Musicman
13 hours ago
So much for the Constitutional Right to face your accuser. If true, this is the cherry on top that proves beyond all doubt that Merrick Garland is a partisan hack. Thank God he didn’t make it to the Supreme Court.

NavyVet Musicman
13 hours ago
"no one cares about this anymore"?
I do. This is a deliberate and malicious swipe at the president-elect, hence an effort to divide and harm our country. It is an indicted ham sandwich, selectively packaged "evidence" that buries all exculpatory evidence.

It angers me, and it calls for a thorough investigation by a trustworthy special counsel. I nominate Sidney Powell. Let that bulldog go after those scumbags and ruin their lives, just like they have been doing to Trump and everyone close to him. //

GreenLanternMD Largo Patriot
12 hours ago
If they had anything persuasive, they would have released it before the election. //

emptypockets
11 hours ago
"full of sound and fury signifying nothing".

Incoming AG Bondi should respond, not Trump. She should begin by noting--clearly and loudly that Smith was an illegally appointed SC. Remind that many others also "mishandled classified docs" including Biden who treated them like a pack rat stashing shinies. Ones he never HAD any right to have while ALL Trump's were his to legally remove as POTUS.

Then she could add that she would be doing some deep cleaning, reviewing of records which should be carefully NOT "lost" or heads might indeed roll sooner than even she expected.

This is sore loser-itis highly inflamed. Maybe someone still loves them enough to give them an ointment for that. Not me, though.

REPORTER: I noticed that when you urge people to action, you often include the word 'peacefully.'

PRESLER: Peacefully

REPORTER: Is that to avoid another Jan 6 type incident?

PRESLER: With all due respect, it's to avoid people like you guys saying that I'm anything but. My motto is to just be super cute, have my data and facts, treat everyone with love and respect, and as you can see, an army of people will follow.

The bias was displayed before the reporter even got the question out of her mouth. Notice that the chyron refers to Presler as a "controversial activist." I'm struggling to determine what is controversial about legally registering people to vote. Is it the reaching out to the Amish part? Or just the fact that it helped Trump win Pennsylvania, which no doubt, CNN finds very controversial? //

I remember when Stacey Abrams, who refused to concede her 2022 election loss to Brian Kemp, was pushing disinformation on voting machines. Her get-out-the-vote organization was also caught up in a scandal, eventually being shut down. Has CNN ever described her as "controversial" in her many appearances on the network? Of course, not.

‘The DoD IG knowingly concealed the extent of the delay in constructing a narrative that is favorable to DoD and Pentagon leadership,’ the letter says.

Loudermilk’s letter refutes the report’s claims that the Defense Department’s actions were “appropriate” and “reasonable” despite its failure to deploy the National Guard in time to prevent violence.

“The DoD IG knowingly concealed the extent of the delay in constructing a narrative that is favorable to DoD and Pentagon leadership,” the letter reads. //

The inability of the DoD IG to adequately review these and other DoD actions on January 6 has informed the Subcommittee’s finding that DoD IG is complicit in intentionally concealing DoD actions to delay the DCNG’s response.” //

The Inspector General also falsely accused Major General Walker of providing false testimony while speaking before Congress, referring to comments made by unnamed junior Army staff members who claimed Walker’s testimony was inaccurate. However, Colonel Craig Hunter, DCNG Task Force Commander, confirmed under oath that Walker’s statements were correct. //

The DoD IG’s report allegedly fabricated a phone call between McCarthy and Walker, according to the letter. Both parties testified under oath that the call never happened. “Inventing a critical phone call between Secretary McCarthy and Major General William Walker in the absence of any evidence violates all investigative standards,” the letter reads.

Let's not forget the Democrats, like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who registered objections to the electoral count in the 2016 election. Then there were the efforts to undermine/threaten/flip electors away from Trump. Plus, there were more than 70 Democrats who boycotted Trump's inauguration. Oh, and let's not forget the leftist riots in the streets.

