Category: Biden Cartel

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Elections Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Don’t you just love it when a awesome Federal Judge gives Special Prosecutor Smith a royal Bitch Slapping?

What a Badd Ass. Aileen Cannon is a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida. She was nominated to the bench in August 2020 by then-President Donald Trump. (Wikimedia Commons)

Don’t you just love it when a awesome Federal Judge gives Special Prosecutor Smith a royal Bitch Slapping? He’s in over his head and he knows it.

As Politico’s Kyle Cheney reported, Cannon struck down two of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s sealed filings in her ruling today. Cheney said she came out swinging.

Judge Cannon comes out swinging at special counsel this morning, striking two of prosecutors’ sealed filings and demanding an explanation of “the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate” the docs case.

The liberal media has claimed that Cannon revealed that an “out-of-district grand jury” is investigating the classified documents case. But Kelly notes it was Jack Smith who did this in a motion filed just last week.

The Gateway Pundit’s Cristina Laila previously reported that this is not the first time Jack Smith has been smacked down by Cannon. She had previously denied motions to keep the government’s motion government’s motion to keep a list of 84 witnesses under wraps.

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Crime How funny is this? Just my own thoughts Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics The Courts

Quick hide your children Progressives claim Trumps out to kill all who get in his way.

Oh if only he could tell the judge to go pound salt.

Quick hide your children Progressives claim Trumps out to kill all who get in his way. Former President Trump made a statement that.

“IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”  Well, the fanatics on the left are in fear. Some maybe even went into hiding. According to Jackie Boy the statement was a threat of violence against the witnesses and Smith and his crackerjack team.

The judge bought the lie and now wants a response from Trump as to what he meant. My first thought was to tell the judge to rotate on it. But seriously this will be a long string of complaints that will be filed.

Under the process known as discovery, prosecutors are required to provide defendants with the evidence against them so they can prepare their defense.

“It could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case,” prosecutors wrote in their filing, adding Trump has a history of attacking judges, attorneys and witnesses in other cases against him.

At his arraignment on Thursday, Trump swore not to intimidate witnesses or communicate with them without legal counsel present.

Protective orders are routine in cases involving confidential documents, but prosecutors said it was particularly important to restrict public dissemination given Trump’s social media statements.

A Trump spokesperson issued a statement defending the former president’s social media post.

“The Truth post cited is the definition of political speech, and was in response to the Rino, China-loving, dishonest special interest groups and super PAC’s,” the statement said.

 

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic Child Abuse Corruption COVID Crime Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science

FDA Head Robert Califf Battles Misinformation — Sometimes.

Lying at a Congressional hearing.

 

This is a clown who served during the Obama administration. Thought the job was all fun and games. Much of this article is Government misinformation. But there are parts that they get right. Come 2024 all these clowns that took part in the attacks on our young and elderly will be gone or in jail.

FDA Head Robert Califf Battles Misinformation — Sometimes.

Robert Califf, MD, the head of the FDA, doesn’t seem to be having fun on the job.

“I would describe this year as hand-to-hand combat. Really, every day,” he said at an academic conference at Stanford in April. It’s a sentiment the FDA commissioner has expressed often.

What’s been getting Califf’s goat? Misinformation, which gets part of the blame for Americans’ stagnating life expectancy. To Califf, the country that invents many of the most advanced drugs and devices is terrible at using those technologies well. And one reason for that is Americans’ misinformed choices, he has suggested. Many don’t use statins, vaccines, or COVID-19 therapies. Many choose to smoke cigarettes and eat the wrong food.

Califf and the FDA are fighting misinformation head-on. “The misinformation machine is really causing a lot of death,” he said, in an apparent ad-lib, this spring in a speech at Tufts University. The pandemic, he told KFF Health News, helped “crystallize” his need to tackle misinformation. It was a “blatant case,” in which multiple studies gave evidence about very effective therapeutics against COVID. “And a lot of people chose not to do it.” There were “large-scale purveyors of misinformation,” he said, poisoning the well.

Occasionally, though, Califf and the FDA have added to the cacophony of misinformation. And sometimes their misinformation is about misinformation.

