America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Friday, June 16, 2023
THE BIDEN REGIME'S POLICE STATE - Biden’s DOJ Turned Trump’s Secret Service Detail Into Informants The bond of trust between presidents and Secret Service agents is being violated.
Chairman Mao, the unspoken hero of our garbage ruling caste, understood that power flows from the barrel of a gun, and it’s not unreasonable to wonder whether the institutions in America that carry guns – law enforcement and the military – and who are supposed to protect us will turn those guns on us if commanded to by the ruling elite.
Stop wondering.
Their answer is that to a greater extent than those of us who grew up in America, when it was a free country before it became our present crypto-leftist tyranny, want to admit, they will. Right now, they are hiding news that undermines their rule. They are censoring opponents. They are locking up political dissidents. And eventually, when the current junta feels truly threatened by the emerging backlash from patriotic citizens, too many of these alleged protectors will kill for their masters – and I mean more than just the occasional and totally unpunished massacres of unapproved dissidents like at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Pretty harsh? It is harsh, but it’s not wrong. Explain why that is the red line they suddenly stop at when they have blasted through the red lines of lying, of censorship, and of framing the opposition using a two-tier justice system. “Yeah, those things are fine, but we won’t go all the way. Oh no, never.” Where’s the guardrail that is going to block the trend that is now sending SWAT teams out to bust people for praying at abortion clinics from accelerating into actually using those big, scary assault rifles?
Remember, we’re not just political opponents. We’re monsters, not even human, and dehumanization is the first step toward murder. In their hideous propaganda – memorably delivered by that brain-dead corrupt husk on TV against that ominous red and black background – we are extremists, terrorists, enemies of democracies and – regardless of our skin tone – “white supremacists.”
What do you do with people who pose such a perilous peril? Their civilian catspaws have the answer. They kill them on the streets in riots over dead thugs, at a congressional softball game, in a Christian school. And when that doesn’t snuff out the embers of freedom, who can argue that the elite will hesitate to use the organized forces of the government to do it” Sorry kids, but the logic of their hate and desperate grasping at power leads to blood, ours. And the leftists would cheer our governmental deaths as just and necessary and beautiful just as they did those amateur atrocities.
Remember Ashli Babbitt? Remember how they delighted in her murder? Remember how her killer is free and unpunished?
We thought we could rely on the members of these institutions to refuse the commands of their leaders if those leaders turned them upon the citizens. We properly hanged Nazis for “just obeying orders” and established a personal responsibility not to be a cog in the gears of tyranny. But look at our law enforcement agencies today. Look at the disgraced FBI, an organization that differs from the Stasi only in that many of its members are fatter. They share the communist secret police’s leftism and the delight spying on and framing citizens. The agents have accepted pursuing political opponents, framing a president, and all manner of lies and deceptions, and we know they accept it all because they don’t resign. A few whistleblowers have come forward, but the vast majority have stayed at their posts, participating indirectly or even directly in the oppression that is the hallmark of this modern Ministry of Truth. We can only hope that those few good apples don’t contaminate the barrel full of bad ones.
Why do they do it? Human weakness. Most have invested in their shabby careers. Most are eying pensions. They go along. They follow orders. And if you think that, given the order and the chance, they will not pull a trigger for the ruling class, well, I have a burnt patch of Texas dirt to sell you. Cheap.
Some will do it eagerly. Some will just do it to keep their jobs. But they will do it, and they will try to justify it to themselves. They will high five each other telling themselves how they are protecting democracy by capping people who dare exercise it. Get it through your heads – this is the result of years of selective hiring and grooming and making clear that you must conform or be cast out. They have built an organization that will protect the ruling class against any threat to its hegemony, and if that means threatening you or framing you or even killing you, they will do it.
Tell me I’m wrong, but support that position with evidence and not cliches like “The vast majority are dedicated to doing their important work defending our country.” Yeah, like defending us from the threat of borderline mental defectives their informers convince to LARP at revolution, or maybe busting granny for taking a Rotunda selfie. Again, the trend line is toward the worst case scenario and there is nothing in the way to stop its downward plunge, except maybe nominating and electing Ron DeSantis instead of a Democrat or some sissy Republican who desperately wants it to be 2005 again so s/he can pretend that federal law enforcement is not today a determined enemy of liberty.
But the FBI is a law enforcement organization and it functions only when the criminal justice system – which is equally a farce on multiple levels – is itself sort of functioning. If that charade collapses, out comes the military. Remember all the collective panty-wetting at the New York Times when Senator Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed suggesting Trump use the troops to crush the communist BLM/Antifa rioting? That will last about a second when the threat to the ruling elite’s hold on power is people like you. Then they will eagerly unleash their dogs of war.
