come to many conclusions, as laid out in his 2022 book, The Big Fraud: What Democrats Don’t Want You to Know about January 6, the 2020 Election, and a Whole Lot Else.
“Why was the Capitol so ill prepared that day?” Nehls asked Raw Story. “I tell you why, because the leadership of the Capitol Police and others didn't want to share the intelligence reports, and they were f------ clear.
“It was quite clear that things were going to get stupid up here.”
Nehls isn’t the only Republican pushing a narrative. In December, the new subcommittee chair, Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), released a report recommending former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), a member of the original J6 panel, be investigated by the FBI “for potential criminal witness tampering.”
"Right now, we're casting a pretty broad net trying to bring in any documents that were not preserved or we don't currently have," Loudermilk said. “Basically going out to all the organizations that provided information to the original select committee.”
“How much is your job, as you see it, or your mandate, to investigate the original J6 committee?” Raw Story pressed. “Or how much is your job investigating what happened Jan. 6, 2021?”
“It's both,” Loudermilk said, “because there are decisions being made in some elements based off that report that should not be made. In fact, because that's the official report, they've literally ruined people's lives from that.”
Loudermilk has plenty of questions.
“Did the FBI have actionable intelligence that this was happening? And what did they do with it? Did they pass it to Capitol Police? Was it passed on? Same with Homeland Security. We're investigating there, and we have reason to believe they had intelligence, it wasn't passed on.”
After an 18-month investigation, the bipartisan committee referred Trump to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. Loudermilk and other Republicans claim much remained unanswered.
“How did this Capitol get breached? Regardless of who did it, it should have never been breached,” Loudermilk said.
“An unarmed mob was able to get in the Capitol, you can't find anything in their report about that. ‘Pipe bombs’ are mentioned five times only in passing, but ‘Donald Trump’ was mentioned over a thousand. So that's why we're looking into it.”
In fact, court records show rioters were armed with weapons including firearms, tasers and knives, as well as makeshift implements used to attack police.
Loudermilk was investigated by the initial Jan. 6 committee after video surfaced of him giving a Capitol tour the day before the attack. Like other Republicans, he refused to sit for an interview.
‘Run the tape’
Democrats plan to hammer home that Loudermilk and other Republicans repeatedly rebuffed fact-finding efforts.
“We can go back to some of the people who didn't testify before and who blew off their subpoenas to see if they're ready to testify,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told Raw Story.
Since serving on the initial Jan. 6 committee, Raskin has become top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, making him an ex-officio member of the GOP’s new panel.
While he dismisses the investigation, Raskin promises to use his perch to highlight the terror of Jan. 6, 2021.
“It's going to be an opportunity for us to talk about the tremendous damage inflicted on the police,” Raskin said.
While Raskin is the only carryover from the initial select committee, other alumni also see Trump’s effort to rehash Jan. 6 as a chance to remind the nation of the attempt to overturn the will of the people that culminated in the brutal attack.
“Ridiculous, but it will give us an opportunity to run the tape over and over again. Why do they want to do this?” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) told Raw Story.
“We found the facts. We posted them. It's terabytes of information. Anyone can get it. They're trying to erase history.”
‘Whitewashing’
Even some in Trump’s own party are questioning his goal.
“Why can't we just say those who hurt cops, they were wrong?” Bacon told Raw Story.
“They deserve to be punished — 140 cops were injured. I don't know why we can't have just some honesty, that there were some bad apples in this whole crowd. They deserve to be punished.”
Not according to Trump, who granted blanket pardons. Democrats see the new committee as an extension of that effort.
“The president, on day one, pardoning 1,500 insurrectionists, criminals — violent criminals — was a whitewashing, an attempt to rewrite history,” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) told Raw Story. “Most importantly, he was pardoning himself. This is a continuation of that.
“It's so infuriating. Just distraction, that's what the administration wants. A little more whitewashing. Absolutely.”
---
---
politico 9 25
A new House panel will re-investigate the Jan. 6 Capitol attack with an eye toward recasting the narrative about the events in Washington that day.
It’s the latest sign that the deadly riot remains a wound on Congress that might never fully heal amid ferocious partisan sparring. Retribution, not reconciliation, appears to be the prime motivation behind the new probe, with the Republicans behind it still bitter over the work of the panel’s previous iteration, which was largely led by Democrats and concluded President Donald Trump was singularly to blame for the violence inflicted by his supporters.
One GOP member of the new panel, Louisiana Rep. Clay Higgins, did not rule out questioning members of the prior committee.
“They were not invested in actual investigative work anyway,” said Higgins, who has pushed an unfounded theory that FBI agents helped coordinate the events at the Capitol. “That thing was never legitimate. It was always biased. And therefore, if we question them, it may be with the angle of having them implicate themselves in lies that they presented as truth.”
Speaker Mike Johnson called it “a committee investigating the previous committee” in a CNN interview Sunday and said the prior effort “was rigged.”
The panel’s chair, Georgia Rep. Barry Loudermilk, describes the investigation more soberly. He said in an interview that GOP staff have been quietly toiling for months, even before Johnson moved to formalize the probe this month.
Loudermilk said his team has been “talking to different entities,” reviewing documents and brainstorming potential investigative targets.
“We need to look at it from a factual standpoint,” he said. “It’s dangerous out there. There were a lot of civilians, as well as members of Congress and staff and even press that were here on Jan. 6. And I think we’re all interested to know, why did the Capitol get breached — regardless of who did it — how did it get breached?”
But to Democrats and even some Republicans, that rationale is a smokescreen for the panel’s true purpose: rewriting the history of Jan. 6, 2021, to minimize the culpability of the president and supporters who violently assaulted police officers and entered the Capitol in an attempt to disrupt the final certification of Trump’s 2020 election loss.
The security failures Loudermilk cited have been the subject of a slew of wide-ranging investigations: a review by retired Army Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré, a series of reports by the Capitol Police’s inspector general, a bipartisan Senate review and two appendices in the final report of the previous House Jan. 6 select committee.
That previous select committee concluded that Trump’s incendiary rhetoric, and months of false claims to sow doubt about his defeat in the 2020 election, inflamed his supporters shortly before he directed them to march on the Capitol. But the review also acknowledged that Capitol security officials were underprepared for the onslaught, leading to the breach of the building and several near-confrontations between rioters and lawmakers.
“They can’t even seem to settle on which conspiracy theory they want to advance,” said Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who served on the previous Jan. 6 panel and serves on the new one. “Was it Antifa? Did it not happen at all? Did Donald Trump really win the election? They can’t figure out what it is they want to say, and it’s because it’s just a tissue of lies and conspiracy theories.”
The backdrop for the new GOP-led investigation is Trump’s return to the presidency and his persistent efforts to reject any blame for the attack — and to accuse his political enemies of persecuting his supporters. On his first day back in office, Trump pardoned about 1,000 members of the mob and ordered his Justice Department to drop pending criminal cases against hundreds of others.
Trump has spent the intervening years downplaying the violence that occurred that day, which left more than 100 police officers injured. One officer died a day after the riot after suffering strokes, and several others died of suicide in subsequent weeks. Four Trump supporters died in the violence, including one who was shot by a Capitol Police officer as she attempted to enter the lobby that leads onto the House floor.
The attack remains a raw issue on Capitol Hill. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) helped sink the nomination of conservative attorney Ed Martin to be Trump’s top prosecutor in Washington, citing Martin’s advocacy for Jan. 6 criminal defendants and his comments about the attack. FBI Director Kash Patel has faced intense questioning about his own advocacy for Jan. 6 defendants and his role in producing a rendition of the National Anthem by some of the most violent offenders that day.
There is even an ongoing controversy over whether to hang a plaque previously commissioned by Congress to honor those who protected the Capitol that day. Johnson has refused to display the memorial, and Loudermilk, while expressing personal support for the officers, said that decision is “not in my decisionmaking wheelhouse.”
Meanwhile, the prior select committee, led by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), remains a particular sore spot for Trump and many Republicans. Even after it was disbanded, Trump continued calling its report a “Hoax” and its leaders “Political Hacks and Thugs” while championing Loudermilk’s work.
Reinvestigating the attack has been a longstanding priority for the Georgia Republican, who came under scrutiny by the previous Jan. 6 panel for hosting a tour of the complex the night before the Capitol riot. One person in his party was later found to have posted incendiary videos and marched toward, but not into, the building the next day.
Neither Loudermilk nor anyone in his tour group was accused of any wrongdoing, but the Jan. 6 committee interviewed one of the group members and questioned why Loudermilk did not inform authorities about the presence of his group.
After Republicans retook the House majority in 2023, Loudermilk led a probe “on the failures and politicization of the January 6th Select Committee” as chair of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight. In that investigation, some entities were uncooperative with his requests, Loudermilk said.
This time, in helming a select subcommittee under the Judiciary Committee, he has full subpoena power to compel compliance with his demands. “We think we’ve got a little more cooperation at this point,” he said.
The formal creation of Loudermilk’s panel followed months of negotiations over its scope and powers, with Loudermilk pushing for greater jurisdiction than Johnson’s team had been willing to give — and complaining to fellow Republicans about how GOP leadership was trying to stifle his effort. Then the Trump administration privately applied pressure to get the effort set up, Loudermilk told reporters earlier this year.
Johnson, who was central to the effort on Capitol Hill to overturn the 2020 election, acted quietly — inserting a provision establishing the panel as part of an unrelated procedural measure. One House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive dynamics around the panel, was unaware the subcommittee even existed before being asked about it by a POLITICO reporter.
Besides Loudermilk and Higgins, the panel’s members are Republican Reps. Morgan Griffith of Virginia, Troy Nehls of Texas and Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, as well as Democratic Reps. Eric Swalwell of California, Jasmine Crockett of Texas and Jared Moskowitz of Florida. House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) will serve as an ex officio member alongside Raskin, the top Judiciary Democrat.
These lawmakers are some of the most aggressive political messengers of their respective parties. Nehls sued the government over what he claimed was retaliation from the Capitol Police for his criticism of the force’s handling of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. Hageman unseated Cheney after she was ostracized by her party for her leading role in the prior panel and her unrelenting criticism of Trump.
The panel is wasting no time in launching an effort to review the findings of that previous committee. Earlier this month, Loudermilk sent letters to some businesses and other entities that had been in contact with the previous Jan. 6 panel to request data that was deleted or not otherwise archived. That committee disclosed a host of information in its possession, but some materials — including footage of its interviews — remain unreleased.
Other details of what the panel’s work will entail in the coming months remain sketchy. Loudermilk said he anticipates releasing a final report, while hearings would be called “based on a need and based on the evidence that we’re collecting.”
He added that his team was focusing on the unsolved mystery of the pipe bombs placed near the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee offices the day before the riot and the FBI’s use of confidential human sources who were present at the Capitol
Patel recently said the bureau’s pipe bomb investigation remained active and promising. The Justice Department’s inspector general reported in December that there were 26 FBI sources present in Washington on Jan. 6 but only three had actually been tasked by the bureau with tracking potential bad actors.
Both issues have fueled conspiracy theories about government involvement in the violence that day. Johnson in the CNN interview Sunday repeated an unfounded narrative endorsed by Trump that there were hundreds of FBI agents in the crowd as the Capitol was stormed — a misapprehension of data released by the bureau that includes agents dispatched to the scene after the violence broke out.
Loudermilk said he intends to steer his panel away from politics.
“I’m trying to make it clear I do not want this to be a partisan clown show,” he said. “This isn’t about getting clicks or media interviews.”
*Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.
- Filed Under:
- Congress,
- House Judiciary Committee,
- Bennie Thompson,
- Liz Cheney,
- Jim Jordan,
- Thom Tillis,
- Jamie Raskin,
- Clay Higgins,
- Barry Loudermilk,
- Mike Johnson,
- Jan. 6 Capitol riot
---
---
NOTE 7 25 TULSI GABBARD DEFLECTION EPSTEIN ACCUSE BO OF TREASON RUSSIA-GATE
SO DEM ELECTION INTERFERENCE?!
// ?
rww
07/24/2025
by
- Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling @ The New Republic: Trump’s Relationship With Epstein Further Exposed in Bombshell Video
In resurfaced video testimony, Jeffrey Epstein was asked if he and Donald Trump ever spent time with young girls.
- Will Sommer @ The Bulwark: MAGA Inches Closer to a Ghislaine Maxwell Alliance
Is perpetrating heinous crimes against children too big a hurdle for a political alliance of convenience? Maybe not.
- Kathryn Wilkens @ Mediaite: Candace Owens Vows to Fight Macron Lawsuit Over Claim French First Lady Is a Man: ‘Obvious’ She ‘Has a Penis’
Candace Owens doubled down on her claim that French First Lady Brigitte Macron was born a man on Wednesday after French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife filed a defamation lawsuit against the right-wing commentator accusing her of spreading the conspiracy theory that Brigitte was born “Jean-Michel Trogneux.”
- Amanda Moore @ The Intercept: Project 2025 Data Leak Shows a Paul Ingrassia Calling for Test for Voting and Halting Immigration
Trump appointed far-right loyalist Paul Ingrassia to head a Justice Department office responsible for keeping politics out of the civil service.
- Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: So much for ‘looking forward’: Republicans launch yet another Jan. 6 probe
The GOP's Jan. 6 probe in the last Congress was an embarrassing dud. Rather than learn an obvious lesson, the party is going to give it a second try.
- Jessica Mason Pieklo @ Rewire News Group: These Two ‘Culture Warriors’ Are Trump’s New Federal Judges
The conservative legal movement used Trump’s first term to seize control of the federal courts. Will it use his second term to rewrite the Constitution entirely?
maddow ref
doj arg pardon covers later gun case?
Almost immediately after Donald Trump pardoned Jan. 6 criminals, including convicted felons who violently clashed with police, congressional Republicans were asked for their reactions. They mostly tried to adopt a forward-thinking posture.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, for example, said in response to questions about the pardons, “We’re looking at the future, not the past.” Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, similarly added, “I’m ready to move forward.”
This was a badly flawed reaction for a variety of reasons, but House Speaker Mike Johnson echoed his party’s preferred talking point anyway. “The president’s made a decision, we move forward,” the Louisiana Republican told reporters on the third day of the new Trump era. Johnson added, “We’re not looking backwards, we’re looking forward.”
As it happens, that wasn’t altogether true. GOP officials didn’t want to look back at Trump’s pardons from January 2025, but they most certainly want to look back at the insurrectionist violence from January 2021. NBC News reported:
House Republicans are moving to create a new select subcommittee to ‘continue Congress’ investigation’ of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, chaired by Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga. The House will have to vote on the resolution to establish the subcommittee, which would fall under the Judiciary Committee.
The House speaker — the one who said, “We’re not looking backwards, we’re looking forward” after Trump put violent criminals back on American streets — boasted this week that his party should further investigate Jan. 6 because “there is clearly more work to be done.”
In reality, it’s not nearly as “clear” as the GOP leader wants the public to believe.
In case anyone needs a refresher, it was just a few years ago, as the Republican majority in the House got to work, when the party decided it was time for a new, GOP-friendly investigation into the Jan. 6 attack. The endeavor would be led by Loudermilk, who faced some uncomfortable questions about a controversial Capitol tour the day before the riot.
After launching his own Jan. 6 probe, the Georgia Republican’s first step was simple: He exonerated himself.
In the months that followed, Loudermilk said he intended to determine “what really happened” on Jan. 6, indifferent to the fact that we already learned what really happened.
More than a year after launching the partisan probe, Loudermilk and his GOP colleagues released a report on their findings, which was effectively meaningless and broke no new ground. The document appeared to be designed to undermine the bipartisan House Jan. 6 committee from the previous Congress, but it failed, and even most Republicans blew it off as irrelevant.
Loudermilk and his cohorts set out to discredit earlier findings and expose shocking new details that would alter the public’s understanding of the assault on the Capitol, but the partisan bombshell was a dud.
In the months that followed, Loudermilk continued to engage in half-hearted efforts — he even asked the Justice Department to launch a criminal investigation into former House GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney for foolish reasons that collapsed under scrutiny — but by any fair measure, the entire endeavor was a failure.
Congressional Democrats barely bothered to push back against Loudermilk’s “investigation” for the most insulting of reasons: They saw it as too boring and pitiful to warrant a full-throated response.
It’s against this backdrop that the House Republican leaders settled on a brilliant idea: Johnson wants the same congressman who failed in his Jan. 6 investigation in the last Congress to keep going with another Jan. 6 investigation in the current Congress — all while telling the public that GOP lawmakers are “looking forward” and leaving Jan. 6 in the rearview mirror. He said this week that Republicans “are proud” to be “exposing false narratives” from the Jan. 6 committee in the 117th Congress.
MAGA activists who are expecting blockbuster revelations should probably start lowering their expectations now.
---
---
an 52 5
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio wanted to slip a sweeping measure into a spending bill that would gut the Federal Trade Commission. Critics say it’s no coincidence that the FTC is suing mammoth health care conglomerates and tech giants like Amazon.
Jordan is chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee. Last week, it released a version of a bill that included tax cuts, federal spending cuts and more spending at the border.
It also contained provisions that would give Trump sweeping new powers to gut government regulations. It would also transfer funds and personnel currently controlled by the FTC to the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department — without the FTC’s unique enforcement authority going with them.
The measure was abruptly nixed, but it would have effectively killed antitrust powers Congress created more than a century ago.
The FTC history
Amid abuses to consumers by big corporations, the Federal Trade Commission Act was passed in 1914. Antitrust enforcement by the Department of Justice dates back further, to 1903.
But the Justice Department is overseen by the attorney general, a presidential appointee. Attorneys general traditionally have had a high degree of independence, but Trump is said to be politicizing the Justice Department at a breakneck pace.
The FTC was created in part to be more independent. It’s governed by commissioners from both parties who are appointed to fixed terms that can be renewed.
Earlier this year, Trump tried to fire the two Democratic commissioners, but they say the move was illegal, and they’re fighting it in court. Antitrust advocates said Trump was doing that as a favor to his billionaire supporters such as Elon Musk.
The two Democratic commissioners, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter, acted to block the Kroger-Albertson’s mega-merger, and they voted to sue Amazon, saying it is “illegally maintaining monopoly power.”
Under Jordan’s leadership, the Judiciary Committee in 2023 attacked the FTC on behalf of Musk. He’s the world’s richest man, whom Trump is allowing to make deep cuts to federal programs for the elderly, veterans, the poor, and agencies that promote science and health.
“THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION: AN AGENCY’S OVERREACH TO HARASS ELON MUSK’S TWITTER,” read the all-caps title of the Jordan-led committee’s report.
A year earlier, the FTC had charged Twitter with using deceptively gathered data from users to target ads at them. If true, it would be added to the fact that an unofficial, Musk-run entity is now collecting much more sensitive government data. It’s raised concerns among several federal judges who said such collections invite abuse and likely violate the law.
“One of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency lieutenants working in the Social Security Administration has been pushing dubious claims about noncitizens voting, apparently using access to data that court records suggest (the so-called Department of Government Efficiency) isn’t supposed to have,” NPR reported earlier this month.
The proposal from Jordan to gut the FTC could have halted major initiatives to regulate giant health conglomerates that own powerful pharmacy middlemen, said Bedoya, one of the commissioners Trump is trying to fire.
Jordan’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment on this story.
PBMs
Each of the three conglomerates — UnitedHealth Group, CVS Health and Cigna-Express Scripts — is among the 15 largest corporations in the United States. Each owns a top-ten health insurer and each owns a pharmacy middleman known as a pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM.
Combined, the PBMs control nearly 80% of the insured drug transactions in the United States. They decide which drugs are covered and use that power toextractrebates from drugmakers. They also determine varying reimbursements to pharmacies — including ones owned by their parent companies as well as the pharmacies with which they compete. Critics — including four-fifths of state attorneys general — say they have a conflict of interest under the arrangement, and that they abuse it.
Last October, the FTC sued the conglomerates, saying they used their dominance in multiple parts of the marketplace to illegally jack up the price of insulin — a drug millions of diabetics need to survive.
The lawsuit comes after the agency in 2022 undertook a major investigation of the health conglomerates. In January, it released an interim report accusing the PBMs of using their dominance to instigate wild price hikes and possibly steer business to affiliated pharmacies.
Politico recently reported that Jordan said his move to consolidate the FTC into the Justice Department was meant to “address the cost of over-regulation.”
“Part of our jurisdiction in Judiciary deals with regulatory concerns and so we are looking at … spending and costs associated with certain regulations. That’s why that language is written the way it was,” Politico reported him as saying.
Many businesses facing regulation — and their advocates in government — have long focused only on the costs. But government regulation can also protect health, safety, the environment, economic stability and competition. Some researchers have said regulation can always be smarter, but its benefits far outweigh the costs.
In a social media post last week, Bedoya, the FTC commissioner, said Jordan’s proposed changes to the agency served another agenda.
“This will gut the FTC,” Bedoya wrote. “FTC is trying to finish a study that already showed how pharmacy middlemen mark up cancer drugs by up to 4,000%. It’s also suing them for allegedly competing to raise insulin prices. If this passes I have no idea what’ll happen to that study and lawsuit.”
Bedoya added, “Take the lawsuit. The draft bill purports to transfer FTC lawyers and lawsuits to DOJ — but it doesn’t transfer the laws that FTC enforces, or authority to enforce those laws. Look (at) page 98 — employees, assets, funding — but no authorities.”
Bedoya also said that when it created the FTC, Congress meant to augment the government’s antitrust powers. Jordan’s changes would remove the government’s ability to police “unfair methods of competition,” Bedoya said, implying that Jordan was trying to slash the government’s power to police wealthy corporations in an era when the political influence of the mega-rich is exploding and the wealth gap is yawning.
“The purpose behind the FTC’s creation in 1914 was to supplement the existing enforcement mechanism (and enforcement gap created by) the Department of Justice,” Bedoya said on X. “When FTC was created in 1914, it alone was authorized to stop something called ‘unfair methods of competition.’ DOJ did not get this” under Jordan’s proposal.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE. SUPPORT
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.
==
AN NO LNX
'Gotta be kidding': Jim Jordan scrambles as he's confronted over Musk 'double standard'
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) listens to House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Rep. James Comer (R-KY) during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on "The Urgent Need to Address the Gun Violence Epidemic," on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., June 8, 2022.
REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
Matt Laslo and Raw Story February 18, 2025
WASHINGTON — What emails?
That’s the mood from congressional Republicans these days as allegations of private servers and accessing sensitive, private data swirl about this White House.
In 2016 alone, House Republicans issued more than 70 subpoenas or investigative inquiries into Hillary Clinton and her private server.
Many of those same Republicans are now shrugging off fears that Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency — a.k.a. DOGE — are flouting government protocols while scouring government databases in their effort to purge federal workers.
But Republicans are about to have a reckoning. Last summer the Supreme Court gave this Congress homework — work policymakers on Capitol Hill haven’t had to do in the past 40 or so years: Write precise rules and regulations instead of leaning on experts in federal agencies to flesh out the policy specifics after Congress passes a bill.
It’s unclear if the contemporary Congress is up to the serious task of policymaking, especially the 119th Congress, which is brimming with technophiles focused on clicks, viral videos and digital dunking.
In the month since Trump took his oath of office, critics say, instead of standing up for Congress and flexing the new powers the Supreme Court bestowed on the institution, congressional Republicans have all but surrendered their oversight responsibilities as they’ve ceded unprecedented power to President Donald Trump and his billionaire sidekick, Elon Musk.
All this talk of a ‘constitutional crisis’ may be a tad premature. What’s certain is America’s in the midst of a congressional crisis — one the current Congress may not be able to withstand.
In more than a dozen exclusive interviews, Republicans on Capitol Hill tell Raw Story not to rule Congress out yet, even as critics fear there’s not going to be much power left for legislators to reclaim with the GOP ceding so much legislative turf to Trump and DOGE at the start of this new administration.
“I'm delighted”
Several Republicans who spoke to Raw Story are cheering for Musk and Trump to dismantle the very federal government set up by Congress in recent years and decades.
“Do you worry that you guys are ceding a little too much power?” Raw Story asked Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) while walking through the Capitol.
“Well, I hate to say this, but the only way it's going to happen, in my opinion, is if we let them do it the way they're doing it. Otherwise, it won't get done. So I'm delighted,” Lummis — who was a member of the far-right, Constitution-wagging Freedom Caucus when she served in the House — told Raw Story. “I mean, really, really delighted with the way that Trump is allowing the DOGE people to audit.”
Team Trump is set on upending, dismantling, overhauling or outright deleting government websites, grants, programs, agencies, protocols and even federal employees themselves.
The courts are now dealing with an onslaught of legal challenges to this new MAGA administration. All those cases will take time to wind through the judiciary, but the Supreme Court’s already spoken.
Last June, the Supreme Court issued new, norm-upending marching orders to Congress when, in a 6-3 ruling, the majority of justices overturned a pivotal, if wonky, 1984 decision when the Roberts Court obliterated the so-called Chevron doctrine, which enabled experts in federal agencies to write rules and regulations never explicitly spelled out by Congress.
That means, Congress’ crutch is gone. It remains unclear if lawmakers will be able to stand on their own and master the jot and tittle of measures they send to the president’s desk.
But for now, at least, Republican majorities on Capitol Hill seem fine outsourcing the legislative branch’s powers to Trump and his White House.
“We're witnessing the collapse of a lot of constitutional boundaries”
In spite of claiming otherwise, DOGE and its unelected leader, Elon Musk, are so opaque, it’s unclear just how their tech is set up. But IT experts say they seem to be operating their own, non-governmental server.
While a case winds through federal courts, Republicans on Capitol Hill are fine with giving Musk, basically, whatever he wants.
“Like, with Musk, I was playing back the tape, you guys were really hard on Hillary for her server,” Raw Story recently pressed House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH). “Is there a double standard here?”
“No, not a double standard. I mean, Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, after the policy decisions that administration made led to — and security decisions that the administration made — led to the deaths of Americans in Benghazi, Libya,” Jordan — the second most senior Republican on the Oversight Committee — told Raw Story. “And then we find out 60,000 emails, and she destroyed, like, 30,000 of them. You gotta be kidding me.”
“So just having the server isn’t the problem?” Raw Story pressed.
“Right. Musk isn't destroying anything,” Jordan said. “He just wants to know where your money’s being spent.”
Democrats agree on one point. They say there’s literally no comparing ‘her emails’ to the work Musk’s conducting in secret.
“No, the two are not comparable, in that Elon is in a class by himself. It's not just the server, but the unfettered power that Trump’s given him,” Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) told Raw Story. “But I think it's important in talking about him to remember, everything he does is empowered by Trump. Good cop, bad cop.”
To congressional Republicans, Trump and Musk are both playing good cop.
“I'm amazed,” Jordan said. “The Trump administration is up to the most intense and focused start of any administration, certainly in my lifetime. I think the American people appreciate the focused, intense, on-offense type of start to this administration.”
“Are you afraid that Congress could be ceding a little bit of its authority — too much of its authority — to the White House and an unelected official?” Raw Story asked.
“No. I think you have this focused effort by DOGE to identify stupid things that the federal government’s spending money on,” Jordan said. “And I think when the American people see that, they're like, ‘Well, that's ridiculous. Of course, we need to change that.’”
Democrats aren’t surprised by much these days. Still, many are astounded watching GOP leaders on Capitol Hill outsource their legislative responsibilities to officials across the Trump administration set on canceling decade’s worth of congressional work — from bipartisan foreign aid programs to nonpartisan domestic food assistance programs.
“There's a shameful abdication of legislative power and responsibility by the GOP majority to the executive branch and the executive branch's lawless delegate,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) — a constitutional scholar by trade — told Raw Story. “We're seeing tremendous erosion of our constitutional edifice.”
Raskin finds the blurred lines between Musk’s work at DOGE and the billions of dollars in federal contracts his companies, like SpaceX, receive beyond troubling.
“We're witnessing the collapse of a lot of constitutional boundaries,” Raskin — the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee — said. “You know, we have this extraordinary convergence of governmental power with corporate power to the extent that a major federal contractor collecting billions from the taxpayers is now also a federal government employee purporting to oversee federal spending.”
Unlike Trump’s first administration, today’s Trump-centric GOP is unified at the Capitol, at least when it comes to oversight, which Raskin says isn’t taking place in spite of Republican rhetoric claiming otherwise.
“They keep talking about, you know, what a great job Elon Musk is doing on oversight when we have an Oversight Committee. The Judiciary Committee has an oversight subcommittee. All of Congress is supposed to be doing oversight as a central part of our responsibility,” Raskin said. “And so instead, they want one, you know, unvetted government contractor to be doing oversight over federal contracts. It's ridiculous.”
It’s not just the lack of oversight. Republicans on Capitol Hill are now Musk’s biggest cheerleaders.
“Everybody sorta ran on the same stuff”
Republicans refute claims they’re laying down on the job. Instead, they argue today’s GOP is in lockstep with the Trump White House.
“What do you view as your guy's role in this Congress?” Raw Story asked Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ). “Is it oversight of the executive, or is it working in tandem because you all are so aligned?”
“I don't know of anybody here who ran away from the president in their campaign. You know what I mean?” the former Freedom Caucus chair told Raw Story. “So everybody sorta ran on the same stuff that included reducing spending, continuing tax cuts, planning for security, that inflation would be dealt with by reducing spending — you know, the whole thing.”
So, instead of passing new measures to bolster the Trump administration’s prerogatives, Republicans are sitting back and enjoying the rowdy show just down Pennsylvania Avenue.
“We're going to do those mandates. We view it as a voter mandate, which gives us a mandate,” Biggs said. “So we move, we work together.”
Besides made-for-TV flurries of executive action from Trump and Musk, there’s not that much working together going on. As each day passes, the threat of a government shutdown increases ahead of the current funding deadline, March 14.
Instead of conducting formal oversight on the administration — like the GOP conducted at the end of the Obama administration and throughout the Biden administration — many Republicans now say their job is to oversee taxpayer dollars. Thus, Republicans say they’re in lockstep with Trump, Musk and DOGE.
“The oversight role still continues, though,” Biggs said. “It's not a new idea to have an independent third party, you know, looking into something like this, so our oversight is to make sure that we know where the dollars are going, just like we've been trying to do for the last — ever since I got here.”
“Now Democrats, they say you guys are just puppets for Musk and Trump,” Raw Story pressed. “You all see it differently?”
“No, that's not true,” Biggs said. “That's kind of a talking point narrative that they're trying to build on, because they don't have jack squat on policy.”
Republicans remain light on policy themselves. That’s despite the new Supreme Court mandate — when it struck down the ‘Chevron doctrine’ last summer — that Congress get serious about writing legislation instead of leaning on federal agencies to think for Congress.
Don’t tell DOGE…
The day’s quickly approaching when Trump will run out of executive orders to sign, and he’ll need Congress to send him actual bills to sign into law.
Lawmakers are braced. Their jobs — or, at the very least, those of their staff — have already gotten noticeably harder since Chief Justice Roberts and the court’s conservatives upended the precedent set in the 1984 Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council decision.
“I haven't thought of it that way. I do think it's put an extra burden on us,” Sen. Lummis — the Wyoming Republican who used to be on the Freedom Caucus — said. “It ramps up our drafting. We're more detailed about our drafting because Chevron.”
It’s not just making drafting legislation more meticulous: it seems to be melding lawmakers from the president’s own party with the very federal agencies lawmakers are supposed to oversee.
“Just more hard work. And it is all specifically geared towards Chevron, but I can't really say that it has affected the relationship between the legislative and executive branch, yet,” Lummis said. “It might, but more the agency level than the White House level. You know, the agencies we work with.”
But soon, the agencies won’t be much assistance as this Congress will be required to stand on its own.
“The Supreme Court said, ‘Hey, you guys gotta do your job,’” Raw Story reminded Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX).
“I think we're early in trying to figure out how to mechanically put all that in place,” Roy told Raw Story at the Capitol. “Like, I think, honestly, a lot of what DOGE is doing and what Elon's doing, we've got to embrace and put in our own orbit in Congress.”
While Musk, Trump and many rank-and-file Republicans are promising some $2 trillion in federal budget cuts, Roy and a handful of other Republicans argue increased funding is needed now to save money in the long run.
Roy argues efforts to cut Congress’ own budget — legislative branch appropriations, to be precise — are misguided, because expertise is needed to upend the administrative state legislatively.
“Guys that are always wanting to slash and burn [legislative] branch approps, I’m like, ‘You got to have your own,’” Roy said. “You’ve got to understand in a post-Chevron world, we got to be able to do our jobs. We need to have, certainly, in some organized fashion — I'm not sure every office has to be beefed up — but our ability to be able to have overview and constraint.”
Roy says that’s where Republicans are rooting for Musk most.
Instead of the time it takes to investigate and then issue a formal report or to “have somebody come testify,” Roy believes the technology-driven Silicon Valley approach will leave a lasting imprint on on not just the executive branch but Congress itself.
“Look, with technology now, I mean, what Elon’s showing — whether you love him or you don’t — the ability to use algorithms and computers and AI to go pore over the government and expose all of the horse crap that we've all been seeing, that we have observed,” Roy said.
“Democrats say you guys are puppets of Musk and Trump,” Raw Story pressed. “But you guys don't see it that way?”
“No — at all, actually,” Roy said. “So far, what I've seen is the president empowering an individual to root through the crap and expose it…and I think this will now empower Congress in the future — both sides of the aisle — to be able to go forward and pore over all of this crap.”
“Because, essentially, when you do spending bills, you'll fill in some of the things that they're currently doing?” Raw Story asked.
“Correct,” Roy said. “But we're going to need to be able to use those same tools and have input and/or build out our own.”
The steady stream of complaints flowing from the left is mere white noise to congressional Republicans these days.
“I think the hyperbole coming from the Democrats is simply because they lost and all of their little pet programs that they've loved for years are going away,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) told Raw Story. “That is fear-mongering. The same fear-mongering that had them ignore the reality of the southern border, and it is why they lost, not just the Senate, That's why they lost the White House.”
Republicans may have won in November, but Democrats say they’re already squandering their newfound populist appeal at the feet of unelected billionaires, like when Musk backed a government shutdown during Congress’ last funding fight in December.
“They have a chance to succeed on, like, big issues that they ran on, but if they're gonna do this nonsense, it'll all fall down on them,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) told Raw Story earlier this winter after Democrats came to Republicans’ rescue and funded the government.
POT HED: MAGA Effect: “It's a different party, in so many ways”
The MAGA-mandate may be nebulous, but to card-carrying club members, part of their job is to dismantle American conservatism — or what became of it in recent neocon saturated decades — itself.
“Is part of the mandate also to upend the Republican Party of old?” Raw Story asked the House Judiciary chair.
“It just happens. It's a different party in so many ways,” Jordan told Raw Story. "Someone said this a few years ago, you know, 'We're no longer the wine and cheese party. We're a beer and blue jeans party.' And so we're much more, I think, a working-class, middle-class-focused party."
“I always say, we make the job too complicated. Job's pretty simple. We just tell the voters what you were gonna do when you ran for it. If you get elected, go do what you said. President Trump does that better than anyone,” Jordan said. “But when you have someone whose, like, singular purpose and focus is to identify that and say, ‘We need to stop this’ — that's a good thing.”
Democrats are still regrouping after their party’s stunning defeat in November, but they see one sliver of an opening — one many predict will only grow in the coming months — as they watch this, supposedly, populist president pal around with billionaires.
“He's good at taking care of people who can afford to join Mar-a-Lago, so that's, like, his crowd, whether it be a tax bill or whether it be for who he's bringing in the administration,” Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) told Raw Story. “It's just very different than what we've been used to, where you bring in experts in areas. Instead, he just brings in fellow rich people.”
NOW READ: Be horror-stricken Trump used the same Bonaparte quote as a right-wing mass muderer
Report typos and corrections to: feedback@alternet.org.
Do you believe President-elect Trump will fulfill his campaign promises?
Read Comments - Join the Discussion
'Stupid, guilty, regretful': How to deal with people now 'embarrassed' they voted for Trump
Why is the media ignoring Trumpworld's latest shout-outs to hardcore racists?