Califf hasn’t been able to consistently estimate misinformation’s public health toll. Last June, he said it was the “leading cause of meaningful life-years lost.” In the fall, he told a conferenceopens in a new tab or window: “I’ve been going around saying that misinformation is the most common cause of death in the United States.” He continued, “There is no way to prove that, but I do believe that it is.”

 

At other times, as in April, he has called the problem the nation’s “leading cause” of premature death. “I’ll keep working on this to try and get it right,” he said. Later, in May, he said, “Many Americans die or experience serious illness every year due to bad choices driven by false or misleading information.”

Americans’ health is indeed in dire straits. The CDC noted the country’s life expectancy has dropped 2 years in a rowopens in a new tab or window — it’s at 76.1 years as of 2021 — a dismal capper to 4 decadesopens in a new tab or window of lagging gains. Countries such as Slovenia, Greece, and Costa Rica outrank the U.S. Their newborn citizens are expected to live more than 80 yearsopens in a new tab or window, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Several factors are at the root of those differences. But Americans’ choices, often informed by bad or misleading data, political jeremiads, or profit-seeking advertising, are among the causes. For instance, one 2023 paper estimated that undervaccination against COVID — caused in part by misinformation — costs as much as $300 million per dayopens in a new tab or window, accounting for both the costs of healthcare and economic costs, like missed work.

Outside experts are sympathetic. Misinformation is a “huge problem for public health,” said Joshua Sharfstein, MD, a Johns Hopkins University public health professor and former FDA principal deputy commissioner. Having a strategy to combat it is crucial. But, he cautioned, “that’s the easiest part of this.”

The agency, which regulates products that consumers spend 20 cents of each dollar on per year, is putting more muscle behind the effort. It’s begun mentioning the subject of misinformation in its procurement requests, like one discussing the needopens in a new tab or window to monitor social media for misinformation related to cannabis.

The agency launched a “Rumor Control” pageopens in a new tab or window seeking to debunk persistent confusion. It also expects to get a report from the Reagan-Udall Foundationopens in a new tab or window, a not-for-profit organization created by Congress to advise the FDA. Califf has said he thinks better regulation — and more authorityopens in a new tab or window for the agency — would help.

Califf has noted small victories. Ivermectin, once touted as a COVID wonder drug, “eventually” became one such win. But, then again, its use is “not completely gone,” he said. And, despite winning individual battles, his optimism is muted: “I’d say right now the trend in the war is in a negative direction.”

Some of those battles have been quite small, even marginal.

And it’s difficult to know what to take on or respond to, Califf said. “I think we’re just in the early days of being able to do that,” he told KFF Health News. “It’s very hard to be scientific,” he said.

Take the agency’s experience last fall with “NyQuil chicken” — a purportedly viral cooking trend in which users roasted their birds in the over-the-counter cold medicine on social media platforms like TikTok.

Califf said his agency’s “skeleton crew” — at least relative to Big Tech giants — had picked up on increasing chatter about the meme.

But independent analyses don’t corroborate the claim. It seems much of the interest in it came only after the FDA called attention to it. The day before the agency’s pronouncement, the TikTok app recorded only five searches on the topic, BuzzFeed News found in an analysis of TikTok dataopens in a new tab or window. That tally surged to 7,000 the week after the agency’s declaration. Google Trends, which measures changes in the number of searches, shows a similar pattern: Interest peaked on the search engine in the week after the agency announcement.

Califf also claimed “injuries” occurred to participants “directly” due to the social media trend. Now, he said, “the number of injuries is down,” though he couldn’t say whether the agency’s intervention was the cause.

Again, his assertions have fuzzy underpinnings. It’s not clear what, if any, actual damage the NyQuil chicken fad caused. Poison control centers don’t keep that data, said Maggie Maloney, a spokesperson for America’s Poison Centers. And, after multiple requests, agency spokespeople declined to provide the FDA’s data reflecting increased social media traffic or injuries stemming from the meme.

In countering misinformation, FDA also risks coming off as high-handed. In September 2021, the agency tweeted about purported mythsopens in a new tab or window and misinformation on mammograms. Among the myths? That they’re painfulopens in a new tab or window. Instead, the agency explained that “everyone’s pain threshold is different” and the breast cancer-screening procedure is more often described as “temporary discomfort.”