So, will our military kill American citizens to suppress opposition to the junta’s rule? The leadership will certainly do it without hesitation. Again, the leadership has been carefully selected and groomed to accept that order if and when the time comes. Milley is clear that he thinks the greatest threat to America is other Americans. Oh, the brass hasn’t won a war in thirty years, and the Chinese are laughing at us in Mandarin as the Navy’s pride flag-waving ships run into each other on the open seas, but they have plenty of time to root out “extremists” in the ranks. And by “extremist,” they mean people like you – the very folks who traditionally serve in our military. Conservative. Patriotic. Cognizant of which bathroom to use. Those people, the enemy of the ruling caste. They have been largely pushed out of the senior ranks, and those that remain keep their heads down counting down to retirement. And few new ones are flowing in – the woke military can’t meet its recruiting goals.
Now, right-wing anarchist imp Michael Malice recently posited that: “The conservatives joking about how ‘woke’ the military supposedly is becoming should realize that it would be far easier for the Federal government to use a ‘woke’ military against them and their families.” This is true, but so is the fact that it will be – hell, it already is – a bad military. Our disastrously-led forces lost to a bunch of mountain tribesmen. Do you imagine their performance fighting ticked-off fellow Americans, who do not want arms and many of whom got military training back when we had a real military, will be better?
His concern also overlooks another key point – the wokeness is in the senior ranks, where your commitments to the fascist ideology that is DEI signals that you are down with the struggle and therefore trustworthy for advancement. These senior leaders, like their FBI counterparts, have an investment in the institution. But all is not lost. The regular joes and middle-level leaders, though shedding many of the patriots that once filled the ranks, are less inclined to that nonsense since they have less of an investment. Most are doing a single hitch; they have no pension to protect. These are the folks who would be expected to do the dirty work, and the dirty work would largely be atrocities committed upon their own people. If it got ugly, we could expect significant desertions and some level of non-compliance, even mutiny. Whole formations in National Guard units, which work for state governors, might resist intact. And it can be fixed quickly with a real leader who clears out the Pentagon deadwood.
But let’s not overlook the fact that a lot of troops would still obey such an order, even if it meant suppressing their fellow citizens. There is a cheery notion to consider, though. The military and law enforcement can put maybe 3,000,000 people on the streets, and a lot of them are support and logistics.
There are about 150,00,000 patriots. If it all goes to hell – and, sadly, the trash who run our institutions are dumb and evil enough to make it all go to hell – I still like freedom’s odds.
Reader Interactions
Trump is Charged Under a Law Meant to Suppress Political Opposition
Democrats have used the ‘Espionage Act’ to silence opponents for over 100 years.
A year after the start of WWI, President Woodrow Wilson addressed his message to Congress and warned that the “gravest threats against our national peace and safety” did not come from “other governments”, but from “within our own borders”.
“Citizens of the United States,” Wilson continued, “born under other flags but welcomed under our generous naturalization laws to the full freedom and opportunity of America, who have poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life.”
Wilson, a notorious racist and a supporter of the KKK who had contempt for a wide variety of other peoples, likely had German immigrants, but not just them, in mind when he called for what would become the Espionage Act so that “we may be purged of their corrupt distempers.”
“I need not suggest the terms in which they may be dealt with,” Wilson concluded.
While there were indeed pro-German terrorist conspiracies in those days, including the Black Tom bombing which damaged the Statue of Liberty and a plot to infect the country’s horses, the Espionage Act of 1917 went far beyond prosecuting criminal activities. Wilson had sought, but not received, the power to censor the press, he did get the power to censor the mail.
Most of those prosecuted under the Espionage Act were not terrorists, but political opponents of the war. They included leftist socialists like Charles Schenck whose Supreme Court case birthed the misleading cliche about “shouting fire in a crowded theater”, as well as Robert Goldstein, a filmmaker whose crime was making a movie, ‘The Spirit of ’76’, about the American Revolution.
Also prosecuted under the Espionage Act were members of the Watch Tower Society for their religious pacifism. This was described as almost “the only time in American history when almost all the leaders of a denomination were in jail”.
When former President Trump was indicted under the Espionage Act, he was being targeted by a law that from its very inception had been created to suppress the political opposition. While elements of the Espionage Act were watered down over the years and only media hacks still quote “shouting fire in a crowded theater” as if it were standing law, that hasn’t really changed.
Widely loathed by liberals and leftists, who were justly often the targets of it, the Espionage Act was mostly used against actual spies during the Cold War. That changed dramatically under Obama who dusted it off and used it to go after reporters and whistleblowers. A decade ago, the Obama administration used the Espionage Act to target FOX News reporter James Rosen.
The Espionage Act allowed Obama to use warrantless wiretapping to bust leakers who were in many cases acting as whistleblowers and trying to expose his administration’s misconduct.
The abuse of the Espionage Act against reporters foreshadowed Russiagate. Having realized how useful the package of national security tools could be against political opponents in the press, the Obama administration decided to go ahead and use them against Trump.