Be horror-stricken Trump used the same Bonaparte quote as a right-wing mass muderer
MOST POPULAR
'Unconstitutional threat’: Trump border czar under fire over AOC DOJ request
'Time to think of Plan B': Musk ripped after forcing out Social Security chief
'I feel so stupid': These 'horrified' Trump voters are having serious buyer’s remorse
Played for suckers: Kansas farmer blasts Trump voters in scathing editorial
'Stealing food money from our soldiers': Troops going hungry as food budgets spent elsewhere
Here's the 'Fire Elon Musk' ad the Washington Post refused to run
'Stupid beyond belief': Trump and Musk blasted as DOGE fires 'hundreds' of FAA employees
Delta jet lands upside-down after Trump admin fires workers 'hired for FAA radar, landing'
Be horror-stricken Trump used the same Bonaparte quote as a right-wing mass muderer
'Ghost town': Restaurants consider closing as 'clientele is in hiding' out of 'real fear'
Trending Topics
george conwaynoam chomskycivil warKayleigh mcenanyMelania trumpdrudge reportpaul krugmanLindsey grahamLincoln projectal franken bill maherPeople of praiseIvanka trumperic trump
ATTACK CISA
This shift in CISA's operations reflects the growing conservative criticism of the agency's work [PDF] on misinformation and disinformation, with some Republicans labeling it as "the nerve center of the federal government's domestic surveillance and censorship operations on social media." The move has raised concerns about the future of election security efforts and the potential impact on the integrity of future elections.
NOW READ:How Jeff Bezos' Washington Post is providing cover for Trump — and Musk
REF JUN 2023
37 PP NO STAFFER OR MOC NAME ON IT
CRUZ TWT WHY ONLY BLUE STATES TAKE SO LONG TO CT WHEN GOP DOES IT ON ELECTION NIGHT
MAIL IN BALLOT BS
HUNTER LAPTOP
...
CISA’s Cybersecurity Advisory Committee (CSAC) DHS created the CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee (CSAC) in June 2021 “to advance CISA’s cybersecurity mission and strengthen the cybersecurity of the United States.”33 CSAC in turn established a “Protecting Critical Infrastructure from Misinformation & Disinformation” Subcommittee,34 commonly known as the “MDM Subcommittee.”35 The MDM Subcommittee, which has since disbanded,36 brought together government, Big Tech, and academic misinformation “experts,” including:
Dr. Kate Starbird, Associate Professor and Co-Founder of the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public (CIP).37 CIP was a member of both the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP)38 and the Virality Project (VP).39 Starbird served as the Chair of the MDM Subcommittee. 40 •
Vijaya Gadde, the former Chief Legal Officer of Twitter, who was “involved in censoring [the New York] Post’s Hunter Biden laptop” story.41 Gadde was also “behind the decision to permanently ban former President Trump from Twitter.”42 Shortly after Elon Musk completed his purchase of Twitter, Gadde was fired from the company in October 2022.43 •
Suzanne Spaulding, a former assistant general counsel and legal adviser for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), who also served as the Under Secretary for the NPPD
CISA’s predecessor within DHS.44 Spaulding is now the “director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS).”45 MDM Subcommittee meetings also featured government participants, including Geoff Hale, who leads CISA’s “Election Security Initiative,”46 and Kim Wyman, the former Washington Secretary of State, who now serves as CISA’s Senior Election Security Advisor.47
...
CONCL
“Silencing those who disagree with us is a sign of weakness, not strength, and it won’t lead to progress.” – former President Barack Obama, April 6, 2023.161
In 2019, CISA’s Chief Counsel claimed: “We are not law enforcement and we’re not the intelligence community.”162 In theory, the statement is accurate. CISA is not a law enforcement agency and is not authorized to act as an intelligence agency. But, in practice, that is how CISA has behaved, arrogating to itself the authority to conduct surveillance of Americans on social media. CISA expanded its unconstitutional practice by developing an elaborate social media censorship apparatus spanning multiple organizations, in order to facilitate the censorship of Americans’ political speech both directly and by proxy. There is no constitutionally viable legal authority that allows CISA to engage in this or any other kind of censorship. Thus, not only does CISA’s conduct violate the First Amendment, it also disregards the basic principle of the separation of powers, which prohibits agencies from acting outside of their congressionally delegated sphere.163
As Suzanne Spaulding, the former CIA legal advisor and MDM Subcommittee member, presaged, it was “only a matter of time before someone realizes we exist and starts asking about”164 CISA’s repeated violations of the First Amendment. CISA’s attempts to cover up its surveillance and censorship operations will not rectify the damage inflicted on the American people by government-induced censorship. Neither CISA’s scrubbing of its website, nor the Biden Administration’s stalling of records requests can conceal the true nature of CISA’s work in “combating MDM.” CISA must be reined in, as must the Biden Administration’s “whole-of-government” approach to social media censorship. Every American has the right to express his or her opinion online, and to receive information from others.
Government classifications of opinions as “misinformation” or “disinformation” do not nullify the First Amendment’s guarantees. A free and democratic society is impossible under a government that acts as the ultimate arbiter of truth in political discourse. To better inform legislative efforts to end government censorship on the Internet and protect Americans’ rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, the Committee and Select Subcommittee will continue to investigate the extent of CISA’s and other Executive Branch agencies’ interactions with social media platforms
---
---
an 1 25
no lnx
'We're gonna come get you now:' Threats flood J6 committee members after Trump pardons
Matt Lasloand Raw Story January 23, 2025
WASHINGTON — The threats are back.
Since President Donald Trump issued sweeping pardons — along with 14 communications — on Monday for the roughly 1,500 people convicted of storming the U.S. Capitol and attacking law enforcement four years ago, there’s been an uptick in threats to the members who served on the January 6 Select Committee.
"Well, already the crazy calls have started coming back," a former member of the committee told Raw Story. The member is not being named due to safety concerns.
"Are you getting threats?" Raw Story asked.
ALSO READ: Inside the parade of right-wing world leaders flocking to D.C. for Trump's inauguration
"Oh yeah,” the member said. “Several members have indicated that since the pardon that they're getting, 'Hey, we're gonna come get you now' and that kind of thing."
"So has your office gotten them?" Raw Story inquired.
"Oh, yeah," they said.
"Does that worry you though?" Raw Story pressed.
"Personal safety is a concern, I think, for a lot of people," the committee member continued. "It puts the public at risk when you put people who have been convicted of assaulting law enforcement back on the streets and you kind of embolden the conduct that they did, like it was somehow okay? So you legitimize bad behavior by people who broke into the Capitol and did all kinds of crazy stuff."
While the former select committee member doesn’t think the threats are coming from those who’ve been pardoned, they’re bracing for what’s to come.
"Some of the folks that he pardoned are still a clear and present danger to the public, members of Congress, staff here on the Hill," the committee member said. "Some of them, as you know, have already publicly said that they're not going to change.”
That’s a far different tune than House Speaker Mike Johnson is singing this week.
Earlier Wednesday, the speaker unveiled a new Jan. 6 subcommittee intended to “uncover the full truth that is owed to the American people,” according to his statement.
“House Republicans are proud of our work so far in exposing the false narratives peddled by the politically motivated January 6 Select Committee during the 117th Congress, but there is still more work to be done,” Johnson’s office released in a statement.
While the speaker’s office didn’t expound on what they now term "false narratives," the former January 6 Select Committee member told Raw Story the only falsehoods they’ve heard this week have come out of the White House — and now Republicans in Congress.
"You know, we had 140 people get hurt. Obviously, some lost their lives. Now to pretend like that was nothing, that what you saw with your own eyes somehow didn't happen, I'll just say, it's a blot on this institution,” the committee alum said. “It's a blot on the people who support people like that being pardoned."
===
---
an 1 25
“Everything’s on the table': Jim Jordan strongly considers calling Jack Smith to testify
---
===
NOTE INVERSION PROJECTION: DO FASCISM IN THE NAME OF NUREMBERG
MMA Alex Jones calls for “Nuremberg two”: “It's not avengeance, it's justice”
11/08/24
BALD?
November 7, 2024, edition of Infowars' *The Alex Jones Show
ALEX JONES (INFOWARS HOST): We have, just like the communists do but we do it as patriots, truth and reconciliation commissions. It's all over television for years, and we destroy the Democratic Party, we destroy the U.N., we destroy the NGOs, and we regain America's soul at the same time. Now that's my plan, and I can tell you that's a common sense plan. And I can tell you that that is the plan that is being prepared right now. And you heard Flynn say, yeah, Alex. Let's, let's not tell 'em too much. We don't wanna be caught flat footed. They know.
And I'm gonna say this again. If we don't hit them hard with this, A, it's the right thing to do, God's watching. We weren't given this victory, God's hand wasn't on Trump for nothing. We then morally are now aiding and abetting this. We don't go all the way. And if we don't get the enemy off balance and defeat them now, they're gonna reconstitute and they're coming after all of us. So, yeah, they're right. When we got into office, we are coming for you. It's true. Because you've committed mass crimes. It's not avengeance, it's justice, and we can't let you commit it again.
Now, you already see the Border Patrol, and the DHS, and the NGO people that were contractors going public all over the place for years, saying we're not part of this. Those people are heroes. And so it's not the Border Patrol, it's not mostly even the employees -- they hate it -- then they hand them off to people literally on airfields, and in fields, and in parking lots at Walmarts at 3:00 AM, and there's not paperwork.
And so that's where the investigation starts. And so, those whistleblowers are all in Congress, more whistleblowers, hearings. You bring it out, and then Trump will have control of the Justice Department. And then these criminals that have been hijacking the government that committed these crimes just like the Nazis, they have to learn they're not above the law. Nuremberg two.
Because if Trump goes after little stuff like Hunter Biden and all the things the media tries to get us to focus on, that's a diversion. Sure. Put him in prison too, but we'll get to him later. Trump says we're gonna find the missing children, and that's what the task force is going out or doing when they're going out with the gangs and the human traffickers.
===
{===}:
lnxno
Alternet
'Cowardly fled the scene of his crime': Sen. Hawley blasted over scathing letter to DOJ and FBI
Maya BoddieDecember 04, 2024
Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) published a scathing letter addressed to to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray on Tuesday, warning them that "real justice" is on the way.
"I’m putting DOJ & FBI on notice: Don’t shred a single document," Hawley wrote via X. "Don’t delete a single file. Accountability is coming. The Judiciary Committee WILL investigate - and find out who authorized spying on Christians, attacks on prolifers, the vendettas against Trump - all of it."
The Missouri The letter begins: "Dear Attorney General Garland and Director Wray: I have received reports that, under your leadership, DOJ and FBI employees are destroying records and other documents in an effort to conceal the widespread misconduct that took place under the Biden Administration. You must immediately stop this attempt to evade accountability, and should terminate any employees involved."
READ MORE: Trump lining up billionaire defense investor and megadonor to be number two at Pentagon
Hawley concluded, "The bottom line is this: you must immediately take all necessary steps to preserve all documents, records, and other materials generated by your agencies during your respective tenures in office. You must cease any bad-faith document destruction. And you should prepare for the real justice to come."
American Enterprise Institute Norman Ornstein commented: "Instigator of violent insurrection who cowardly fled the scene of his crime speaks"
Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan replied: As much as I loathe Hawley and his ideology, at least he understands politics and what his role is and how to exercise power. When was the last time you saw Dick Durbin write a letter like this to Republican officials? He rolled over for Justices Roberts, Thomas and Alito.
---
===
an 9 24
Even though he said he's willing to testify, House Republicans are still likely to vote in favor of holding one of President Joe Biden's Cabinet secretaries in contempt of Congress.
Politico reported Tuesday that Republicans are aiming to hold Secretary of State Antony Blinken in contempt, claiming he is obstructing their duty to investigate the U.S. military's withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) accused Blinken of failing to comply with a subpoena issued on September 18 to testify today, while Blinken is in New York for the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA).
“I wish we were not here today. However, Secretary of State Antony Blinken brought this upon himself,” McCaul said. “I take no joy in this procedure.”
READ MORE:['Cease fire now!' Blinken testimony repeatedly interrupted by protesters against military aid to Israel
In a letter to the House Foreign Affairs Committee earlier this week, Blinken emphasized that he was "willing to testify" but that his job as the United States' top diplomat required him to be at the United Nations. Blinken is expected to speak at the UNGA about the Biden administration's ongoing efforts to negotiate a ceasefire in Gaza and return hostages taken by Hamas on October 7, as well as about the United States' efforts to aid Ukraine in its war with Russia.
"I am profoundly disappointed you have once again chosen to send me a subpoena and threaten contempt, rather than engage with me and the department in a meaningful way to resolve this matter through the constitutionally-mandated accommodation process," Blinken wrote. "As I have made clear, I am willing to testify and have offered several reasonable alternatives to the dates unilaterally demanded by the Committee during which I am carrying out the President's important foreign policy objectives."
McCaul insisted that he made "numerous, good-faith" attempts to bring Blinken before the committee. However, Democrats disagreed with that characterization. Ranking member Gregory Meeks (D-New York) accused McCaul and other Republicans of orchestrating a "political stunt made for Fox News."
“That’s what this is: a political stunt, plain and simple,” Meeks told Politico. “Why is there suddenly a rush to hold this contempt vote when the secretary has made it clear time and time again that he’s willing to testify?”
As the U.S. was winding down the war in Afghanistan and preparing to withdraw all troops from the war-torn nation, Taliban fighters killed 13 American service members in a bombing at the Kabul airport. Republicans have seized on the tragedy as a central point to argue that Biden's oversight was to blame, given that he had assumed the oath of office several months before the attack.
However, as Vice President Kamala Harris pointed out during her September debate with former President Donald Trump, the Biden administration was simply carrying out the peace plan that Trump and his then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo negotiated with the Taliban in 2020. That deal established the timeline for U.S. withdrawal, with all parties agreeing that the U.S. would withdraw from Afghanistan by May of 2021 after roughly 20 years of war.
Blinken is the third of Biden's cabinet secretaries to be pursued by House Republicans. The House GOP impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas earlier this year over the Biden administration's immigration policy, and held Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress over his refusal to provide the GOP with audio of Biden's deposition with Department of Justice special counsel Robert Hur.
Click here to read Politico's report in full.
READ MORE:['That's false': Trump caught lying about Afghanistan withdrawal to families of slain veterans
===
===
Take Trumpist threats to jail journalists seriously
Written by Matt Gertz
Published 09/23/24 mma
Last year, after I criticized the Republican political operative Mike Davis, he publicly declared that he had added me to a list he maintains of Americans he would imprison if he led the Justice Department. I am far from alone: The former Senate Judiciary Committee staffer has issued similar threats to several of my colleagues as well as journalists at other outlets.
When Davis is challenged about his openly fascistic musings, he retreats to claiming that his deranged threats are only trolling. But two disturbing reports last week show that if Davis is just kidding about punishing the press and other presumed Trump critics, portions of the MAGA movement — including Donald Trump himself — are not in on the joke.
Indeed, Davis’ psychotic behavior helped turn him into a MAGA favorite who gets floated for a high-ranking role in a second Trump administration — perhaps even attorney general. The former president’s most zealous supporters, who frequently call for politicized prosecutions against his foes, can’t get enough of Davis’ authoritarian diatribes.
It’s not just trolling: Trump is an authoritarian leading an authoritarian movement, and if he returns to the White House, he will again try to carry out his authoritarian impulses. And journalists, whom the former president often describes as the “enemy of the people,” will not be spared.
*A Mike Davis post from X/Twitter. Davis claims to have “five lists, ready to go,” if he becomes attorney general; List 2 is people he would indict and List 4 is people he would imprison in the “DC gulag” or Guantanamo Bay.
Davis told a Politico reporter he was trolling. Then MAGA thugs cornered the reporter.
In a profile of Davis published Friday, Politico reporter Adam Wren discussed being accosted by Trumpist goons while he was reporting from the Republican National Convention.
Wren’s piece chronicles how Davis’ star has risen within the MAGA movement due to his willingness to defend Trump in the wake of his indictments on state and federal changes. Wren particularly highlights Davis’ incendiary calls for retaliatory prosecutions if Trump is elected in November, such as his August 2023 statement that he would use a “three-week reign of terror” as attorney general to carry out his “five lists” of people to fire, indict, deport, imprison, and pardon.
But in interviews for the piece, Davis maintained to Wren that his statements about sending people like me to a “gulag” shouldn’t be taken literally. From the profile (emphasis in the original):
Davis will admit to being quite serious about much of what he says in the media, including wanting to dismantle the power of the federal government, an idea he has held onto since his Gingrich days. But he told me he is obviously joking about some of the more inflammatory promises — putting kids in cages and detaining journalists in a gulag. He later told me the sound bite was “a self-inflicted wound,” but also said he “didn’t want to back down from it.”
“It’s hilarious that it’s so easy to trigger these people. I’m obviously trolling them,” Davis told me of Democrats.
Davis’ allies are apparently not quite so sure.
Wren writes that when he accompanied Davis to a ninth-floor hotel bar frequented by the Trump family and their hangers-on during the Republican National Convention, he observed Davis being “greeted by Republican revelers like a caesar” — and overheard Donald Trump Jr. telling the GOP operative, “I want you to be my father’s attorney general for all four years.”
Then a woman “demanded” that Wren either delete his notes of that interaction or hand over his phone, “recruited four men to block the elevators” when he refused, and issued a not-terribly-veiled threat. Unable to access the elevators to leave the bar, Wren wrote that he fled down the stairs, pursued by two of the goons.
Wren further described the incident in an interview with The Bulwark:
Davis, Wren explained in his piece, subsequently “confronted the aide near the elevators and dressed her down” and told the reporter what happened was “fucking shocking.”
The Politico profile concludes with an adviser to Donald Trump Jr. telling Wren that the behavior he had experienced was unacceptable — and also that Don Jr.’s comments to Davis about serving as attorney general were merely “trolling.”
Donald Trump spent his White House years demanding — and receiving — probes of his enemies
In a lengthy investigation published over the weekend, New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt reviewed the cases of 10 individuals who “faced federal pressure of one kind or another” following Trump’s “public or private demands for them to be targeted by the government” during his presidency.
Schmidt revealed:
- In the spring of 2018, Trump told White House counsel Donald McGahn “that he wanted to order” Attorney General Jeff Sessions “to prosecute” Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey, “and that if Mr. Sessions refused he would take matters into his own hands.”
- Lawyers in the White House counsel’s office subsequently authored a memo to the then-president which “made clear that Mr. Trump did not have the authority ‘to initiate an investigation or prosecution yourself or circumvent the attorney general by directing a different official to pursue a prosecution or investigation,’ as one draft memo put it.”
- Nonetheless, “within a month, Mr. Trump plunged ahead with one of his most successful efforts to have a Democratic critic investigated. He publicly demanded and ultimately got an inquiry by federal prosecutors into” former secretary of state John Kerry.
- “Through the rest of Mr. Trump’s time in office, he never let up on pressuring federal agencies to take action against his perceived enemies even as he was counseled against it by aides like Mr. McGahn and John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff from the middle of 2017 until the beginning of 2019.”
- “In a few of the cases where Mr. Trump wanted investigations, there was legitimate basis for action. But in many others, there was little or no legal justification. None resulted in a criminal conviction.”
- “There is no record of the inquiries and other actions coming about as a result of a formal, signed order from Mr. Trump. Instead, he repeatedly signaled what he wanted, publicly and privately, leaving no doubt among subordinates.”
- “At least two other West Wing officials defied Mr. Trump’s repeated instructions not to take notes and wrote down accounts of Mr. Trump’s eruptions about using the federal government to target his perceived enemies. Those notes were taken from the White House as well to ensure there was documentation.”
Schmidt’s list of investigations Trump demanded into his foes is lengthy but by no means exhaustive. It mentions, for example, that “federal prosecutors and a special counsel examined nearly all the issues and conspiracy theories Mr. Trump raised about Mrs. Clinton, her campaign and the Clinton Foundation,” but it omits the ultimately fruitless two-year review of her role as secretary of state in the sale of the company known as Uranium One that he had sought.
Nor does it reference every instance in which Trump sought government retaliation against his critics. Schmidt’s list notes that “the Justice Department obtained phone and email records for reporters for CNN, The Washington Post and The New York Times” as part of leak investigations, but it does not detail Trump’s efforts to use federal regulatory powers to punish news outlets.
Nevertheless, it shows quite clearly that Trump’s impulse to prosecute his political foes found few restraints during his presidency — and could be even more dangerous in a second term.
The staffing plans developed under the auspices of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 are intended to empower loyalists while keeping out people like McGahn, who reportedly tried to prevent Trump from exercising his whims. Meanwhile, presidential efforts to pressure Justice Department officials to take action were specifically rendered immune from federal prosecution thanks to the radical doctrine the Supreme Court enshrined over the summer in Trump v. United States.
Trump, for his part, continues to regularly accuse his political opponents of crimes. That has critics worried he would once again urge the Justice Department to initiate investigations if he returned to office. But Trump’s supporters say such claims are overwrought. “His defenders often seek to explain away Mr. Trump’s threats to take legal action against opponents as campaign trail bluster,” Schmidt wrote.
In other words, they’re claiming that Trump is just trolling.
Related
11/10/23 11:39 AM EST
02/29/24 11:08 AM EST
11/30/23
===
---
an 8 24
Mike Nellis, a veteran Democratic operative and former senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris, on Wednesday shared that he was subpoenaed by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) — which Nellis says is another one of the GOP leader's "a baseless right-wing conspiracy" theories.
"BREAKING: We have just received a subpoena from Jim Jordan and the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee," Nellis wrote via X. "This is yet another abuse of power, aimed at promoting a baseless right-wing conspiracy theory that links our company, Authentic, to Donald Trump’s fraud trial. We are thoroughly reviewing the subpoena with our legal team and will provide updates as soon as we have more information."
He continued, "Let us be clear: these allegations against our company are completely false and purely politically motivated. This is a blatant attempt to intimidate us and divert attention from Donald Trump’s conviction. We refuse to be bullied, and we will not allow House Republicans or MAGA extremists to spread lies about our work. We remain steadfast in our mission and are deeply grateful for the unwavering support of our friends and family during this time."
READ MORE:**'False' and 'irresponsible': DOJ smacks down Jim Jordan’s 'conspiracy' in sharp letter**
Jordan's subpoena is connected to his belief that New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan — who presided over Donald Trump's hush money case — faced a conflict of interest due to his daughter's past work with Nellis' firm, Authentic Campaigns Inc.
The Associated Press reported earlier this month, that Loren Merchan "met Harris occasionally in 2019 but never 'developed an individual relationship' with her," according to Nellis.
The news outlet noted that Authentic Campaigns Inc. has not worked for Harris’ campaign during the 2024 election cycle.
MSNBC's Katie Phang replied to Nellis' post, writing: "Jim Jordan IGNORED a Congressional subpoena issued by the January 6th House Select Committee. But Jordan insists that others comply when it’s nothing but a baseless harassment campaign? In Jim Jordan’s world, it’s 'Rules for thee, but not for me.'"
READ MORE:[Merchan’s daughter got 'credible' death threats 'requiring intervention' after Trump attacks
---
8 24 jdv remorse, kh surge dnc hit so desperate to ctr pgm
fox moves on to Comer’s Walz-China smears as his Biden impeachment inquiry collapses
Written by Matt Gertz
Published 08/20/24
Fox News hasn’t learned any lessons from the collapse of its long-sought impeachment probe of President Joe Biden. The network’s biggest stars remain eager to peddle the GOP’s politically motivated investigations of Democrats in hopes of returning Donald Trump to the White House.
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) announced on Friday that his committee had opened an investigation into Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s “longstanding connections to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) entities and officials” and was seeking information from the FBI about the governor’s “problematic engagement” with China. While the connections are purportedly “longstanding,” Comer’s interest in them manifested just days after Vice President Kamala Harris named Walz as her running mate.
Comer pitched his new probe on Monday night to Fox’s Jesse Watters, who nodded along as the chairman claimed Walz “really has embraced China's view of the world, the Chinese ideology, which is communism.” Comer also cited Walz’s trips to China as an educator to claim that “it’s very possible” China had been “grooming” the Minnesota governor “to try to have a foothold in our government.”
“It says a lot about Kamala Harris that she picked this guy to be her No. 2,” concluded Watters, who is apparently incapable of subtext.
“Yes,” replied Comer, not pretending that his work is nonpartisan.
Video
CitationFrom the August 19, 2024, edition of Fox News' Jesse Watters Primetime.
This is absurd. Walz is obviously not a communist; he’s a mainstream Democrat who regularly touts his work helping small business owners.
Nor is Walz some sort of Manchurian candidate. Beginning in 1989, he frequently visited China as an educator in the 1990s and 2000s — first teaching in the country and later shepherding American students for visits — and has expressed admiration for its people. But as a member of Congress, Walz proved an “outspoken critic of the Chinese government,” The New York Times reported, noting his “sharp critiques of China’s human rights record” and meetings with dissidents from Tibet and Hong Kong.
Meanwhile, Trump’s companies received millions of dollars from Chinese government entities while he was in the White House, and the former president regularly praises Chinese president Xi Jinping and vouched for his efforts to contain COVID-19 as the virus spread worldwide — all without triggering concern from Comer or Fox’s hosts.
:{:{Comer’s McCarthyian turn on Fox came just hours after the chairman concluded his Biden impeachment inquiry with a whimper. House Republicans launched that investigation in response to pressure from Fox, which showered Comer with attention over his hapless probes into the business dealings of Biden’s son Hunter.}:
But the impeachment inquiry all but collapsed after the Justice Department indicted a key “informant” who had claimed the president had taken a hefty bribe for allegedly making up the story. The probe’s final report, released Monday morning, reveals “almost nothing … that wasn’t known or understood before the formal investigation began,” The Washington Post’s Philip Bump reported.}:
But Fox stars like Watters are happy to be used as a propaganda tool by the GOP, and so he’s seamlessly moved on to Comer’s next bit of nonsense.
“Please keep us posted on these developments, this is an important investigation,” Watters told Comer at the end of their interview. The House Republican will surely oblige him.
related
:{:{01/05/24}:
- ### Fox News' failed attempt to use Hunter Biden to gin up an impeachment of his father, by the numbers
:{:{04/25/24}:
12/05/23
---
---
an 7 24
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) threw cold water on Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) after he claimed the media was "colluding" against conservatives.
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Jordan contended that the Global Alliance for Responsible Media had conspired with its members to avoid advertising on conservative outlets.
"They came together, agreed to limit advertising on certain platforms and news outlets that millions— millions of Americans choose to read, watch, and listen to," Jordan claimed. "They collude to make sure that no other advertisers support any news outlets, platforms, or creators that these massive companies don't agree with."
"And these people do not like conservatives," he insisted. "They will use their cartel to eliminate competition based on internal biases of these massive companies, and they will deprive Americans of the content that they actually want to consume."
Nadler pointed out that Jordan's hearinghad "nothing to do with antitrust laws, since the majority's allegations wither under even the most basic antitrust analysis."
"This is instead another dangerous effort by the majority to bully companies into promoting and supporting far-right extremist views, views that brands understandably do not want to be associated with," Nadler explained. "In this case, the majority seeks to undermine companies' First Amendment rights and to make it harder for them to avoid monetizing online and offline harm through advertising."
The Democratic lawmaker noted that advertisers wanted to avoid "funding of terrorist organizations, the promotion and distribution of foreign propaganda materials, and the promotion and distribution of racist, hateful, and discriminatory content."
Nadler pointed out that Republicans wanted to force advertisers to run ads on "platforms like Twitter, now known as X, True Social, Breitbart, and The Daily Wire, even though those sites are rife with adult content, hate speech, false information, misinformation, and racist and violent propaganda."
EXCLUSIVE:Trump's 'secretary of retribution' has a 'target list' of 350 people he wants arrested
The congressman told Jordan that The Daily Wire, run by Republican witness Ben Shapiro, had generated $220 million in revenue last year.
"His website has over 15 million followers across his main social media handles, including on sites that are members of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, known as GARM, the target of today's hearing," Nadler said. "This hardly sounds like the victim of a conspiracy to suppress content."
"Under the direction of the chair, the committee is abusing its oversight authority," he added. "The Republicans are so committed to the belief that conservative content, in quotes, is being censored, despite all evidence to the contrary, that they will do anything to undermine the efforts of platforms to moderate their own content, which the Supreme Court recently affirmed is an exercise of their First Amendment rights."
Watch the video below from the House Judiciary Committee.
---
AN 6 24
JIM Jordan attacks Trump DA Alvin Bragg over new YouTube restriction
---
alternet no lnx
New plans? How Trump loyalists are out for Biden family blood more than ever
Matt LasloandRaw Story June 15, 2024
WASHINGTON — House Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden all but unraveled, but you wouldn’t know that from talking to House Republicans this week.
They’re out for Biden family blood more than ever.
The GOP’s cheering of a damning verdict for presidential son Hunter Biden — found guilty of lying on a federal firearm form and illegally owning a gun — have proven short-lived.
On Capitol Hill, the mood amongst Republicans is mostly anger as the party overflows with complaints about “a two-tiered” system of justice — even after the president’s son was successfully prosecuted by the same Department of Justice they decry for its pursuit of former President Donald Trump.
“No one's taking it seriously, because the Department of Justice, if they were actually a real justice system, they would have charged him for FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act]. They would be charging him for human sex trafficking,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) told Raw Story while walking to the Capitol to vote Wednesday.
MTG’s far from alone.
On Wednesday, three powerful Republican committee chairs sent the Department of Justice criminal referrals for Hunter and James Biden, the president’s brother.
The two Bidens made false statements to their committees that "implicate Joe Biden’s knowledge and role in his family’s influence peddling schemes and appear to be a calculated effort to shield Joe Biden from the impeachment inquiry," wrote Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY), Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-MO).
Those criminal referrals were sent to Special Counsel David Weiss and Attorney General Merrick Garland on the same day House Republicans voted to hold Garland in contempt for turning over a transcript of President Biden’s interview with the special prosecutor while withholding audio of it.
In the wake of the Hunter Biden guilty verdict, Republicans now say Department of Justice lawyers are complicit in a cover up.
“I think it's just an attempt to try to say, ‘Oh, we're not a two-tier justice system,’” Greene said. “And they [don’t] want to prosecute BLM rioters, Antifa and all these other people that caused $2 billion in damage.”
It’s more than just a different system of justice: the “deep state” is now in the driver’s seat at the DOJ, according to many in the GOP.
“The Hunter Biden trial was a veneer. There wasn't a sincere prosecution,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) told Raw Story.
While House Republicans voted along party lines to launch a formal impeachment inquiry into President Biden at the end of last year, the effort has gone nowhere in the GOP-controlled House.
That’s in part because their star witness, retired Russian figure skater Alexander Smirnov, went from being an FBI informant to being charged with lying and creating false documents about President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
While on a private fundraising call last year, Gaetz dismissed the Biden impeachment effort — “I don’t believe that we are endeavoring upon a legitimate impeachment of Joe Biden” — since then he’s been raising alarms about bribes the Oversight Committee has failed to link to the president.
ALSO READ: ‘MIA MTG’: Why Marjorie Taylor Greene has no publicly listed district offices
Even though his committee has failed to make the case that Biden corruption is a family affair leading all the way to the White House, Gaetz dismisses the Hunter Biden gun case as “dumb.” He says DOJ lawyers need to do more — and broaden their investigation.
“I identify strongly with the statement from the Trump campaign that it was a distraction from the real Biden crimes. These guys are moving around millions of dollars in Chinese bribe money, and what we got him on was lying on a gun form? It’d be like getting Jeffrey Dahmer for littering,” Gaetz said, referencing the convicted serial killer.
Dumb or not, many Republicans are now watching to see whether Hunter Biden gets any jail time for his first time, non-violent felony conviction.
“Well, I think they considered the facts and found him guilty. It’ll be interesting to see what his consequences are,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) told Raw Story. “If you’re on drugs, should you really have a gun? It’s either a law or it’s not a law. If they don’t believe in it, it’s like anything else, you gotta change it.”
While Norman’s closely watching the case against the first son, he, too, accuses the Department of Justice of playing politics even after the special prosecutor won a conviction this week.
“I do think it's a smokescreen,” Norman said. “I mean, look at what Hunter Biden’s gotten by with. $8 million in art sales. I don’t think he’s an artist.”
President Biden has said he will not pardon Hunter Biden.
“I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal," President Biden said. "Jill and I love our son, and we are so proud of the man he is today. So many families who have had loved ones battle addiction understand the feeling of pride seeing someone you love come out the other side and be so strong and resilient in recovery."
President Biden also reaffirmed his loyalty to his family.
"Jill and I will always be there for Hunter and the rest of our family with our love and support,” Biden said. “Nothing will ever change that."
From Your Site Articles
'A picture would help': Ex-Trump aide discredits GOP’s Hunter Biden witness with one photo ›
Hunter Biden retains high-profile lawyer who represented Jared Kushner: report ›
House Republicans’ attempts to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress have stalled out ›
McCarthy accuses Gaetz of 'buying coke and paying minors for sex': 'Hunter Biden of the GOP' ›
Ex-Trump adviser: 'Republicans need a different talking point' after Hunter Biden conviction ›
---
an 6 24 hunter biden convicted?
“False' and 'irresponsible': DOJ smacks down Jim Jordan’s 'conspiracy' in sharp letter
---
---
---
---
an 4 24
house Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) recently told a GOP colleague, according to CNN, that he just wanted to be ‘done with' his 15-month-long impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.
CNN reported last week that the Kentucky lawmaker has already begun to set his eyes on other goals — "ambitions to run for higher office one day, including potentially running for governor, according to lawmakers who have spoken to him."
In a Sunday, April 28 op-ed published by MSNBC, author and journalist Paul Weldman suggests Comer, his GOP colleagues, and Fox News media allies want the public to somehow forget about the probe, and just how unsuccessful it was — despite the fact their nominee for president is swimming in pools of the "corruption" they've been looking for.
READ MORE:'Used by the Russians': Moskowitz mocks Comer’s Biden impeachment failure
"You might recall that [former President Donald] Trump was first impeached for pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to open a sham investigation of Biden in order to discredit him ahead of the 2020 election," Weldman writes."Comer and House Republicans delivered what Zelenskyy refused to."
The "White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy" author emphasizes, "Again and again, they’d find some new piece of information, rush to the cameras to proclaim that they had located the smoking gun, then watch as their claims collapsed when the mundane truth came out."
Weldman writes:
*And yet, despite the best efforts of the House GOP’s worst people, the investigation did not find any corruption. That’s not to say Biden is a paragon of ethical purity; he’s done a few questionable things, like taking a position at the University of Pennsylvania after his vice presidency that involved a healthy salary and few responsibilities. That kind of sweetheart deal may be a little unseemly, but it’s neither illegal nor particularly uncommon for someone in his position.
Corruption, however, is something very different — and there’s never been any credible evidence that Biden is corrupt at all. The fruitless quest to find something criminal Biden did is particularly ironic given that Republicans are working so hard to return possibly the most corrupt president in history to the White House. Even now, they support him as he argues to the Supreme Court that presidents must be immune from prosecution for any crimes they might commit while in office. So if they want to find corruption, they know where they can look.*
"Things have not worked out the way Comer and his colleagues wished," the Boundary Issues podcast host adds. "The only ones humiliated were the bush-league Javerts of the GOP."
READ MORE:White House ends GOP’s unsuccessful impeachment saga: report
Weldman emphasizes, "And Republicans — and their media allies — are hoping you forget all about it."
*Welman's full op-ed is availablehere.
---
---
an badash 3 24
last year House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer acknowledged former President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House advisor Jared Kushner had “crossed the line” when he accepted $2 billion in foreign investment funds from the government of Saudi Arabia as he started up a private investment firm just months after leaving the White House.
Now, Chairman Comer says he will not open an investigation into any possible wrongdoing, Huffpost reports, despite top Democrats alleging Kushner engaged in “apparent influence peddling and quid pro quo deals.”
On Tuesday, the top Democrat on Comer’s Oversight Committee, Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, and Democrat Robert Garcia, the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, formally requested Comer “convene a hearing regarding Jared Kushner’s apparent influence peddling and quid pro quo deals involving investments in exchange for official actions and to examine the resulting threats to our national security.”