Statements like these “erode trust,” said Lisa Fitzpatrick, MD, MPH, MPA, an infectious diseases physician and currently the CEO of Grapevine Health, a startup trying to improve health literacy in underserved communities. Fitzpatrick has previously served as an official with the District of Columbia’s Medicaid program and with the CDC.

“Who are you to judge what’s painful?” she asked, rhetorically. It’s hard to brand subjective impressions as misinformation.

Califf acknowledged the point. Speaking to 340 million Americans is difficult. With mammograms, the average patient might not have a painful experience — but many might. “Getting across that kind of nuance and public communication, I think, is in its early phases.”

Scrutiny over the agency’s role regarding food and nutrition is also mounting. After independent journalist Helena Bottemiller Evich wrote an article criticizing the agency for relying on voluntary reporting standards for baby formula, Califf tweeted to correctopens in a new tab or window a “bit of misinformation,” saying the agency did not have such authority.

An agency communications specialist made a similar intervention with New York University professor Marion Nestle, PhD, MPH, referring to a “troubling pattern of articles with erroneous information that then get amplified.” The agency was again seeking to rebut arguments that the agency had erred in not seeking mandatory reporting.

“As I see it, the ‘troubling pattern’ here is FDA’s responses to advocates like me who want to support this agency’s role in making sure food companies in general — and infant formula companies in particular — do not produce unsafe food,” Nestle retortedopens in a new tab or window. Notwithstanding the agency’s protests to Evich and Nestle, the agency had only recently asked for such authority.

Efforts to respond to or regulate misinformation are becoming a political problem.

In July, a federal judge issued a sweeping, yet temporary, injunctionopens in a new tab or window — at the instigation of Republican attorneys general, multiple right-wing political groups, and prominent anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense — barring federal health officials from contacting social media groups to correct information. A large section of the ruling detailed efforts by a CDC official to push back on suspected misinformation on social media networks.

An appeals court later issuedopens in a new tab or window its own temporary ruling — this time countering the original, sweeping order — nevertheless underscoring the extent of pushback on government pushback against misinformation. Califf has consistently played down the government’s ability to solve the problem. “One hundred percent of experts agree, government cannot solve this. We have too much distrust in fundamental institutions,” he said last June.

A photo of Robert Califf, MD

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Government Overreach Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Tucker Carlson. Part 1. Devon Archer and Part 2. Devon Archer Interviews.

FILE PHOTO: Fox personality Tucker Carlson speaks at the 2017 Business Insider Ignition: Future of Media conference in New York, U.S., November 30, 2017. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

Tucker Carlson. Part 1. Devon Archer and Part 2. Devon Archer Interviews. Here’s part 1 and 2 of the Devon Archer interviews.

Around 10 minutes into the more than hour-long interview, Archer starts to discuss how he got involved with the Bidens and the origins of their overseas business dealings, including how Burisma got the president of Poland to invite him and Hunter to work on the board of the Ukrainian gas company.

“It sounds like you had a successful business. So how does Hunter Biden get involved and why?” Tucker asks around minute 12:30.

“We had this lunch with a mutual friend… an attorney of Hunter’s had introduced us,” Archer said. “You’re always looking for kind of an edge or advantage, being a boutique. Certainly [managing] $3 Billion was good… but in real estate, it’s kind of a levered number… We were demystified to Washington, and Hunter was in a stage where he was transitioning from lobbying to strategic advising… There are some legal limits to registering when your father is the vice president, so I think that’s what they ran into.”

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Corruption Crime Links from other news sources.

Judge Releases Hunter Biden Plea Deal. Now that’s news.

Judge Releases Hunter Biden Plea Deal. The judge who bitch slapped Hunter has released the full transcript of the under the table deal the government did with Hunter. We have this from Newsmax.

Noreika also released the diversion agreement, which included that the U.S. agreed to “not criminally prosecute Biden, outside of the terms of this Agreement, or any federal crimes encompassed by the attached Statement of Facts (Attachment A) and the Statement of Facts attached as Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of Plea Agreement filed this same day.”

The Republican heads of three House committees on Monday announced in a letter they will investigate the circumstances surrounding Biden’s failed plea deal, the New York Post reported.