When Obama and Clinton associates in the Justice Department targeted Gen. Flynn for conducting preemptive diplomacy for the incoming Trump administration, they explored using the Espionage Act and the Logan Act. The current charges against Trump are not an unexpected development, they’re what Russiagate was always about.
Power corrupts. And once the Obama administration realized that it could use the Espionage Act to kill unfavorable stories in the media, it was obvious that its members would not stop until they had escalated to using it directly against political opponents from Gen. Flynn to Trump.
Leftists used to hate the Espionage Act, like all forms of government power, until they were able to take control of it. And then, instead of being targeted by it, they wielded it and, with the inevitably corrupt predictability of human nature, used it to settle political disputes.
There are any number of parallels between Woodrow Wilson and Joe Biden. Both men were parochial narcissistic racists who ran as moderates only to rule as radicals. And their public profiles seemed so absurd that their opponents had a bad habit of underestimating them.
In a foreshadowing of what could happen to Biden, Wilson became non-functional in office and the country was temporarily run by his wife, yet he went on dreaming of a third term in office.
Wilson, like Biden, might have also been thinking of using the Espionage Act to cover up his own corruption.
For nearly a decade, Wilson had been conducting a secret affair with another woman. Fearful of discovery, he sent her thousands of dollars, a fortune by today’s standards, and drafted a partial admission of guilt. Wilson had called for the Espionage Act earlier that year which would give his administration the authority to censor the mail. It would have been a convenient means of suppressing revelations about his affair that might have damaged his reelection campaign.
Fortunately for Wilson, former President Theodore Roosevelt, his 1914 election opponent, had dismissed the idea of exposing the affair. “No evidence could ever make the American people believe that a man like Woodrow Wilson, cast so perfectly as the apothecary’s clerk, could ever play Romeo,” Roosevelt, a barrel-chested man of action, had sneered.
By 1916, Republicans, stuck with the uninspiring candidacy of Charles Evans Hughes, appeared ready to take off the gloves and were trying to aggressively get hold of Wilson’s letters. The version of the Espionage Act that allowed Wilson to censor the mails, but not the press, may have been a compromise to protect the use of the ‘nuclear option’ of the affair.
Biden, likely unknowingly, followed in Wilson’s footsteps by deploying claims of foreign election interference to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story during the election.
The abuse of national security by Democrats to go after the political opposition is not a new phenomenon. It’s been underway for over a century with the Espionage Act.
Charging Trump under the Espionage Act is no accident: it’s a proud tradition. It’s also a deeply corrupt and illegal attack on the Constitution. But that’s the function that the Espionage Act has served for over a century under Democrats. Corrupt megalomaniacal Democrats like Wilson, Obama and Biden use claims of national security to illegally investigate their opponents.
And whether it’s Wilson’s affair with a married woman, Hunter Biden’s harem of Uber prostitutes, or Joe Biden’s money from China, the Espionage Act is a red flag for presidential corruption.
National security is legitimate when it protects Americans from foreign enemies, not when it’s used, as Wilson and Biden have, to target Americans under the facade of national security.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
Biden’s DOJ Turned Trump’s Secret Service Detail Into Informants
The bond of trust between presidents and Secret Service agents is being violated.
The Obama strategy was to weaponize every element of the federal government. The Biden administration, run by many of the same people, are taking that strategy to the next level.
Previously, I discussed how Jack Smith, the Clinton allied Special Counsel, had violated the attorney-client privilege of 3 Trump lawyers so far, bringing the total number of Trump attorney-client privilege violations to 5 so far.
Even Trump’s Secret Service detail has been weaponized and transformed into informants.
Secret Service agents hired to protect Donald Trump may have provided key evidence in the classified documents case where the former president is at risk of federal indictment, according to a legal expert.
Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance discussed a “new and interesting” detail reported by The New York Times on June 6. More than 20 members of the former president’s security detail have testified to a grand jury in Washington D.C., the newspaper reported. The grand jury heard evidence as part of the investigation into allegations Trump mishandled classified materials found at his Mar-a-Lago resort and obstructed the federal attempt to retrieve them…
It was previously reported in April that “multiple” Secret Service agents had been subpoenaed to testify in front of the grand jury in Washington D.C. Further details—including the questions the agents were asked to answer under oath—are unknown….
Secret Service agents are always with Trump. And they are also highly trained as observers and witnesses,” Vance wrote.
“Agents work criminal cases and testify before grand juries and trial juries. It’s their job. In other words, these folks are trained witnesses. As a prosecutor, you couldn’t ask for much better.”
While Trump, as a former president, can decline Secret Service protection, if he were to win reelection, he could not.
There is supposed to be a bond of trust between presidents and the Secret Service agents who protect them.
The Democrat DOJ coup there, as with Trump’s lawyers, has set out to violate that bond of trust and to weaponize people who are supposed to protect Trump.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
The Exciting Adventures of Prosecuting Political Opponents with the Espionage Act (VIDEO)
Are you a president with approval ratings lower than a midget with a bad back?