“This Committee cannot claim to be ‘investigating foreign nationals’ attempts to target and coerce high-ranking U.S. officials’ family members by providing money or other benefits in exchange for certain actions while continuing to ignore these matters,” Raskin and Garcia wrote. “We therefore urge you to work with us to finally investigate Mr. Kushner’s receipt of billions of dollars from foreign governments in deals that appear to be quid pro quos for actions he undertook as senior White House adviser in Donald Trump’s Administration.”
READ MORE: Greene Says She Won’t Take Responsibility if Johnson Loses Speaker’s Gavel Before Election
The American people are deeply concerned about these business dealings and Mr. Kushner’s apparent influence peddling. We must address
those concerns with a fair, impartial, and public process to understand the truth and to institute meaningful reforms to safeguard public confidence in our executive branch.”
The two Democrats in their letter say their “request comes in light of allegations that Jared Kushner is pursuing new foreign business deals, just as Donald Trump becomes the presumptive Republican nominee for the presidency. Last year, well before these new allegations came to light, Chairman Comer had already conceded that Jared Kushner’s conduct ‘crossed the line of ethics’ and promised that the Oversight Committee would ‘have some questions for Trump and some of his family members, including Jared Kushner.'”
Raskin and Garcia paint a picture of “Kushner’s pattern of profiting off of his time in the White House.”
Citing The New York Times (apparentlythis article), they write, “Jared Kushner was closing in on investments in Albania and Serbia, leveraging relationships he built during his time as a senior adviser in his father-in-law’s White House. Reportedly, Mr. Kushner is considering an investment on the site of the former Yugoslav Ministry of Defense.”
“Mr. Kushner is reportedly being advised by Richard Grenell, another former senior Trump Administration official who served as U.S. Ambassador to Germany and, concomitantly, as ‘special envoy for peace negotiations between Serbia and Kosovo.’ Mr. Grenell reportedly ‘pushed a related plan’ for redevelopment of the same site during his time in the Trump Administration.”
READ MORE: Trump Says He Thinks He’s ‘Allowed’ to Accept Foreign Money to Pay Fines
“In pursuing investment opportunities in Albania, Mr. Grenell and Mr. Kushner have been openly leveraging their relationship with Edi Rama, the Prime Minister of Albania. While Commander-in-Chief, President Trump received unconstitutional payments from Prime Minister Rama and other senior Albanian government officials who spent thousands of dollars at theTrump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., over three separate stays,” Raskin and Garcia write.
They also allege, “Mr. Kushner successfully overruled State Department officials, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, to make President Trump’s first foreign trip as President to Saudi Arabia. Mr. Kushner personally intervened to inflate the value of a U.S.-Saudi arms deal and to finalize the deal President Trump signed, which was worth $110 billion. Mr. Kushner
also provided diplomatic cover and support to the Crown Prince after the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi, an American permanent resident and journalist. Mr. Khashoggi’s murder was assessed by American Intelligence to have been approved by the Crown Prince himself.”
Despite their extensive allegations, Chairman Comer is refusing to open an investigation.
“Unlike the Bidens, Jared Kushner has a legitimate business and has a career as a business executive that predates Donald Trump’s political career,” Comer said, as HuffPost reports. “Democrats’ latest letter is part of their playbook to shield President Biden from oversight.”
---
MASSIVE FAIL
224 fbi indict star witness impeach smirnoff, gop no back off russia disinfo
efforts by House Republicans to impeach President Joe Biden ran into a brick wall when informant Alexander Smirnov was arrested for allegedly lying to the FBI.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Kentucky) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) touted Smirnov as the "star witness" who would show that Biden and his son Hunter Biden committed corrupt or illegal acts in Ukraine. But Smirnov's arrest, according to Democrats, seriously hurts both Comer's and Jordan's credibility in the matter.
In a MaddowBlog column published on February 22, MSNBC producer Steve Benen slammed Jordan for acting like House Republicans' case for impeaching President Biden hasn't already collapsed.
READ MORE:'[Tale of the tape': These 10 Republicans brazenly touted indicted FBI informant before he was tried
"The House Republicans' impeachment crusade against President Joe Biden was already a fiasco, though it managed to get worse last week: The GOP's star witness — the man at the heart of the party's case — was arrested for lying to the FBI about the Bidens," Benen argued. "This week, the bottom fell out completely: The same witness Alexander Smirnov, according to a Trump-appointed prosecutor, peddled false claims he received from foreign intelligence officials."
Benen added, "In fact, according to the latest court filing, Smirnov 'admitted that officials associated with Russian intelligence were involved in passing a story about' Hunter Biden."
But Jordan, the MSNBC columnist emphasizes, is in total denial about the Smirnov debacle.
"Jordan might still believe baseless claims that were thoroughly discredited five years," Benen explained. "But as things currently stand, proponents of the Biden impeachment inquiry no longer have any facts. Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking member on the Oversight panel, told reporters that the entire impeachment investigation 'essentially ended' in response to this week's revelations."
Informant’s arrest for allegedly lying to FBI could be bad news for Jim Jordan - Alternet.org
---
===
Critics slam Jim Jordan’s Fani Willis subpoena: 'Frivolous waste of time' - Alternet.org
---
---
Tori Otten @ The New Republic: New Transcript Blows Up James Comer’s Entire Hunter Biden Argument.
:{A new transcript from a key Hunter Biden witness undercuts many of the claims Republicans are making about “Biden corruption.”:{}:
---}:
IN a Sunday, January 21 op-ed, MSNBC Daily writer and editor Hayes Brown points to "an amicus (or friend of the court) brief filed on behalf of nearly 200 Republican members of Congress," which urges the US Supreme Court to determine whether Donald Trump can remain on the ballot in Colorado. Brown emphasizes "that there's a deeply self-serving element to their arguments."
He adds, "Under the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling," several GOP lawmakers "could also credibly be described as having 'engaged in insurrection' — and thus theoretically be disqualified from holding office," just as Donald Trump could.
Brown writes, "Dozens of other signatories voted against certifying Biden’s win even after the rioters had stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The goal of their brief isn’t just to keep their party’s standard-bearer on the ballot, but it’s also to absolve themselves of their own sins and to inoculate themselves from calls that they, too, face accountability for supporting Trump’s attempt to steal the election."
The MSNBC Daily writer notes:
*Section 3 states, in part, that if somebody has 'previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States … to support the Constitution of the United States' but then has 'engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,' that person can’t be allowed to 'be a Senator or Representative in Congress.'Section 3 also gives Congress the power to, 'by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.'
*The self-interested lawmakers give up the game with this line from the brief: 'Although not directly relevant to President Trump, the Colorado Supreme Court would give itself the power to judge the qualifications of those who would be elected to the House or Senate.' That would be especially troubling for Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona. The three of them were knee-deep in plotting to overturn the election, and, in a more just world, they would have faced expulsion for violating Section 3. It’s their inclusion as signatories on the amicus brief that makes this filing particularly odious.
*Read Brown's full op-ed here.
---
---
---
'We have to': Jim Jordan says Americans 'demand' a government shutdown - Alternet.org
---
The disaster that is Jim Jordan - Alternet.org
reich robert oct
---
an 12 23 no lnx
Busted: Jim Jordan and James Comer have a new judicial plan
Matt Laslo
andRaw Story
December 25, 2023
WASHINGTON – Republicans in Congress aren’t just doing all they can to impeach the Biden name – and possibly President Joe Biden himself – they’re also going to extraordinary lengths to protect two billionaire GOP megadonors who helped the party remake the Supreme Court in recent years.
For one, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) are trying to stymie Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s investigation into Federalist Society co-chairman Leonard Leo.
Schwalb is looking into allegations that Leo is illegally profiting off non-profits. Jordan and Comer have responded by threatening to subpoena Schwalb.
ALSO READ: A neuroscientist’s guide to surviving Christmas with Trump-loving relatives
Meanwhile on the other side of the U.S. Capitol, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee walked out en masse, boycotting Democrats’ effort to subpoena Leo and Republican jurisprudence sugar daddy Harlan Crow over the hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts he’s given to Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni over the decades, according to a ProPublica investigation.
The GOP offensive to protect two billionaire donors is blatant hypocrisy, according to ethics watchdogs.
“There are many senators who will say anything. I mean, as long as it's their guy, they'll defend anything, and they have no consistency whatsoever and they're completely hypocritical,” Melanie Sloan, a senior adviser for nonpartisan watchdog American Oversight, told Raw Story.
ALSO READ: Florida judge’s son is a neo-Nazi patron: data leak
In today’s tribal and perpetually warring Congress, it seems even pay-to-play politics are now partisan. While Senate Republicans are vowing to use all procedural tools at their disposal to block Leo and Crow from being subpoenaed, most in the party are also backing the Biden impeachment inquiry because they say Hunter Biden was selling access to his father — an accusation for which they’ve provided no evidence to date.
On paper – paper stamped with GOP letterhead, mind you – the impeachment inquiry is focused on buying access.
“It better be, because, quite honestly, Hunter Biden's personal problems aren't the issue. The issue is whether he was selling access to a vice president willing to provide that access, and whether the vice president at the time – the current president – was enriched by it,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) told Raw Story.
As for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in private jet travel, stays at his private retreat and luxurious free vacations aboard his 162-foot yacht that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni admitted to receiving from Harlan Crow?
“That's not enriching yourself, because you went on a boat ride for God's sake. That's not the same as cash in your checking account,” Cramer said of ProPublica’s revelations.
Cramer argues, if the trips weren’t free “maybe he wouldn't have gone on it.”
“The difference is … he’s a friend. Friends are allowed to provide hospitality for you in their home or on their boat. That's very different than a foreign adversary providing cash to a sitting vice president of the United States through his son. That's barely, barely even in the same ballpark, if at all,” Cramer said. “It’s a stretch, to say the least. It's just, it's not the same thing.”
That’s not even mentioning the free private school tuition Thomas’ nephew – who he raised like a son – received from Crow, which ProPublica estimates could have totaled upward of $150,000.
ALSO READ: Busted: These healthcare nonprofits are accepting millions from Big Tobacco
Senate Democrats, some of whom argue Thomas was in a prime position to rule on cases that effect Crow’s fortune, are particularly interested in whether Crow declared the lavish free vacations and travel as business expenses on his federal taxes.
For Leo – co-chairman of the Federalist Society, including the $1.6 billion fortune it now controls – Campaign for Accountability filed an IRS complaint alleging he’s funneling money from seven nonprofit entities he controls to his for-profit businesses, thus illegally profiting off campaign donations. The apparent interference from Jordan and Comer is appalling to watchdogs.
“Then, at the same time, they're screaming about the politicization of justice when they talk about Donald Trump, but they want to tell a sitting U.S. attorney – you know, the state's attorney for D.C. – who he can and can't look at because they don't want him looking at Leonard Leo,” Sloan said. “They just are bowing down at the altar of Leonard Leo and his $1.6 billion.”
House Republicans deny they’re interfering with an ongoing investigation.
“I’m confused. So it’s OK for Democrats to subpoena Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow, but not OK for us to look into AG Schwalb? Isn’t that literally the definition of a double standard — a.k.a Democrats can do something, but we can’t?” Russell M. Dye, communications director and counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, emailed Raw Story.
ALSO READ: ‘Too preposterous to be real’: College hires ‘pink slime’ publisher as journalism prof
Republicans say there’s no reason for an investigation, because the megadonors aren’t accused of trying to change the outcomes of specific cases before the Supreme Court.
“I really think there's like a fundamental difference here between trading favors and not, right? The difference here is the consideration. I've seen no evidence that any of the Supreme Court justices, least of all Clarence Thomas, offered to give anything back. To me, that’s the big difference,” Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) told Raw Story.
“Now look, if Harlan Crow or anybody else wrote $100 million to a Supreme Court Justice, and say, ‘Hey, please do this thing in my benefit’ — well, that raises some serious problems. But is it the standard that a Supreme Court justice can't have a rich friend?” Vance continued. “If they want to set that standard, it’s up to them, but I don't think that that raises nearly the same pay-to-play concerns as Joe Biden’s situation.”
Gifts are different than business appears to be the current GOP ethical standard for such matters.
“We're not talking about gifts. This is business. So with Hunter [Biden], this is, you know, he's on the Burisma board. He's doing these foreign business deals in Ukraine and China and lots of offices, and he is openly out there selling his dad,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) told Raw Story. “At the very least, he's clearly making money off his father. The question is, did the president benefit from that? That's what they need to answer. So that's why we have the inquiry.”
When pressed on the impeachment inquiry into Biden, former Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wasn’t up to date on the specifics, even as he proudly remembers getting the investigative ball rolling for House Republicans.
“You’re talking about the substance of it. I’m not sure I can talk about the substance of it,” Grassley told Raw Story. “Except, the process is necessary to complete what [Sen. Ron] Johnson (R-WI) and I started four years ago, and that is to get all the information that Congress is entitled to in our oversight capacity and that's what it's all about, as far as I know.”
The Supreme Court adopted a new code of ethics since the lavish gifts were first reported, so Democrats’ complaints are outdated, Grassley argues.
ALSO READ: You blew it in New Hampshire, Joe Biden. Pray it doesn’t hurt you — and then some
“Because the judicial branch put out their … new regulation, and if that doesn’t take care of it – and we won't know that for a little while, maybe a year or two – then maybe that'd be a legitimate question,” Grassley said. “But right now it’s not a legitimate question considering the initiative of the Supreme Court.”
After all, 10 Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee walked out of the vote to subpoena Leo and Crow on November 30 – allowing Democrats to pass the measure 11-0 – Senate Republicans argue the vote broke committee rules.
“They’re not legal,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Raw Story. “Anybody who knows a lawbook from a J. Crew catalog knows they can get those subpoenas quashed in one hearing.”
Because of wholesale GOP opposition, there doesn’t seem to be the votes to formalize the subpoenas on the Senate floor where Republicans are threatening to require a 60-vote threshold.
“You’ll never see this come to the floor,” Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Politico. “We’ll attack it legally, we’ll vote against it. It’d be a s—show.”
Even as the party hasn’t decided how it will proceed in the Senate, many Democrats expected this.
“We're going after the icons of the Republican Party, Leonard Leo, of course, and, to some, Justice Thomas. They’re very sensitive to that,” Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) told Raw Story. “Public sentiment is overwhelmingly in our favor, so they have got to be strident in opposition.”
The two different standards for Biden and GOP donors is remarkable to Democrats.
“Republicans want to protect the court that they have packed, and they protect the court by maintaining its status as an unaccountable highest court of the land,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) told Raw Story. “It looks like they're doing everything they can to keep hidden the secret relationships that are going on at the court with powerful interests that bring cases before the court.”
To the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), this made-for-Fox-and-Newsmax drama shows how completely former President Donald Trump has remade the GOP in his own image.
“It is just sad the way that Donald Trump has completed his stranglehold over the Republican Party,” Raskin told Raw Story. “Donald Trump has taught them – from the Charlottesville riot forward – that there should be no enemies on the right. And they have no enemies on the right, and they will take no principled stance against anybody on the right, no matter how fascistic they are.”
From Your Site Articles
'Contemptible': GOP strategist slams 'cowardly' Republicans for allowing speakership chaos ›
'I will not bend to bullies': Iowa GOP rep against Jordan responds to 'credible death threats' ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
'Significant concerns': GOP analyst explains why Jordan’s plan to 'bully' Republican colleagues might fail ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
Frustrated GOP congressman calls out Jim Jordan’s hypocrisy: 'The goalposts continue to move' ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
Here are 9 reasons why Jim Jordan would be an 'absurd and dangerous choice' for House speaker ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):Related Articles Around the Web
Chairman Jim Jordan Subpoenas Big Tech Executives | House ... ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
Jim Jordan ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
House Judiciary Committee Republicans | ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
U.S. Congressman Jim Jordan | ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):
The Chairman | House Judiciary Committee Republicans ›:(style="font-family:Merriweather"):---
an 12 23
the day after the House GOP voted unanimously to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, with some congressional Republicans admitting there is no evidence of impeachable offenses, the lead investigator declared their most damning evidence is a long-ago widely-debunked conspiracy theory.
Republican Oversight Chairman Jim Comer, head of one of the three most-powerful House committees and the top promoter of the push to impeach President Biden, Thursday morning was asked by Fox News Business host Maria Bartiromo to name his “most damning” evidence.
“We’ve talked about the potential of money laundering and bribery,” said Bartiromo, who has been called an “election fraud promoter,” and a “once-respected journalist” who became a “full-blown Donald Trump sympathizer.”
“What can you tell us about the evidence?” she asked.
Comer claimed “over $24 million” has been run through a “series” of shell companies. “And then they laundered the money down to the Biden family members, 10 Biden family members.”
READ MORE: Clarence Thomas vehemently objects to LGBTQ conversion therapy case denial by SCOTUS
He defends his money-laundering claim because banks, he says, filed suspicious activity reports (SARs). According to the Thomson Reuters Institute, in 2022 alone there were 3.6 million SARs filed, and that number “this year is likely to set additional records.”
He adds, “six different banks accused the Bidens of money laundering – that’s a serious crime.” Money laundering is a serious crime but filing an SAR does not mean a bank is accusing someone of money laundering, nor does it mean money laundering is taking place.
The Chairman claims “we know they got tens of billions of dollars from bad people in bad countries. He admits, “We don’t know what exactly they did, but alleges, “We fear Joe Biden’s compromised.”
Comer then continues to make broad, unspecific allegations, using non-definitive words and terms, like, “we fear,” and, “we figure.”
“We figure this is one reason that he’s soft on China,” a claim he’s made before, in part based on the President removing Trump’s ban on TikTok, a ban that has been challenged in court.
He also claims, “we have specific policy decisions that Joe Biden made while he was vice president and president that we fear were made because he was compromised,” without providing any evidence to support the claim.
READ MORE: White supremacist who dined with Trump calls for 'death penalty' for non-Christians: report
Comer again defaults to the long-debunked Burisma conspiracy theory.
“We fear this is one reason that he obviously fired the prosecutor who was investigating Hunter’s corrupt energy company in Ukraine when he was vice president.”
Not one word of that is true, although the owner of Burisma, the energy company, was under investigation and is reportedly now wanted by Ukrainian authorities.
Then-Vice President Biden did not nor could he “fire” Viktor Shokin, the former Ukrainian Prosecutor General, who was removed from his post for not investigating corruption, by the Ukrainian Parliament, after both domestic and international calls for him to be replaced for not doing his job. Those calls came from the European Union (EU), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the United States, where it was Obama administration policy that Shokin had to go.
Comer’s claim is further debunked by numerous reports going back to 2019.
“Burisma Holdings was not under scrutiny at the time Joe Biden called for Shokin’s ouster, according to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, an independent agency set up in 2014 that has worked closely with the FBI,” USA Today reported that year. “Shokin’s office had investigated Burisma, but the probe focused on a period before Hunter Biden joined the company, according to the anti-corruption bureau.”
Also in 2019, Bloomberg published a report with this headline: “Ukraine Prosecutor Says No Evidence of Wrongdoing by Bidens.”
“I do not want Ukraine to again be the subject of U.S. presidential elections,” Shokin’s successor Yuriy Lutsenko, told Bloomberg. “Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian laws — at least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board.”
Watch Comer’s remarks below or at this link. aaron r twt]
---
---
---
AN 1123
David Weiss, who was tapped by Attorney General Merrick Garland as special counsel to oversee the Department of Justice's investigation into Hunter Biden, recently testified under oath that his investigation has not been obstructed in any way by the Biden administration.
The House Judiciary Committee — chaired by Trump acolyte Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — recently brought in Weiss for questioning in relation to the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation, which Republicans argue is being hamstrung by the White House. But the Washington Post reported Wednesday that Weiss' testimony silenced those rumors.
"I am, and have been, the decision-maker on this case," Weiss said. "At no time was I blocked, or otherwise prevented from pursuing charges or taking the steps necessary in the investigation by other United States Attorneys, the Tax Division or anyone else at the Department of Justice."
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), the ranking member on the committee, called Weiss' testimony a "waste of time."
"[Weiss] was very clear that no one told him what to prosecute and what not to prosecute. He made all those decisions himself, and he said that before," Nadler said. "And I mean, [Republicans] tried to get him to say anything, but they just go over and over and over again the same thing."
House Republicans disagreed with that sentiment, insisting that Weiss' testimony wasn't credible and that questions still lingered about political pressure from the White House on the DOJ's investigation into the president's son.
"The important thing is that he has no answers for why he would offer a misdemeanor plea bargain with no jail time to someone who committed felonies and exclude all unknown or yet-to-be-investigated crimes," Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) said. "It’s that lack of explanation that leads us to all the other questions of whether he was influenced by others or in consultation with others."
READ MORE:Republicans' 'untethered' Hunter Biden claims demolished by WaPo fact-checker*
Hunter Biden is set to go to trial in 2024 on charges relating to gun possession and filing false statements after a plea agreement fell apart earlier this year. Weiss was appointed by former President Donald Trump in 2018 to be US Attorney for the US District Court in the District of Delaware. President Biden has kept him in that position.
---
---
==
two of the House of Representatives’ most powerful committee chairs, Republicans Jim Comer and Jim Jordan, are targeting the District of Columbia’s Attorney General’s reported investigation into Leonard Leo, a right-wing judicial activist who heads a myriad of dark money groups and has worked to help pick or confirm every Republican-appointed U.S. Supreme Court Justice who currently sits on the nation’s highest court.
Leonard Leo has strong ties to the ultra-conservative Federalist Society, which then-President Donald Trump used as a recommendation engine for his Supreme Court nominees. Leo served in different roles at the Federalist Society for more than a quarter century.
Calling him a “conservative activist,” The Washington Post in 2019 reported, “Leonard Leo helped conservative nonprofits raise $250 million from mostly undisclosed donors in recent years to promote conservative judges and causes.”
READ MORE: ‘There Are American Hostages’: House GOP Slammed for ‘Exploiting a War to Pass a Tax Cut’
That was before a single donor handed Leonard Leo $1.6 billion to remake the federal judiciary.
“In the largest known political advocacy donation in U.S. history, industrialist Barre Seid funded a new group run by Federalist Society co-chair Leonard Leo, who guided Trump’s Supreme Court picks and helped end federal abortion rights,” ProPublica reported last year. The investigative nonprofit called Leo “one of the prime architects of conservatives’ efforts to reshape the American judicial system, including the Supreme Court.”
In August, Politico reported that “Washington D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb is investigating judicial activist Leonard Leo and his network of nonprofit groups, according to a person with direct knowledge of the probe.” Schwalb’s office has not confirmed the existence of the investigation.
“The scope of the investigation is unclear. But it comes after POLITICO reported in March that one of Leo’s nonprofits — registered as a charity — paid his for-profit company tens of millions of dollars in the two years since he joined the company. A few weeks later, a progressive watchdog group filed a complaint with the D.C. attorney general and the IRS requesting a probe into what services were provided and whether Leo was in violation of laws against using charities for personal enrichment.”
Now, as The Messenger first reported Monday, House Oversight Committee Chair Jim Comer and Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan “are probing the D.C. attorney general’s investigation of the conservative legal mastermind behind the Supreme Court’s hard right turn.”
The two chairs in a Monday press release call the investigation into Leonard Leo “politically motivated.”
In their letter the pair of Republicans claim they are “concerned about potential infringement on free association and donor privacy.”
They allege Attorney General Schwalb does not have jurisdiction to investigate “because Mr. Leo and the organizations with which he is affiliated are, according to publicly available information, based outside of Washington, D.C.”
Last year, The New York Times reported the “network of increasingly influential conservative groups that Leonard A. Leo has helped to create and shape is not easily defined or quantified.”
“It is funded mostly by so-called dark money that is difficult to trace. The roster of nonprofit groups has evolved, with some ceasing operations and others being added. Mr. Leo has formal leadership roles in some groups, while he is an informal adviser to others. Most of the nonprofit groups have paid him or his for-profit firms, CRC Advisors and BH Group.”
Earlier this month ProPublica reported Leo “drew up the lists of potential justices that Donald Trump released during the 2016 campaign. He advised Trump on the nominations of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Before that, he’d helped pick or confirm the court’s three other conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.”
---
aha reverse of move goalpost on trump [don't impeach, let cts do it --> no ct let voters decide wash rereat --> widen the net/what counts // escalator
an 8 23 no lnx
Republicans’ 'untethered' Hunter Biden claims demolished by WaPo fact-checker
Alex HendersonAugust 17, 2023
A Washington Post fact check on Thursday took House Republicans to task as right-wing lawmakers "over hype" the House Oversight Committee's investigation into President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Kentucky) has been leading the Hunter Biden probe in the U.S. House of Representatives. The Post's Glenn Kessler gives Comer and his GOP colleagues an aggressive fact-check in his August 17 column.
"The House Oversight Committee, led by Comer, has been investigating business dealings of President Biden's son, Hunter, and other family members — and by extension, unverified allegations that the president was involved in his son's business as well," Comer explains. "The Committee has obtained thousands of bank records, and the Republican staff has issued three memorandums summarizing some of the findings. The memos are written in a partisan manner — ignoring or playing down contrary information — but an interesting pattern has emerged."
Kessler continues, "The memos themselves have careful language that is often hedged. Then, Comer and other GOP lawmakers, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), go on Twitter or speak to conservative media using hyperbolic language that goes well beyond what the memos say. Over time, the reporting on the memos in conservative media becomes untethered from the documentation in the reports."
House Republicans, Kessler emphasizes, typically exaggerate the amount of $20 million in payments that went to the Biden family because of Hunter Biden's business activities.
"As for the $20 million in payments," Kessler explains, "Comer and other Republicans invoke this figure often. A close reading of the memos, however, finds that only about $7 million can be directly attributed to Biden family members, mostly Hunter, while the rest went to 'associates,' according to the memos. Yet Comer and other lawmakers misleadingly suggest all of the money went to the Biden family or, as some label it, 'the Biden crime family.' No evidence has emerged that any of these funds can be traced to Joe Biden himself."
Kessler points out that Comer "often suggests that the Biden family used…. so-called shell companies to launder money." But that claim, according to Kessler, is "undercut by the list of 21 companies that appear in" a staff memo.
READ MORE: 'It's like a soap opera': These Republicans are weary of their colleagues' Hunter Biden obsession
The term "shell company," Kessler points out, has a dark connotation. But the companies Hunter Biden headed, he adds, "had legitimate business interests."
"Others had clearly identified business investments," according to Kessler. "Digging through the records, we find only three whose business purpose remains vague. One, Rosemont Seneca Global Risk Services, LLC, may not even be related to Hunter Biden, according to an e-mail found in Hunter Biden's laptop. The memos do not list any payments that flowed through these three companies."
READ MORE: Vivek Ramaswamy implies Hunter Biden is reason behind US aid to Ukraine: report
Glenn Kessler's full column is available at this link (subscription required).
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Republicans claim 'coverup' after Merrick Garland appoints special counsel for Hunter Biden probe ›
Why did Republicans obsessed with Hunter Biden leave Jared and Ivanka alone? ›
Hunter Biden plea deal falls apart when Trump-appointed judge refuses to be a 'rubber stamp' ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Hunter Biden pleads not guilty after plea deal is derailed ›
Hunter Biden: The struggles and scandals of the US president's son ... ›
Hunter Biden: US attorney leading Hunter Biden criminal probe is ... ›
---
an no lnx
'It's like a soap opera': These Republicans are weary of their colleagues’ Hunter Biden obsession
Alex HendersonJuly 27, 2023
President Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden has been an ongoing obsession of former President Donald Trump and conspiracy theorists in the right-wing media. Trump has railed against what he calls the "Biden crime family" relentlessly, and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-California) has said that an "impeachment inquiry" is a possibility.
But not all Republicans believe that obsessing over Hunter Biden and looking for ways to impeach the president are advantageous for their party.
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-North Carolina), who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), is acknowledging that Hunter Biden may not be a high priority for voters.
READ MORE: Trump dismisses Hunter Biden plea deal as a 'traffic tricket'
In an article published by Politico on July 27, reporters Natalie Allison and Ally Mutnick cite Hudson as an example of a Republican who is "questioning the effectiveness of going after the president's son."
Hudson told Politico, "I think when we get home, the focus is the economy, the border, crime. These are the issues that matter, and these are the issues we're talking about."
Hudson added that Hunter Biden is a "focus in D.C." but not in other parts of the U.S.
Allison and Mutnick note that the "debate about how hard to go after (President) Biden over his son's legal problems has been stirring inside the party."
READ MORE: 'Truly off the wall': Journalists debunk Hunter Biden conspiracy theories
GOP strategist Mike Madrid believes that obsessing over Hunter Biden "just smells like Benghazi," and he doesn't think it is a smart strategy for Republicans.
Madrid told Politico, "Republicans trying desperately to make a story. It's always, 'We've got a witness coming, we've got more coming.' It's always next week. It's like a soap opera: 'Tune in next week.'"
READ MORE: Hunter Biden's plea deal launches Nancy Mace on conspiracy theory rant
Read Politico's full report at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Hunter Biden could crush Fox News' for 'actual malice': ex-GOP congressman ›
'What’s plan B'? Maria Bartiromo snags GOP congressman over lack of Hunter Biden evidence ›
How MAGA Republicans’ Hunter Biden obsession underscores a 'deep psychological need': ex-Reagan speechwriter ›
'He didn’t know anything about that': Andy Biggs admits star witness unaware of Biden 'bribe' - Alternet.org ›
Republicans claim 'coverup' after Merrick Garland appoints special counsel for Hunter Biden probe ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Hunter Biden plea deal on hold ›
Hunter Biden: The struggles and scandals of the US president's son ... ›
Hunter Biden pleads not guilty after plea deal is derailed ›
---
2x?
https://www.alternet.org/house-republican-admits-bank-records/
---
plea deal chucked (by judge?) b/c no guar not go after him in future
-->
https://www.alternet.org/republicans-coverup-garland-hunter-biden/
---
---
an 8 23
ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan has revealed what he calls "smoking gun" evidence that the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has gathered against Joe Biden, Newsweek reported Tuesday.
The congressman and other Republican filed a legal briefing in an ongoing case, the State of Missouri v. Biden, which accuses the president's administration of government overreach by attempting to suppress information online.
According to Jordan and other committee members, the Biden administration called on Facebook to take down posts that suggest the COVID-19 pandemic originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology – a theory that has gained traction in recent months, buoyed by Biden's own Department of Energy concluding in February that the virus likely originated from a lab leak.
In another email, a Facebook employee allegedly told CEO Mark Zuckerberg and then-COO Sheryl Sandberg that the company was "facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the White House and the press, to remove more COVID-19 vaccine discouraging content."
As Newsweek points out, the Biden administration has previously defended its coordination with social media platforms to take down or throttle content it defined as misinformation as the pandemic unfolded.
"We've increased disinformation research and tracking within the surgeon general's office," then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said at a press conference in July of 2021. "We're flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation. We're working with doctors and medical professionals to connect medical experts who are popular with our audiences with accurate information and boost trusted content – so we are helping get trusted content out there."
---
https://www.alternet.org/alternet-exclusives/gop-scientific-method-evidence-conspiracy/
an 7 23 no lnx
Home | For the GOP, the scientific method is evidence of conspiracy
Lindsay Beyerstein July 19, 2023
A scientific paper now ranks with the grassy knoll in the minds of conspiracy theorists. “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” (2020) has become an object of obsession complete with its own rich folklore. Last week, House Republicans devoted a three-hour hearing to haranguing the scientists who wrote it.
:{:{}:
}:
Two of the paper’s authors, Dr. Kristian Andersen and Dr. Robert F. Garry, were hauled before the committee to answer for their defiance from GOP orthodoxy.
The GOP party line is that Dr. Anthony Fauci somehow forced a group of university professors to publish a peer-reviewed paper arguing that Covid-19 wasn’t a bioweapon or a laboratory construct. Fauci supposedly wanted to discredit the lab leak because he helped the Wuhan Institute of Virology create the virus. No, really. They get indignant when you call it a conspiracy theory, but that’s the B-movie plot they’re pushing.
READ MORE: Did Trump let Americans die purely for political purposes?
The proximal origin of Proximal Origin was not Fauci’s NIAID lair, but a teleconference organized by Dr. Jeremy Farrar, then the head of a UK research charity. Farrar set the agenda, invited the guests, and even provided tech support. The witnesses testified that Fauci hopped on the call but said little of substance.
:{:{}:
}:
Andersen also testified that, far from pressuring him to debunk the lab leak, Fauci had encouraged him to publish any evidence that he might find of a leak and offered to help him share any such evidence with the proper authorities. These are not the actions of someone orchestrating a massive coverup.
:{:{}:
}:
In lab leak lore, the researchers’ open-mindedness is evidence of coercion. The subpoenaed emails show that, far from being reflexive leak deniers, the authors of this paper thought they saw features that couldn’t have evolved naturally. If they couldn’t explain how the virus might have arisen in nature, that raised red flags that it might have been engineered. But once they delved into the quirks of SCV2 and explored the weird and wonderful features of wild coronaviruses, their doubts were allayed.
If Fauci was orchestrating a coverup, why would he pick scientists who said they took the lab leak seriously?
READ MORE: Ron DeSantis’ surgeon general 'personally altered' key data on COVID-19 vaccines’ safety: report
Another plank in the GOP conspiracy theory is that Fauci bribed Andersento argue against the lab leak with a federal research grant.In fact, that grant was awarded before the pandemic started. As is standard for such grants, the award was based on high scores by independent reviewers, not the whims of Tony Fauci.
The majority falsely claimed in its report that the authors sent the paper to Fauci for editing and approval before it was published. In fact, Fauci received a copy of the manuscript that had already been accepted by the journal and didn’t offer any comments.
Most disturbing of all, Republicans tried to spin the scientific method itself as evidence of a conspiracy. They seized on a snippet of an Andersen email stating that he and his colleagues were trying to disprove the lab leak theory. That’s not a conspiracy, that’s science. Experimenters start with a testable hypothesis like, “Sars-CoV-2 leaked from a lab” and then they do their best to knock it down. If they can’t defeat it, the hypothesis survives to be tested again another day. As Andersen explained, they couldn’t definitively disprove a lab leak, but the evidence convinced them it was unlikely.
:{:{}:
}:
“My early hypothesis was that of a ‘lab theory’ and when I stated that we were “trying to disprove any type of lab theory,” I was specifically referring to the concept of falsification,” Andersen said in his written remarks.
:{:{}:
}:
“This is a text-book example of the scientific method in use.”
READ MORE: 'Ignorance about the biological function': Virologist dispels testimony from GOP’s lab link 'expert'
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Noam Chomsky sounds the alarm on the rise of anti-science rhetoric in America ›
'Bigotry and megalomania': Scientific American Editorial board warns of DeSantis’ 'antiscience agenda' ›
COVID will rage on longer because Republicans and white evangelicals refuse to get vaccinated: analysis ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Earth science is not hard science, congressional Republicans declare ›
The Reason Some Republicans Mistrust Science: Their Leaders Tell ... ›
The GOP has a long history of ignoring science. Trump turned it into
---
Column: House Republicans give a crash course in how to concoct a conspiracy theory about COVID’s origin
covid origins
Virologists Robert Garry, left, and Kristian Andersen listen patiently at a Congressional hearing Tuesday as a gang of politicians tell them their scientific method was flawed. (House Oversight Committee)
BY MICHAEL HILTZIK
BUSINESS COLUMNIST
JULY 11, 2023
Opening Tuesday’s House subcommittee hearing on the origin of the COVID virus, the panel’schairman, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), promised an impartial inquiry.
“This is not an attack on science,” he said. “And it’s not an attack on an individual.”
He and his GOP colleagues proceeded over nearly three hours to accuse Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — one of the most respected such scientists in the world — of having masterminded the creation of the virus, with the connivance of Dr. Francis Collins, then the director of the National Institutes of Health.
Misinformation, disinformation and conspiracy theories...have resulted in significant harassment and threats....Online there are so-called kill lists and I have found myself on those lists.
— Virological expert Kristian G. Andersen
The Republicans’ main “evidence,” such as it is, involves a seminal paper in the scientific study of the virus.
Published as a letter in the journal Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020, under the title “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” the paper weighed the two major theories of COVID’s origin: that it reached the human population from infected wildlife (known as zoonosis) or that it leaked from a government lab in Wuhan, China, the teeming metropolis where the first COVID outbreak occurred in late 2019.
Get the latest from Michael Hiltzik
Commentary on economics and more from a Pulitzer Prize winner.