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Crime Elections Government Overreach How sick is this? Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others. The Courts The Law

Attorney John Lauro: Trump Is Being Criminalized For Objecting To The Way That 2020 Election Was Handled.

Corruption at the highest level.

Attorney John Lauro: Trump Is Being Criminalized For Objecting To The Way That 2020 Election Was Handled.

This writer ( Right or Wrong ) has decided that the Trump indictments are nothing but cover for the Biden Cartel possible crimes. I’ve decided, that after today to pretty much ignore these falsehoods. Now if there is something that’s newsworthy I’ll comment on it. But there’s so much news out there that’s news worthy. Enjoy the article below.

Trump attorney John Lauro spoke to FOX News host Bret Baier on Tuesday following the announcement of another indictment against the former president. Lauro said Trump is being criminalized for questioning whether the 2020 election was conducted in a valid way.

Lauro said when this case goes to trial, “we’re going to be representing not just President Trump, but every single American that believes in the First Amendment and believes in your ability to redress and bring grievances to Congress.”

“It’s not just issues of fraud,” Lauro said of the 2020 election. It’s also the fact that procedures were changed, undeniably so, that procedures at the state level were changed without the ability of the legislature to weigh in. And what President Trump was raising when he asked Vice President Pence to send it back to the state legislatures was to give the legislature in each state of those contested states one last chance to make a determination, because the reality is that the state legislatures in every state has the ultimate responsibility ability for qualifying electors.”

“What Mr. Trump did was exactly constitutionally precise and in order,” he added.

“Nothing was done in a way that wasn’t constitutionally permissible,” he said. “It’s all politics. It’s all politics. And if we’re criminalizing politics, what’s going to happen when the Republicans are next in office? Think about the pressure that’s going to be put on a Republican president to go after and indict sitting Democrats now in Congress or in statehouses for their political views.”

Transcript, via FOX News:

BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: We need a whiteboard for all of this. It is like planes going into La Guardia with this legal situation.

But the person who’s dealing with this case joins us now. John Lauro is former President Trump’s lead attorney on this specific case. He joins us with his first public reaction.

John, thanks for being here.

JOHN LAURO, ATTORNEY FOR FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Good evening.

BAIER: You heard what the special counsel said. You have read the indictment. Your client’s been talking about it quite a bit today on TRUTH Social.

Your thoughts on this?

LAURO: It’s a terribly tragic day that we find ourselves in, where political speech now has been criminalized, where an existing Justice Department, Merrick Garland, has a boss. His name is Joe Biden.

And Joe Biden is running against Donald Trump and losing currently. And now we have that Justice Department indicting President Trump for actions that he took as the executive — as the chief executive of the United States with respect to public policy matters.

So, now we have the criminalization and the weaponization of public policy and political speech by one political party over another. And it’s not surprising when it comes. It comes on the heels of unbelievable allegations against Mr. Biden and his son, as well as the fact that Donald Trump is leading in the polls right now.

And now we have what essentially is a regurgitation of the allegations in the January 6 report, which was highly political. It really reads no differently. So it’s really an astounding document, because, for the first time in American history, a former president is being prosecuted by a political opponent, who wields the power of the criminal justice system, for what he believed in and the policies and the political speech that he carried out as president.

This is unprecedented. It affects not just Donald Trump. It affects every American, who now realizes that the First Amendment is under assault. It’s under attack by the Biden administration. We now have a political incumbent who is attacking Americans for their beliefs, attacking Americans for their speech, and attacking Americans for their politics.

This has never happened in the history of our country, and it’s playing out right now.

BAIER: Yes, John, let me read from the indictment, and you can respond to this specifically.

It says: “The defendant lost the 2020 presidential election. Despite having lost, the defendant was determined to remain in power. So, more — for more than two months following the Election Day, November 3, 2020, the defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the defendant knew that they were false, created an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger and eroded public faith in the administration of the election.”

LAURO: I would like them to try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump believed that these allegations were false.

What did he see in real time? He saw changes in election procedure in the middle of the game being carried out by executive-level — people at the state level, election officials, but not the state legislatures.

He had an advice of counsel, a very detailed memorandum from a constitutional expert who said: Mr. President, these states are complaining about what happened. You, as the executive, have the ability to ask Vice President Pence to pause the vote on January 6, have these states audit and recertify, and, that way, we know ultimately who won the election.