Are you a president with approval ratings lower than a midget with a bad back? Never fear, the Espionage Act is here to help.
With the aid of this exciting tool, you too can prosecute your political enemies just like a former KKK president. Proven reliable for over 100 years, the Espionage Act is tailor made for inventing and selectively finding crimes by political opponents or just guys you don’t like, and launching fishing investigations to find or manufacture new crimes they can be investigated for.
Join us on this exciting new episode where we delve into the history of the Espionage Act, Woodrow Wilson’s torrid romances and what he has in common with Joe Biden.
Wilson, like Biden, might have also been thinking of using the Espionage Act to cover up his own corruption.
For nearly a decade, Wilson had been conducting a secret affair with another woman. Fearful of discovery, he sent her thousands of dollars, a fortune by today’s standards, and drafted a partial admission of guilt. Wilson had called for the Espionage Act earlier that year which would give his administration the authority to censor the mail. It would have been a convenient means of suppressing revelations about his affair that might have damaged his reelection campaign.
Fortunately for Wilson, former President Theodore Roosevelt, his 1914 election opponent, had dismissed the idea of exposing the affair. “No evidence could ever make the American people believe that a man like Woodrow Wilson, cast so perfectly as the apothecary’s clerk, could ever play Romeo,” Roosevelt, a barrel-chested man of action, had sneered.
By 1916, Republicans, stuck with the uninspiring candidacy of Charles Evans Hughes, appeared ready to take off the gloves and were trying to aggressively get hold of Wilson’s letters. The version of the Espionage Act that allowed Wilson to censor the mails, but not the press, may have been a compromise to protect the use of the ‘nuclear option’ of the affair.
Biden, likely unknowingly, followed in Wilson’s footsteps by deploying claims of foreign election interference to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story during the election.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
The FBI’s mission is “To protect the American people and uphold the U.S. Constitution.” Their motto is “Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity”.
How is the FBI doing on these fronts?
What are they protecting the American people from? Are they upholding the Constitution? Who is their fidelity to? Do they act with integrity?
The current FBI fails on all these counts. They have morphed from the premier law enforcement agency in the world to a Democrat party superPAC.
Start with revelations from the Durham, and previously the Weissman/Mueller reports. The FBI knowingly and deliberately used bogus and unverified opposition research from the Clinton campaign to spy on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, his transition, and then his administration.
The FBI lied to FISA courts to obtain warrants to spy on those within Trump’s orbit. Some were entrapped, as was Gen. Michael Flynn, and prosecuted. Others received visits by FBI agents or SWAT teams, such as Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, and Rudy Giuliani, to intimidate and harass them for the sin of supporting Donald Trump.
Have any Democrats been treated similarly?
The FBI conspired with suspected Russian agent Igor Danchenko who, along with British agent Christopher Steele, concocted the bogus “Steele Dossier” used as the basis of spying and undermining the Trump campaign and administration.
Cornell Law school defines, “Treason refers to the betrayal of one’s own country by attempting to overthrow the government through waging war against the state or materially aiding its enemies.”
Isn’t Russia considered our enemy?
Since the CIA knew that “Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, wanted Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election,” treason accurately describes the FBI's activities, preventing Trump’s election and stopping his presidency to serve the wishes of and aiding America’s enemy Russia.
Then there is the Hunter Biden laptop, in FBI’s possession since 2019, but hidden away and not investigated.
According to Yahoo News, “A whistleblower claims FBI officials instructed agents not to investigate Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 presidential election.”
Of course, Democrats and the FBI wanted to suppress such a story, just as their FBI superPAC smothered the Hillary Clinton email scandal? This was blatant election interference by the FBI.
The FBI, by ignoring the laptop in their possession, altered the 2020 election, “16% of Biden voters would have voted differently if Hunter Biden laptop story was not suppressed by media, big tech.” They left out the original suppressor, the FBI.
Voters agree that the FBI actions interfered in the 2020 election: “79% say ‘truthful’ coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop would have changed 2020 election.”
Additional confirmation came from a Twitter file release last December, “Evidence shows FBI, Biden campaign and Twitter worked together to suppress Hunter story.” In other words, the FBI and Twitter were part of the Democrat campaign.
At least in Twitter’s defense, it is a private company. The FBI is not, instead it is a taxpayer funded agency under the Department of Justice. Yet here they are as a Democrat party superPAC.
Who was in charge of the FBI during this time? An honest guy like the Efrem Zimbalist Jr character in the 1960 series “The FBI”? No, it was James Comey, who doesn’t hide his hyper-partisanship and political activism.
In a recent MSNBC interview Comey asserted, “Trump poses a near-existential threat to the country if he gains a second term.” In another interview he was in full campaign mode saying, “It has to be Biden in 2024.” He also predicted, "He could be wearing an ankle bracelet while accepting the nomination at the Republican convention."