The paper’s authors noted that all the features of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID, are observable in nature, coinciding with the zoonosis hypothesis. They added, “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”
For years, Republicans have asserted without a scintilla of evidence that Fauci and Collins manipulated the scientific consensus away from the lab-leak hypothesis.
Why have they seized on this theory? Its provenance may offer a clue: It flowered during the Trump administration among political appointees in the State Department, who saw it as a cudgel with which to beat the Chinese government, which they viewed as an economic threat to the U.S. It was also useful to undermine the authority of Fauci, whose skepticism about Trump’s COVID policies was manifest.
Security personnel stand guard outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan as members of the World Health Organization (WHO) team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus make a visit to the institute in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on February 3, 2021. (Photo by Hector RETAMAL / AFP) (Photo by HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via
Column: U.S. government debunks COVID lab-leak conspiracy theory, enraging conspiracy theorists
June 26, 2023
Soon enough, it became Republican orthodoxy.
Lab leak proponents in government and Congress have smeared and vilified Fauci and Collins, among other scientists, in the service of purely partisan claims, ignoring the utter absence of any scientific evidence for a lab leak and the mounting evidence that it first reached humans through interactions with susceptible animals being sold illegally at a wildlife market in Wuhan.
The foils for this phase of the GOP effort to construct an evidence-free narrative of COVID’s origin were two of the five authors of the “Proximal Origin” paper, Robert F. Garry of Tulane and Kristian G. Andersen of Scripps Research in La Jolla.
Garry and Andersen sat patiently at the witness table in the committee room as the Republican members used cherry-picked quotes from their emails, misrepresented their research findings and ignored their painstaking explanations of how science is done in the real world. They listened stoically to committee members — some of whom have medical degrees but none any evident expertise in scientific research — harangue them about supposed flaws in their scientific methods.
“We do know something for certain,” Westrup said: “that the drafting, coordination and publication of ‘Proximal Origin’ and downplaying the lab leak was antithetical to science.”
One low note among many others during the hearing came fromRep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), who charged that “Dr. Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins realized that they had been implicated in the creation of production or the creation of this virus and they were doing everything they could including both of you to come on board as tools or vehicles to undermine that theory.”
Truth to tell, however, the committee majority’s purpose was no secret from the start. The hearing was titled, after all, “Investigating the Proximal Origin of a Cover Up.”
It may be useful to examine the path the subcommittee’s GOP majority traveled to come to its assertions that the Proximal Origin paper was a sham.
[Dr. Scott Atlas speaks as President Donald Trump looks on
BUSINESS
Column: These ‘experts’ sold the U.S. on a disastrous COVID plan, and never paid a professional price
May 23, 2023]
As laid out in written testimony submitted to the subcommittee by Garry and Andersen, it started in January 2020, when almost nothing was known about the virus and not much about its genomic family.
The first examinations of its structure revealed several features unfamiliar to virologists. At first glance, they looked like nothing occurring in nature. Many thought this pointed to some sort of laboratory engineering.
When Andersen brought this concern to Fauci during a call on Jan. 31, Fauci urged him to write a scientific paper about the issue, and suggested that if confirmed, the matter should be referred to the FBI and the British intelligence service MI5.
Jeremy Farrar, an infectious disease expert who is currently the chief scientist of the World Health Organization, convened a conference call on Feb. 1 among nine scientists, including Andersen and Garry. Fauci and Collins joined the call, but by all accounts merely listened in without contributing any opinions.
New data came to the scientific community in a torrent over the next few days and weeks. The unfamiliar features turned out to be more common in nature than many virologists had known, and the process by which they might become incorporated in SARS-CoV-2 progressively better understood.
By the end of February, when the authors of the Proximal Origin paper submitted an initial draft to Nature Medicine, they still did not have enough data to rule out either major theory but had become more certain that a laboratory role was plausible.
The subcommittee Republicans profess to be thunderstruck that a theory about COVID’s origin could be posed and discarded in the space of a few days, but Andersen and Garry tried to explain that they’re wrong.
The scientists started with no data, and incorporated new information into their viewpoints as it arrived. In any event, Andersen testified, the period between the conference and the publication of the paper wasn’t three days, as the Republicans kept insisting, but 45 days. Neither Fauci nor Collins played any role in guiding the authors’ conclusions, the witnesses said.
The published paper, moreover, made clear that the state of SARS-CoV-2 research was in its infancy. “More scientific data could swing the balance of evidence to favor one hypothesis over another,” the authors wrote.
[Column: How Trump’s anti-science meddling erased 3 years of crucial COVID research
May 12, 2023]
But its general conclusion that a lab leak is implausible and the virus probably emerged by natural spillover from animals “has only been further supported by additional evidence and studies,” Andersen told the subcommittee. He and Garry said that if evidence emerged supporting a lab leak, they would examine it objectively and be guided by their findings. As of this moment, there is none.
Under prompting by subcommittee Democrats, the witnesses pointed to the long-term consequences of the Republican efforts to foment mistrust of science by mainstreaming conspiracies.
“Misinformation, disinformation and conspiracy theories around the paper have resulted in significant harassment and threats,” Andersen said. “Including everything from typical targets on social media to emails, to telephone calls to my office ... to death threats.... Online there are so-called kill lists and I have found myself on those lists together with my co-authors.”
The thrust of the subcommittee’s claims, he said, “is that the virus was created and that American scientists played a role in that and have been covering that up.... All of which, as the record clearly shows, is false.... The focus has been that there’s a need to blame someone.”
What has been going on here has been nothing less than a partisan witch hunt. Westrup made clear that the Republican narrative was predetermined: “We’re examining any conflicts of interest, biases or suppression of scientific discourse regarding the origins of COVID-19,” he said. The record shows, however, that what occurred was the scientific method in action.
If the subcommittee members are truly devoted to protect Americans from a future pandemic, they couldn’t find a worse way to reach that goal. “If I was a future scientist, looking at the attacks directed at us, for example, maybe I wouldn’t go into infectious disease research.... It’s incredibly damaging,” Anderson said.
LATEST FROM MICHAEL HILTZIK
Column: The false centrism of political group No Labels
Column: By the standards of their peers, Hollywood CEOs aren’t all that overpaid. That’s the problem
Column: RFK Jr. gets around to blaming the Jews
---
ggl 7 23
Hearing Wrap Up: Suppression of the Lab Leak Hypothesis ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › Press Releases
Jul 12, 2023 — WASHINGTON — The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing titled “Investigating the Proximal Origin of a Cover Up” to ...
Garry Testimony
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › uploads › 2023/07
Jul 11, 2023 — United States House of Representatives. Oversight and Accountability Committee. Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
Wenstrup to Hold Hearing with “Proximal Origins” Authors
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › Press Releases
Jun 27, 2023 — WASHINGTON — Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) will hold a hearing titled “Investigating the ...
Comer & Jordan Demand Docs & Testimony on COVID ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › Press Releases
Dec 14, 2022 — and House Committee on the Judiciary Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) are pressing senior Biden Administration officials, the president of ...
February 3, 2022 Dr. Robert Garry Professor, School of ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › Letter-to-Dr-Garry
Feb 3, 2022 — Documents in the custody of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reveal how a group of scientists—including you—initially believed COVID-19.
COVID Origins - United States House Committee on ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › landing › covid-origins
Mounting evidence points to the virus originating from a leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S. National Institutes of Health ...
Missing: garry | Show results with: garry
Wenstrup: Knowing the Origin of COVID-19 is Fundamental ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › Press Releases
Mar 8, 2023 — WASHINGTON—Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) opened today's hearing on “Investigating the ...
Interview of: Robert F. Garry
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › uploads › 2023/07
Jul 11, 2023 — COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY,. SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC,. U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,. WASHINGTON, D.C..
Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic ...
House.gov
https://oversight.house.gov › uploads › 2023/03
Mar 5, 2023 — Drs. Fauci and Collins were first warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan,. China and, further, may have been intentionally ...
Scientists at House hearing refute claims they were bribed ...
CNN.com
https://www.cnn.com › 2023/07/11 › health › covid-orig...
Jul 11, 2023 — Democrats on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic said they aimed to use a hearing Tuesday to set the record straight ...
Hearing on the Origins of COVID-19
C-SPAN
https://www.c-span.org › video › hearing-origins-covid-19
Jul 12, 2023 — Scientists Kristian Andersen and Robert Garry testified on the origins of COVID-19 before the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the ...
House Hearing on the Origins of COVID-19 | March 8, 2023
C-SPAN
https://www.c-span.org › video › house-hearing-origins-...
Mar 13, 2023 — Former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield joined public health and science professionals and advocates to testify on the origins of COVID-19 ...
GOP probes covid origin paper as authors protest 'absurd' ...
Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com › health › 2023/07/11
Jul 11, 2023 — The House panel investigating the government's response to the coronavirus pandemic heard testimony Tuesday from influential virologists who ...
Now in charge, House Republicans launch flurry of ...
Science
https://www.science.org › content › article › now-charge...
Jan 13, 2023 — The new Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives is preparing to shine a bright light on science—and scientists.
Republicans Release Text of Redacted Fauci Emails on ...
The Intercept
https://theintercept.com › 2022/01/12 › covid-origins-...
Jan 12, 2022 — A scientist told The Intercept he was advised not to “mention a lab origin as that will just add fuel to the conspiracists” after a call ...
Congress takes up COVID origins: A primer on the debate ...
The Christian Science Monitor
https://www.csmonitor.com › USA › Politics › Congress-...
Jan 31, 2023 — Republicans say they're trying to get answers on how the pandemic started, but others worry a partisan probe will muddy the waters.
COVID-19 ORIGIN ACT OF 2023; Congressional Record ...
Congress.gov
https://www.congress.gov › house-section › article
Mar 10, 2023 — For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF. [Pages H1255-H1260] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government ...
Hiltzik: The COVID lab leak conspiracy game
Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com › business › story › column-ho...
Jul 11, 2023 — House Republicans used an oversight hearing to accuse former NIH officials Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins of complicity in the COVID ...
Revisiting Gain of Function Research: What the Pandemic ...
Senate.gov
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov › etso › hearings › revisi...
Revisiting Gain of Function Research: What the Pandemic Taught Us and Where Do We Go From Here. Date: August 3, 2022. Time: 2:30pm.
House Oversight holds hearing on origins of COVID-19
PBS
https://www.pbs.org › newshour › politics › watch-liv...
Mar 8, 2023 — The House Oversight Committee held a hearing on Wednesday on the origins of COVID-19 following a new report from the Energy Department that ...
Missing: garry | Show results with: garry
Uncovering COVID-19's Origin Just One of Many Pandemic ...
The Heritage Foundation
https://www.heritage.org › public-health › commentary
Nov 9, 2022 — The origin of COVID-19—whether natural or the product of a lab—is a crucial yet unresolved issue. Minority staff of a key Senate committee, ...
Lab-Leak Theory Resurfaces as House Republicans ...
WTTW
https://news.wttw.com › 2023/03/09 › lab-leak-theory...
Mar 9, 2023 — The U.S. Department of Energy and the FBI both assess that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China. Yet the Energy Department ...
Timeline: The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
U.S. Right to Know
https://usrtk.org › covid-19-origins › timeline-the-pro...
Apr 11, 2023 — NIAID had funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology — a fact Fauci had been alerted to by late January. Minutes after being alerted by one of the ...
Amid Partisan Politicking, Revelations on a Covid Origins ...
The Nation
https://www.thenation.com › Article
Jul 12, 2023 — On Tuesday, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held an oversight hearing on “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” a ...
A Covid Origin Conspiracy?
City Journal
https://www.city-journal.org › article › a-covid-origin-...
Jan 23, 2022 — From almost the moment the Covid-19 pandemic broke out in the city of Wuhan, the medical-research establishment in Washington and London ...
Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic
https://twitter.com › covidselect
Fauci was aware of risky gain-of-function research occurring in Wuhan, China prior to the emergence of COVID-19. Why didn't he tell the American people? @ ...
Top oversight Republicans call on 7 scientists to testify ...
Fox News
https://www.foxnews.com › politics › top-oversight-re...
Feb 3, 2022 — EXCLUSIVE: Three senior House Republicans investigating the origins of the coronavirus called on seven scientists to provide voluntary ...
Rand Paul and the GOP effort to blame Fauci for the ...
National Institutes of Health (.gov)
https://www.nih.gov › foia › simonson-56433
May 7, 2021 — It has been known for a long time that. U.S. health agencies funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and it's valid to ask whether that funding.
House Republicans Launch Subcommittee to Investigate ...
National Review
https://www.nationalreview.com › news › house-repub...
Jan 10, 2023 — House Republicans passed a rules package that included the formation of a Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to investigate the ...
Republicans revive discredited Wuhan Lab Leak theory ...
World Socialist Web Site
https://www.wsws.org › articles › 2023/02/17 › sjcr-f17
Feb 16, 2023 — Republicans have demanded Former Biden chief medical advisor Dr Anthony Fauci testify on the Wuhan lab leak theory.
U.S. Government Pulls Funding For Research Project On ...
NPR
https://www.npr.org › goatsandsoda › 2020/04/29 › why...
Apr 29, 2020 — The project, run by the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, aimed to identify places to monitor, come up with strategies to prevent spillover of ...
EcoHealth Alliance Statement Correcting Inaccuracies in ...
EcoHealth Alliance
https://www.ecohealthalliance.org › 2023 › March
Mar 13, 2023 — March 13 2023 – Professor Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia University) submitted written testimony to the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus ...
A call for an independent inquiry into the origin of ...
PNAS
https://www.pnas.org › doi › pnas.2202769119
by NL Harrison · 2022 · Cited by 27 — Since the identification of theSARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan, China, in January 2020 (1), the origin of the virus has been a topic of intense scientific debate and ...
NIH acknowledges US funded gain-of-function at Wuhan ...
WVLT
https://www.wvlt.tv › 2021/10/21 › nih-acknowledges-us...
Oct 21, 2021 — Rand Paul. The National Institutes of Health is now admitting to funding gain-of-function research at a lab in Wuhan, China despite repeated ...
House panel investigating COVID-19's origins holds first ...
Gem 104
https://www.gem104.com › 2023/03/08 › house-panel...
Mar 8, 2023 — Tetra Images - Henryk Sadura/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- On the heels of a federal agency's new assessment that COVID-19 "mostly likely" ...
A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin ...
American Society for Microbiology
https://journals.asm.org › mBio › Vol. 14, No. 2
Mar 28, 2023 — When humans experience a new, devastating viral infection such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), ...
COVID-19 lab leak theory
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › COVID-19_lab_leak...
The COVID-19 lab leak theory, or lab leak hypothesis, is the idea that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, is the result of a ...
Fauci shut down lab leak theory despite scientists lending it ...
Denver Gazette
https://denvergazette.com › news › fauci-shut-down-lab-l...
Jan 11, 2022 — Scientists consulting with the U.S. government early in the pandemic believed COVID-19 originating from a lab in Wuhan, China, was possible ...
How Top Experts Misled World On Covid-origin, Why Are ...
Outlook India
https://www.outlookindia.com › International
Apr 4, 2023 — The experts included the then-National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Dr Anthony Fauci, Holmes, Wellcome Trust ...
Republicans Push COVID Lab-Leak Theory, Imply Cover ...
Medpage Today
https://www.medpagetoday.com › ... › COVID-19
Mar 9, 2023 — While there is "no smoking gun" to prove a laboratory leak hypothesis, "the growing body of circumstantial evidence suggests a gun that is at ...
TWiV 774: Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, and the ...
MicrobeTV
https://www.microbe.tv › twiv › twiv-774
Jul 1, 2021 — Kristian Andersen and Robert Garry join TWiV to discuss recovery of deleted deep sequencing data from early in the Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 epidemic ...
Lab Leak
Open Source with Christopher Lydon
https://radioopensource.org › lab-leak
May 27, 2021 — There's a swerve in the road, signs that say “Sharp Curves Ahead,” in the origin story of the COVID pandemic. Where did that virus come from?
House panel investigating COVID-19's origins holds first hearing
go.com
https://abcnews.go.com › Politics › story
Mar 8, 2023 — The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, chaired by Ohio Republican Brad Wenstrup, met to tackle a question that's plagued ...
Missing: garry | Show results with: garry
Rep. Jim Jordan, Sen. Roger Marshall expose Fauci's web ...
Minot Daily News
https://www.minotdailynews.com › opinion › 2022/02
Feb 10, 2022 — More than two years into the pandemic, it's becoming increasingly clear that Americans don't trust Dr. Anthony Fauci, the top White House ...
Key questions for new House subcommittee on ...
South Gibson Star-Times
https://www.sgstartimes.com › articles › opinion › key...
Mar 14, 2023 — It's no longer a “conspiracy theory.” There's growing evidence that COVID-19 probably originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, and not from a ...
Congress launches probe into Covid-19 origins
Homeland Preparedness News
https://homelandprepnews.com › featured › 71249-co...
A congressional panel began the formal process of investigating the origins of Covid-19 Wednesday amid recriminations over allegations of researchers being ...
Uncovering COVID-19's Origin Just One of Many Pandemic ...
The Daily Signal
https://www.dailysignal.com › 2022/11/08
Nov 8, 2022 — The Senate report details the role of the Wuhan Institute of Virology as a center of China's intense, bat-based coronavirus research, the ...
CD258: Gain of Function Research
Congressional Dish |
https://congressionaldish.com › cd258-gain-of-functio...
Sep 18, 2022 — On August 3rd, Senate Republicans held a hearing examining gain of function research: its possible role in creating the COVID-19 pandemic; ...
Top virologists who changed tune on COVID-19 lab leak ...
Washington Examiner
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com › healthcare › c...
Mar 2, 2023 — Leading virologists who initially raised concerns about the possibility of COVID-19 leaking from a lab in Wuhan, China, before later ...
Email Shows Fauci Privately Acknowledged Gain-Of- ...
The Daily Caller
https://dailycaller.com › fauci-gain-of-function-wuhan
Jul 14, 2023 — A new document released by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus reveals that Anthony Fauci knew that gain-of-function research ...
Ask PolitiFact: What's going on with EcoHealth Alliance, the ...
PolitiFact
https://www.politifact.com › article › oct › ask-politifa...
Oct 28, 2021 — Lawrence Tabak has been cited as proof that the National Institutes of Health funded “gain of function” research in Wuhan, China, despite ...
Is Biden silencing the world's premier spy agency over ...
93.3 KWTO
https://933kwto.com › is-biden-silencing-the-worlds-p...
Mar 9, 2023 — This week, the House Oversight Committee hosted a hearing on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, with multiple expert witnesses pointing ...
Scientist who denounced Covid lab leak theory said ...
Daily Mail
https://www.dailymail.co.uk › health › article-12289007
Jul 13, 2023 — Dr Kristian Andersen, a Danish evolutionary biologist, co-authored a now-notorious research paper published on March 17, 2020, ...
ProPublica Takes Another Look at Wuhan
Substack
https://fallows.substack.com › propublica-takes-another-l...
Jul 12, 2023 — It was from the Republican staff of the House Foreign Affairs committee and it argued that Covid had begun with a “lab leak” in China.
Cruz: If IRS whistleblowers are telling the truth, AG Garland ...
Santa Barbara News-Press
https://newspress.com › Local
Jul 15, 2023 — “[Attorney General] Merrick Garland may have lied under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee and obstructed justice in the Hunter Biden ...
House Oversight subcommittee to investigate COVID-19 ...
USA Today
https://www.usatoday.com › politics › 2023/02/13 › h...
Feb 13, 2023 — A House Oversight select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic is launching its investigation into COVID-19 origins and funds sent to a ...
Missing: garry | Show results with: garry
No Evidence Scientists Received Grant for Changing ...
FactCheck.org
https://www.factcheck.org › 2023/03 › scicheck-no-ev...
Claim: Dr. Anthony Fauci pressured virologists to change their minds on the origin of COVID-19 in exchange for a $9 million grant.
Claimed by: Rep. Jim Jordan
Fact check by FactCheck.org: No Evidence
Feedback
Suppression of COVID Lab Leak Hypothesis Was Unscientific
thepulse.one
https://www.thepulse.one › suppression-of-covid-lab-lea...
7 days ago — Was it politics or science that covered-up and censored the discussion of COVID lab origins? A new hearing sheds light.
A Crypto Bill is Possible, Says Key Republican After Ripple ...
BNN Bloomberg
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca › a-crypto-bill-is-possib...
6 days ago — A federal judge ruled last week that sales of Ripple Labs Inc.'s XRP token were securities — and under the SEC's remit — when made directly to ...
N.I.H. Leader Rebuts Covid Lab Leak Theory at House ...
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › U.S. › Politics
Feb 8, 2023 — Now in the majority, House Republicans are eager to scrutinize the Biden administration's Covid policies and the origins of the virus, ...
Missing: garry | Show results with: garry
---
an 7 23
Rep. Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) called out Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for a history of threatening witnesses at a hearing on government censorship Thursday.
At a meeting of the House Judiciary Committee, Plaskett interrupted witnessRobert F. Kennedy Jr. to note that he was being given more time to speak than expected.
"Is it going to be 10 minutes for every witness?" she asked.
"We'll give you five minutes, but we're pretty lax with this," Jordan stated.
"I've seen you gavel down on quite a number of witnesses," Plaskett noted. "Let's just watch the time for all the witnesses."
"And if you want to cut him off and censor him some more, you're welcome to do it," Jordan jabbed.
"Oh, that's not my job. That's your job," she replied. "Why don't you threaten a witness so that they can not want to be a witness?"
Most recently, Jordan threatened FBI Director Christopher Wray with contempt.
---
no lnx an 7 23
'The chutzpah, the audacity': House Democrat hammers Republicans for badgering FBI Director Wray
Brandon GageJuly 13, 2023
United States Representative Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee) on Thursday tore into House Republicans on the Judiciary Committee over their treatment of Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Christopher Wray during his testimony on Wednesday.
Right-wing lawmakers who seek to defund the FBI as retribution for executing a search warrant at former President Donald Trump's Palm Beach, Florida Mar-a-Lago estate last August were hurling "continual questions, attacking his patriotism, his judgment," Cohen said.
"It was really amazing, the hypocrisy that was shown. The issue was weaponization of the FBI, and yet every member of this panel who was here onJanuary 6th, 2021, knows that the government was weaponized on that day," Cohen stated. "As I said, nuclearized, to take over the government, to overthrow the government, in contradiction of the oath of office that each of us had taken. And that we've learned that certain members of this Committee went and met with Donald Trump, and that they were participating in the overthrow of our government, the nuclearization slash weaponization of our government, and yet they had the chutzpah, the audacity, the lack of integrity, to question Wray's judgment. And went on and on. And I was sorry. I came in here today and I'm sorry..."
READ MORE: FBI director warns of 'violent gangs,' 'child predators' and 'terrorist attacks' if agency is defunded
Cohen was interrupted by Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government member and Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Chair Darrell Issa (R-California), who asked, "Is the gentleman accusing us of a lack of integrity?"
Cohen fired right back.
"Mr. Chairman, if you would ask whoever it is to shut up," he snapped.
"I'm sure the chairman will rule when it comes back," Issa replied.
READ MORE: Democrat grills FBI director to prove 'Trump surrounded himself with criminals'
Cohen was unfinished.
"I came in today and I heard some questions about your relationship with the Bar Association," Cohen continued. "Hey, you don't talk about rope and a house where a man's been hung. You don't ask about membership in the Bar Association on a Judiciary Committee where there are members who never passed the bar and aren't members of the bar. And they are members of this Committee in good standing. So we need to get beyond the hypocrisy and realize where we are and don't raise such subjects.
Watch below via The Tennessee Holler or at this link.
READ MORE: 'Worse than theater': Ex-FBI official buries Republicans for fomenting 'massive distrust in the government'
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
McCarthy takes aim at FBI director with threat to charge him with contempt over Biden family probe ›
Trump deposition may follow Christopher Wray’s in ex-FBI employees’ lawsuits: report ›
Watch: Chris Wray slaps down Matt Gaetz’s claims about FBI’s reputation ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
FBI Director Chris Wray defends agency at House Judiciary ... ›
FBI Director Wray faces off with his harshest critics at heated ... ›
FBI Director Christopher Wray Testifies Before House Panel - The ... ›
---
https://www.alternet.org/hunter-biden-2662275022/
---
no lnx an 7 23
conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will testify as a witness next week before Chairman Jim Jordan’s House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Jordan has been under pressure from Republicans to produce actual evidence of so-called weaponization. Some have warned his committee may “simply be a Fox News clip generator.”
The announcement that RFK Jr. will be a witness came Wednesday evening, with the Committee saying its “hearing will examine the federal government’s role in censoring Americans, the Missouri v. Biden case, and Big Tech’s collusion with out-of-control government agencies to silence speech.”
Hour later, Fox News ran an article quoting RFK Jr., who said: “I was the first person censored by the Biden administration.”
READ MORE: Mitch McConnell Defends Clarence Thomas
According to Fox News, “Kennedy said the White House entreated Twitter and Facebook to censor him within two days of President Biden’s inauguration.”
“I’m still being censored. We know the FBI is involved in that censorship as well as a whole plethora of other federal agencies,” Kennedy alleged.
Experts note the federal government has spent years under both the Biden and Trump administrations, fighting dangerous misinformation, on issues such as COVID-19 and vaccines, and voting and elections. Legal experts including civil rights groups say notifying social media platforms of dangerous misinformation is not censorship, but a Trump-appointed federal judge recently disagreed.
In April, reporting on Kennedy’s entrance into the 2024 presidential race, the Associated Press described him as “an anti-vaccine activist and scion of one of the country’s most famous political families.”
READ MORE: Inflation Is Plummeting Across America – But Not in Ron DeSantis’ Florida
Noting he is the “nephew of President John F. Kennedy and the son of his slain brother Robert F. Kennedy,” the AP saidhe “was once a bestselling author and environmental lawyer who worked on issues such as clean water.”
“But more than 15 years ago, he became fixated on a belief that vaccines are not safe. He emerged as one of the leading voices in the anti-vaccine movement, and his work has been described by public health experts and even members of his own family as misleading and dangerous.”
Democrats on Wednesday expressed opposition to hosting Kennedy. “We believe in candidates for president who believe in science and vaccines,” and said his beliefs are not “grounded in reality.”
Watch the video below or at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
New report exposes more details Jim Jordan held back about Trump on Jan. 6 — and ropes in Matt Gaetz too ›
Former RNC Chair Michael Steele merrily rips into Jim Jordan's selective Jan. 6 amnesia ›
These wealthy megadonors are supporting DeSantis and RFK Jr. at the same time: report ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
RFK Jr. Campaign's Crazy New Low: Strategic Farting by Climate ... ›
RFK Jr. will testify before House panel on government censorship ›
---
an 7 23
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) blasted House Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) for focusing on Hunter Biden's laptop.
"Chairman, I've counted in this hearing – and we're only about an hour and a half in – the use of the word laptop about 20 times," Swalwell told Jordan on Wednesday. "That is bananas to me. You all are bringing up FISA, every single question," he said, referring to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"You're essentially saying to the American people that you're guardians of personal security and privacy, but the 2020 election was determined because the FBI didn't let more Americans see a private citizen's nonconsensual nudes?" he remarked, mentioning a furor made by conservatives when Twitter took down naked pictures of the president's son.
Jordan asked Swalwell to yield for a comment, but the Democratic lawmaker refused.
"Like, you should be a party of ideas, not a party of nonconsensual nudes to help you win an election," Swalwell continued. "We should be talking about the mass shootings that occurred over the last ten days. This hearing has turned into absolute chaos."
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/the-right-wing/gal-luft/
no lnx
Comer’s missing FBI 'whistleblower' and 'very credible witness on Biden family corruption' was just indicted
David Badash andThe New Civil Rights Movement July 11, 2023
House GOP Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer‘s alleged FBI “whistleblower,” who he claimed just days ago was a “very credible witness on Biden family corruption,” despite having been missing for months, was just indicted on charges including “arms trafficking,” “Iranian sanctions violations,” and “conspir[ing] with others in an effort to act within the United States to advance the interests of the People’s Republic of China (China),” according to the U.S. Dept of Justice.
He is currently on the run, DOJ says.
“According to court documents, Gal Luft, 57, is charged in an eight-count indictment with offenses related to willfully failing to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), arms trafficking, Iranian sanctions violations and making false statements to federal agents,” a DOJ press release states. “Luft was arrested on Feb. 17 in the Republic of Cyprus based on the charges in the indictment. Luft subsequently fled after being released on bail while extradition proceedings were pending and remains a fugitive.”
Some, including NBC News senior reporter Ben Collins are characterizing Luft with being charged as a “Chinese spy.”
“The ‘missing’ Hunter Biden witness the GOP was promising for a while there was just charged by the DOJ with being a Chinese spy,” Collins tweeted.
On Friday, Chairman Comer (photo) tweeted out a clip of his appearance on Newsmax, and wrote: “Gal Luft, a very credible witness on Biden family corruption, provided incriminating evidence to six officials from the FBI and the DOJ in a meeting in Brussels in March 2019. We have no reason to believe the FBI & DOJ acted on this info. Americans deserve answers.”
Comer told Newsmax Gal Luft is “very credible, and the people on MSNBC who made fun of me when I said that we had an informant that was missing, they should feel like fools right now.”
“This is their worst nightmare, again, because this is a credible witness,” he continued.
Chairman Comer’s allegations attacking President Joe Biden and his family repeatedly have been baseless.
“Comer has so far failed to show how Biden may have benefited from the payments or how any alleged business dealings by relatives may have impacted Biden’s policy decisions,” TIME reported back in May. “He has repeatedly blamed stonewalling by the Biden Administration for why his investigation hasn’t gotten more traction.”
“We are hopeful that we can find the informant,” Comer told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. “Now remember, these informants are kind of in the spy business, so they don’t make a habit of being seen a lot or being high profile or anything like that.”
Also Friday, Rupert Murdoch’s NY Post Editorial Board ran a piece titled, “Media silence on key would-be witness Gal Luft’s Biden revelations speaks volumes.”
“The drip-drip-drip of evidence detailing the Biden family criminal enterprise has turned into a torrent,” it claimed.
Watch below or at this link.
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Israeli professor wanted in the US for weapons trafficking goes ... ›
Israeli professor arrested for trafficking weapons to China, Libya ... ›
'Missing' Biden family corruption probe witness Gal Luft speaks out ... ›
---
---
always same schtick we insurgents rock and are competent and you estb suck: also fail to punish will be punished
https://www.alternet.org/steve-bannon-jim-jordan/
---
https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-2661556363/
no lnx raw 6 23
Jim Jordan leads GOP push to cripple 'fight against disinformation': report
Matthew Chapman
June 19, 2023,
Republican lawmakers are joining forces with far-right activists to attack universities and even private businesses that are investigating the spread of disinformation online — claiming that this amounts to an effort to silence conservatives on the internet, according to a report.
The New York Times posted a details of the actions they are taking on Monday.
"The effort has encumbered its targets with expansive requests for information and, in some cases, subpoenas — demanding notes, emails and other information related to social media companies and the government dating back to 2015. Complying has consumed time and resources and already affected the groups’ ability to do research and raise money, according to several people involved," reported Steven Lee Myers and Sheera Frenkel.
"They and others warned that the campaign undermined the fight against disinformation in American society when the problem is, by most accounts, on the rise — and when another presidential election is around the corner. Many of those behind the Republican effort had also joined former President Donald J. Trump in falsely challenging the outcome of the 2020 presidential election."
The House Judiciary Committee, under Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), has been leading the charge. Meanwhile, a group founded by far-right former Trump adviser Stephen Miller has filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court going after the same entities.
"Targets include Stanford, Clemson and New York Universities and the University of Washington; the Atlantic Council, the German Marshall Fund and the National Conference on Citizenship, all nonpartisan, nongovernmental organizations in Washington; the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco; and Graphika, a company that researches disinformation online," said the report.
"In a related line of inquiry, the committee has also issued a subpoena to the World Federation of Advertisers, a trade association, and the Global Alliance for Responsible Media it created. The committee’s Republican leaders have accused the groups of violating antitrust laws by conspiring to cut off advertising revenue for content researchers and tech companies found to be harmful."
The new push is part of a broader, years-long conspiracy theory among right-wing activists that the government and "big tech" companies are colluding to silence conservative speech on the internet. There is no evidence of any such conspiracy; in fact, research shows conservative content actually spreads more easily on Facebook and Twitter.
:{:{}:
}:
LNX
There is no evidence of any such conspiracy; in fact, research shows conservative content actually spreads more easily on Facebook and Twitter.
---
---
mma 6 23
June 12, 2023
- Madeline Peltz and Jacina Hollins-Borges @ Media Matters: Career women in right-wing media tell young girls to give up their dreams at Young Women’s Leadership Summit.
- Jack Jenkins @ Religion News Service: With Turning Point Faith, pastors use politics as a church-growth strategy.
- Sarah Posner @ Talking Points Memo: How Pat Robertson Helped Create The Christian Nationalist Lawyer Brigade Reshaping American Life.
- Nick Vachon @ The American Independent: ‘Gender ideology’: The history of the right’s new favorite phrase.
- Michael Tomasky @ The:{New Republic: Inside the GOP’s Latest Desperate Attempt to Smear Joe Biden.}:
- Joe Jervis: Trump: I Will Prosecute “The Entire Biden Crime Family.
- Kelly McClure @ Salon: Kari Lake takes wild leap in Trump’s defense, threatening gun violence against DOJ and Biden.
Tags: Charlie Kirk Donald Trump Kari Lake Pat Robertson Round-Up Turning Point USA
---
ref
Michael Tomasky
June 12, 2023
OLD PLAYBOOK
Inside the GOP’s Latest Desperate Attempt to Smear Joe Biden
How low will Republicans go?
Trump arrives at a Waffle House with Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene in Columbus, Georgia, on Saturday.
If you get your news on planet Earth, you agree with me that the biggest news story of last week was the federal indictment of Donald Trump.
If, however, you get your news on planet Wingnuttia, you have been led to believe that while the Trump matter was certainly news, the bigger deal by several orders of magnitude was the “proof” that emerged last week that Joe Biden took a $5 million bribe from Ukraine and that Representative Jamie Raskin lied about it. You’ve also been told that the timing of the Trump indictment was no mere coincidence—it was handed down precisely to distract America from the “fact” of Biden’s corruption.
If all this is unfamiliar to you, don’t worry. There is no such proof. Raskin, one of the most honorable public servants in America, who couldn’t lie if you tortured him, did not utter a falsehood.
It’s all right out of the playbook the right wing has been using for the last 30 years. They just make up stuff about Democratic presidents and presidential candidates. It has failed more often than it’s worked. But it’s worked often enough that we need to pay some attention to it and understand what’s going on here.
You probably caught wind of the fact that House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer subpoenaed FBI Director Christopher Wray back in May. He did this after Senator Charles Grassley received a whistleblower complaint charging that the bureau was in possession of a document that revealed an alleged criminal scheme involving the Biden family and a foreign country.
Comer wanted the document. The FBI refused, citing the need to protect source confidentiality. But under political pressure, the FBI agreed to brief Comer and Raskin, the committee’s ranking Democrat, and show them a partially redacted version of the memo. Then all members of the Oversight Committee were allowed to read it.
Here’s the long and short of it. It involves Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company on whose board Hunter Biden sat. The confidential source was told by the head of Burisma that he paid bribes of $5 million each to Joe and Hunter Biden.These were basically Rudy Giuliani’s old scotch-fueled rumors.
This all dates, by the way, to June 2020. This is a useful fact to keep in mind, for two reasons. One, it means that all of this is three years old; two, it means that Donald Trump was president and Bill Barr his still-loyal attorney general, when this document, an FD-1023 in FBI-speak, was logged.
Naturally, the Justice Department set out to look into it. Barr appointed Scott Brady, then the U.S. attorney for western Pennsylvania, to look into Giuliani’s claims.
As Raskin explained several times on cable news last week, the FBI has three levels or phases of investigation: assessment, preliminary investigation, and full investigation. Obviously, assessment means that the bureau looks at the charges and decides whether the evidence is sufficient to move forward to a preliminary investigation.