And that’s the only thing that President Trump suggested. There’s nothing unlawful about that. He was entitled to do that, as the chief executive officer carrying out the laws, and nothing about that was obstructive.

It was quite interesting that Mr. Smith talked about the violence on Capitol Hill. He’s not being charged with that. There’s no allegation that President Trump incited any violence or did anything to cause any violence. Just the opposite. He’s being indicted for free speech.

He’s being indicted for objecting to the way that the 2020 election was carried out. And any American that takes that view should be equally concerned, are they next? Because the reality is that, if a president can be indicted for free speech, then anybody can be indicted.

So, when this case goes to trial, we’re going to be representing not just President Trump, but every single American that believes in the First Amendment and believes in your ability to redress and bring grievances to Congress.

And that’s exactly what people were doing. You had these alternate electors that said to the Congress: We have serious doubts about what happened in the 2020 election. We’re bringing these grievances to you. Listen to us.

That’s being criminalized now. Don’t forget, we had an extraordinary set…

BAIER: Yes.

LAURO: … of circumstances in 2020.

We had the COVID virus. We had laws being changed in the middle of the game. And Donald Trump had every responsibility and every right to raise these issues.

BAIER: To your point about what he believed, I talked to the former president a few weeks ago at his place in New Jersey about other things, but the 2020 election came up.

BAIER: You lost the 2020 election.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Bret, you take a look at all of the stuffed ballots, you take a look at all of the things, including things like the 51 intelligence agents.

BAIER: There were recounts in all of the swing states. There was not significant, widespread fraud.

TRUMP: Bret, we’re trying to get recounts, real recounts…

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: … number of votes cast.

BAIER: There were investigations. Widespread corruption, there was not a sense of that.

There were lawsuits, more than 50 of them, by your lawyers, some in front of judges — judges that you appointed…

TRUMP: Bret, are you ready? Look at Wisconsin.

BAIER: … that came out with no evidence.

TRUMP: Wisconsin is — Bret, Wisconsin has practically admitted it was rigged. Other states are doing the same right now. And it’s continued on. It was a rigged election.

BAIER: There have been reviews of every potential case of voter fraud in six battleground states, and they found fewer than 475 cases. It was not affected.

TRUMP: You know why? Because they didn’t look at the right things, Bret.

BAIER: OK. Are you going to…

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: My point in showing that is that he is pushing back on June 20 on that front.

John, when it says that he knew that the election was lost and it quotes people that they have interviewed, what’s the pushback to that?

LAURO: Very easy and very simple. It’s not just issues of fraud. It’s also the fact that procedures were changed, undeniably so, that procedures at the state level were changed without the ability of the legislature to weigh in.

And what President Trump was raising when he asked Vice President Pence to send it back to the state legislatures was to give the legislature in each state of those contested states one last chance to make a determination, because the reality is that the state legislatures in every state has the ultimate responsibility ability for qualifying electors.

So, what Mr. Trump did was exactly constitutionally precise and in order. There was nothing illegal about that. And he was required to take steps as president of the United States to ensure that that election was held in a valid way.

All of that now is being criminalized. The one thing I will say, though, in 2020, Mr. Trump’s campaign had a few weeks to gear up and present evidence, and it was very difficult. We now have the ability in this case to issue our own subpoenas, and we will relitigate every single issue in the 2020 election in the context of this litigation.

It gives President Trump an opportunity that he has never had before, which is to have subpoena power since January 6 in a way that can be exercised in federal court.

BAIER: What you’re talking about, the states, the states did that. Each individual state certified the elections. They were signed by the governors, many of them Republican governors, and many of them Republican secretaries of state, that signed off and certified those election results before they came to Washington, D.C., and we had what was January 6.

LAURO: Right.

BAIER: So, what you’re talking about was done. It was certified.

LAURO: No. No, I’m sorry, but — but you’re missing what Professor Eastman’s advice was.

Professor Eastman said that the state legislatures had not opined and weighed in on the changes that had been done in those various states. And…

BAIER: But each one of those states since that time — now we’re talking about two years later — has not reopened those cases.

They have not — some of them have had audits, but they have not reopened the 2020 election from that point of view. And some of them are Republican legislatures.