It's extremely likely that Comey held these views as FBI director, when Trump ran for and was elected president. After Trump’s election, Comey, along with his wife and daughters marched through Washington, D.C. wearing “pink pussy hats,” protesting the election of the president he purportedly served. So much for fidelity or integrity.
Not only Comey, but two senior FBI officials, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok had this exchange in August 2016,
“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok in August 2016.
“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.
I’m sure similar conversations took place in the DNC headquarters. Is there any difference between the DNC and FBI?
The FBI has hunted Trump supporters anywhere near the U.S. Capitol on January 6, arresting them and serving them up to the other Democrat superPAC, the DOJ, for draconian prosecution. Meanwhile they can’t seem to identify the January 5 pipe bomber and are keeping Ray Epps and his role on January 6 hidden and buried as deeply as Hunter Biden’s laptop.
The FBI raided the home of a former Republican president over supposed classified documents, which he has declassification authority over, and which were in locked in his home under Secret Service protection.
While a Democrat senator and vice president, Joe Biden, without declassification authority, stored classified documents in garages, homes and offices, in multiple states, under no specific security protection, and the FBI yawns and instead pursues parents exercising their right of free speech at school board meetings.
Our FBI shields firms tied to the Chinese communist party that hold U.S. voter data in mainland China while they pressured Twitter to suppress information critical of the Biden family.
The FBI celebrates Democrat priority Pride Month while targeting Catholics as domestic terrorists. Just as any Democrat operative would have done.
As Rep. James Comer said, “The FBI is attempting a coverup, and Democrats are doing their bidding by lying to the American people” regarding supposed DOJ investigations into the Biden Family selling influence to foreign countries.
Then there is last week’s Trump indictment, after an unprecedented FBI raid and fishing expedition, seizing thousands of Trump’s personal items having nothing to do with national security. The FBI played tag team with the DOJ, indicting Trump for flimsy interpretations of the Espionage Act.
Trump was indicted over so-called classified documents that remain hidden. As Sundance described, “They cannot tell anyone, even the court, what the nature of the documents are that underpin their assertion. Remember, they wouldn’t even let a court appointed “special master” review the documents.”
I predict that if there is a trial, it will drag out through campaign season, only to be dropped on election day, having served its original intent of election interference by the Biden administration.
On the same day as the indictment, the FBI, under Congressional pressure, finally coughed up documents verifying their slow-walked investigation into an alleged $5 million bribe to then Vice President Biden from a Ukraine energy company.
Joe Biden has been confirmed as “the big guy” by a Burisma executive, after a few years ago being called the same over peddling his vice presidential status and influence to China. The FBI is “investigating” a $5 million bribe paid to “the big guy” but are sure keeping the investigation quiet.
No swat raids. No indictments. No arrests. Senate Republicans had to drag this out of the agency charged with monitoring and prosecuting foreign influence peddling by U.S. officials. The FBI is protecting one of its own fellow Democrats.
What’s the solution? Few Republicans seem to care, and the Democrats are happy to have the FBI as one of their most influential superPACs. If wrongdoing by the FBI is uncovered, nothing will happen, as evidenced after the Durham Report release.
The U.S. House has the power of the purse and could defund the FBI if they don’t reverse course but that will never happen. Instead, the FBI thumbs its nose at Congressional subpoenas, comfortable in the assurance that the DOJ would never prosecute such contempt of Congress. That’s reserved only for Republicans.
Fortunately House Speaker Kevin McCarthy found his spine and tweeted,
Today is indeed a dark day for the United States of America.
It is unconscionable for a President to indict the leading candidate opposing him. Joe Biden kept classified documents for decades.
I, and every American who believes in the rule of law, stand with President Trump against this grave injustice. House Republicans will hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable.
Talk is cheap though. Let’s see of Speaker McCarthy follows through.
The American people stand with Trump though. Following his indictment, Trump’s poll numbers went up, giving him a nearly 40 point lead over the rapidly diminishing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Fifty years ago, many feared a politicized and weaponized FBI under the reign of J. Edgar Hoover. Now those fearing a tyrannical government are in charge and running these agencies.
We now have a federalized police agency targeting political opponents of the party in power. Biden is now in good company with other tyrants who acted similarly including Mao, Stalin, and Hitler.
From Reagan’s “Shining city on a hill” we have Biden’s Banana Republic of America, thanks to the unethical and unscrupulous FBI. The Democrat party, with the able assistance of the FBI and DOJ, is attempting to take out the leading 2024 election opponent to assist their very own Big Guy. So much for the will of the people electing their president.
Wednesday, during an appearance on FNC’s “Jesse Watters Tonight,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, accused the FBI of covering for President Joe Biden.
Grassley was referring to the FBI’s alleged stonewalling regarding House inquiries into potential wrongdoing by Biden and members of his family.
“Senator Chuck Grassley, you’re a resolute guy,” FNC Jesse Watters said. “You are patient. You’ve done this before. You know how this works. Do you feel like the Department of Justice and the FBI are playing games?”