In this case, the charges didn’t even move beyond the assessment phase. Brady did little, at least that we know of. The only thing he ever did with respect to this matter that made the papers was that he held one four-hour meeting with Giuliani. But he brought no charges, and now he’s back in private life.
So, yes, as Raskin said last week, Barr’s Justice Department did drop the matter. However, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney for Delaware, David Weiss, was conducting a separate, parallel investigation of Hunter Biden, and the Justice Department sent the Giuliani allegations to Weiss. When Barr took issue with Raskin’s description of events last week, he was referring to that. So in theory, the “Justice Department” (which does include the U.S. attorney offices) is still looking into the allegations, but Weiss’s probe is known to be centered around possible tax evasion and gun charges against Hunter.
Raskin said in a statement: “If William Barr has a problem with [my] characterization, his problem is not with me but with the FBI, Mr. Brady, and other high-level officials reporting to him in his own Justice Department who signed off on closing down Mr. Brady’s probe.” His statement also included information about the meeting he and Comer had with the FBI last Monday. They were told, he said, that “in August 2020, [the] assessment was closed after a determination was made that there were no more investigative steps to be taken and the evidence collected did not meet FBI’s standard for opening a preliminary or full-scale investigation.”
So that’s where things stand. These are three-year-old allegations that have never been proven. Even Comer and Grassley admit that these are just allegations—although Comer (and this will give you a sense of his conception of justice) also said that the information in the document “has not been disproven.” Other Republican committee members—notably extremist Marjorie Taylor Greene and biography-enhancer Anna Paulina Luna—read the FD-1023 and pronounced Biden guilty on the spot.
Is it possible that Biden took a $5 million bribe? Sure, anything’s possible. But which is more likely: that Biden, who has been in the public eye for half a century without a single episode of financial scandal to his name, took a bribe (after, by the way, he was out of public life and finally making some serious jack on the lecture and book circuit, meaning that money was the last thing he needed); or that the right wing, which has peddled fiction after fiction about top-ranking Democrats, is lying?
This is what they do. They told 50 lies about Bill Clinton. None of them have been proven. He made no money from Whitewater. He did not protest the Vietnam War in front of the Kremlin. Yes, he had that affair, and he lied about that. But he did not obstruct justice. The zealous Mr. Starr would have found out if he had.
They lied about Al Gore, who never said he “invented” the internet. They lied about John Kerry’s military record—just ghastly, wholly fabricated assertions about a man who held a degree from Yale and could have found 500 ways to get out of military service but went to the Army recruiter’s office and demanded he be sent to the front lines in Vietnam. (By the way: Gore too graduated from Harvard and went immediately to a recruitment office in New Jersey to enlist to make absolutely sure that he would get no senator’s son breaks, while George W. Bush hid out in the Texas Air National Guard.)
They lied repeatedly about Barack Obama, who was not born in Kenya and did not smoke crack with his gay lover and was not a Communist Muslim terrorist sympathizer. They lied nonstop for 30 years about Hillary Clinton. Lying about her was an industry that at one time rivaled the gross domestic product of small nations. She sometimes didn’t help her own cause in the way she handled things, but remember this point, always: The number of “her emails” that were classified was … zero. Did you get that? Zero.
Don’t take this from Hillary. It was affirmed in 2019 by Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo’s State Department. (The probe did find that information that department officials considered to be classified wound up in many of her email exchanges, but the number of documents included in her emails that were marked classified was zero.)
Do Democrats lie about Republicans sometimes? I suppose so. But not like this; not this systematically. Lying is core to Republican presidential campaigns. Their positions—give more money to rich people, stop all abortions, take transgender children away from sympathetic parents, ban books, destroy the planet—aren’t popular, and they know this, so they have to make voters hate the Democrat. And corruption is all-purpose. Everyone can be troubled by it, whatever their ideology.
It’s especially useful to them now, with their party being led by the most corrupt person ever to occupy the White House by far. In a week when we learned that Trump admitted in 2021 that he could no longer declassify documents, blowing a huge hole in the case for his defense, Republicans were particularly desperate to dirty up Joe Biden. Comer and Jim Jordan will keep pushing not-yet-disproven narratives, repackaging old allegations as new. The mainstream media—and even, it must be admitted, this magazine, under conservative editors in the 1990s—has a pretty sorry record of falling for this stuff since Clinton’s time. Some Democrats, too, used to give these lies credence. I hope people have learned by now that there’s only one response to all this: Fight.
Michael Tomasky @mtomasky
Michael Tomasky is the editor of The New Republic
---
an 6 23
an individual categorized as a "whistleblower" by Republicans on the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee's Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government was allegedly fired from the Federal Bureau of Investigation for leaking classified material, NBC News has learned.
Garret O'Boyle "was suspended by the bureau because internal investigators had concluded that he leaked sensitive investigative information to the right-wing group Project Veritas," NBC exclusively reported on Thursday.
"House Democrats are now accusing O'Boyle of lying to the committee and are referring the matter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, according to a letter obtained by NBC News," the outlet explained.
READ MORE: House Oversight chair struggles to defend need for FBI document behind contempt of Congress hearings
NBC also noted that "lawmakers learned about the reason for O'Boyle's suspension, which was previously unreported, in testimony that Jennifer Moore, executive assistant director of the FBI for human resources, provided to the House Judiciary Committee's Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Portions of her testimony are included in a letter that top Democrats on the Judiciary and Weaponization panels wrote to Garland, alleging that O’Boyle lied to the committee about leaking information prior to his suspension."
NBC's report continues at this link.
This is a breaking news and developing story.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
- 'What’s plan B'? Maria Bartiromo snags GOP congressman over lack of Hunter Biden evidence ›
- 'Somebody send out an Amber Alert': House Republican mocked over 'missing' Hunter Biden 'whistleblower' ›
- Analyst accuses Fox News of keeping Oversight Republicans’ sketchy 'FBI whistleblower' claim alive ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
- GOP subpoenas FBI over whistleblower's claims about Biden - ABC ... ›
- Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government | House ... ›
- GOP subpoenas FBI for Biden records; WH denounces 'innuendo ... ›
---
whistleblower gone so want raw intel fbi form
https://www.alternet.org/grassley-gop/
claim biden took bribe
---
---
deep state conspiracy wingnuttery
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-news-jesse-watters-claims-fbi-installed-joe-biden-president-intelligence-op-after
omg mm a 6 23
JESSE WATTERS (HOST): Powerful people installed Biden so that he can take orders, not give them. Joe Biden's been groomed his whole career to take orders. And now that he's literally slept his way to the top, they won't let him go anywhere. The FBI put their guy in the White House. "You think we're just going to, like, let voters decide if he should serve four more years? We can't afford to take that risk."
Joe Biden has been an intelligence op since he was vice president. One of the FBI's top informants, a guy with impeccable credentials, a great track record, reported an allegation that Joe Biden took a $5 million bribe -- right under Barack Obama's nose -- from a foreign national in exchange for a policy decision. They've been blackmailing Joe Biden with this for a decade. Well, until a whistleblower came forward. And now, James Comer wants the document released to Congress and the FBI's caught in a cover-up.
---
---
an 6 23 vid
comer burisma redux bs
https://www.alternet.org/recycling-stale-debunked-conspiracy-theories/
https://www.alternet.org/a-huge-distraction-gop-fbi/ contempt of congr
https://www.alternet.org/jim-jordan-trump-special-counsel/
---
---
//
an 6 23
former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Sunday compared President Joe Biden's alleged scandals to what he claimed was "deviancy" of LGBTQ+ people.
During Sunday's Uncovering the Truth on WABC, Giuliani noted that Republicans planned to meet with the FBI over documents they believe will show evidence of corruption.
"But to sit by and watch a guy get elected president who's been a thirty-year bribe taker," Giuliani said.
"Well, it's that defining deviancy down," co-host Maria Ryan agreed. "Once you do that and you start getting used to certain things."
"It's almost like gays, right?" she added. "At one time in this population, it was really frowned upon. It was misunderstood whatever, and now it's accepted, and they have equal rights. So you just get used to certain things."
Ryan said she had probably not used the "best example" by comparing gay people to Biden.
"No, no, I think it's not the best example, but it is a good example in this sense," Giuliani remarked. "You take anything to an extreme, and you can get into the area of deviancy. Look, heterosexuals can be deviants. Nothing wrong with gay, nothing wrong with lesbian except if it morphs into pedophilia."
Ryan interrupted to suggest same-sex attraction was unnatural....
---
---
no lnx an 5 23
Bill Barr’s former special counsel John Durham to testify at House hearing
David Badash andThe New Civil Rights Movement May 26, 2023
Former Special Counsel John Durham, who recently ended his four-year investigation into the FBI’s decision to launch an investigation into Russia’s attack on the 2016 election and any possible connection Donald Trump or his campaign had to those efforts, will testify before the Republican-majority House Judiciary Committee next month.
The Durham report, widely-panned by legal experts but praised by GOP partisans, was the culmination of an investigation many believe was started to appease then-President Donald Trump. Trump Attorney General Bill Barr secretly elevated Durham to Special Counsel status in October of 2020, effectively to allow his investigation to continue regardless of the result of the following month’s presidential election.
Durham ended up indicting just three people. He lost two cases and the third pleaded guilty to a minor charge.
RELATED: ‘Circle of Garbage’: Experts Slam Durham ‘Wild Goose Chase’ as Investigation Into DOJ Trump-Russia Probe Ends With ‘Bupkis’
Washington Post columnist Philip Bump published an analysis earlier this month titled, “Durham’s probe ends as it began: Pointing at trees to obscure the forest.”
But Durham’s report gives fodder to the far-right.
National security and legal experts have torn the Durham report apart, with some noting his investigation directly conflicts with findings from a DOJ Inspector General and the then-GOP majority Senate Intelligence Committee’s report.
Fox News reports Durham “will testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee about his report in June, a source has told Fox News on Friday.”
“The hearing will happen on Wednesday, June 21,” Fox adds. “The day before, Durham will appear before the House Intelligence Committee in a closed-door briefing.”
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Unseemly whining': Legal experts rebuke John Durham’s criticism of juries ›
Mueller prosecutor asks why John Durham spent $200K on travel in six months ›
Durham investigation goes bust: Why Bill Barr blew up his personal project to expose the deep state ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
The stunning hypocrisy of special counsel John Durham's inquiry ... ›
Barr Pressed Durham to Find Flaws in the Trump-Russia ... ›
John Durham probe failure belongs to Barr — and Trump ›
---
an 5 23
no lnx
Oversight chair appears to admit his Hunter Biden probe is designed to help Trump win the White House
David Badash andThe New Civil Rights Movement May 22, 2023
Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer in a 4 AM interview Monday morning appears to have admitted to actually weaponizing the federal government for political gain.
Chairman Comer, Republican of Kentucky, appeared to tell Fox News early Monday morning that his investigations into Hunter Biden are actually designed to help Donald Trump win the 2024 presidential election.
“We have talked to you about this on the show, about how the media can just not ignore this any longer.In an op-ed in The Washington Post, it says, ‘Millions Flowed to Biden Family Members. Don’t Pretend It Doesn’t Matter,’” said Fox News host Ashley Strohmier, as HuffPost reported Monday. “So do you think that because of your investigation, that is what’s moved this needle with the media?”
READ MORE: Moms for Liberty Leader Says Biden Behind High-Level, Coordinated Effort to Make Kids LGBTQ (Video)
“Absolutely. There’s no question,” Comer replied, sounding very similar to Kevin McCarthy in 2015 (below) when he admitted the Benghazi investigations were designed to hurt Hillary Clinton in the polls. “You look at the polling, and right now Donald Trump is 7 points ahead of Joe Biden and trending upward, Joe Biden’s trending downward. And I believe that the media is looking around, scratching their head, and they’re realizing that the American people are keeping up with our investigation.”
Comer citied one recent poll, but may polls show President Joe Biden beating Donald Trump, and overall, while it is still very early, the polls are very close.
“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?” McCarthy had said. “But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a Select Committee ― what are her numbers today?” McCarthy had told Fox News at the time. “Her numbers are dropping, why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened.”
HuffPost notes that “in reality, despite House Republicans’ efforts to portray Biden as hopelessly corrupt, the committee didn’t present any evidence in its hearings that directly implicated Biden.”
Watch Comer below or at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Somebody send out an Amber Alert': House Republican mocked over 'missing' Hunter Biden 'whistleblower' ›
ABC host grills GOP House Oversight chair: Will you be investigating Jared Kushner too? ›
---
an 5 23
former FBI field agent and key Republican witness on the House Judiciary Committee’s “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government” may have lied under oath about receiving financial aid from a Donald Trump ally, the Guardian reports.
Garret O’Boyle — described by the Washington Postas "a suspended FBI special agent from the Wichita Resident Agency in Kansas" — was a star witness last Thursday for the “weaponization” subcommittee, a Freedom Caucus brainchild purporting to uncover clear evidence that the U.S. government, “and in particular the Justice Department, has unfairly targeted conservatives,” as NBC News reports.
Per the Guardian, O’Boyle was asked at one point "whether Kash Patel, who held multiple roles in the Trump administration, is helping finance O’Boyle’s legal counsel.”
“Not that I’m aware of,” O’Boyle said, according to a transcript of the exchange.
"The answer has raised eyebrows because, during a previous interview with the House of Representatives’ [weaponization] subcommittee in February, O’Boyle disclosed that his legal fees are being paid by a nonprofit organisation called Fight With Kash, also known as the Kash Foundation and run by Kash Patel," the Guardian reports.
Indeed, a Democratic Staff Report published on March 2 reveals:
During their interviews, Garret O’Boyle and Stephen Friend both confirmed that they ha received money from Patel. Committee Democrats have determined that Patel’s support for them extends beyond that to helping them secure legal counsel and promoting them and their causes.
According to that report, O’Boyle told Democratic Committee staff, “[Patel] asked me how he could help. So I told him a little bit of my situation. And he said that he thinks he could get the nonprofit to help.”
As the Guardian notes, “Lying to Congress carries a penalty of up to five years’ imprisonment.”
Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), who asked O’Boyle last week about Patel’s involvement, told the Guardian, “Mr O’Boyle’s answers in the subcommittee hearing on Thursday appear to contradict his previous testimony in the transcribed interview with subcommittee staff. In order to ensure witnesses are truthful when they come before the subcommittee, Chairman Jordan must determine whether or not Mr O’Boyle lied under oath on Thursday.”...
spox distort brave whistleblowers
---
an 5 23
rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, threatened to investigate Bill and Hillary Clinton.
During a Sunday interview on Fox News, hostMaria Bartiromo asked an animated Jordan if he would consider opening an investigation into the Clintons.
"Do you want to see another investigation of Hillary and Bill Clinton?" Bartiromo wondered. "Because in the Durham report, John Durham wrote that while they were pursuing Trump, they made no effort to investigate the claim that Hillary Clinton was taking money from foreigners for her Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Foundation."
"They not only didn't investigate her like they did President Trump, they gave her campaign a defensive briefing!" Jordan exclaimed. "They should have done the same for President Trump because they literally had no evidence."
Jordan said he would talk with his attorneys and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) before proceeding.
"We're going to give that a good hard look," he insisted. "But nothing is off the table because it is critical the American people understand how their government, their agencies have been turned on, them the taxpayer,and we get all the facts out there."
Watch the video below from Fox News or at this link
---
tom b raw
appearing on MSNBC with fill-in host Charles Blow, former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele dropped the hammer on House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan's latest FBI "weaponization" hearing and laughed at how poorly his hearings have all gone.
As Steele told the host, the Ohio Republican is inadvertently making the case that the real problems lie within the years Donald Trump was president and his own DOJ.
Above all, Steele claimed Jordan is running a "dog and pony show" that is not convincing anyone that there was a conspiracy against conservatives and Trump.
"Michael, did Jordan's performance during these hearings actually help Democrats prove their point, the only party weaponizing the government is the Republican Party?" host Blow asked.
"Any time Jordan opens his mouth he proves that point," Steele shot back. "The reality is there's no substance to any of this. This is just the dog and pony show, it's like the worst you can come up with in the world where you can just make stuff up. So you're trying to connect dots that do not exist. You're grasping about little lines of this and a little line over here about something else, and none of it ever comes together."
"So this idea of weaponization of the government is being done by the very people who are supposed to be investigating weaponization," he continued before laughing and adding, "I guess by the Biden administration? Didn't this all occur during Trump's term in office? It was his Justice Department and FBI. It just kind of proves the point."
"So, are you mad at Trump? Jordan, Jim, are you mad at Trump?" he added while still laughing. "Are you mad at Mr. [Bill] Barr? Who you mad at? What are you trying -- where was the weaponization against Trump's own people by Trump? Because that's basically what we are looking at here."
Watch below or at this link
---
an raw 5 23 no lnx
no lnx
two House Republican leaders on Wednesday in a letter to CIA Director William J. Burns threatened to subpoena the agency over documents that they say show a coordinated effort to falsely discredit an ongoing Hunter Biden investigation.
Reps. Jim Jordan and Mike Turner, both Ohio Republicans, said in a news release that they have “renewed their requests for documents related to the investigation and warned that compulsory process may be necessary if the agency does not comply.”
Jordan, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, and Turner, who chairs the Intelligence Committee, in the letter said their committees are investigating an Oct. 10, 2020 “Public Statement” signed by 51 former intelligence community officials on the president’s son’s emails.
:{:{}:
}:
“This statement, signed by former intelligence community officials using their official titles and emphasizing their national security credentials, suggested that public reporting about Hunter Biden’s business dealings and Biden family influence-peddling ‘ha[d] all the hallmarks of a Russian information operation,’” the letter said.
“We have since learned that the statement was drafted and disseminated following communications between former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell and Biden campaign advisor—now Secretary of State—Antony Blinken.”
Jordan and Turner in the letter said the CIA is in possession of documents that are “responsive to our requests and necessary to our oversight.”
“The Committees have received evidence that the CIA, or at least an employee of the CIA, may have helped to solicit signatories for the statement about Hunter Biden,” the letter said.
“If accurate, this information raises fundamental concerns about the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election.”
The letter said that the CIA provided a “minimal production of documents” on May 9 but said the CIA admitted it hadn’t performed a comprehensive records search, noting that a CIA staffer in a May 12 phone conversation, committed to cooperating in full with the Committees’ oversight.
“We fully expect the CIA to produce all responsive documents to the Committees’ March 21, 2023, request in unredacted form no later than May 30, 2023. If the CIA does not produce all responsive documents, the Committees may resort to compulsory process.”
Read the full letter here.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Jim Jordan's 'weaponization' committee 'contradicts sworn testimony' and 'ignores key events': analysis ›
'Hunter derangement syndrome': Twitter mocks Jim Jordan for his deep concern over Hunter Biden art sales ›
Jim Jordan freaks out over Hunter Biden shaking hands ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
House GOP's latest Hunter Biden laptop theory is less than meets ... ›
GOP Rep. Comer says pending probes will show Hunter Biden ... ›
White House accuses Jim Jordan of 'highly misleading' leak on ... ›
---
an 5 23
united States Representative and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) scoffed at a reporter's question on Thursday morning about suspended Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Garret O'Boyle, whom The New York Times revealed in March has financial connections to an ally of former President Donald Trump.
O'Boyle is one of several so-called "whistleblowers" scheduled to testify at Thursday's Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government hearing.
"We're talking a lot about in the point of this press conference, the point of the hearing is to talk about how the FBI is politicized, but do you think it's appropriate for some of these whistleblowers, including two who will get your hearing today, to be paid by one of the former president's closest advisors?" the correspondent asked Jordan. "Kash Patel, who actively..." she continued until Jordan abruptly cut her off.
READ MORE: Congresswoman tears into Jim Jordan for abusing his office for 'performance'
"They got a family. How they supposed to feed their family?" Jordan snapped. "Four hundred and fifty days the FBI has kept these, uh, has kept Mr. O'Boyle in, in limbo where he can't work without pay. He's got four kids. He was selected to come to this special unit they were forming here in Virginia. He moves his family and the day he gets here, the day he gets here, they say, 'Hey, we're suspending your clearance.' And they won't let him get access to his furniture, his clothes, and he's got a two-week-old newborn child.I mean, you gotta be kidding me. Of course, they're gonna, they're gonna do whatever they can to feed their family and I don't fault them for that."
Watch below or at this link.
---
---
puts the cash in patel?
https://www.alternet.org/send/jim-jordan-trump/
marh 3
a trio of witnesses being called as "whistleblowers" by the GOP committee investigating the "weaponization" of government were paid off by a Trump ally and spread conspiracy theories, reportedThe New York Times on Thursday.
"The first three witnesses to testify privately before the new Republican-led House committee investigating the 'weaponization' of the federal government have offered little firsthand knowledge of any wrongdoing or violation of the law, according to Democrats on the panel who have listened to their accounts," reported Luke Broadwater and Adam Goldman. "Instead, the trio appears to be a group of aggrieved former F.B.I. officials who have trafficked in right-wing conspiracy theories, including about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the Capitol, and received financial support from a top ally of former President Donald J. Trump."
"The roster of witnesses, whose interviews and statements are detailed in a 316-page report compiled by Democrats that was obtained by The New York Times, suggests that Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, the chairman of the panel, has so far relied on people who do not meet the definition of a whistle-blower and who have engaged in partisan conduct that calls into question their credibility," said the report. "And it raises questions about whether Republicans, who have said that investigating the Biden administration is a top goal, will be able to deliver on their ambitious plans to uncover misdeeds at the highest levels."
The three witnesses in question, per the report, are "George Hill, a retired F.B.I. supervisory intelligence analyst from the bureau’s Boston field office; Stephen Friend, a former special agent who worked in the Daytona Beach office; and Garret O’Boyle, a special agent from the field office in Wichita, Kan., who has been suspended."
They have promoted conspiracy theories; Hill wrote on Twitter that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was a "set up." Meanwhile, O'Boyle and Friend have admitted to receiving financial aid from Kash Patel, a former aide to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Trump associate who has testified in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.
"The Democratic report includes excerpts from depositions and evidence of conspiratorial social media posts," noted the report. "It also details the ties between Mr. Trump’s inner circle and the witnesses. For instance,Mr. Patel found Mr. Friend his next job, working as a fellow on domestic intelligence and security services with the Center for Renewing America,which is run byRuss Vought. The center is largely funded by the Conservative Partnership Institute, which is run by Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, and former Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina."
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
- Jim Jordan threatens to investigate newly-appointed special counsel in ongoing probe of Donald Trump ›
- 'A lot of explaining to do': Jim Jordan slammed on Twitter for contradictory remarks about 1/6 call to Trump ›
- 'That’s weaponization': Dem smacks down Jim Jordan for ignoring Trump DOJ corruption ›
- Manhattan DA schools Jim Jordan for demanding he testify in ongoing Trump investigation - Alternet.org ›
- Jim Jordan busted for helping Trump 'tamper' with probe: 'Beyond all bounds of what's legal' - Alternet.org ›
- Jim Jordan subpoenas FBI director Wray - Alternet.org ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
- Jim Jordan brazenly lies about GOP's 'Kanye. Elon. Trump.' tweet ›
- Rep. Jim Jordan, a close Trump ally, signals he won't cooperate with ... ›
- CNN fact check - Did Jim Jordan never say the election was stolen? ›
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/just-believe-our-lies/
no lnx twit
Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) declared to Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo on Wednesday that all of the purported evidence against President Joe Biden and his son Hunter that Republicans have supposedly amassed over the last three years is something to "infer" and that "you're not necessarily going to get hard proof" of criminal activity.
"So [House of Representatives Oversight Committee Chairman] James Comer [R-Kentucky] walked us through this web of LLCs that the Biden family created and money came from China and other adversarial countries, by the way, not just China. But going into these LLCs and then from there the money went from the LLCs to, to various Biden family members. What can you tell us about that? What were they getting paid for?" Bartiromo asked Johnson.
:{:{}:
}:
"Well, again, on, on the bank records, you're not gonna see bribe to change this policy. You have, you have to infer what's happening here. You, you have to take a look at the, the bulk of the evidence. You have to file the money and realize what, so what did this Biden family member do to earn that amount of money? I mean, that's what we did with, with Hunter Biden in Ukraine," Johnson said.
READ MORE: 'Show the goods': Fox News host calls out House Republican over lack of Hunter Biden evidence
"I mean, what did he know about oil and gas to be on the board of Burisma and knocked down about $4 million over the course of a number of years when his father was the point person in Ukraine, that, that corrupt system," Johnson continued. "So again, you, you have to infer these things. You're not going to get necessarily hard proof, but there's such a huge body of evidence. We had it in September 2020. It was all ignored. It was all denigrated. It was all called Russian disinformation. It's the same playbook of the Democrats, the same playbook of the media that wants to prop up and cover up for the Bidens."
Johnson's remarks did not play well on social media.
MeidasTouch: "I'm going to 'infer' that Ron Johnson and his corrupt Republican friends are liars engaging in defamation the day after their dear leader was held liable for defamation in court."
Ford News: "Senator Ron Johnson on Fox News just admitted we will never get hard proof regarding the GOP probe into bank transfers from a foreign country to Hunter Biden's LLC."
READ MORE: House GOP Oversight warns DOJ: 'Do not indict Hunter Biden before Wednesday'
Kelly D: "Ron Johnson said live on Fox there is no evidence and we just need to infer that the entire Biden family is guilty. Of what, I’m not sure. But also, we don't infer sh*t in this country. Bring the evidence to the DOJ or S T F U."
Jamison Foser: "I mean I can pretty easily infer all kinds of crimes Ron Johnson has committed if this is how we're going to do things."
Art Martin: "Judge Ron Johnson: I find Joe Biden guilty beyond an unreasonable inference!"
Devin Duke: "When Trump refuses to criticize Putin on any topic ever, should we infer what's happening there?"
McSpocky™: Of course there isn't going to be 'hard proof.' Biden did nothing wrong!
Kaloyan: "Infer? You mean insinuate, right, right?"
Jo: "So, these clowns are gonna impeach President Biden because they've 'inferred' crimes? Based on something other than… EVIDENCE?!? F*cking clown show."
Outspoken: "'Just believe our lies.'"
Watch Johnson below or at this link.
READ MORE: Federal prosecutor close to a decision in Hunter Biden probe: report
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Busted: Ron Johnson caught faking a phone call when questioned by reporters ›
'Greedy, selfish, self-serving': Ron Johnson blasted for 'taking comfort' in global warming ›
Law professor expertly shuts down Sen. Ron Johnson's false claim that social media is biased against the right ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Republican Inquiry Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by Biden ... ›
US Sen. Ron Johnson stands by Medicare, Social Security remarks ... ›
Ron Johnson says he didn't feel threatened Jan. 6. If BLM or Antifa ... ›
---
an 5 23
Representative James Comer (R-Kentucky, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, once again fell flat during an interview with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo over supposed evidence of criminal activities that the GOP claims to have accumulated against President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
Following a series of unendearing interviews this week, Comer on Thursday insisted that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice are stymieing their probe into the clandestine connections that Republicans believe the Bidens have with international interests.
Politico noted on May 3rd that while Comer and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) "asserted that the FBI has material outlining 'an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions,'" Comer and Grassley have "provided no further detail on the nature of those allegations."
READ MORE: House GOP Oversight warns DOJ: 'Do not indict Hunter Biden before Wednesday'
Politico also explained that although "Comer and Grassley say they became aware of the potential existence of material underpinning the anti-Biden allegations from a'highly credible whistleblower' who contacted lawmakers to assert knowledge of a conversation the FBI had with a confidential source... the two Republicans provided no information on the purported whistleblower’s background, or how that person would have knowledge of an alleged conversation with an FBI source."
Over the past week, Comer and his confederates have stumbled when questioned about what proof they have against the Bidens, prompting skepticism among normally friendly conservative media anchors.
Such was the case on Thursday when Comer spoke with Bartiromo.
"And we're going to move forward with Plan B and I, and it's unfortunate that we have to do this. It's unfortunate that, uh, neither Senator Grassley nor I have one ounce of confidence in the leadership of the FBI right now, or the DOJ. Uh, but we're gonna move forward. They're not going to obstruct our investigation or corruption in this White House. And we're gonna continue to, to press and, and get answers and provide the American people with the facts," Comer said.
no lnx
Congressman, what's Plan B?" Bartiromo asked.
Comer had no substantive response.
"Well, stay tuned. Maria. You'll be the first person that'll know. I, I can assure you," he replied. "But it's, uh, you know, we assumed the FBI would continue this pattern of behavior of, uh, you know, acting independently. I mean, this is an example of thedeep state, uh, and the fourth branch of government."
Watch below or at this link.
READ MORE: 'Show the goods': Fox News host calls out House Republican over lack of Hunter Biden evidence
Politico's report continues here.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Hunter derangement syndrome': Twitter mocks Jim Jordan for his deep concern over Hunter Biden art sales ›
Trump attorney rambles incoherently about Hunter Biden when asked why her client predicted a Tuesday arrest ›
Jim Jordan freaks out over Hunter Biden shaking hands ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Inside Hunter Biden's multimillion-dollar deals with a Chinese ... ›
Federal prosecutors have considered four possible charges against ... ›
Bracing for impact: Biden world preps for Hunter Biden fallout ... ›
---
---
staff oppos res?
an 4 23
Dr. Mark Lowenthal accused Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) of misleading the public about the origins of Covid-19.
During a House hearing on Covid-19 Tuesday, Greene complained that the government could track down alleged military leaker Jack Teixeira but couldn't determine the origins of the virus.
"So, the intelligence community is able to figure out immediately who was leaking classified information in a Discord chat, but yet still doesn't want to say whether it came from the lab or didn't come from the lab," Greene said. "The intelligence communities seem to release or not release information based on how the information will affect the government that it seems to protect."
Lowenthal, a former intelligence agent, responded to Greene.
"May I respond to something else that you said in your comments, Ms. Greene?" he began. "There is a vast, vast difference between tracking a leak on a social media site and determining the origins of this disease. And to compare the two is entirely fallacious, ma'am."
"Dr. Lowenthal, you've said that you keep your intelligence claims and information nonpartisan," Greene shot back. "In 2018, Mr. Lowenthal, you were quoted in the New York Times saying that President Trump is the best president that Russia ever had. That sounds pretty political to me."
"I was no longer an intelligence officer at the time, ma'am," Lowenthal replied. "I'm a private citizen."
"Well, I think you have a difficult time keeping your political opinions out of your political [analysis]," Greene quipped.[vid]
---
---
paydirt at last? but no hearing? basically a hit tweet on official stationery?
mma 4 23
Right-wing media are fearmongering that the FBI is waging “an assault on religion and Christianity” after an internal memo was leaked from the FBI about investigating potential radicalization at select traditionalist Catholic churches in Virginia. However, the memo was withdrawn and the FBI has reiterated that it does not open investigations “based on the religious beliefs—to include Catholicism—of the subject involved.”
In February, internal documents leaked to a right-wing former FBI agent revealed that the FBI had attempted to develop insider sources in select traditionalist Catholic churches in Richmond, Virginia, to investigate possible radicalization. On April 10, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) issued a subpoena for FBI Director Christopher Wray to release the records on these probes, accusing the bureau of seeking to “enlist Catholic houses of worship as potential sources to monitor and report on their parishioners.”
The internal memo makes reference to the FBI’s interest in identifying “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics,” who are described as having an “adherence to anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ and white supremacist ideology.” Christopher Dunham, the FBI’s acting assistant director of congressional affairs, has said that the report “did not meet the FBI's exacting standards and was withdrawn,” and “upon learning of the document, FBI Headquarters removed it from our internal system. The FBI also initiated a review — which is now ongoing.” Dunham also stressed to Jordan that the bureau “does not categorize investigations as domestic terrorism based on the religious beliefs—to include Catholicism—of the subject involved."
But in reaction to the news, right-wing media freaked out about the memo, calling it “an assault on religion and Christianity” and an example of the government’s “targeting of faithful Catholics,” while others pressured the FBI to instead target “Antifa and the trans radicals”:
- During the April 11 episode of Hannity, Fox News host Sean Hannity described the memo as “an assault on religion and Christianity.” Hannity also asked guest Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) if Attorney General Merrick Garland was lying during his Senate testimony about “sending agents into Catholic churches.”
- On the April 11 episode of Fox News’ Outnumbered, radio host Ben Ferguson said the FBI’s memo is an example of what “communists used to do, which is target people you want to take out,” and criticized the organization for “go[ing] after an entire religion.”
- During the April 11 episode of Fox & Friends, Fox News media contributor Leo Terrell called the FBI’s probe into Catholic churches “a war by the extreme left against religion” and claimed that “the far left haveweaponized the FBI.”
- Radio host Benny Johnson tweeted on April 11: “Why is the FBI targeting Catholic churches? If they want to root out domestic terrorism, they should probably start with Antifa and thetrans radicals. Not Christians.”
- The Federalist’s April 11 article, titled “House Weaponization Committee Subpoenas FBI Director Over Agency Targeting Catholics,” described the memo as a “targeting of faithful Catholics by the premier U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agency” and attacked the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops for not speaking out against the FBI.
- “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander sent out a Telegram message on April 10, calling the FBI “apostates” and warning his followers to “be careful of Feds infiltrating the Church and our political movements. They’re here to break us up.”
- Alexander also called theFBI “sickos” for “spying on Catholics while they fake worship.”
- In reference to the FBI memo, Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren tweeted, “The assault on Christianity continues! The FBI sought to develop sources in Catholic churches to combat domestic terrorism?! You’ve got to be kidding me!”
- Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk attacked the FBI for investigating domestic extremism in Catholic churches, asking if it would investigate “radical trans groups like the one that assaulted Riley Gaines? Or militant pro-abortion groups like Jane's Revenge? Or Treehouse Antifa that attacked Cop City?”
---
---
an 4 23
Jordan (R-Ohio) melted down during a Fox News appearance on Wednesday afternoon because President Joe Biden's son Hunter accompanied him to Ireland and mingled with the crowd.
Host Martha MacCallum led with a question:
Curious. You know, what, what goes through your mind when you see Hunter traveling with the president and you know, doing the rope line, shaking hands with everybody?
In response, Jordan – the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee – fell into a tangent about how unfair it is that former President Donald Trump is being pursued by the law:
I, I think it's just how brazen the left has become. I mean, I mean, go back to what I said earlier, the fact that the IRS knocked on a journalist's door [taibbi] while he is testifying in front of Congress after that same journalist had learned, the FTC mentioned him in a letter to a private company. I, I just think there, there's no bounds now, and this is the scary part. The, the Biden, uh, Hunter Biden behaves this way. You, I think you're gonna see, I think you're gonna see the state of Georgia go after President Trump. I hope it doesn't happen. I think you may see the special counsel go after President Trump. I hope it doesn't happen. But that's just how, how ridiculous the left has become. And it's not good. Not good at all for our great country.
---
https://www.alternet.org/jim-jordan-fbi/
no lnx
house Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has issued a subpoena to the Director of the FBI over the Bureau’s alleged efforts to develop “sources” in local Catholic Churches, and a now-withdrawn memo from a local field office that reportedly discussed the possibility some right-wing Catholics might pose possible domestic terror threats.
Jordan, who also heads the House GOP’s new, specially-constituted Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, appears to be using the new committee as a bullhorn to amplify far-right wing conspiracy theories about alleged incidents of anti-conservative bias, while attacking government officials who he sees as enemies of the far-right. His committee has not investigated any instances of anti-liberal bias.
But this new subpoena of FBI Director Wray (Jordan infamously to this day has refused to comply with a lawful subpoena from the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack) comes under the auspices of Jordan’s Judiciary Committee, despite Jordan tweeting it out via his Weaponization Committee account.
“The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) handling of domestic violent extremism investigations against Catholic Americans and its effect on protected First Amendment activity,” Jordan’s letter begins. There is no proof his allegations are credible.
READ MORE: Louisville Becomes 146th Mass Shooting in Just 100 Days This Year – Dem Governor Says Two of the Victims Were His Friends
Commonweal, a liberal Catholic magazine, explored the issue last month, mocking the far-right’s outrage, and noting: “Those who’ve been quick to call the FBI anti-Catholic should recognize that far-right Catholic websites do publish a great deal of material that would draw and affirm racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, especially anti-Semites. Catholic leaders and spokespersons should condemn that more forcefully.”