LAURO: Yes. And it’s never been presented to the states.

Now what we’re going to have is not just a civil trial, but a criminal trial for Mr. Trump exercising his right to speech. So there may be disagreement about what happened, but the bottom line is, we’re now treating this as a criminal case, rather than, as we’re doing, Bret…

BAIER: Yes.

LAURO: … talking about this in the context of politics and free speech. And — and…

BAIER: Yes. Well, let’s talk about legal for just a second, John.

LAURO: Yes.

BAIER: And you are specifically running point on this case.

And according to our legal analysts…

LAURO: Oh…

BAIER: Is that true?

LAURO: Along with Todd Blanche.

BAIER: Yes.

LAURO: Yes, we’re co-counsel on it, definitely.

BAIER: On the other cases, is it legally somebody else, like, for the documents case? Are you also on that?

LAURO: I’m not on that team. I’m concentrating on the First Amendment issues. I’m concentrating on this case, which is a direct attack on our constitutional principles, only this one.

BAIER: Will you run point in Georgia, if an indictment comes down in Georgia?

LAURO: No. No.

BAIER: Somebody else.

LAURO: Absolutely. There are other groups working on that.

Obviously, there’s coordination around the country. And all of this is being done in the middle of an election season where Donald Trump is winning. So, you have a series of criminal cases that are being brought and serially brought out on a regular basis now, with only one objective in mind, and that’s to interfere in this election cycle, which is now under way.

BAIER: What about the stories that these campaign funds are now paying for legal fees and it’s — and you’re running out of cash in that front?

LAURO: Well, I’m not involved in that.

But the bottom line is, the way that they’re trying to take out Donald Trump is through the legal process. So, he’s being forced to spend money on legal defense which should be spent on the discussion of critical ideas and critical issues. People want to hear the issues. They don’t want to relitigate 2020.

And that’s exactly what the special counsel — I should say Merrick Garland. Merrick Garland and the Biden administration had to sign off on this indictment. And what they have really done is invited now a relitigation of 2020, but this time in a criminal court, which is unprecedented.

No sitting president has ever been criminally charged for his views, for taking a position. And, by the way, is there any doubt there’s two systems of justice in the United States? Was Hillary Clinton prosecuted for the Russian hoax? Were those individuals who said, don’t worry about the Biden — the Biden laptop, because it’s just Russian disinformation, are they being prosecuted?

No. Only one person in America is being prosecuted for his political beliefs. And that should send a chill, a warning to every single American who one day wants to get up and say, this is what I believe in. I disagree with the Biden administration, but these are the beliefs I have, because every person who does that now is subject to a potential criminal case.

BAIER: Last thing.

According to this indictment, they believe that that argument would empower every losing politician to do what former President Trump did, and by using what they call in this indictment false information to stir up people, that the system then breaks down.

It’s — I’m paraphrasing, but, essentially, that’s what it says in this indictment.

LAURO: So, what they’re saying is, politicians may use hyperbolic speech or excessive speech in some way and stir up people, and we’re going to criminalize that.

Good luck in the United States, if that’s where we’re heading. Good luck, because the reality is that everything that Mr. Trump requested to be done was done with the advice of counsel, was done with lawyers giving him advice. Those lawyers are going to come in and testify.

Nothing was done in a way that wasn’t constitutionally permissible. It’s all politics. It’s all politics. And if we’re criminalizing politics, what’s going to happen when the Republicans are next in office? Think about the pressure that’s going to be put on a Republican president to go after and indict sitting Democrats now in Congress or in statehouses for their political views.

And then we have this vicious circle once the criminal justice system has been politicized.

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Opinion Politics

Now this is news. Jonathan Turley Responds to Devon Archer Testimony. Not some to do about nothing protest in 2021.

Turley discussing corruption. FOX Photo.

Now this is news. Jonathan Turley Responds to Devon Archer Testimony. Not some to do about nothing protest in 2021. Jonathan was all over the other day talking about one of the greatest corruption scandals in the history of Washington.

Never in this countries history have we seen such open corruption by a political figure. What’s amazing is that this family has been doing it for four decades.