“Absolutely,” Grassley replied. “First of all, I want to compliment Congressman Comer because he has been very helpful with working me on this issue. And we wouldn’t be where we are with the FBI if he hadn’t been involved.”
“So, let me answer your question this way,” he continued. “We have an unclassified document. We have what the FBI calls a credible source because they paid this person over the years, six figures. And I’ve got a reputation for protecting whistleblowers, and we’re going to keep going until we get this document. But, yes, I believe the FBI is covering for President Biden. And the information that’s in this is from a credible source, from credible whistleblowers, people that are protected by the Whistleblower Protection Law, and we just got to get to the bottom of it, and we’re not going to give up until we get this document.”
“Senator Grassley, we’re hearing the FBI says they can’t protect this whistleblower if this document drops, he might wind up dead,” Watters asked. “How does that make you feel?”
“Well, let’s put it this way,” Grassley replied. “Look at — compared to the way they’re treating Congress as a second-class citizen. They gave the New York Times on May 18 a classified document. We have an unclassified document, and they gave them the name of a human source. Did they worry about that person being assassinated? I think that’s all blue smoke.”
Republican lawmakers are demanding transparency from President Joe Biden regarding his 2017 tax returns in which his entity, “CelticCapri Corp,” listed nearly $10 million without specifying revenue line items, raising concerns about who paid the entity and for what in the wake of Joe Biden’s alleged link to a $5 million Ukrainian “bribery” scheme.
Before the 2020 election, USA Todaypublished a “fact check” article that tried to support the claims that the Bidens earned “$15.6 million … from speaking fees and book deals” from 2017 to 2019, and that “more than $10 million of that total income was profits from Biden’s memoir ‘Promise Me, Dad’ and $3 million in profits from Jill Biden’s book.”
But a closer look at Joe Biden’s 2017 tax returns raises eyebrows. “Follow the source link provided to that $10 million number, though, and you’ll end up at Joe Biden’s campaign website with financial disclosure links to only their individual returns — no S-corporation tax returns,” the Federalist critiqued USA Today. “So, in reality, readers were left with a smokescreen.”
The so-called “smokescreen” raised alarm for Republican lawmakers, causing them to demand transparency about the nearly $10 million sum from the passthrough entity.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), a co-author of the 2020 Senate report on the Bidens, told Breitbart News Joe Biden should openly disclose the source of the revenue. “Biden should disclose and every member of the press ought to hound him until he does,” he said.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) told Breitbart News Joe Biden should produce unredacted bank records to provide transparency.
“The President seems to find selling out our country funny. We don’t,” she said. “If he’s serious about proving our allegations wrong he should release his and his family’s unredacted bank records and show the American people where all this money is coming from. The FBI can’t protect him forever.”
Related: FBI Deputy Director Refuses to Discuss Biden Ukraine Allegations as Cruz Presses Him
Senate Judiciary Committee
0 seconds of 6 minutes, 35 secondsVolume 90%
Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ), a successful businessman in his own right, told Breitbart News Joe Biden should come clean about the money in lieu of the alleged pay-for-pay scheme.
“The fact that there are credible claims signaling that a foreign national bribed the President of the United States with cash in exchange for influence over U.S. policy decisions is appalling. The American people deserve to know who paid the Bidens and what exactly they were paid for,” he said.
“Now that we know there are recordings of conversations Joe Biden and his degenerate son had with a Burisma executive, it’s becoming more and more obvious how the indictment of President Trump is meant to be a distraction,” Crane added. “It would shock no one in this town if Joe Biden received millions of dollars from selling out the country in a bribery scheme and then hid that money in shady shell companies.”
It is apparently “common” for personal tax returns to not list line item income of S Corporations entities, according to Jerry Allison, a CPA of Allison Financial Services who practiced accounting for over 30 years. However, the lack of detail should raise concern for House investigators, he noted, as allegations against Joe Biden arose last week about receiving a foreign bribe while he was vice president.
Upon reviewing Biden’s personal tax return, which includes an entity controlled by first lady Jill Biden, Allison explained the entity’s revenue is likely much higher due to expense deductions.
“The point I am making here is that the $9.5M income and the $557K income on Schedule E are after expenses have been subtracted, so the original income is much more than these numbers,” he told Breitbart News.
“It is my opinion that both S Corporation returns should be examined to find the actual amount of income and to obtain clues as to where the income may have originated,” he added. “The S Corporation returns might reveal other entities from which the income may have originated.”
A majority of voters believe FBI officials tried to cover up a bureau informant file that allegedly details a $5 million bribery scheme involving an exchange of money for policy decisions between now-President Joe Biden and a foreign national, a Rasmussen Reports poll found Wednesday.
The FBI’s informant file allegedly linked Joe Biden to the family’s business deals in Ukraine, House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) revealed Tuesday. The FBI file originated from an interview the bureau conducted with an informant, who is reportedly a “highly credible” FBI source with a history dating back to the Barack Obama administration.