The FBI withdrew the memo after it was leaked. The far-right jumped on the memo as yet another alleged example of anti-Christian bias of the federal government. In reality, it was a memo drafted by one Richmond, Virginia FBI agent.
The now-withdrawn FBI memo, The Richmond-Times Dispatch reported in February, “said the agency was investigating Catholics who have possible ties to ‘the far-right white nationalist movement.'”
In his letter, Jordan claims: “Based on the limited information produced by the FBI to the Committee, we now know that the FBI relied on at least one undercover agent to produce its analysis, and that the FBI proposed that its agents engage in outreach to Catholic parishes to develop sources among the clergy and church leadership to inform on Americans practicing their faith. This shocking information reinforces our need for all responsive documents, and the Committee is issuing a subpoena to you to compel your full cooperation.”
Commonweal also wrote that it’s “easy to make fun of the leaked FBI memo that proposed infiltrating radical-traditionalist Catholic organizations to gather intelligence on the violent extremists said to be drawn to them and, supposedly, their celebrations of the Tridentine Mass.As one op-ed writer scoffed in the Washington Post, ‘the most dangerous thing a Rad Trad might do is leave a rosary lying about for someone to slip on.'”
“It’s also easy to be outraged, especially if you misinterpret the FBI memo in the way twenty Republican attorneys general did in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland: ‘The memorandum’s targeting of Catholics because they prefer to pray in the ancient liturgical language of the Church, and the tactics it proposes for dealing with those Catholics, harkens back to some of the worst chapters of our past.'”
READ MORE: Jim Jordan to Hold Committee Hearing During NYC Field Trip to Attack Alvin Bragg for Prosecuting Trump
It’s also important to remind Americans that Republican outrage during the early days of the Obama administration over a Dept. of Homeland Security “report warning that home-grown extremists are organizing and targeting military veterans for recruitment,” was so vilified – because those extremists were right-wing extremists – DHS withdrew the report.
:{:{}:
}:
That helped enable the rise of right-wing violent extremism, including white supremacist and white nationalist hate groups, that America faces today.
In 2021, President Joe Biden said, “Domestic terrorism from white supremacists is the most lethal terrorist threat in the homeland.”
Watch President Biden’s remarks below or at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'So defund the police?' Jim Jordan slammed for plan to cut DOJ and FBI funds over Trump indictment ›
Jim Jordan threatens 16 FBI officials with subpoenas after facing affront over three 'nutcase' whistleblowers ›
Revealed: Jim Jordan's FBI 'whistleblowers' were paid by Trump ally and spread J6 conspiracy theories ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Jim Jordan ramps up investigation into FBI over domestic terrorism ... ›
Jim Jordan's first FBI whistleblowers face scrutiny from skeptical ... ›
Jim Jordan's FBI 'whistleblowers' gambit starts to unravel ›
---
ref 1
no lnx doc ltr
the FBI on Tuesday said an internal memo from the Richmond office related to investigating Catholics — a memo that has angered public officials and several state attorneys around the country and in Virginia — “does not meet the exacting standards of the FBI.”
“While our standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligence products, this particular field office product — disseminated only within the FBI — regarding racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism does not meet the exacting standards of the FBI,” the national office for the FBI said yesterday in an email.
“Upon learning of the document, FBI Headquarters quickly began taking action to remove the document from FBI systems and conduct a review of the basis for the document,” the statement said.
“The FBI is committed to sound analytic tradecraft and to investigating and preventing acts of violence and other crimes while upholding the constitutional rights of all Americans and will never conduct investigative activities or open an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity,” it added.
A spokeswoman for the local FBI field office in Richmond had said that the agency would not be commenting about a request by U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to hand over documents related to the internal memo, which classified “radical-traditionalist Catholic ideology” as a possible national security threat.
The eight-page memo from the Richmond office was leaked on Jan. 23 by Kyle Seraphin, who was a special agent at the bureau for six years, and was published on the site uncoverdc.com.
It said the agency was investigating Catholics who have possible ties to “the far-right white nationalist movement.”
“The FBI’s Richmond Division would like to protect Virginians from the threat of ‘white supremacy,’ which it believes has found a home within Catholics who prefer the Latin Mass,” Seraphin, who is Catholic, wrote.
Seraphin told The New York Post he believed the document was an “appalling” violation of the First Amendment and said there is no connection between Catholics and white supremacists.
The document was later rescinded by FBI headquarters.
Download PDF Letter]
Nineteen attorneys general, including Virginia’s, wrote a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in which they condemned the memo and asked for information about how Catholics were being investigated. The letter also was sent to Stanley M. Meador, the special agent in charge of the Richmond office.
Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, and U.S. Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., also contacted Wray. They described the “FBI’s targeting of a set of Catholic Americans for their religious beliefs” as the latest example of a “serious misuse of federal law enforcement resources” for “apparent political purposes.”
Jordan asked that the FBI produce a list of investigations that the Richmond Field Office “relied upon to make its assessment,” as well as a list of the agency employees involved in the drafting, reviewing, approving or disseminating it. He set a deadline of 5 p.m. March 2.
“We remind you that whistleblower disclosures are protected by law and that we will not tolerate any effort to retaliate against whistleblowers for their disclosures,” Jordan added.
The Staten Island Advance contributed to this report.
---
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/03/jim-jordan-weaponization-subcommittee-witnesses
ref 2
no lnx ref
Report: Jim Jordan’s “Weaponization” Witnesses Are Conspiracy Theorists With…No Knowledge of Government Wrongdoing
The congressman’s hearings are off to a very embarrassing start.
BY BESS LEVIN
MARCH 3, 2023
One of the most ridiculous things Republicans have done in recent memory—and there are a lot of ridiculous things they’ve done in recent memory—was to create a House subcommittee to investigate the “Weaponization of the Federal Government.” Tasked with probing everything from the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago last year to what really happened on January 6, the panel operates on the assumption that agencies and officials within the federal government have abused their power to silence, punish, and hurt conservatives; chaired by Representative Jim Jordan, the committee has vowed to expose this bias against the right. And hey—if Jordan & Co. have any evidence to support their claims, they should definitely make them public! Unfortunately, at this time it appears they very much do not.
As for the first three witnesses to testify behind closed doors to the newly formed subcommittee, a trio the GOP insists are brave whistleblowers with inside knowledge of a huge bias against conservatives within the government, Jordan may as well have picked up a few random folks at the gas station or Dunkin’ Donuts by his house on the way to work, for all they revealed. Oh, sure, the witnesses definitely thought they had the kind of damning information the committee has promised, but according to The New York Times, their collective testimony seemed to be less based on actual evidence than it was on crackpot conspiracies one can read about online.
Per the Times:
The trio appears to be a group of aggrieved former FBI officials who have trafficked in right-wing conspiracy theories, including about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the Capitol…. The roster of witnesses, whose interviews and statements are detailed in a 316-page report compiled by Democrats that was obtained by The New York Times, suggests that Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, the chairman of the panel, has so far relied on people who do not meet the definition of a whistle-blower and who have engaged in partisan conduct that calls into question their credibility.
“Each endorses an alarming series of conspiracy theories related to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, the COVID vaccine, and the validity of the 2020 election,” Democrats wrote in the heavily footnoted report, which cites scores of statements made by the witnesses. “One has called repeatedly for the dismantling of the FBI. Another suggested that it would be better for Americans to die than to have any kind of domestic intelligence program.”
The report focuses on the testimony of George Hill, a retired supervisory intelligence analyst from the bureau’s Boston field office; Stephen Friend, an ex–special agent who worked in the Daytona Beach office; and Garret O’Boyle, a special agent from the Wichita, Kansas, field office who is currently suspended. As the Times notes, Hill has claimed on Twitter that January 6 was a “set up” and part of a “larger #Democrat plan using their enforcement arm, the #FBI.” For his part, Friend, who has also claimed FBI wrongdoing, was suspended after he refused to take part in a SWAT raid of a January 6 suspect who’d been accused of being a member of a right-wing militia group with ties to the Three Percenter movement, and who had posted a video of himself outside the Capitol on January 6 wearing body armor and a gas mask and holding an AR-15-style rifle. Friend also testified about “being asked to surveil a person attending a school board meeting, touching on a claim promoted by Republicans that the government mistreated conservative parents,” as the Times reports. Yet the Democrats’ report found, according to the Times, “Friend conceded during his interview that the man being tracked was a Three Percenter who was under counterterrorism investigation,” and the man was later arrested on charges related to the January 6 attack.
Mr. Friend also engaged with Russian propaganda outlets while he was an FBI employee, the report noted, including being quoted extensively in an article in Sputnik headlined “Under Biden Federal Agencies Turned Into Instrument of Intimidation, FBI Whistleblower Says,” and appearing for an interview with Russia Today…. The report also said that Mr. Hill had embraced a conspiracy theory that an Arizona man named Ray Epps was a federal informant who helped to instigate the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Prominent Republicans—including Mr. Trump—have widely promoted the claim, which Mr. Epps denies and the House Jan. 6 committee determined to be unfounded.
Naturally, O’Boyle also compared COVID-19 vaccine mandates to Nazi genocide, according to the report. Democrats concluded in the report that nothing in O’Boyle’s testimony “suggests misconduct at the FBI” and that Hill had “made multiple claims about the FBI’s handling of criminal investigations into the January 6 Capitol attack, despite having very little personal involvement in those investigations.”
And then, of course, there’s the matter of money. O’Boyle and Friend both testified to the subcommittee that they had received, per the Times, “financial support from Kash Patel, a Trump loyalist and former high-ranking official in the former president’s administration.” (According to Friend, Patel sent him $5,000 basically right after they connected in November 2022.) In a statement to the Times, Patel did not confirm or deny sending the witnesses money, but said, “Whistleblowers who provide credible information exposing government waste, fraud, and abuse serve a critical role for constitutional oversight.”
In their report, Democrats wrote, “Based on this evidence, committee Democrats conclude that there is a strong likelihood that Kash Patel is encouraging the witnesses to continue pursuing their meritless claims, and in fact is using them to help propel his vendetta against the FBI, Justice Department, and Biden administration on behalf of himself and President Trump.”
---
an 4 23
all of the concessions that Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) made in his desperate bid to become House Speaker are coming back to haunt him as his caucus can't seem to get on the same page and now he is starting to point fingers at his deputies for their failings -- many of which are his fault.
According to a report from Politico, McCarthy's travails have led him to start looking for "scapegoats" in an effort to escape blame and allay doubts that he is not up to the job.
As the report notes, "Within days of Kevin McCarthy clinching the speakership, some of his allies began to fret: How the hell was he going to live up to all the promises he’d made to conservatives to win their support? How, in particular, would he pass a budget that would balance within 10 years — a tricky feat even before he took cuts to Social Security and Medicare off the table?"
Adding that his "chickens coming home to roost," the report states that the embattled McCarthy won't own up to his failures and now wants to spread the blame.
Pointing out that McCarthy has taken shots at Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) as "incompetent" and chief deputy Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) as "ineffective," the report states, "People close to McCarthy tell us that he perceives both men as disloyal (and we know from covering McCarthy for almost a decade that he holds grudges)."
According to one Republican aide, it was inevitable that McCarthy's unbridled ambition would put him in the place he is today.
“He made a bunch of promises during the speaker race that were always untenable, but he made them anyway,” they explained. “At a certain point, a lot of that stuff is going to collide, and he’s getting nervous and looking for others to blame.”
You can read more here.
---
---
an 4 23
Jamie Raskin (D-MD) shared an internal memo with Democrats revealing that House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY) has issued subpoenas for documents and bank records related to the Biden family and business deals allegedly conducted by Hunter Biden, Politico reported.
The memo showed that Bank of America, Cathay Bank, JPMorgan Chase, HSBC USA N.A., and Mervyn Yan, a former business associate of Hunter Biden’s, were all targeted in the subpoena.
"To date, Chairman Comer has issued six subpoenas and sent 39 letters in the Biden family investigation alone. Notably, Mr. Comer has failed to issue a single document subpoena in any other Committee investigation this Congress," Raskin said. "This significant use of resources duplicates efforts by Senate Republicans in the 116th Congress, which, after three years, have failed to reveal any wrongdoing by President Biden."
Comer fired back at Raskin's statement, saying his disclosing of the subpoenas showed a "cheap attempt to thwart cooperation from other witnesses."
"Given his antics with the first bank subpoena, the American people and media should be asking what information Ranking Member Raskin is trying to hide this time," he added.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
- Republicans frustrated with Oversight chair Comer for sticking his nose in their business: report ›
- 'Just dreamed that up': Jamie Raskin knocks Republicans over their latest attacks on the IRS ›
- House oversight chair coordinated with Trump lawyer to end Trump tax probe: Raskin ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
- Oversight Committee probes Hunter Biden as Raskin accuses chair ... ›
- Raskin says Republican Comer is trying to quash release of Trump ... ›
- Democrats allege Comer has withheld evidence, misrepresented
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/jim-jordan-subpoenas-ex-prosecutor/
an badash 4 23
no lnx
house Republican Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, ignoring a stern warning from Alvin Bragg to not interfere with his hush money payoff probe into Donald Trump, has issued a subpoena to one of two former New York prosecutors who resigned over what appeared at the time to be the Manhattan District Attorney’s decision to stall the investigation.
In a statement from the House Judiciary Committee Jordan say he “subpoenaed former New York County Special Assistant District Attorney Mark Pomerantz to appear before the Committee for a deposition. As a special assistant district attorney, Pomerantz led the investigation into President Donald Trump’s finances before resigning in protest after Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s initial reluctance to move forward with charges against President Trump. Pomerantz publicly criticized Bragg for failing to aggressively prosecute President Trump and even wrote a memoir describing his eagerness to investigate President Trump and disclosing internal deliberations about the investigation.”
Chairman Jordan is claiming “Pomerantz’s public statements about the investigation strongly suggest that Bragg’s prosecution of President Trump is politically motivated.”
:{:{}:
}:
However, Pomerantz has publicly stated the reason he resigned was because he believed, based on the investigation, that Trump had committed multiple crimes.
:{:{}:
}:
READ MORE: ‘It’s Illegal’: Legal Experts Trounce Clarence Thomas Over Bombshell Corruption Allegations
:{:{}:
}:
The New York Times in March of last year reported Pomerantz “believed that the former president was ‘guilty of numerous felony violations’ and that it was ‘a grave failure of justice’ not to hold him accountable, according to a copy of his resignation letter.”
:{:{}:
}:
In that letter Pomerantz “states explicitly his belief that the office could have convicted the former president. Mr. Bragg’s decision was ‘contrary to the public interest,’ he wrote.”
“The team that has been investigating Mr. Trump harbors no doubt about whether he committed crimes — he did,” the letter states. Pomerantz also “wrote that he believed there was enough evidence to prove Mr. Trump’s guilt ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’”
Chairman Jordan may have difficulty enforcing the subpoena. Pomerantz refused a request to voluntarily appear, and legal experts including Bragg’s general counsel have made clear Jordan does not have the authority to investigate Bragg or an open case.
Also, Chairman Jordan last year refused to comply with a lawful subpoena from the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack.
Jordan also claims he is “conducting oversight of Bragg’s unprecedented prosecutorial conduct to inform the consideration of potential legislative reforms that would, among other things, prevent state or local politically motivated prosecutions of current or former presidents.”
CNN adds that the subpoena “comes as Jordan has left the door open on whether to take the unprecedented step to subpoena Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, as part of the larger House Republican effort to discredit the case he has brought against Trump.”
READ MORE: Students Across the Country Walk Out of School to Protest Gun Violence After Nashville as TN House GOP Moves to Expel Dems
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Jen Psaki shatters Jim Jordan's dream of running interference for Donald Trump ›
Jim Jordan's 'weaponization' committee 'contradicts sworn testimony' and 'ignores key events': analysis ›
'That’s weaponization': Dem smacks down Jim Jordan for ignoring Trump DOJ corruption ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Powerful GOP Rep. Jim Jordan accused of turning blind eye to ... ›
Jim Jordan Issues Information Requests to Universities Researching ... ›
Six former wrestlers say Rep. Jim Jordan knew about abusive OSU ... ›
---
---
an 4 23
House GOP's efforts to find wrongdoing by President Joe Biden aren't yielding the results that some Republican lawmakers thought they would — and there is growing frustration within the caucus and their hardest-right constituents, reported Politico on Tuesday.
"According to interviews with more than a dozen House Republicans, a sizable chunk of the conference is focused on preventing a banking crisis and a looming debt fight instead of on Biden family oversight or a politicized government panel," reported Politico.
"At the same time, the party base is chafing at the lack of big bombshells and concrete steps against administration officials to back up all of lawmakers’ talk."
"Republicans have fired off scores of letters, issued subpoenas and initial reports and held a handful of hearings. But part of the problem is the lofty expectations they set coming in," said the report.
"Long before GOP lawmakers settled their speakership fight, they promised voters they’d deploy the chamber’s oversight power against President Joe Biden on a host of issues. They vowed to find a smoking gun that links Biden to his family’s overseas business dealings. They even embraced comparisons of their investigative efforts to Congress’ storied 1970s Church Committee, which uncovered significant abuses by the intelligence community."
Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA), told Politico, “All of us hear from constituents that they’re very anxious for results. And our task, part of our task, is explaining to people what this process is about, and what to expect. I think some people get anxious because they just want immediate results.”
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who heads up a new panel dedicated to investigating what Republicans call the "weaponization" of government, has been stymied at times as his committee gets ahead of itself. A heated exchange between him and Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) took place last month during a public hearing about FBI investigation tactics, after she pointed out he prematurely issued subpoenas without trying to secure officials' voluntary cooperation first.
"[Oversight Chair James] Comer released a report last month focused on Hunter Biden and other Biden family members’ receipt of more than $1 million from an associate who made a deal with a Chinese energy company— though Republicans didn’t draw a direct link to the president, which has been their stated goal," said the report. "The Treasury Department also has granted Comer’s panel access to so-called suspicious activity reports related to Hunter Biden and associates. But the committee has yet to release any new findings from those activity reports, which are records submitted by banks that don’t necessarily indicate wrongdoing."
---
an 3 23
Jim Jordan (R-OH) is questioning whether Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg has taken time away from probing former President Donald Trump to investigate Hunter Biden's art sales.
Jordan tweeted Friday, "Is Alvin Bragg looking into Hunter Biden's art sales and business records in New York City?"
USA Today reports:
Republicans are investigating Hunter Biden's art sales as part of wide-ranging inquiries into his business dealings and bank records. Rep. James Comer, the Oversight chairman, questioned whether Hunter Biden was peddling influence to foreign adversaries by using high-value art to evade U.S. sanctions, with prices on his work initially listed at up to $500,000 and now ranging from $55,000 to $225,000 apiece.
New York gallery owner, Georges Berges, according to USA Today has "defended Hunter Biden and predicted he would be 'one of the most consequential artists in this century.'"
Regarding the congressman's spearheading of the Biden probe, Slate reports:
Jordan and other Republicans are not obsessed with Hunter Biden because they believe humbly in the ideals of ethical government. Instead, they are taking cues from Donald Trump, who for several years has fixated on a number of fantastical and never-proven accusations that Hunter and Joe Biden are engaged in 'deep state' corruption together....
---
BAK TXT
see benghazi BS
bad code bold
matt taibbi sad
---
an 2 23 fail?
---
an 3 23
house Republicans' hearings on the purported "weaponization" of the federal government against conservatives have gotten off to a rocky start, with even some Fox News personalities complaining that they've so far failed to dig up anything significant.
The hearings continue to misfire on Thursday, and USA Today reporter Bart Jansen likened them to a "Monty Python sketch" in his latest dispatch from the Capitol.
At issue was the fact that two witnesses called by House Republicans made incendiary claims about the federal government "censoring" them under President Joe Biden's direction, but then left the hearing before they could be asked any questions by Democratic members of the committee.
Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) called out Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for not allowing anyone to question the witnesses he brought before the committee.
"They have scurried away with your complicity,” he scolded Jordan. “That’s pretty disgraceful.”
A defensive Jordan replied that the two witnesses didn't "scurry" despite the fact that they had left before any of their claims could be scrutinized.
One witness who didn't "scurry," noted Jansen, was Stanford constitutional scholar Matthew Seligman, who emphasized to the committee that private companies such as Twitter and Facebook are not obligated to let everyone use them and that their decision to remove certain content did not amount to government-sponsored censorship.
"Once again it bears repeating: the First Amendment applies to governmental restrictions of speech, not private conduct," he said.
---
https://www.alternet.org/jen-psaki-shatters-jim-jordan/ dream of run interference for trump
---
https://www.alternet.org/trump-jim-jordan-insurrection-committee/
badash no tet vid?
This is about one client. Donald Trump': Jim Jordan hammered over 'Insurrection LLC' committee
David Badashand The New Civil Rights Movement March 29, 2023
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) unleashed massive criticism of Jim Jordan Wednesday afternoon, accusing the House Judiciary Committee Chairman of working solely for Donald Trump.
In his opening remarks of a Judiciary subcommittee hearing Swalwell, the Ranking Member, slammed Jordan for refusing to comply with a legal subpoena issued by the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, and criticized the subcommittee for holding a hearing – not on gun violence and mass shootings – but on what the California Democrat said was issues to help the ex-president.
Congressman Swalwell blasted Jordan and his “Committee to Obstruct Justice” on a wide range of issues, including obstructing justice, ordering a district attorney to commit a felony, and lying that Attorney General Merrick Garland labeled parents “domestic terrorists.”
“Well, here we are. Another partners’ meeting of Insurrection, LLC,” Swalwell said as he began his remarks. “That’s what this is. This is the newly formed largest law firm in Washington, D.C. Only has one client, maybe a second client that we’re going to learn about today, but that client is former president Donald Trump.”
“Their job,” he said, referring to Jordan’s Judiciary Committee, subcommittees, and his controversial Subcommittee of the Weaponization of the Federal Government, “is to litigate every one of [Trump’s] petty, petty, petty grievances.”
READ MORE: Watch: House Dem Mocks Republicans by Thanking Them for Taking Time Away From ‘Trump’s Memorial Service to David Koresh’
“It’s now 321 days since this subpoena was sent to Jim Jordan, that he did not comply with,” Swalwell said, pointing to a large blown-up copy of the subpoena, with the word “subpoena” enlarged exponentially.
“So it’s comical that we are here today, under Jim Jordan’s leadership, asking people why they don’t want to comply with subpoenas. The guy won’t comply with the one that was sent to him 321 days ago, witness to a crime, the crime that has led to more arrests than any investigation in America,” Swalwell observed, referring to the January 6 prosecutions.
“He’s a witness being asked to do his patriotic duty and respond to a subpoena 321 days later, refuses. Also, since the last hearing of this Committee to Obstruct Justice, Chairman Jordan is now in interfering in an independent criminal prosecution. There’s an investigation in Manhattan, also in Atlanta, also at the Department of Justice, into the former president and Jim Jordan has sent a letter to the independently elected District Attorney Alvin Bragg of Manhattan. He is asking Alvin Bragg to commit a felony.”
“Why is he asking Alvin Bragg to commit a felony? To help Donald Trump. Why is it a felony? Because if Alvin Bragg were to turn over what Jim Jordan is asking of him, Bragg would be violating New York law that says you cannot turn over grand jury proceedings, but that’s what they’re asking them to do. Again, the law doesn’t matter if your client is Donald Trump.”
“The other day Jim Jordan was asked, ‘Well, what do you think of the former president who put out on Truth Social the other day, essentially an another call to action? A January 6-like post when the former president said this posting, Jim Jordan was presented with this post by the former president that calls for ‘death and destruction.’ And Mr. Jordan said that he would ‘need his glasses.’ He was looking the other way. Jim Jordan looking the other way.”
READ MORE: Here’s How Five Republicans in Congress Are Responding to the Mass Shooting of 3 Children and 3 Adults in Nashville (Video)
“Well, we have blown up on the screen and we’ve put it right here and I’ll leave it for Jim Jordan. This is what Donald Trump said, Mr. Jordan,” Swalwell said, reading the e-president’s social media post:
“‘What kind of person can charge another person? In this case it former president of the United States who got more votes than any sitting president in history and leading candidate by far for the Republican Party nomination with the crime when it is known by all that? No crime has been committed and also known that potential death and destruction and such a false charge can be catastrophic for our country. Why and who would do such a thing? Only a degenerate psychopath that truly hates the USA?'”
“Again, I’m gonna leave this up here in probably 200 font. So Mr. Jordan doesn’t need his glasses to read it,” Swalwell added, referring to news that Jordan recently refused to comment on a Trump social media post claiming he first hadn’t read it, then when a reporter showed it to him, Jordan said he couldn’t read it because he didn’t have his glasses.
“The same individual who posted this also posted this photo. There you go, Donald. Trump. Real tough guy holding a baseball bat, next to a picture of that independent prosecutor that Jim Jordan wants to commit a felony, Alvin Bragg.”
“But you won’t hear from this Committee to Obstruct Justice, any condemnation of what Donald Trump posted. They can’t condemn him. They can’t. So in their silence, they condone it. And in these posts from Donald Trump, he incites more and more Americans to commit violence like a woman who was arrested yesterday, near Times Square with a knife seeking to carry out an act of violence in Donald Trump’s name.”
Swalwell blasted Chairman Jordan for repeatedly falsely claiming that Attorney General Merrick Garland had labeled parents speaking at school board meetings “domestic terrorists,” a lie made by many Republicans and conservatives.
READ MORE: New WSJ Poll Is Devastating for DeSantis and His ‘Anti-Woke’ Policies
“No parent has a right to threaten a school board volunteer. If a threat is brought to the FBI, it’s their duty to investigate those threats. We’ve also learned from all the document production from DOJ and the FBI in the Department of Education, that there is not one instance where the Department of Justice called any parent or a group of parents, ‘domestic terrorists,’ as has been claimed by Jim Jordan.”
And he criticized House Republicans, who, under Jim Jordan, had posted a tweet in support of Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Kanye West.
“It’s also about a tweet that Jim Jordan posted back in the fall. ‘Kanye. Elon. Trump.’ Now after that tweet was posted, Kanye said he’s going to declare ‘DEF CON three on the Jews.’ The tweet stayed up for months. Everyone was like, ‘Hey guys, turns out your hero Kanye West hates the Jews. We all stand with Israel. Please take down the tweet.’ They didn’t take down the tweet. They kept the tweet up. Day after day. Jewish community they’re hurting, they say, ‘Please don’t take, please don’t put this tweet up.’ It stays up.”
He also blasted the GOP for holding hearings with witnesses they invited who are anti-police, despite their motto of “backing the blue.”
“Last week, we had a hearing where you could call anyone in America when you have the majority, the power of a subpoena. We had a hearing about the ATF. These guys brought a witness who had just recently tweeted, ‘fuck cops.’ Cops. That’s what this guy tweeted. Anyone on Earth could have come to that hearing and they brought someone that said, ‘fuck cops.’ Then one of their colleagues, this is what she’s selling on her social media: ‘defund the FBI.’ So we went from backing the blue to backing the coup.”
Swalwell concluded his remarks by slamming the committee for doing nothing to reduce gun violence in the wake of Monday’s school mass shooting.
“So we’ll waste our time today on this exercise on behalf of Donald Trump and perhaps Elon Musk, but everyone on their side is going to have to go home this weekend to their constituents and their constituents are going to ask them one question: Three little babies died this week in a school in Nashville. No other committee in Congress has jurisdiction to do something about that except this committee. So you’re on the Judiciary Committee. Three kids are dead. They’re gonna be buried this week. What did you do about it? Did you show up to the Judiciary Committee and fight for those kids? Or did you show up and fight for Donald Trump? They showed up to the first hearing after Nashville and they’re fighting for Donald Trump.”
Watch the videos above or at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Jim Jordan's attempt to 'intimidate' Manhattan DA is a 'gross abuse of congressional power': conservative ›
House Republican stumbles after Jake Tapper reminds him that Jim Jordan skirted his January 6th subpoena ›
Jen Psaki shatters Jim Jordan's dream of running interference for Donald Trump ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Rep. Jim Jordan Flip-Flops After Being Called Out Over Kanye Tweet ›
Opinion | Jim Jordan is about to lead Republicans into a dangerous ... ›
Opinion | Jim Jordan abuses his power going after District Attorney ... ›This is about one client. Donald Trump': Jim Jordan hammered over 'Insurrection LLC' committee
---
https://www.alternet.org/menacing-wickedness-marjorie-taylor-greene/
no lnx twt
on June 22nd, 2021, then-freshman United States Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) filed House Resolution 3960 to abolish the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, alleging that the agency was in cahoots with President Joe Biden to strip American citizens of their right to bear arms.
"The ATF's ongoing, unconstutional [sic] attacks on the Second Amendment must end," Greene's office stated of the Brian A. Terry Memorial Eliminate the ATF Act, which went nowhere because Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress. The typo still appears on Greene's website.
Like most right-wing lawmakers, Greene is steadfastly opposed to any form of sensible gun control, even as thousands of Americans are killed by bullets every year. But Monday's mass shooting at the private Christian Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee that claimed the lives of at least six people marked an escalation in Greene's rhetoric and actions aimed at thwarting efforts to save lives.
READ MORE: Marjorie Taylor Greene garners few sympathizers after claiming she was 'attacked' in a restaurant
At around the same time that Greene baselessly blamed Biden for the slaughter, Greene and other members of their state's Capitol Hill delegation were obstructing a routine ATF inspection of a weapons retailer in Smyrna, Georgia.
Footage of the confrontation was posted to Twitter along with a screenshot of Greene boastfully writing that the ATF abandoned its assignment "after we questioned their motives."
In the video, Greene flexed her power.
"We're members of Congress," she said, adding that "I serve on the Oversight Committee."
READ MORE: Watch: Jamie Raskin shreds Marjorie Taylor Greene at hearing for sympathizing with insurrectionists
Greene also complained to the ATF officer that the "government has been weaponized," that "people feel like their gun rights are threatened," and that "gun dealers feel like their businesses are threatened."
Given the day's events, social media users tore into Greene with exasperated disgust.
Jayme Ruimveld: "Is this today? Is she running her mouth about guns while children have been murdered by guns at their preschool? Not a shred of decency. Not an ounce of respect or concern for the grieving families. Absolutely soulless."
Kat: "And they're worried about gun vendors, feeling threatened!"
Judy Miron: "There are 7 more people dead, 3 of them children today in Nashville.. and she complains about ATF inspections!! Time to get rid of her. Vote her out!!"
Michelle: "Marge is nothing but a heartless hateful little troll."
Leon: "Meanwhile children died today at a Christian School, but hey as long as your precious 2nd Amendment that was written for Flintlock rifles is protected right."
Cathy Coleman: "There is something very wrong with MTG and the Republican members of Congress who hover around her & follow her lead. Something beyond dirty politics or unbridled ambition - there is a menacing wickedness and cruelty about them all."
ZoëbethC-MeidasMighty: "Just as another shooter shows up in Tennessee to kill elementary school kids. They got their priorities straight. I bet after lunch it's more bills to ban Drag Shows on a federal level."
Marcus Flowers: "As America grieves over yet another school shooting, this time in Nashville, Marjorie Taylor Greene is trying to prevent the ATF from doing their job. Common Sense Gun Legislation is necessary. We must do something to protect our children."
Seth Abramson: "Marjorie Taylor Greene is all about 'good guys with guns' until a violent insurrectionist smashes the window of the Speaker's Lobby inside a closed-to-the-public United States Capitol so a military veteran can leap into the breach and kidnap or kill a sitting member of Congress."
Watch the encounter below or at this link.
READ MORE: 'Performative disgrace': Marjorie Taylor Greene ridiculed for defending Ashli Babbitt while misspelling her name
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Liar, liar': Joe Biden amuses crowd with quip about Marjorie Taylor Greene ›
Marjorie Taylor Greene says the Navy will be 'force fed' bugs and Krabby Patties ›
Veteran rips into Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert over Jan. 6 jail visit ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Marjorie Taylor Greene's jail visit pulls GOP closer to Jan. 6 rioters ... ›
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene rises from GOP fringe to front | AP News ›
House Republican leaders condemn GOP candidate who made ... ›
---
---
an 3 23
no lnx
republican House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan's unprecedented attack on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg this week will "backfire" on the GOP, according to a Washington Post columnist who spoke with House Democrats.
Chairman Jordan, who has no constitutional oversight authority over an elected county district attorney, demanded Bragg hand over documents and communications and testify before Congress about his criminal investigation into Donald Trump's hush money payoffs and business practices. Some believe an indictment could come as early as Wednesday afternoon.
"If Jim Jordan and MAGA Republicans attack the Manhattan DA's potential indictment of Trump, Democrats will use the proceedings to draw attention to coordination between House Republicans and Trump's legal team, Dems tell me," The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent said Wednesday via Twitter. "This will backfire on the GOP."
Sargent adds House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin told him: "This is an extreme move to use the resources of Congress to interfere with a criminal investigation at the state and local level." Raskin likened "GOP 'political culture' to 'authoritarian dictatorships.'"
READ MORE: 'Chilling': Law Enforcement 'Seriously' Investigating Threats Ahead of Possible Trump Indictment Says Top WaPo Reporter
Sargent says Democrats "can use this against the GOP."
He adds: "Trump's lawyer sen[t] a letter to Jim Jordan urging an investigation into any charges against Trump, the NYT reports. Dems will use any hearings that Jordan holds to shed light on coordination between Trump's legal team and House Republicans, aides tell me."
In his Wednesday Washington Post opinion column Sargent calls on Democrats to "marshal some serious creativity in response" to Republican attacks.
"The extraordinary move by House Republicans to insert themselves into Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's investigation of Trump provides Democrats with an opening to do just that," he says.
Sargent says "it's not clear that Jordan, the Judiciary Committee chair, has thought this through. The course of action signaled by the letter — also signed by Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) — could go sideways for Republicans in unforeseen ways."
READ MORE: US Secretary of State Denounces Uganda's New 'Kill the Gays' Bill
Raskin is an attorney, constitutional law professor, and was the lead impeachment manager for the second impeachment of Donald Trump. He has become a leading voice for American democratic values and in the fight against the MAGA Republicans.
"If and when there is an indictment, we will be able to reconstruct all the facts of this case in a way that makes sense to the American public," Raskin told Sargent, who explains: "The aim, he noted, would be to 'show the justice process is working, and there is no call for extraordinary intervention by the U.S. Congress.'"
Sargent warns, "A Trump indictment will unleash months of information warfare around a numbingly complex matter never before litigated in the public arena. Democrats sometimes undervalue the importance of sheer creativity in politics, and as ugly as the GOP response has been, Republicans are responding to unprecedented circumstances with new innovations. Democrats must meet them on that battlefield."
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Wtf is he doing?': Twitter explodes at Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg for letting Donald Trump grand jury expire ›
'Purely political attack': Jim Jordan demands Alvin Bragg testify about anticipated Donald Trump indictments ›
Trump’s MAGA apologists show their 'demagoguery' with bogus attacks on DA Bragg: ex-federal prosecutor ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Jordan, Comer, Steil Demand Communications, Documents, and ... ›
Who is Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan DA who would bring charges ... ›
Manhattan DA Bragg privately warns of intimidation after Trump calls ... ›
---
https://www.alternet.org/james-comer-2659569934/
an 3 23 no lnx
house Oversight Chair James Comer's zeal to open multiple investigations into President Joe Biden and members of his administration is starting to rankle his GOP colleagues who want the Kentucky Republican to slow down and stay out of their work.
According to a report from Punchbowl, there is a belief among Republicans that Comer is spreading himself too thin by chasing after multiple investigations that normally don't fall under his committee's purview.
As Punchbowl is reporting, "In a little more than two months as chair, Comer has launched a barrage of probes into everything from the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan to Ukraine aid to the toxic train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio," and that has some other House committee chairman unhappy that he is stepping on their toes.
One of those avenues of investigations is into Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan which resulted in a letter from Comer demanding information and that letter caught House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-TX) flatfooted.
“I was a little surprised by the letter,” he admitted before brushing it off with, “But we’ve talked since then. We’re working it out.”
According to the report, "Comer’s letter to Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg last month requesting information on the Ohio train derailment raised eyebrows in GOP circles as well. Some Republicans thought the probe is overreaching on an issue better served by either the Energy and Commerce or Transportation and Infrastructure panels."