 

Turley on all of this.  it is still a crime to lie to Congressional investigators, you don’t need to put him under oath. What we now know very clearly is the president has been lying. He has been saying for years he hasn’t discussed the business dealings of his son, he has had no involvement or knowledge. That was previously contradicted. People forget about people like Tony Bobulinski, who said he actually is who actually sat down with the vice president and discussed business with the vice president. There are audiotapes of the president discussing business dealings in the press. This further demolishes those denials but the question is now: why was the president lying? It is fairly clear now he was part of the brand and the brand was influence peddling. He was the object of the influence peddling. It was influence and access to him, and the way you sell it is to have him pop into meetings and dinners showing I’m a phone call away, so you can ink that deal with my son.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Corruption Links from other news sources. Politics Reprints from others.

The rest of the story. Democrat congresswoman lashes out at Biden over ‘shameful’ Space Command decision: ‘I expected more’.

Politics over selection. Fox Photo.

The rest of the story. Democrat congresswoman lashes out at Biden over ‘shameful’ Space Command decision: ‘I expected more’. The Space Command HQ was to be moved to Alabama. In a survey of locations, the present location was picked fifth.

“Huntsville finished first in both the Air Force’s Evaluation Phase and Selection. The GAO did the survey to see what location would be the best. Was it political? Three red states with four locations scored higher than Colorado.

Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Ala., released a statement late Monday sharply attacking Biden over the decision, calling it “shameful” and accusing him of bowing “to the whims of politics over merit.”

“This Administration’s decision to keep Space Command in Colorado bows to the whims of politics over merit. Huntsville’s merits won this selection process fair and square,” Sewell said. “In three separate reports, Huntsville reigned victorious, whereas Colorado did not come in second or even third.”

“This reversal is as shameful as it is disappointing. I expected more from the Biden Administration. A decision of this magnitude should not be about red states versus blue states, but rather what is best for our national security. To be clear, the Alabama Congressional Delegation stands united in opposition to this decision,” she added.

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Crime Links from other news sources.

Referring to Joey Boy as The Big Guy.

Referring to Joey Boy as The Big Guy. On more than one occasion Biden has been mentioned as The Big Guy. Breitbart did a nice job of pointing out at least five different occasions.

An FBI informant form publicly revealed Thursday shows Zlochevsky referred to Joe Biden as the “big guy.” Zlochevsky is the founder of Burisma Holdings. An FBI informant claimed in a FD-1023 form that Zlochevsky bribed Joe and Hunter Biden with $5 million each.

IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley said the leadership of the DOJ’s criminal investigation of Hunter Biden for alleged tax and gun violations prevented subordinates from investigating the “big guy.”

Hunter Biden’s business partner, James Gilliar, dubbed Joe Biden ‘the big guy’ in a 2017 email. Gilliar used the monicker for Joe Biden in his May 13, 2017, email to whistleblower Tony Bobulinski, who confirmed “the big guy” was a reference to Joe Biden. The 2017 email revealed a business deal between Bobulinski, the Biden family, and high-ranking members of the Chinese Communist Party would include 10 percent “held by H for the big guy?”

An executive at wealth management company Glenmede Trust Company, Geoff Roger, used the monicker in an email to Hunter Biden about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s appearance at a dinner at Whitehall Neck Sportsman Club, a private club in Delaware in 2013.

Hunter Biden used the “big guy” monicker in a 2014 email to Chuck Harple, a trade union lobbyist, with whom Hunter Biden hoped to set a meeting between the head of the North American Building Trades Union and Joe Biden. The email came after not receiving a response after using an official channel.

So we see that Joe’s been referred to as The Big Guy since 2014.

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Crime Elections Government Overreach

Stop the Presses. Thanks to Jack Smith, Trump trial in Florida will be after the elections.

BEATING THEM ALL?

Stop the Presses. Thanks to Jack Smith, Trump trial in Florida will be after the elections. First I figured that with the judges ruling that Smith had to reveal his 84 witnesses, I would think that Trumps attorneys would want to depose them. How long would that take?

I was involved in a case where three people were deposed. Took six months. Now with the new charges, Smith will have to reveal his witness list, and I’m sure there will be deposition hearings for them.

Finally with the new charges, I’m sure Trumps new lawyers will ask for more time to prepare. So I doubt that this case will be not heard in May like the judge said.