The FBI refused to comply with Comer’s subpoena for nearly a month. Eleven hours before the House Oversight Committee planned to assemble to vote on holding FBI Director Wray in Contempt of Congress, the FBI agreed to permit all members of the Oversight Committee to review an unclassified file.
The bureau’s capitulation came on the same day polling revealed that 60 percent of voters believe it is likely that top FBI officials helped cover up any alleged wrongdoing the document might detail by Joe Biden or his family, including 48 percent who believe it is “very likely.”
“Thirty-three percent (33%) don’t believe an FBI cover-up is likely, including 16% who say it is Not At All Likely,” the poll found.
The poll surveyed 999 likely voters from June 4-6 with a +/- three percent margin of error.
The committee stated Wednesday:
After weeks of refusing to even admit the FD-1023 record exists, the FBI has caved and is now allowing all members of the Oversight and Accountability Committee to review this unclassified record that memorializes a confidential human source’s conversations with a foreign national who claimed to have bribed then-Vice President Joe Biden.
“Allowing all Oversight Committee members to review this record is an important step toward conducting oversight of the FBI and holding it accountable to the American people,” the committee added.
Related — Dem Rep. Goldman: House GOP’s Corruption Allegation Against Biden “Complete Garbage”
FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate stonewalled Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) during Tuesday’s Judiciary Committee hearing about if the bureau possesses the alleged 17 recordings between a Burisma Holdings executive and President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
On Tuesday, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) revealed the Burisma executive who allegedly paid Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden $5 million each kept 17 audio recordings of his conversations of them as an “insurance policy.”
“Do you have the 17 recordings? Yes or no?” Cruz drilled Abbate.
“I’m not going to get further into that,” he replied after admitting the FBI possesses a form that alleges the 17 recordings.
“That’s the problem the FBI has right now, anunlimited hubris that you believe you are unaccountable,” Cruz slammed the FBI agent. “You don’t believe you’re accountable to the United States Congress, and you don’t believe you’re accountable to the American people.”
“You’re sitting there happily erecting a wall to protect Joe Biden,” he added.
Cruz again pressed Abbate to disclose the alleged audio recordings. “Will you provide the 17 recordings so we can assess what is the evidence, the specific credible evidence,that Joe Biden personally took a $5 million bribe from a foreign national?”
“Senator, we will work with this committee, you, and other members to provide the information within the parameters of the process,” Abbate said, providing an indefinite answer.
Cruz also noted that if Joe Biden wanted to disprove the allegations, he could call for the release of the unclassified FBI informant form.
“And to be clear, if the allegations are false, you know who could disprove them?” Cruz rhetorically asked. “Joe Biden.”
“He could call for this to be released publicly. But the FBI is stonewalling.Would youagree?” Cruz questioned.
“Senator, no one’s stonewalling,” Abbate claimed.
Related — Grassley: Foreign National in Alleged Biden Bribery Scheme Has “Insurance Policy” Recordings of Joe and Hunter
C-SPAN
0 seconds of 3 minutes, 26 secondsVolume 90%
The FBI’s refusal to be forthcoming about the alleged “bribery” scheme comes as Republican lawmakers demandedtransparency from Joe Biden regarding his 2017 tax returns in which his entity, “CelticCapri Corp,” listed nearly $10 million without specifying revenue line items.
The lack of transparency raises concerns about who paid the entity and why in the wake of Joe Biden’s alleged link to the $5 million Ukrainian “bribery” scheme.
While it is apparently “common” for personal tax returns to not list line item income of S Corporations entities, the lack of detail should raise concern for House investigators, according to Jerry Allison, a CPA of Allison Financial Services who practiced accounting for over 30 years.
Upon reviewing Biden’s personal tax return, which includes an entity controlled by first lady Jill Biden, Allison told Breitbart News that the entity’s revenue is likely much higher due to expense deductions.
“The point I am making here is that the $9.5M income and the $557K income on Schedule E are after expenses have been subtracted, so the original income is much more than these numbers,” he told Breitbart News.
“It is my opinion that both S Corporation returns should be examined to find the actual amount of income and to obtain clues as to where the income may have originated,” he added. “The S Corporation returns might reveal other entities from which the income may have originated.”
Top members of the House Oversight Committee will review two more FBI informant documents related to the Bidens’ business, a spokesperson for the Committee confirmed to Breitbart News.
The FBI holds at least two more FD-1023 forms referenced in the FBI informant document reviewed by the Committee Thursday.
The FBI will allow House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) and Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) to review the two new forms this week.
The original FBI informant file revealed the alleged existence of two pieces of evidence showing President Joe Biden received $5 million from Ukrainian energy company Burisma, Committee Republicans told reporters.
When a reporter questioned Joe Biden Thursday about the alleged $5 million payment, he jokingly responded, “Where’s the money?”