One aide for a House member was critical of Comer thrusting himself into everything.
“There’s a big difference between oversight where you have expertise and oversight to churn out press releases,” they explained. “Everyone thought he’d learn from prior chairmen and work in a more coordinated way. It’s been quite the opposite.”
The report adds that House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) tried to tamp down complaints about Comer's intrusiveness, telling Punchbowl: "We’re gonna do stuff in our committee. He’s going to do stuff on his committee, and if there’s overlap, and he’s doing stuff that we’re doing too … the most important thing is that the American people get the facts, we propose legislation and we address things in the appropriations process.”
You can read more here.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Dean Obeidallah: Comer should probe Trump and Kushner’s Saudi ties if they care about 'influence peddling' ›
'Watching a snake eat its own tail': Analysis torches Comer’s double standard in Trump classified docs case ›
ABC host grills GOP House Oversight chair: Will you be investigating Jared Kushner too? ›
---
https://www.propublica.org/article/jim-jordan-disinformation-subpoena-universities
3 23
house Republicans have sent letters to at least three universities and a think tank requesting a broad range of documents related to what it says are the institutions' contributions to the Biden administration’s “censorship regime.”
The letters are the latest effort by a House subcommittee set up in January to investigate how the federal government, working with social media companies, has allegedly been “weaponized” to silence conservative and right-wing voices. So far, the committee’s investigations have amplified a variety of dubious, outright false and highly misleading Republican grievances with law enforcement, many of them espoused by former President Donald Trump. Committee members have cited supposed abuses that include the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago, its investigations of Jan. 6 rioters and the Biden administration’s purported use of executive powers to shut down conservative viewpoints on social media.
now, universities and their researchers are coming under the spotlight of the committee, which the Republicans have labeled the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. The letters, signed by Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who is chair of both the House Judiciary Committee and the subcommittee, were sent in early March.
They cover an investigation into how “certain third parties, including organizations like yours, may have played a role in this censorship regime by advising on so-called ‘misinformation,’” according to a copy of one of the letters obtained by ProPublica.
The committee requested documents and information dating back to January 2015 between any “employee, contractor, or agent of your organization” and the federal government or social media organizations pertaining to the moderation of social media content. ProPublica confirmed the requests went to Stanford University, the University of Washington, Clemson University and the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
The letters have prompted a wave of alarm among those in the field that the congressional inquiry itself, no matter what it finds, will lead universities to pull back on this research just as the 2024 election gets underway. “Recent efforts definitely have a chilling effect on the community of experts across academia, civil society and government built up to understand broader online harms like harassment, foreign influence and — yes — disinformation,” Graham Brookie, who leads studies in this area at the Atlantic Council, told ProPublica.
“The ‘weaponization’ committee is being weaponized against us,” another researcher told ProPublica. Like half a dozen others interviewed for this story, this person asked not to be identified because of the ongoing congressional probe.
Democrats have called the committee a modern-day House Un-American Activities Committee, akin to the congressional committee that pursued alleged communists during the McCarthy era.
Since Rep. Jordan took over the gavel of the judiciary committee in January, he has issued more than 80 subpoenas and requests for documents. Recipients have included the CEOs of social media companies, intelligence officials who signed on to a statement about Hunter Biden’s laptop during the 2020 campaign and members of the National School Boards Association who asked the Justice Department to investigate threats of violence against school board officials. Jordan himself refused a subpoena to testify before the Democratic-led House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, prompting that committee to refer the matter to the House Ethics Committee.
Jordan’s missives were sent a day after a committee hearing on the “Twitter files,” leaked internal communications from the company that purported to show how right-wing accounts were sidelined and silenced. In written testimony, a panelist accused a broad swath of organizations and individuals of being members of the “Censorship Industrial Complex,” including, he implied, the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, CIA, Department of Defense and universities. The witness wrote disinformation researchers, working with the government, are “creating blacklists of disfavored people and then pressuring, cajoling, and demanding that social media platforms censor, deamplify, and even ban the people on these blacklists.”
A New York University study concluded in 2021 that social media had not silenced those on the right. “The claim of anti-conservative animus” by social media companies, the study said, “is itself a form of disinformation: a falsehood with no reliable evidence to support it."
A spokesperson for Rep. Jordan did not respond to requests for comment.
Since the 2016 elections, Stanford, UW, Clemson and others have engaged in research, sometimes in partnership with social media platforms, government officials and each other, into ways that disinformation can pose tZreats to democracy and how such efforts can be meaningfully countered. The role of lies and disinformation leading to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol gave increased prominence to their work.
As ProPublica has previously reported, sustained accusations by congressional Republicans and right-wing influencers that the Biden administration is stifling dissent have caused the administration to back away from its efforts countering disinformation, including canceling research contracts and sending messages inside the administration that disinformation work is too hot to handle.
Those moves followed a bungled rollout of a clumsily named “Disinformation Governance Board” to coordinate efforts to counter what the administration had called “dangerous conspiracy theories that can provide a gateway to terrorist violence.” Following criticism, the administration disbanded the board and accepted the resignation of its executive director, Nina Jankowicz.
Jordan has subpoenaed Jankowicz, too. She is scheduled to testify April 10 and said she will happily testify under oath.
“This sort of inquiry isn’t something that belongs in the United States Congress,” said Jankowicz. “But given that this method of bullying has caused other institutions to fold to Republican pressure in the past, I fear we may see the blunt force of congressional committees continue to be used in ways that are in direct opposition to the safety, security and free expression of the American people."
deSantis Privately Called for Google to Be “Broken Up”
Stanford did not answer a question about whether it stood by its research or make its researchers, the Stanford Internet Observatory’s Alex Stamos or Renee DiResta, available for comment. The university referred ProPublica to an online fact sheet addressing “inaccurate and misleading claims” made in the congressional testimony about Stanford’s “projects to analyze rumors and narratives on social media relating to U.S. elections and the coronavirus.” The German Marshall fund said it was working to address the request and Clemson University’s media relations department did not respond to requests for comment.
The University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public issued a statement that said “We’re incredibly proud of our work,” adding that “some of the projects CIP researchers have contributed to have become the subject of false claims and criticism that mischaracterizes our work, a tactic that peer researchers in this space are also experiencing.” The statement did not specifically address the House requests.
A university spokesperson, Victor Balta, said in an email, “The UW stands behind this important research aiming to resist strategic misinformation and strengthen our discourse. We have received a request for documents and information, and a response is in progress.”
---
bad code
68 pp basis for benghazi attack?
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/shellenberger-testimony.pdf
The Censorship Industrial Complex U.S. Government Support For Domestic Censorship And Disinformation Campaigns, 2016 - 2022 Testimony by Michael Shellenberger to The House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government March 9, 2023
---
Executive Summary 4
The Censorship Industrial Complex Today 8
Definition and Mission 8
National Science Foundation Funding 8
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Roots 9
Key Organizations 10
Key Individuals 15
The Complex’s Disinformation Campaigns 18
- The Trump-Russian Collusion Conspiracy Theory, 2016 - 19 18
- Delegitimizing the Covid Lab Leak Theory, 2020 – 2021 22
- The Hunter Biden Laptop Conspiracy Theory, 2020–21 22
Ideology, Strategy, And Origins 25
Ideology 25
Strategy 30
Origins 34
Key Events 36
2017 36
New Knowledge runs disinformation campaign against Republican Senate
Candidate in Alabama 36
Former FBI employee web site that falsely accuses ordinary Twitter users of
being Russian bots 38
2018 39
Senate Intelligence Report On Russian Interference 39
2020 40
“Election Integrity Partnership” 40
Aspen Institute Workshop Trains Top Journalists To Pre-Bunk “Hack and Leak” 42
Covid Censorship 45
Lab Leak Theory 45
Mask Skepticism 46
2021 46
DHS Expands Its Censorship Powers 46
Under Pressure From White House, Facebook and Twitter Censor Accurate Vaccine
Information 47
Climate Change and Energy 50
2022 53
U.S. government funds “Disinformation Index” and “News Guard” to drive
advertisers away from disfavored news media 53
Creation of Department Of Homeland Security’s “Disinformation Governance
Board” 54
2023 54
Diresta and Stamos hype “foreign disinformation” threat 55
Recommendations 56
- Defund the Censorship Industrial Complex 56
- Mandate instant reporting of all communications between government
officials and contractors with social media executives relating to content
moderation 56
- Reduce Scope of Section 230 56
---
Shellenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 4
Executive Summary
In his 1961 farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned of
“the acquisition of unwarranted influence… by the military-industrial
complex.” Eisenhower feared that the size and power of the “complex,” or
cluster, of government contractors and the Department of Defense would
“endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” How? Through “domination
of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the
power of money.” He feared public policy would “become the captive of a
scientific-technological elite.”1
Eisenhower’s fears were well-founded. Today, American taxpayers are
unwittingly financing the growth and power of a censorship-industrial complex
run by America’s scientific and technological elite, which endangers our
liberties and democracy. I am grateful for the opportunity to offer this
testimony and sound the alarm over the shocking and disturbing emergence
of state-sponsored censorship in the United States of America.
The Twitter Files, state attorneys general lawsuits, and investigative
reporters have revealed a large and growing network of government agencies,
academic institutions, and nongovernmental organizations that are actively
censoring American citizens, often without their knowledge, on a range of
issues, including on the origins of COVID2
, COVID vaccines3
, emails relating to
Hunter Biden’s business dealings4
, climate change5
, renewable energy6
, fossil
fuels7
, and many other issues.
I offer some cautions. I do not know how much of the censorship is
coordinated beyond what we have been able to document, and I will not
speculate. I recognize that the law allows Facebook, Twitter, and other private
companies to moderate content on their platforms. And I support the right of
governments to communicate with the public, including to dispute inaccurate
and misleading information.
But government officials have been caught repeatedly pushing social
media platforms to censor disfavored users and content. Often, these acts of
censorship threaten the legal protection social media companies need to exist,
Section 230
Shellenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 5]
“If government officials are directing or facilitating such censorship,”
notes George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, “it raises
serious First Amendment questions. It is axiomatic that the government cannot
do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly.”8
Moreover, we know that the U.S. government has funded organizations
that pressure advertisers to boycott news media organizations and social
media platforms that a) refuse to censor and/or b) spread disinformation,
including alleged conspiracy theories.
The Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington, the
Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and Graphika all have
inadequately-disclosed ties to the Department of Defense, the C.I.A., and
other intelligence agencies. They work with multiple U.S. government agencies
to institutionalize censorship research and advocacy within dozens of other
universities and think tanks.
It is important to understand how these groups function. They are not
publicly engaging with their opponents in an open exchange of ideas. They
aren’t asking for a national debate over the limits of the First Amendment.
Rather, they are creating blacklists of disfavored people and then pressuring,
cajoling, and demanding that social media platforms censor, deamplify, and
even ban the people on these blacklists.
Who are the censors? They are a familiar type. Overly confident in their
ability to discern truth from falsity, good intention from bad intention, the
instinct of these hall monitor-types is to complain to the teacher — and, if the
teacher doesn’t comply, to go above them, to the principal. Such an approach
might work in middle school and many elite universities, but it is anathema to
freedom and is an abuse of power.
These organizations and others are also running their own influence
operations, often under the guise of “fact-checking.” The intellectual leaders
of the censorship complex have convinced journalists and social media
executives that accurate information is disinformation, that valid hypotheses
are conspiracy theories, and that greater self-censorship results in more
accurate reporting. NOTE LACK OF EVIDENCE
In many instances, censorship, such as labeling social
[Shellenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 6
media posts, is part of the influence operation aimed at discrediting factual
information.
The censorship industrial complex combines established methods of
psychological manipulation, some developed by the U.S. Military during the
Global War on Terror, with highly sophisticated tools from computer science,
including artificial intelligence. The complex’s leaders are driven by the fear
that the Internet and social media platforms empower populist, alternative,
and fringe personalities and views, which they regard as destabilizing. Federal
government officials, agencies, and contractors have gone from fighting ISIS
recruiters and Russian bots to censoring and deplatforming ordinary Americans
and disfavored public figures.
Importantly, the bar for bringing in military-grade government
monitoring and speech-countering techniques has moved from “countering
terrorism” to “countering extremism” to countering simple misinformation.
The government no longer needs a predicate of calling you a terrorist or
extremist to deploy government resources to counter your political activity.
The only predicate it needs is simply the assertion that the opinion you
expressed on social media is wrong.
These efforts extend to influencing and even directing conventional
news media organizations. Since 1971, when the Washington Post and New
York Times elected to publish classified Pentagon papers about the war in
Vietnam, journalists understood that we have a professional obligation to
report on leaked documents whose contents are in the public interest, even
when they had been stolen. And yet, in 2020, the Aspen Institute and
Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center urged journalists to “Break the Pentagon
Papers principle” and not cover leaked information to prevent the spread of
“disinformation.”
Government-funded censors frequently invoke the prevention of realworld
harm to justify their demands for censorship, but the censors define
harm far more expansively than the Supreme Court does. The censors have
defined harm so broadly, in fact, that they have justified Facebook censoring
accurate information about COVID vaccines, for example, to prevent “vaccine
hesitancy.” Their goal, clearly, is not protecting the truth but rather persuading
Shellenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 7]
the public. That is the purpose of open debate and the free exchange of ideas.
Persuasion by covert means is censorship.
And, increasingly, the censors say their goal is to restrict information
that “delegitimizes” governmental, industrial, and news media organizations.9
That mandate is so sweeping that it could easily censor criticism of any part of
the status quo from elected officials to institutions to laws. This extreme,
reactionary attitude is, bluntly, un-American.
Congress should immediately cut off funding to the censors and
investigate their activities. Second, it should mandate instant reporting of all
conversations between social media executives, government employees, and
contractors concerning content moderation. Third, Congress should limit the
broad permission given to social media platforms to censor, deplatform, and
spread [GUBMINT PRESUMABLY] propaganda.
Whatever Congress does, it is incumbent upon the American people to
wake up to the threat of government censorship via behind-the-scenes
pressure on media corporations. “Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry,”
Eisenhower noted, “can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and
military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that
security and liberty may prosper together.”
---
p11
Key Organizations
CISA: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency,
an agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). On January 6, 2017, outgoing Obama Administration DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson designated “election infrastructure” as “critical infrastructure,” opening up CISA’s mission to censoring alleged “disinformation.”15 Congress created CISA in November 2018 to defend the U.S. from cybersecurity threats from hostile foreign actors (e.g., Russian hackers).16
Digital Forensics Research (DFR) Lab at the Atlantic Council.
The lab is one of the most established and influential full-time censorship institutions in the world.17 Atlantic Council DFR Lab created the foreign-facing DisinfoPortal in June 2018, working directly with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and 23 organizations to censor election narratives leading up to the 2019 elections in Europe.18 In 2018, Facebook named Atlantic Council, an official partner in “countering disinformation” worldwide.19 US taxpayer funding to the Atlantic Council comes from the Defense Department, the US Marines, the US Air Force, the US Navy, the State Department, USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, as well as energy companies and weapons manufacturers.20
Graphika: a private network analysis firm. Graphika published a report for the Senate Intelligence Committee in December 2018, which claimed to have uncovered “in unusually rich detail the scope of Russia's interference not only in the 2016 U.S. presidential election but also in our day-to-day democratic dialogue.”21 Graphika hired as its director of investigations Ben Nimmo away from DFR lab.22
The Defense Department's Minerva Initiative, which focuses on psychological warfare, and DARPA, both gave grants to Graphika.23 In 2021, the Pentagon awarded nearly $5 million in grants and nearly $2 million in contracts to the organization.24 Last fall, Graphika alleged that cartoons on a fringe website were “suspected Russian actors” that were
p12
Shillenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 11]
Shellenberger Testimony March 9, 2022 p. 12]
“engaged in a renewed effort” to interfere in the 2022 midterm elections.25
The New York Times picked up on the story.26
Moonshot CVE is private firm to redirect right-wing people online away
from radicalism 27 but was found to have pushed right-wing people toward an
anarchist leader. “They sent people who were already looking for violence to a
convicted felon with anarchist and anti-Semitic views,” Rep. Morgan Griffith (RVa.)
said to Google’s CEO. “Who is vetting the vetters? We continue to need
more transparency and accountability.”28 Moonshot includes Elizabeth
Neumann, former DHS Asst. Sec. for Counter Terrorism.
FITF: Foreign Influence Task Force, a cyber-regulatory agency
comprised of members of the FBI, DHS, and ODNI
GEC: Global Engagement Center, an analytical division of the U.S. State
Department which systematically launders domestic censorship by working
through “counter-disinformation” NGOs and foreign firms.
Hamilton 68: A dashboard created with U.S. government funding and
the support of New Knowledge claiming to reveal Russian bots on Twitter but
was mocked by Twitter staff because all or almost all belonged to American
citizens
HSIN: Homeland Security Information Network, a portal through which
states and other official bodies can send “flagged” accounts
EIP: Election Integrity Project, a partnership between four government
funded censorship organizations: Stanford Internet Observatory, Graphika,
University of Washington Disinformation Lab, and the Atlantic Council’s Digital
Forensic Research Lab. EIP has served as CISA’s deputized domestic
disinformation flagger
IRA: Internet Research Agency, the infamous Russian “troll farm”
headed by “Putin’s chef,” Yevgheny Prigozhin
MISP: Malware Information Sharing Platform. Used by cyber security
operatives to share malware, tools around bots, coordinated and inauthentic
ops. “When DFR wanted to apply cybersec tools to misinformation,” said a
government disinformation specialist, “they used MISP.”29
NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index, both taxpayer-funded,
are urging advertisers to boycott disfavored publications, and direct
their funding to favored ones The organizations have been caught spreading
disinformation, including that the COVID lab leak theory is a debunked
conspiracy theory, and seeking to discredit publications which accurately
reported on Hunter Biden’s laptop, such as the New York Post
Cognitive Security Collaborative and Adversarial Misinformation and
Influence Tactics and Techniques.
These are online platforms for describing
and coordinating disinformation attacks. “It works like other security
operations focused on threat actors,” noted the specialist. “If they have a
threat actor who has launched a coordinated inauthentic information attack,”
said a source, “they would log the threat actor and start mapping the actor
just as they would a cyber attack. They then coordinate social media
takedowns” [removals].30
University of Washington (UW), one of two academic institutions that
DHS worked directly with and had as its partner, to censor information on
social media platforms during the 2020 election.31 It received a $3 million
government grant, shared with Stanford Internet Observatory, from the Biden
Administration in 2021, to continue its “election misinformation” flagging.32
Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO).
One of the four members of the
Election Integrity Project (and later the Virality Project) with UW, Graphika, and
DFR. It was created in June 2019 by director Alex Stamos and research
manager Renee DiResta. SIO monitors social media and promotes Internet
censorship. For the 2020 election, as part of its partnership with CISA, SIO had
50 “misinformation” analysts assigned to monitor social media.33 SIO was
originally funded by Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the Omidyar Network, and
the Charles Koch Foundation.34
Key Individuals
● Graham Brookie, leader of the Atlantic Council’s DFR Lab. Brookie
served in the Obama White House on the National Security Council.35
● Renee DiResta, Stanford Internet Observatory. DiResta was the research
director for the organization caught creating bot accounts and spreading
disinformation about Alabama Republican Senate Candidate Roy
Moore.36 In her 2018 Senate testimony DiResta advocated “legislation
that defines and criminalizes foreign propaganda” and allowing law
enforcement to “prosecute foreign propaganda.”37 According to
recorded remarks by DiResta’s supervisor at Stanford, Alex Stamos, she
had previously “worked for the CIA.”38
● Jen Easterly, CISA Director. A former military intelligence officer and the
National Security Agency (NSA) deputy director for counterterrorism.
“One could argue we’re in the business of critical infrastructure,” said
Easterly in November 2021, ”and the most critical infrastructure is our
cognitive infrastructure, so building that resilience to misinformation and
disinformation, I think, is incredibly important.”39 The month before,
Easterly said during a CISA summit that Chris Krebs's construction of a
“counter-misinformation” complex with the private sector was a high
priority for DHS.40 A U.S. District Court ruled in October of last year that
Easterly could be deposed because of her “first-hand knowledge” of the
CISA “nerve center” around disinformation.41
● Chris Krebs. CISA Director (2018 to 2020). Chair of Aspen Institute
“Commission on Information Disorder,” helped organize DHS’s “whole-of-society”
approach to censorship.42 Krebs administered the federal
side of the 2020 election after DHS effectively nationalized election
security on January 6, 2017, via the declaration of elections as “critical
infrastructure.” Krebs then declared that “misinformation” was an attack
on election security. Krebs said in April 2022 that the Hunter Biden
laptop still looked like Russian disinformation and that what mattered
was that news media did not cover the laptop during the 2020 election
cycle.43 Krebs advocated for censoring critics of government COVID-19
protocols44 and said “misinformation” is the largest threat to election
security.45
● Ben Nimmo, Head of Global Threat Intelligence for Facebook, and thus
one of America’s most important censors. Nimmo was the technical lead
for censorship at the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensics Research Lab,
was employed by Graphika in the fall of 2020 46, and worked in NATO
information operations.47 In 2018, Nimmo publicly reported an
anonymous Twitter account, “Ian56”, as a Russian disinformation bot
account because it expressed left-of-center populist anti-war views when
in reality Ian56 was a real person.48 After Nimmo's report, “Ian56” was
reported to the UK government.49
● Kate Starbird, who runs the University of Washington disinformation lab,
has for years been funded primarily by U.S. government agencies to do
social media narrative analytics of political groups, or insurgency
movements, of interest or concern to U.S. military intelligence or
diplomatic equities. Starbird acknowledged that the censorship focus of
CISA and EIP moved from “foreign, inauthentic” social media users to
“domestic, authentic” social media users between 2016 to 2020.50
Starbird is now the head of CISA’s censorship advisory subcommittee.
Alex Stamos was the senior leader at EIP and VP, which served as the
deputized domestic “disinformation” flagger for DHS via Chris Krebs’
CISA. Stamos in 2020 proposed that DHS centralize government
censorship.51 Stamos was the Chief Security Officer of Facebook and led
Facebook's response to alleged Russian disinformation after the 2016
election. Stamos left Facebook, now Meta, in 2018, after reportedly
conflicting with other Facebook executives over how much to censor.52
Stamos says he favors moving away from a free and open Internet
toward a more controlled “cable news network” model. A huge part of
the problem is “large influencers,” said Stamos.53
● Claire Wardle cofounded and directed, First Draft News. a nonprofit
coalition, in June 2015, to build the censorship complex. “In September
2016, our original coalition expanded to become an international Partner
Network of newsrooms, universities, platforms and civil society
organizations.” In 2017, while at the Shorenstein Center for Media,
Politics and Public Policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School, Wardle helped
develop the “Information Disorder Lab,” a framing that Aspen Institute
would embrace. In June 2022, First Draft closed, but its work lives on at
the Information Futures Lab at Brown University’s School of Public
Health.
The Complex’s Disinformation Campaigns
Many of the leaders and participants in today’s censorship industrial ex
have been involved in spreading disinformation, including conspiracy
theories compl, while discrediting accurate information and alleging that valid
theories were debunked conspiracy theories.
- The Trump-Russian Collusion Conspiracy Theory, 2016–2019
The complex’s first major disinformation campaign was the conspiracy
theory that Donald Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin and the Russian
government to steal the 2016 election.
There is no evidence that Russia’s social media investments, or its
hacking and leaking of emails, had any impact, much less a decisive one, on
the outcome of the 2016 election.54 Most neutral analysts, as well as many
Democratic strategists, believe that they did not.55
Two of the four leading censorship organizations, New Knowledge and
Graphika, provided the Senate Intelligence Committee provided the academic
foundation for the claim that the Russians had elected Trump. They pointed to
evidence that ten million people in the U.S. had seen the ads.56
“The Russian disinformation operations that affected the 2016 United
States presidential election are by no means over,” wrote DiResta in the New
York Times in December 2018. “Russian interference through social media… is
a chronic, widespread and identifiable condition that we must now
aggressively manage.”57
Her findings were widely respected and publicized. Former director of
national intelligence James Clapper called the evidence that Russia had
influenced the election "staggering." University of Pennsylvania
communication professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson pointed to the evidence to
conclude that Trump would not have been president without the Russians.58
But there is no evidence that the Russians had any influence on the
2016 campaign, much less that they won it for Trump. Robert Faris, Hal
Roberts and Yochai Benkler of Harvard's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and
Society analyzed millions of articles from 2015 to 2018 using network analysis
to measure how audiences paid attention to media coverage, text analysis to
see which sites wrote about what and when, and wrote detailed case studies of
the most salient issues in the election. “The Russians are there,” wrote Benkler.
“They are trying. But in all these cases, American right-wing media did the
heavy lifting to originate and propagate disinformation.”....
---
---
an ah 3 23
when conservative ex-Rep. John Boehner was serving as House speaker during the Barack Obama years, one of the far-right congressmen who really got on his nerves was a fellow Ohio Republican: Rep. Jim Jordan, a Tea Party and House Freedom Caucus favorite who is now a Donald Trump loyalist and a prominent figure in the MAGA movement. As Boehner saw it, Jordan's very performative antics were harmful to the conservative cause. And Boehner's contempt for Jordan was obvious when he described him as a "legislative terrorist."
But in 2023, Boehner is long gone from Congress. And Jordan's prominence in the U.S. House of Representatives has increased to the point where, under House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-California), he now chairs the House Judiciary Committee as well as the House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
In right-wing media, MAGA pundits have been insisting that Jordan's work with the Weaponization Subcommittee will seriously wound Joe Biden's presidency and the Democratic Party in general. But in an article published by the conservative website The Bulwark on March 10, two legal voices — former Associate U.S. Attorney General Frederick Baron and former federal prosecutor Dennis Aftergut — argue that the Weaponization Subcommittee's bark has so far been a lot worse than its bite.
READ MORE: Jim Jordan's 'weaponization' committee 'contradicts sworn testimony' and 'ignores key events': analysis
"Jim Jordan's premise as chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is apparent: If at first you don't succeed with political stunts dressed up as 'investigations,' change the subject and try again," Baron and Aftergut argue. "After an initial February 9 hearing airing old grievances…. Jordan, (on March 9), tried what had already backfired for his fellow MAGA committee chair James Comer: a disproven claim that the FBI had censored a Twitter story about Hunter Biden. But, once again, Jordan's investigative weapon was loaded with blanks. And he was hunting dead game anyway."
The legal experts continue, "You might remember the backstory: On October 14, 2020, just a couple of weeks before the 2020 election, Twitter prevented its users from linking to a New York Post article about Hunter Biden's laptop, because the article relied on stolen e-mails and contained private information. But by October 16, 2020, Twitter had corrected, once again permitting users to post links to the story. This tired old story was what Jordan chose as the focus of (March 9's) hearing."
Baron and Aftergut stress that so far, the Weaponization Subcommittee has been painfully short on substance.
"If Jordan's next hearing does not produce weightier and more relevant evidence of government misconduct," they write, "Jordan's weapon may look like a popgun firing a small cork on a thin string."
---
an 3 23
'Ignorance about the biological function': Virologist dispels testimony from GOP’s lab link 'expert'
Dr. Robert R. Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, joined by President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence, along with members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, addresses his remarks at a coronavirus update briefing Wednesday, April 8, 2020, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by D. Myles Cullen)
Lindsay BeyersteinandThe Editorial BoardMarch 10, 2023
Proponents of a lab origin for SARS-Cov-2 are trying to make it seem as if new evidence for their conjecture is rapidly accumulating.
But Wednesday’s House Oversight hearing on the origins of the coronavirus seemed as if wiped from a bat’s butt. It was the same old players ruminating over the same stale conspiracy theories.
You wouldn’t know it from the hearing, but a lot has been done in the last three years to ferret out the origins of SARS-Cov-2.
After an all-out sprint called by President Biden to uncover the origins of the virus, the consensus of the US intelligence community remains that SARS-Cov-2 probably spilled over from wild animals, and that it’s neither genetically engineered nor a bioweapon.
Three years on, there’s still no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (or any other lab) had SARS-Cov-2 or any plausible progenitor virus before the outbreak. Most importantly, research has shown that the earliest cases of covid were tightly linked to one of the few markets in Wuhan that sold trafficked wildlife.
The GOP’s star witness was Dr. Robert Redfield, the former director of the Centers for Disease Control under Donald Trump.
The Republicans on the committee staked a lot on his credibility because, unlike their other witnesses (a science writer, and a self-described technology futurist), Redfield’s a virologist.
But Redfield botched basic facts in his testimony. And these weren’t trivial misstatements. He put false claims forward as his main reasons for thinking that SARS-Cov-2 was genetically engineered.
Redfield’s critics had plenty of time to roast him on Twitter because the GOP majority didn’t see fit to call any real virus experts to testify.
“Just looked in on the COVID origins to hear Redfield talking complete and utter gibberish,” tweeted Dr. Paul Bieniasz, who studies the evolution of viruses at the Rockefeller University.
Redfield falsely asserted that the SARS1 and MERS coronaviruses cannot spread person-to-person. He said, as a scientist, that he realized immediately that the Covid-19 virus was genetically engineered because it seemed designed to spread person-to-person, unlike SARS1 and MERS, which don’t spread that way.
Actually, the SARS1 and MERS coronaviruses do spread between people. SARS1 was so good at spreading person-to-person that it went to Canada all the way from China to kill hundreds.
So much for that argument.
Redfield insinuated that Chinese researchers must have taken a harmless bat virus and inserted into it a special sequence to make it infectious to people. In saying so, he grossly misstated the function of a viral feature known as the furin cleavage site (FCS). He said he suspected covid was genetically engineered because the virus’s furin cleavage site “totally changes the orientation of the binding domain of Covid [...] so it has high affinity for human [ACE2] receptors.”
None of this is true.
“The furin site is not involved in spike binding to the ACE2 receptor, and insertion of the furin site does not reorient the receptor binding domain to allow recognition of human ACE2,” Stephen Goldstein, a virologist at the University of Utah, explained to me.
“It's a stunning revelation about Redfield's ignorance about the biological function of the FCS as well as even a basic understanding of the Spike-ACE2 binding and viral entry,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan, and a co-author of one of the most influential papers arguing for a natural origin.
Redfield also spent time whining about how Anthony Fauci excluded him from a working group investigating the origins of SARS-Cov-2.
“It was told to me that they wanted a single narrative and that I obviously had a different point of view,” Redfield claimed.
He offered no evidence to support his claim that he’d been excluded because of his opinion that the virus was genetically engineered. However, Redfield’s claim is unlikely true because scientists who were initially sympathetic to a lab origin were invited to participate.
Maybe they thought Redfield was busy running the CDC during a global pandemic.
Or maybe Redfield was left out because he doesn’t know a furin cleavage site from a fusilli.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Do I need a booster shot if I got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine? A virologist answers 5 questions ›
Kevin McCarthy's debt to the 'anti-science resistance' is a recipe for 'epidemiological disaster': virologist ›
'A cascade effect': Leading Spanish virologist explains why China’s COVID-19 surge is 'worrisome' ›
---
---
an 3 23 maya
no lnx
Jim Jordan's (R-OH) Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee's latest hearing blatantly ignores the recent testimony from a former Twitter executive, Yoel Roth, The Washington Post senior political correspondent Aaron Blake reports.
When it comes to Jordan's belief the Democrats "suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story," Blake writes, the GOP-led committee's investigation has proven to "include plenty of supposition and elaborate theorizing — even as that has often run afoul of the known facts."
Blake writes:
Less than a minute into his opening statement, Jordan invoked Twitter’s former head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth.
'So what did the government tell him? A hack-and-leak operation was coming. How often did the government tell him this? Repeatedly for a year. When did the government say it was going to happen? October of 2020. And who did the government say it would involve? Hunter Biden,' Jordan said.
'The FBI knows what's going to happen, when it's going to happen, and who it's going to involve. Now that's amazing,' he continued. 'So maybe they get the time right, but they got the time, they got the method, and they got the person. That's amazing. It’s almost like these guys were clairvoyant.'
READ MORE: Why Jim Jordan's new subcommittee is 'pitiful' — not 'scary': Maddow producer
During the committee's first hearing last month, according to The Post, Roth asserted "it wasn't the government that suggested such a hack-and-leak operation might involve Hunter Biden" as "he believed that that information had actually had come from another company."
Roth said, "I don’t believe that perspective was shared by law enforcement. They didn't endorse it. They didn't provide that information."
Blake writes:
Roth said some people had drawn the wrong conclusion based on a misreading of an affidavit he had signed. In the affidavit, he described meetings with federal law enforcement in which he was warned about potential foreign hack-and-leak operations shortly before the 2020 election. The affidavit stated: 'I also learned in these meetings that there were rumors that a hack-and-leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.'
READ MORE: Red flags about Jim Jordan’s 'weaponization' committee ID’d by past congressional investigators
According to Blake, Roth confirmed last month that "he hadn't said law enforcement was his source."
Roth noted, "In one of those meetings, it was discussed, I believe by another company, that there was a possibility the hack-and-leak could relate to Hunter Biden and Burisma."
Blake noted, however, that "Jordan's summary is also contradicted by a November deposition from the former FBI agent whom Roth cited as warning of the hack-and-leak operations, Elvis Chan. 'I do not remember us specifically saying ‘Hunter Biden’ in any meeting,' Chan said in the deposition.'"
Moreover, Blake wrote, "Jordan's summary ignored key events, and it is contradicted by sworn testimony previously delivered by two key witnesses — including one who was responding to questions from Jordan himself."
READ MORE: 'That’s weaponization': Dem smacks down Jim Jordan for ignoring Trump DOJ corruption
The Washington Post's full report is available at this link (subscription required).
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Get on with it': Jim Jordan gets earful from Dem fed up with GOP 'playbook' of lies ›
For Jim Jordan, this is probably as good as it gets ›
'Unbelievable': Twitter users blast Jim Jordan after 'real America' post backfires ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Jim Jordan scrambles amid claims "weaponization" probe is a dud ›
Jim Jordan's 'Weaponization Committee' Is Misfiring - POLITICO ›
Panel on Weaponization of Government Advised to Seek ... ›
==
an 3 23no lnx
Rep. Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) clashed with Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) on Thursday after she accused Republicans of using a "playbook" that includes "false narratives" about the 2020 election and the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021.
At a House Oversight hearing on government "weaponization," Plaskett blasted Jordan for only providing access to documentation minutes before the event. She compared the tactics to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-CA) decision to give Fox News host Tucker Carlson thousands of hours of video from Jan. 6.
"This is unacceptable," she explained. "I'm ready for it. I don't know if a lot of other people are, but just as it was unacceptable for Kevin McCarthy to provide 41,000 hours of sensitive security footage to a biased talking head in an effort to rewrite what happened on January 6th."
"This is a new Republican playbook, apparently. Risk American safety and security to score political points," Plaskett insisted.
"The gentlelady's word should be struck," one Republican on the panel demanded. "That is out of line and outside the rules of this committee."
Plaskett objected.
"You don't get to determine what's struck down," Jordan snapped, declining to take down her words.
"This is a false narrative," Plaskett said of the hearing. "We're engaging in false narratives here, and we [Democrats] are going to tell the truth."
Following Plaskett's opening statement, Jordan felt the need to push back.
"You guys don't care," he remarked on Jan. 6. "You don't care. You don't want the American people to see what happened. The full video, transparency, you don't want that."
"And you don't want [the testimony of] two journalists who have been named personally by the Biden administration FTC in a letter," Jordan added. "They're here to tell their story. And frankly, I think they're brave individuals for being willing to come after they've been named in a letter from the Biden FTC."
"Is this your question time?" Plaskett asked.
"No, I'm responding to your ridiculous statements you made in your in your opening statement," Jordan shot back.
"OK, well, let's get on with it," Plaskett said.
"Oh, now we want to get on with it. So you can say all the things you want?" Jordan complained.
"I did in my opening statement as well as you had an opening statement," Plaskett pointed out. "You said what you needed to say in your opening statement. And I, as the ranking member, have used my time!"
Watch the video below from the U.S. House.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
House Republicans 'admitted' that 'tax cuts don’t pay for themselves': columnist ›
'Unbelievable': Twitter users blast Jim Jordan after 'real America' post backfires ›
For Jim Jordan, this is probably as good as it gets ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Jim Jordan subpoenas former head of DHS disinformation board ›
Six former wrestlers say Rep. Jim Jordan knew about abusive OSU ... ›
---
---
an 3 23 raw
no lnx twt vid
Jamie Raskin (D-MD) blasted a House Select Committee on Covid-19 by noting that former President Donald Trump had refused for months to investigate the virus's origins but praised China President Xi Jinping instead.
At a hearing to determine the origins of Covid on Wednesday, Raskin wondered why Republicans were not more upset with Trump's mishandling of the pandemic.
"The COVID-19 pandemic came to America in 2020, of course, when Donald Trump was president," Raskin told the committee. "And that president's policy failures, magical thinking, and total recklessness caused, according to his own special advisor on COVID, Deborah Birx, the unnecessary death of hundreds of thousands of Americans."
Raskin said that answers "must come from objective, fact-based investigations informed by doctors, scientists, and public health experts."
"Whatever the origins of COVID-19, whether it is bats or bureaucrats, no finding will ever exonerate or rehabilitate Donald Trump for his lethal recklessness in mismanaging the crisis in America, which cost us more than a million lives," he continued. "Indeed, if COVID was actually the product of a lab leak, or the worst bioweapon of mass destruction ever invented, as some have argued, and obviously we don't have the scientific evidence to say any of this yet, it would not only not remove Donald Trump's culpability, it would only deepen his culpability in the most profound way."
The congressman offered a list of tweets in which Donald Trump praised Xi in the early days of the pandemic.
"I'm just giving the committee a tiny taste of Donald Trump's fawning, star-struck, sycophantic embrace of everything the Chinese government was telling him in 2020," he explained. "He could have directed the intelligence community to lead a COVID-19 origins investigation back in March of 2020, three years ago. He did not. He wasted precious time minimizing the risk of the virus and lavishing his praise on President Xi."
Raskin concluded: "He could have pushed back against the CCP for interfering with the WHO's investigation into its origins, and he could have asked our intelligence community to intervene. He did none of those things. And everyone should remember that. Let's take the politics out of it, and let's get to the bottom of what happened."
Watch the video below from the U.S. House.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
'Just dreamed that up': Jamie Raskin knocks Republicans over their latest attacks on the IRS ›
Jamie Raskin: Donald Trump must be prosecuted 'because of the magnitude of the attack on democracy' ›
Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene: Jamie Raskin is a 'communist' and unfit to serve due to son's suicide ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Raskin gives update on cancer treatment: 'I'm losing about 40 or 50 ... ›
House GOP did not tell Raskin to remove head covering | AP News ›
---
an 3 23
all 26 Republicans on the powerful House Oversight Committee have refused to sign a simple, two-sentence statement denouncing white supremacy.
"We, Members of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, together denounce white nationalism and white supremacy in all its forms, including the 'Great Replacement' conspiracy theory. These hateful and dangerous ideologies have no place in the work of the United States Congress or our Committee," the statement (copy below) from Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) reads.
It comes after several Oversight Committee Republicans "invoked dangerous and conspiratorial rhetoric echoing the racist and nativist tropes peddled by white supremacists and right-wing extremists," during a February hearing on the "border crisis," Ranking Member Raskin said in a March 5 letter to Committee Chair James Comer (photo, top.) The Washington Post first reported on Raskin’s letter.
"In particular, some Members repeatedly described the number of migrants arriving at the border as an 'invasion,' and even went so far as to falsely accuse the Biden-Harris Administration of implementing a plan 'to deliberately open our border' for purposes of 'changing our culture'—mirroring language often used by MAGA extremists who believe that pro-immigration policies are designed to replace white populations with non-white immigrants and other racial minorities," Raskin's letter says.
Congressman Raskin is a former constitutional law professor who gained national prominence as the impeachment manager during the second impeachment of Donald Trump.
READ MORE: Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Law Gutting Child Labor Protections for Minors Under 16 Years Old
"As I explained to you at the hearing," his letter to Comer continues, "such language borrows from the 'Great Replacement' theory, the central dogma of contemporary white supremacy that has been repeatedly invoked by white nationalists to justify violent acts of domestic terrorism, including the mass murders of dozens of Americans at a Tops Supermarket in Buffalo, New York, the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and a Walmart in El Paso, Texas."
All 21 Democrats on the Oversight Committee signed the statement, and all 26 Republicans refused. A Committee spokesperson called the statement a "distraction," according to The Independent.
the 26 Republican Representatives who refused to denounce white supremacy and white nationalism are (in order of appearance on the statement): James Comer, Jim Jordan, Mike Turner, Paul Gosar, Virginia Foxx, Glenn Grothman, Gary Palmer, Clay Higgins, Pete Sessions, Andy Biggs, Nancy Mace, Jake LaTurner, pat Fallon, Byron Donalds, Kelly Armstrong, Scott Perry, William Timmons, Tim Burchett, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lisa McClain, Lauren Boebert, Russell Fry, Anna Paulina Luna, Chuck Edwards, Nick Langworthy, and Eric Burlison.
See a copy of the signed/unsigned statement below or at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
The GOP cements their legacy as the white supremacist party with filibuster of the 'For The People Act' ›
MSNBC guest exposes the dark underbelly of racism inherent in the Republican Party and 'this idea of whiteness' ›
'Not accidental': GOP governor admonishes Donald Trump for dining with Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Survey: 60 Percent Of Republicans Say White Supremacy Is A ... ›
We asked 57 Republican lawmakers if they condemn Trump's ... ›
White Supremacy Should Be Denounced By Oversight Committee ... ›
---
https://www.mediamatters.org/steve-bannon/steve-bannon-guest-says-house-weaponization-committee-failure-jim-jordans-part
---
3 23 edit bd
For Jim Jordan, this is probably as good as it gets
The subcommittee to investigate the weaponization of the federal government has nothing, has had nothing and will have nothing.
The House Democrats released a 316-page report last week showing Jim Jordan has nothing, has had nothing and will have nothing, if things go on like this, to justify the creation of special subcommittee to investigate “the weaponization” of the federal government against Donald Trump, Republican illiberals and other “real Americans.”
This is not to say the Ohio congressman and other subpanel goons won’t fabricate buzzy newsbits bent on apologizing for Trump’s one calamitous term. They will do that. So let’s not overestimate the report’s political value. Yeah, it makes the GOP look like clowns but that never stopped the GOP from making clowns look like heroes.
We should see the report by the House Democrats who sit on the subcommittee, and who were present for private testimony by its first three witnesses, as less “gotcha!” and more “that’s it wut?”
Instead, we should see the report by the House Democrats who sit on the subcommittee, and who were present for private testimony by its first three witnesses, as less “gotcha!” and more “that’s it wut?”
Jordan could have lined up serious and credible sources prepared to come forward with serious and credible allegations – whistleblowers – to expose the presence of The Deep State that secretly conspired with the criminal former president’s enemies, foreign and domestic.
They were busy, I guess.
Instead, Jordan brought in three former FBI officials, two of whom were paid by Trump Toady Kash Patel, to regale the subcommittee with “an alarming series of conspiracy theories related to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, Covid vaccines and the validity of the 2020 elections,” the Times said. (Panel Democrats leaked their report to the Times.)
The report said that, “One has called repeatedly for the dismantling of the FBI. Another suggested that it would be better for Americans to die than to have any kind of domestic intelligence program.”
That’s par for men in Kash Patel’s orbit. Before he served in Trump’s National Security Council and Defense Department, he was the author of “the Nunes report,” named after former Congressman Devin Nunes.
It alleged "political bias" in the FBI’s decision to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election. On the strength of that decision was based Robert Mueller’s inquiry, which confirmed the Kremlin’s sabotage of the Hillary Clinton campaign for the benefit of Trump’s.
Since then, Patel has reemerged periodically to provide timely lies for Trump, the most recent being that, before leaving the White House, Trump declassified the government secrets found at his private club.
From the Times:
Based on this evidence, committee Democrats conclude that there is a strong likelihood that Kash Patel is encouraging the witnesses to continue pursuing their meritless claims, and in fact is using them to help propel his vendetta against the FBI, Justice Department and Biden administration on behalf of himself and President Trump.
I won’t and neither should you dismiss Jim Jordan’s gambit, which is to find as much filth and slime as he can on the GOP’s enemies. But I think it’s reasonable to say that, for Jordan, this is probably as good as it gets.
Bill Barr was booked, I guess. So was Karl Rove. Both are the Old Masters at making weighty things look trivial (Barr) and trivial things look weighty (Rove). Their style of strategic thinking, and their depth of strategic knowledge, are conspicuous for their absence from Jordan’s smear-hoping. He’s single-A baseball compared to their big leagues.
And it shows.
One more observation
The Deep State is real to the extent that highly trained, highly educated and highly paid government agents can and do succumb to believing conspiracy theories that claim to explain what seems to them to be a conspiracy against what they believe these United States should be.
---
https://www.alternet.org/why-jim-jordan-s-new-subcommittee-on-government-weaponization-is-pitiful-not-scary-columnist/
---
cudgel threat enforce retaLIaTION
an 3 23
In late January, DirecTV dropped far-right Fox News competitor Newsmax from its satellite lineup when the two were unable to reach an agreement on license fees. MAGA Republicans were bitterly disappointed, as Newsmax prides itself on being more right-wing and more pro-Donald Trump than Fox News and Fox Business. However, DirecTV hasn't ruled out the possibility of bringing Newsmax back if they can come to an agreement on license fees.
Some of the MAGA Republicans who hated to see Newsmax removed from the DirecTV lineup are angrily accusing DirecTV of discriminating against the right. And one of them is Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky), who now chairs the House Oversight Committee.
During a Friday, February 24 appearance on Newsmax, Comer threatened to use House Oversight against DirecTV if it doesn't restore Newsmax to its lineup.
READ MORE: Watch: Newsmax host falsely declares that 'exclusively white Americans' fought to end slavery
Comer told Newsmax host John Bachman, "I'm very concerned. I'm very upset that DirecTV does not have Newsmax on there. I've been in constant communication with the leadership at AT&T and DirecTV. I have strongly encouraged them to meet with your CEO, Mr. (Chris) Ruddy, to get this worked out — or else! If anyone has ever watched the House Oversight Committee — any of our first three hearings — they have to ask themselves: Do they really want to go in front of the House Oversight Committee?"
Fox News continues to have the highest ratings on right-wing cable TV. But in MAGA World, Newsmax appeals largely to people who believe that Fox News and Fox Business aren't far enough to the right.
On Bachman's show, Comer told the host, "We're all huge fans of Newsmax. We don't like to see Newsmax not being offered on DirecTV, especially considering Newsmax is the, I think, the fourth highest-rated news show on TV now."
Comer also said, "And they have dozens of other news shows that have much lower ratings than Newsmax. So, I'm doing everything in my ability to see that this gets worked out. If it doesn't, then I would expect the Republican majority to begin to take steps to take action in this."
READ MORE: Republicans claiming 'censorship' threaten to haul AT&T, DirecTV into Congress for dropping far-right Newsmax
DirecTV, however, has maintained that its decision to drop Newsmax was merely a business/budgetary matter — not an effort to silence Republicans.
In late January, a DirecTV spokesperson told Fierce Video, "On multiple occasions, we made it clear to Newsmax that we wanted to continue to offer the network, but ultimately, Newsmax's demands for rate increases would have led to significantly higher costs that we would have to pass on to our broad customer base. Anyone, including our customers, can watch the network for free via NewsmaxTV.com, YouTube.com and on multiple streaming platforms like Amazon Fire TV, Roku, and Google Play. We continually evaluate the most relevant programming to provide our customers and expect to fill this available channel with new content."
READ MORE: 'Violation of my constitutional rights': Newsmax host attacks drag queens while defending Donald Trump
Watch The Daily Beast's video here (subscription required).
---
---
an 3 23
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) called out House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) because he had no plans to investigate abuses at the Justice Department during the Trump administration.
At an Oversight hearing on Tuesday, Democrats argued that a rules package offered by Republicans was "cut and pasted" from the "right-wing echo chamber" and that it was full of "racist tropes."
"I've been concerned about the weaponization of the federal government program," Cohen said. "And I think it was pretty clear during the previous administration, [former Trump attorney] Michael Cohen went to jail for doing what Donald Trump asked him to do. Donald Trump was called Individual 1. He didn't go to jail. He didn't even go to jail when the administration changed, and Merrick Garland came in."
Cohen recalled that Trump's former attorney was forced to return to jail when he tried to write a book about the ordeal.
"It's come out; it was the Justice Department that did that," he continued. "Could we go, Mr. Chair, back into those issues and look at the weaponization that occurred during the Trump [administration], particularly that Michael Cohen incident?
However, Jordan said he only remembered the falsehoods Michael Cohen allegedly said during his testimony before Congress.
"But you do remember he went to jail?" Cohen asked.
"I remember that too," Jordan confirmed.
"And they put him back in when he was going to publish a book because they wanted him to not comment on it, and you do remember that when they put him back in jail, they put him in solitary confinement?" Cohen pressed.
"I don't recall the details," Jordan said.
"Should we not be able to study that because you don't know it?" the Tennessee Democrat wondered. "That's weaponization!"
Jordan, however, changed the subject and accused Democrats of "targeting parents."
"My Chairman, it's my time; I'm going to reclaim it," Cohen said.
"But you asked me a question," Jordan protested.
"That's not the answer," Cohen explained.
"You may not like — that's my answer!" Jordan exclaimed. "You may not like it, but I'm allowed to give the answer I want to give."
"I'm all for parents, but that's not the issue," Cohen snapped. "The issue is the weaponization of the Justice Department that happened under Trump like never before in our country's history."
House Republicans have vowed to investigate the so-called weaponization of the federal government by Democrats, corporations, and the "deep state."
Watch the video below from the House Oversight Committee.
---
---
an 2 23
House Republicans spearheading the House select subcommittee probing the "weaponization of the government" are displeased with its budget, lamenting the amount is not nearly as large as the Jan. 6 committee's allotment, Rolling Stone reports.
Per The New York Times, the new subcommittee, which falls under the House Judiciary Committee, reflects the House GOP's commitment to exercise its congressional control "to scrutinize what they said was a concerted effort by the government to silence and punish conservatives at all levels, from protesters at school board meetings to former President Donald J. Trump."
Since the subcommittee's launch, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who leads the House Judiciary Committee, requested the House Judiciary budget receive "a $2 million annual increase," which he says would "'meet the immediate needs of additional staff and resources' for both the new weaponization subcommittee and House Judiciary Committee."
READ MORE: 'Wild' GOP government weaponization hearings will be loaded with Fox News contributors
Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) compares the subcommittee's current budget to that of the now-defunct House Jan. 6 panel's for it's investigation into the attack.
"We got what we call a 'Church-style' committee," Roy said. "With the kind of budget and kind of staff — we said at least as much as the Jan. 6 Committee," he continued, claiming the amount would allow "more resources, more specificity, more power, to go after this recalcitrant Biden administration."
However, according to The NYT, Jordan claims the purpose of the subcommittee is "not to target Democrats or law enforcement officers who have scrutinized Mr. Trump’s behavior," but to "'protect the First Amendment' at a time when he said the right was being unfairly targeted."
Rolling Stone reports:
READ MORE: These MAGA 'antagonists' have major plans for the House Rules Committee: report
[Jordan] asks for 'the ability to access up to an additional $15 million from the reserve fund' in order 'to address ongoing and unforeseen needs' — an amount that, when added to the $2 million per year, would total $19 million, roughly equivalent to the Jan. 6 spend.
The $19 million budget would be more aligned with the Jan. 6 committee's of $18 million, which according to Rolling Stone, "employed roughly 50 investigators across five teams to carry out more than 1,200 interviews and depositions."
The committee's first hearing took place earlier this month, which Rolling Stone reports the House Republicans used to "air a market basket of right-wing grievances," rather than to focus on the task at hand.
Following the hearing, The Daily Beast reports, Fox News host Jesse Watters complained, "I’m sick of these hearings. Tell me this is going somewhere. Can I throw someone in prison? Can someone go to jail? Can someone get fined?"
READ MORE: Jan. 6 Committee gave DOJ an 'extraordinary wealth of evidence' for a Trump prosecution: legal experts
Still, Jordan contends he is hoping for an increase in funds, according to a spokesperson for the chairman.
"Republicans are fully committed to the mission and important work of the Select Subcommittee," the spokesperson said. "And the Speaker has made clear that we will have access to all the resources needed to complete our task.
They continued, "The funding request is structured to achieve our mission in a fiscally responsible manner, recognizing that we work on behalf of the American people and we must be careful stewards of their tax dollars."
Rolling Stone's full report is available at this link. The New York Times' report is here.
READ MORE: 'Beyond a reasonable doubt': Watergate lawyer breaks down Jan. 6 Committee’s 'overwhelming case' against Trump
---
---
an 2 23
House Republicans spearheading the House select subcommittee probing the "weaponization of the government" are displeased with its budget, lamenting the amount is not nearly as large as the Jan. 6 committee's allotment, Rolling Stone reports.
Per The New York Times, the new subcommittee, which falls under the House Judiciary Committee, reflects the House GOP's commitment to exercise its congressional control "to scrutinize what they said was a concerted effort by the government to silence and punish conservatives at all levels, from protesters at school board meetings to former President Donald J. Trump."
Since the subcommittee's launch, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who leads the House Judiciary Committee, requested the House Judiciary budget receive "a $2 million annual increase," which he says would "'meet the immediate needs of additional staff and resources' for both the new weaponization subcommittee and House Judiciary Committee."
READ MORE: 'Wild' GOP government weaponization hearings will be loaded with Fox News contributors
Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) compares the subcommittee's current budget to that of the now-defunct House Jan. 6 panel's for it's investigation into the attack.
"We got what we call a 'Church-style' committee," Roy said. "With the kind of budget and kind of staff — we said at least as much as the Jan. 6 Committee," he continued, claiming the amount would allow "more resources, more specificity, more power, to go after this recalcitrant Biden administration."
However, according to The NYT, Jordan claims the purpose of the subcommittee is "not to target Democrats or law enforcement officers who have scrutinized Mr. Trump’s behavior," but to "'protect the First Amendment' at a time when he said the right was being unfairly targeted."
Rolling Stone reports:
READ MORE: These MAGA 'antagonists' have major plans for the House Rules Committee: report
[Jordan] asks for 'the ability to access up to an additional $15 million from the reserve fund' in order 'to address ongoing and unforeseen needs' — an amount that, when added to the $2 million per year, would total $19 million, roughly equivalent to the Jan. 6 spend.
The $19 million budget would be more aligned with the Jan. 6 committee's of $18 million, which according to Rolling Stone, "employed roughly 50 investigators across five teams to carry out more than 1,200 interviews and depositions."
The committee's first hearing took place earlier this month, which Rolling Stone reports the House Republicans used to "air a market basket of right-wing grievances," rather than to focus on the task at hand.
Following the hearing, The Daily Beast reports, Fox News host Jesse Watters complained, "I’m sick of these hearings. Tell me this is going somewhere. Can I throw someone in prison? Can someone go to jail? Can someone get fined?"
READ MORE: Jan. 6 Committee gave DOJ an 'extraordinary wealth of evidence' for a Trump prosecution: legal experts
Still, Jordan contends he is hoping for an increase in funds, according to a spokesperson for the chairman.
"Republicans are fully committed to the mission and important work of the Select Subcommittee," the spokesperson said. "And the Speaker has made clear that we will have access to all the resources needed to complete our task.
They continued, "The funding request is structured to achieve our mission in a fiscally responsible manner, recognizing that we work on behalf of the American people and we must be careful stewards of their tax dollars."
Rolling Stone's full report is available at this link. The New York Times' report is here.
READ MORE: 'Beyond a reasonable doubt': Watergate lawyer breaks down Jan. 6 Committee’s 'overwhelming case' against Trump
---
https://www.alternet.org/debbie-schultz-wasserman/
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) did not hold back when she interrogated a Fox News legal analyst for offering “pure conjecture” during an appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives' newly established committee for the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
On Thursday, February 9, Fox News' Jonathan Turley, appeared before the committee as a witness called by Republican lawmakers. During his appearance, he discussed the so-called "Twitter files," which spawned from Twitter CEO Elon Musk sharing intel with journalists.
However, Wasserman Schultz appeared unsure about Turley actually having “unique knowledge” about the social media platform.
READ MORE: Holocaust meme-tweeting House Republican casts only 'no' vote on resolution condemning antisemitism
“Do you have any formal relationship with the company?” she asked.
“No, I just have an account,” replied Turley, to which, Schultz said, “So essentially your responses to the questions here today were your own opinion and pure conjecture.”
But despite Turley's remarks, Schultz pushed back for more clarity saying, “You said that you don’t have any specific or unique knowledge of Twitter, but you spoke as if you did. ... And so this is only just your opinion, would you say, as a Twitter account user?”
“No, I come to give legal analysis based on facts that are in the public domain,” Turley said.
READ MORE: 'In a heartbeat': Analysis explains why Florida Dems believe DeSantis might take the Trump route and attempt a coup
Refusing to back down, Schultz offered Turley a harsh lesson on the real meaning of "legal analysis specifying that it is “another word for ‘opinion.'”
Watch the video below or at this link.
---
---
AN 2 23
Members of Congress have access to vast resources to conduct the people’s business, including on-staff attorneys and the ability to contract experts, yet on Wednesday U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) appeared to shun those assets while appearing before the TV cameras while misrepresenting federal law. She falsely declared that Twitter banning her personal account was “against the law,” and a violation of her First Amendment rights as she made clear she will use her newly-restored committee assignments to spread falsehoods, misinformation, and disinformation.
Greene now sits on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee. During its third hearing of the year, “Protecting Speech from Government Interference and Social Media Bias: Twitter’s Role in Suppressing the Biden Laptop Story,” Greene appeared determined to extract vengeance for her personal Twitter account being permanently “suspended” – banned –before Elon Musk purchased the company and restored accounts of countless extremists.
At the beginning of her remarks Greene mentioned the witnesses, including former Twitter executives, and said: “You can consider your speech canceled during my time because you permanently canceled mine.”
“You see, you permanently banned my personal Twitter account, and it was my campaign account also, so let’s talk about election interference, shall we?”
“Let’s explain 52 United States law 10101: ‘No person shall intimidate, threaten or coerce or attempt to stop any other person for the purpose of interfering with their rights to vote or to vote as you may choose,'” Greene said, reading inaccurately from 52 U.S.C. 10101.
READ MORE: Former GOP Congressman Calls for Marjorie Taylor Greene to Be Censured After Calling President Biden a ‘Liar’
For reasons unknown, Congresswoman Greene decided that federal voting rights law applies to Twitter. It does not.
“You didn’t shadow ban or permanently ban my Democrat opponent,” Greene charged. “No, you did that to me. And that was wrong and it was against the law.”
It is not against the law for Twitter to shadow ban or permanently ban anyone, even a Member of Congress and their personal Twitter account.
“You see, not only that, was it was it me, that you violated my First Amendment rights, you violated countless conservative Americans,” she said, which again is false. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
READ MORE: ‘Let’s Be Blunt’: Bannon Blasts Huckabee Sanders as ‘Not Intellectually Capable’ After ‘Insulting’ SOTU Response
Greene pushed forward.
“These were doctors that were trying to tell the truth about COVID,” she said, of people spreading false or misleading information and disinformation. “Doctors that were having success treating people with ivermectin that you all would not allow to be talked about.”
The FDA has made clear ivermectin is not a treatment for COVID-19: “The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals. Ivermectin is approved for human use to treat infections caused by some parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea.”
“These were parents complaining about their school boards, teaching gender lies in their schools, biological males entering their daughter’s bathrooms and sports,” she complained. “These were also people questioning the 2020 election. And guess what? That’s Americans’ First Amendment right. These were people talking about voting machines. You know what? Democrats did that in 2019 before the 2020 election,” she claimed.
Watch below or at this link.
---
---
an 2 23
no lnx etc
House Oversight Committee hearing held this week to purportedly prove that former Twitter executives colluded with federal government officials to cover up a 2020 New York Post article about Hunter Biden's laptop did not pan out the way Republican members hoped, The Daily Beast reports.
Per CNN, hard-right GOPers in the House, including Rep. James Comer (R-TN), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), have allotted a significant amount of time to push their "factually unsupported narrative" that the so-called "collusion" is designed to suppress conservatives.
Ex-Twitter executives Yoel Roth, James Baker, and Vijaya Gadde, and Anika Collier Navaroli testified during the hearing that "it was a 'mistake' to briefly block the article over misinformation concerns," but they ensured the House members that there was no government involvement, Daily Beast reports.
READ MORE: GOP Congressional candidate encourages violence over the information surrounding Hunter Biden laptops
During the hearing, Comer asserted that Twitter intentionally abided by demands from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to cover up the Hunter Biden story "because they were 'terrified of Joe Biden not winning the election,'" according to CNN.
However, the GOP member's accusation backfired.
The former Twitter executives not only proved that there was no government involvement in the Hunter Biden Laptop story, but also testified that former President Donald Trump "received preferential treatment for years" and "directly requested the site remove tweets that he didn’t like," according to The Daily Beast.
Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly showed that it was Trump's administration that attempted to have content removed in 2019 after model Chrissy Teigen tweeted that Trump is a "p***y a** b****."
And on the other hand, President Joe Biden's administration never called on the social media giant to have content taken down.
READ MORE: GOP lawmaker vows to investigate Twitter employees who may have helped to censor news on Hunter Biden's laptop
A former senior Trump aide told Rolling Stone, “It was strange to me when all of these investigations were announced because it was all about the exact same stuff that we had done [when Donald Trump was in office]."
“It was normal," the aide added.
Additionally, CNN reports Navaroli "testified that the social media company ended its ban on abusive language against immigrants to 'go back to where they came from' so that Trump would not face repercussions for his racist 2019 attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen."
Still, the GOP members remain steadfast in pushing their theory.
“My, my, my—what happens when you hold a hearing, and you can't prove your point?” Connolly asked.
WATCH: Marjorie Taylor Greene 'wrongly' declares her Twitter ban as illegal
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Elon Musk has invited 'suspended' journalists to return to Twitter, but there’s a 'catch': report ›
'A huge oxymoron': Marjorie Taylor Greene's tweet condemning 'candidate quality' quickly backfires on Twitter ›
Marjorie Taylor Greene criticizes Tulsi Gabbard in Twitter rant for giving George Santos 'zero grace' ›
GOP lawmaker vows to investigate Twitter employees who may have helped to censor news on Hunter Biden's laptop ›
---
---
bb 2 23
ohio's gerrymandered into permanence congressperson of ill repute Jim Jordan could not make his point at a House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing called to discuss Twitter's handling of some Hunter Biden BS. Jordan fumbled the ball well enough to actually disprove the reason for the entire hearing — as Twitter isn't held accountable to the First Amendment, it is meant to regulate the government.
The best part is the very end when Jordan yielded his remaining time to Rep. Connolly who remarked "My, my, my, what happens when you hold a hearing and can't prove your point?"
[vid]
crooks&Liars:
Then Jordan asked if there was a violation of the First Amendment if the FBI sent emails to Twitter saying, "We think these accounts need to be looked at because they violate your terms of service."
That's a different standard. Your terms of service, which don't have to apply with the First Amendment, but the government saying we don't think these accounts comply with your terms of service 'please take them down,' you see a problem there, Mr. Roth?" Jordan asked.
"Do I think if that's a valuable use of the FBI's time, no, but I don't see in a request for review a problem under the First Amendment.' Roth said.
==
an ah 2 23
When conservative Republican John Boehner was House speaker during the Barack Obama years, he had nothing but disdain for Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Boehner, in fact, has used the words “legislative terrorist” to describe the far-right congressman.
But Jordan went from being someone Boehner regarded as the U.S. House of Representatives’ lunatic fringe to chairing the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 under Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Liberal Washington Post opinion columnist Greg Sargent examines Jordan’s recent activities in his February 7 column, warning that the Ohio Republican is turning that committee into a bastion of conspiracy theories.
“Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has subpoenaed top Justice Department officials, supposedly to investigate the Department’s suppression of information about the persecution of conservative parents,” Sargent explains. “Republicans have long alleged that federal jackboots have terrorized parents for protesting at school board meetings about COVID-19 restrictions and teachings about race and sex.”
READ MORE: Far-right 'attack dog' Jim Jordan now enjoys greater 'power' than ever before: report
The columnist adds, “Democrats will no doubt respond by noting that this claim has been decisively debunked. But Democrats should use these hearings not just defensively, but also, affirmatively, to show that GOP rhetoric, much of it degenerate nonsense, has helped fuel a toxic atmosphere of threats and violence toward educators that has no business anywhere near your child’s school.”[elect principals?]
Rep. Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat known for his work on the House Judiciary Committee, discussed Jordan’s activities with Sargent.
The congressman said of House Judiciary Republicans, “They don’t want the FBI to investigate people on their side who they’ve spun up over, frankly, b******t claims. You have a right to say just about anything you want, but you don’t have a right to threaten violence.”
Democrats, according to Sargent, need to use House Judiciary hearings to show that Republicans are promoting an environment that is dangerous for educators.
READ MORE: 'Because Biden didn't defy a subpoena!' Chuck Todd fact-checks Jim Jordan on Mar-a-Lago 'raid'
“If Republicans think they can prove FBI harassment of conservatives, let’s air this out,” Sargent argues. “But Democrats can’t function just as fact-checkers, accusing Republicans of ‘conspiracy theories’ and complaining they are ‘stoking the culture wars.’ That could make Democrats seem defensive and responsive, which isn’t sufficient in an environment that’s increasingly shaped by full-blown information warfare.”
Sargent adds, “Instead, Democrats should make these hearings about what Republicans did. This entails using spectacle to show what happened to educators as a result of Republicans systematically smearing them with hateful propaganda. Why not try to bring in educators to testify emotionally about the threats and harassment they’ve faced?”
READ MORE: Marjorie Taylor Greene could access 'the most sensitive secrets in the government' if House GOP has its way
Read Greg Sargent’s full Washington Post column at this link.
---
an 2 23
its first hearing isn’t until Thursday but already Chairman Jim Jordan‘s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is being mocked after the list of witnesses was released.
NBC News’ Garrett Haake reports testifying before the committee on Thursday will be ex-Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and former FBI special agent Nicole Parker.
Gabbard left the Democratic Party and is now an independent and a Fox News contributor. In 2019, Hillary Clinton suggested she was a Russian asset being groomed for a third-party presidential run. She sued the former Democratic presidential nominee and former U.S. Secretary of State but later dropped the defamation lawsuit.
Also, Gabbard “shared false information,” Forbes reported last year, “about U.S. involvement in Ukraine biological laboratories … giving credence to an unfounded Russian-backed conspiracy theory the U.S. has warned could serve as justification for Russia to use biological and chemical weapons against Ukraine.”
READ MORE: Santos Denies Sexually Assaulting Prospective Staffer Working in His Office – Calls Allegations ‘Comical’
Sen. Johnson, who narrowly won re-election after being among the top promoters of Donald Trump’s “Big Lie,” is a conspiracy theorist who uses his Senate seat to spread false information about COVID and a host of other crises.
CNN’s Chris Cillizza branded Johnson the “Senate’s leading conspiracy theorist” just one year ago. The Washington Post reported last May that Sen. Johnson “expressed openness” to “a fervent anti-vaccination” commentator’s “idea that maybe the coronavirus vaccines are a conduit for deliberately giving people AIDS.”
Sen. Grassley has come under fire for his racist remarks about COVID-19, dangerously false claims about the IRS, and apparent falsehoods about the January 6 insurrection and its participants.
Last year The American Independent reported Grassley told a constituent “what you said is accurate.” According to The Independent, the constituent said during a town hall: “Knowing that the FBI and Capitol Police were complicit in Jan. 6, what have you done to get the political prisoners being held in gulag conditions out on bail?”
Some were quick to mock Chairman Jordan’s choice of witnesses to testify before his subcommittee’s first hearing.
“Johnson actively pushed the WI legislature & the VP to overturn the election. Tulsi used her perch in Congress to secretly meet with Assad & whitewash his war crimes. so in a sense, they are indeed experts on weaponizing gov’t.,” mocked former Hillary Clinton foreign policy spokesperson Jesse Lehrich.
READ MORE: ‘Whatever Side Bet on Stupid Won Big’: Steve Schmidt Scorches Marco Rubio for ‘Kernels of Imbecility’ on Balloongate
Jim Manley, a top aide to then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, described the panel as “low energy.”
NBC News Justice reporter Ryan J. Reilly pre-deflated Parker’s possible contributions, citing her as saying: “’I was never asked to participate in anything that was political,’ Nicole Parker said in one of her Fox News hits (Hannity, specifically).”
Even CNN did not hide its skepticism, beginning its reporting with this line: “The GOP-led House select subcommittee on so-called weaponization of the federal government will draw upon a prominent ex-Democrat, two of their Republican Senate colleagues, and a former FBI agent in their first public hearing to discuss how they believe the government has been weaponized against conservatives, multiple sources familiar with the plans tell CNN.”
---
---
mma 1 23
Mainstream news outlets are already failing in their coverage of a newly created House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government by allowing false Republican claims to go unchallenged, and omitting crucial context about suppression of left-wing groups at the hands of federal law enforcement.
The new committee is chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), and was reportedly established as a concession to hardline opponents of Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) in his recent, rocky bid for the chamber’s top office. Jordan and his team have set their sights on the Department of Justice, the FBI, the IRS, and other offices that Republicans falsely claim are specifically targeting and persecuting conservatives.
In describing the committee’s investigative prospects, several mainstream outlets allowed false or misleading claims to go unchallenged.
Axios described Rep. Thomas Massie’s (R-KY), who has announced his spot on the subcommittee, as “a libertarian-minded conservative long skeptical of the federal security apparatus,” who “pointed to IRS targeting of Tea Party groups in the 2010s and Trump's sparring with the FBI as inflection points.”
Axios failed to inform its readers that Massie’s claim of a partisan witch hunt by the IRS is false. Although the IRS did audit some Tea Party groups, the agency also targeted “scores” of progressive groups for audits as well.
The New York Times reported that the committee is planning to investigate “allegations that the federal government encouraged Twitter to discriminate against Republicans and the treatment of conservative or right-wing protesters at school board meetings and abortion clinics.”
Readers of the Times’ coverage wouldn’t know that Twitter, in fact, has shown a bias toward promoting conservative content, not suppressing it. Conservatives have also claimed, falsely, that the DOJ has targeted parents at school boards, including identifying them as domestic terrorists. Although the Times didn’t use that phrase, their coverage failed to challenge the myth that conservative parents are facing federal persecution.
One of the focuses of the subcommittee is likely to be an examination of the FBI and DOJ’s case against a group of men who plotted to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. The FBI used undercover agents and informants in their investigation, which conservatives have argued could amount to entrapment.
In Politico’s article on the subcommittee, they quoted Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC), who cited the Whitmer case, and asked, “Exactly what is the line on entrapment and then the law on entrapment?”
Although that is a fair question to ask in the abstract, Politico’s readers could be left thinking that the FBI specifically uses informants against right-wing movements. In fact, the FBI has been using informants extensively against Muslims at least since 9/11. John Miller, a high ranking police officer turned conservative pundit turned CNN analyst exemplifies the right-wing impulse towards increased investigations of Muslim communities.
None of these articles include broader historical context, which is that the FBI has disproportionately targeted left-wing movements since its inception. None of them include more recent examples of the FBI targeting the left, either, especially FBI operations to infiltrate and spy on Black activists, including creating the ridiculous category of “Black Identity Extremist” to justify the Bureau’s actions.
Those real documented examples of FBI overreach are nowhere to be found in this overly credulous mainstream coverage. Nor are readers given an adequate sense of what this committee is likely actually about, as detailed recently by a Trump-aligned think tank called the Center for Renewing America, which released a proposed federal budget sharing almost the exact same title as the new subcommittee.
CRA is run by Christian nationalist Russ Vought, who served as former President Donald Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget. His organization’s budget proposal makes clear that the conservative aim here is unleashing the FBI on the right’s political enemies while ensuring immunity for themselves.
All of that context is crucial to understanding this new subcommittee, and the new Republican House majority writ large. Jordan and company haven’t even begun their work, but mainstream outlets are already falling short.
---