Watch — Joe Biden Denies Bribery Allegations, Claims He Is Not Interfering with DOJ
The White House
0 seconds of 49 secondsVolume 90%
In 2015, Burisma was under suspicion of money laundering and public corruption. Prosecutor Victor Shokin investigated the case before his termination due to pressure applied by then-Vice President Joe Biden, who threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid from Ukraine if the Ukrainian government did not fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma.
In exchange, the informant file alleges Joe Biden and Hunter Biden received $5 million each in small sums through separate bank accounts.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) on Friday exclusively told Breitbart News the FBI held two more informant files on the Biden family’s business ventures, triggering the House Oversight Committee on Friday to subpoena two more banks.
The Committee did not respond to a request for comment about the bank subpoenas.
Greene told Breitbart News the House Oversight Committee issued two subpoenas Friday to compel information about the Bidens’ Ukrainian transactions. Greene did not comment on which banks Comer subpoenaed.
An informant alleging a $5 million bribery scheme involving President Joe Biden is reportedly a “highly credible” FBI source with a history dating back to the Obama administration era.
The FBI possesses a document from an interview the FBI conducted with the informant, which allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions between now-President Joe Biden and a foreign national.
After weeks of stonewalling a congressional subpoena, FBI Director Christopher Wray finally agreed to allow members of Congress to view the unclassified document next Monday. A House Oversight Committee spokesperson told CNN the committee still plans to move forward with holding the FBI in contempt of Congress.
A source told Fox News the informant was a “pre-existing” FBI source with a long track record dating back “at least several years” to the Obama era before generating the file detailing allegations against then-Vice President Biden.
In addition, the source claimed the informant was previously “found to be highly credible” and was “consistently reviewed by the FBI.”
In May, James Comer issued a subpoena to obtain the document from the FBI following legally protected disclosures to Sen. Chuck Grassley’s (R-IA) office.
Elements of a potential bribery scheme involving Biden and his family members’ overseas business interests have been evident for years. Breitbart News’s Joel Pollak wrote in March that there was evidence supporting the impeachment of President Biden for bribery:
Hunter Biden’s overseas business ventures had been recognized as early as 2015 as a potential conflict of interest for his father. Diplomats and journalists questioned Hunter Biden’s appointment to the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma, where he earned $83,333 per month, despite lacking relevant expertise, while his father was in office.
Those concerns were brushed aside, however, by the vice president’s office, and the issue was never resolved. Hunter Biden also connected other foreign business associates with his father, including Chinese associates.
Biden could be impeached retroactively, following a precedent set by Democrats in their second impeachment trial of President Donald Trump in 2021.
White House spokesman Ian Sams lashed out against House Republicans who plan to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress for refusing to divulge an unclassified, subpoenaed document that allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions between now-President Joe Biden and a foreign national.
After Wednesday’s meeting between Wray and House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY), in which the bureau chief confirmed the file’s existence, Comer doubled down on his threat to hold Wray in contempt of Congress — which the White House called a “silly charade” and a “political stunt.”
“This silly charade by @JamesComer is yet another reminder that his so-called ‘investigations’ are political stunts not meant to uncover facts but to spread thin innuendo to attack the President and get himself media attention and the Fox News spotlight,” Sams posted on Twitter shortly after the meeting.
During Comer’s meeting with Wray, the FBI confirmed the existence of the subpoenaed informant file the bureau refuses to provide Congress that allegedly links President Joe Biden to a $5 million bribery scheme, Comer said. The Justice Department previously did not deny the document’s existence upon Comer’s subpoena.
Comer said in a statement:
While Director Wray – after a month of refusing to even acknowledge that the form existed – has offered to allow us to see the documents in person at FBI headquarters, we have been clear that anything short of producing these documents to the House Oversight Committee is not in compliance with the subpoena. If the FBI fails to hand over the FD-1023 form as required by the subpoena, the House Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings.
After releasing the statement, Comer told Fox News that he and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) already inspected the document he subpoenaed and will go to the FBI headquarters and review it again.
“We will go there and look at the redacted document. But we know what is in the document,” he said.
House Oversight Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) also voiced frustrations with Comer for threatening to hold Wray in contempt of Congress after reviewing the document.
“Despite these extraordinary accommodations—and the fact that Republicans have claimed to have access to the very information subpoenaed—Chairman Comer has continued to insist he will hold the FBI Director in contempt,” Raskin told reporters.
The Democrats’ angst about the FBI potentially being held in contempt comes as Comer’s probe into the Biden family uncovered damning information. The probe uncovered that the Biden family business, over the course of several years, received at least $10 million from business schemes in Romania and China in return for what appears to be influence peddling. In addition, nine Biden family members received payments from the family foreign business ventures, including two of Joe Biden’s grandchildren, Comer revealed.
Watch — Schiff: Rep. Comer’s Investigation into Biden a “Fiasco” Full of “Unsubstantiated Allegations”
No comments:
Post a Comment