What will they do now? Kelly, a lawyer, mentioned the lawfare she thinks is coming. I think that's probably a given. If they act as insane as they were in 2016 after he won, how much more insane will they be now? //

Breaking911
@Breaking911
·
Follow
🚨REP. RASKIN: "It's gonna be up to us on January 6, 2025 to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqualified."

"We need bodyguards for everybody and Civil War conditions, all because the nine Justices...do not want to do their job."

4:17 PM · Aug 5, 2024

When CNN pundits are asking questions, you know it smells. Though the outlet is famous for their hatred for Trump, even their senior legal analyst Elie Honig is wondering, just what the heck is going on here?

CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig on Friday said he is unaware of “any precedent” for Judge Tanya Chutkan releasing redacted documents of special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence against former President Donald Trump, given the November election is approaching. //

🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸
@mrddmia
·
Follow
More blatant lawfare and election interference by Biden-Kamala’s Jack Smith and DC Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan.

They’re publicly dumping a one-sided political narrative tomorrow.

With the election less than 3 weeks away.

After waiting nearly 3 years to bring the (bogus) charges.
9:09 PM · Oct 17, 2024 //

Is it election interference? "It’s very much a Rorschach test,” Honig said. I sure as heck know what I'm reading from that test.

He argued that the matter is open to interpretation, which is damning enough considering that even the appearance of banana republic justice is problematic after all the abuses of the Justice Department since Biden-Harris came into power. //

The Justice Department flatly states in their manual:

Federal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) is facing accusations of unethical conduct after it was revealed that she allegedly had private communications with a key witness in the Jan. 6 investigation using an encrypted messaging app.

The lawmaker, a fierce critic of former President Donald Trump, played a pivotal role in the proceedings.

Cheney allegedly exchanged messages with former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson in June 2022 as the investigation was still in full swing, according to Just the News. It is believed she used Signal, the messaging app, as a back channel to discuss the case with Hutchinson.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), chairman of the House Administration oversight subcommittee, brought the allegations to light. //

“Our investigation has uncovered unethical back-channel communications between former Rep. Liz Cheney and Cassidy Hutchinson just before Hutchinson changed her sworn testimony,” Loudermilk said. “Not only is communicating with a witness without their attorney present unethical, it undermines the integrity of an investigation. //

“Clearly, Cheney did not want Stefan Passantino representing Hutchinson; as shortly after Cheney and Hutchinson began communicating, Cheney convinced Hutchinson to fire Passantino, and arranged for a new attorney to represent Hutchinson pro-bono. “ //

The revelation has raised questions about Hutchinson’s testimony – especially her wild claims about Trump.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk @RepLoudermilk
·
President Trump directed senior DoD leaders to ensure events on J6 be safe.

They ignored his guidance, prioritized optics concerns over security, and pushed a flawed narrative in their IG report.

The American people deserve the full truth.
cha.house.gov
Transcripts Show President Trump's Directives to Pentagon Leadership to
12:09 PM · Sep 20, 2024 //

We’ve known some of this before, but the transcripts themselves are pretty startling. They all but tell the sitting president of the United States to shove off:

The vote counting joins other major events such as the national nominating conventions, presidential inaugurations and the president’s annual State of the Union address. But this is the first time the Electoral College counting and certification has been designated.

Curious, isn't it? It strikes me as a political move, made to remind the country of the so-called January 6, 2021 "insurrection" by Trump loyalists. Nah, the Biden-Harris administration would never do that, right? //

Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok
·
"Donald Trump left us the worst attack on Democracy since the Civil War." -Kamala Harris

Tomorrow is 9/11
Embedded video
9:16 PM · Sep 10, 2024

Greg Price
@greg_price11
·
Follow
🚨BREAKING: Never before seen footage of Pelosi on January 6 filmed by her daughter shows her admitting that its her fault that the Capitol wasn't secure.

“We're calling the National Guard now? They should have been here to start out."

"We have totally failed. We need to take… Show more

9:21 PM · Aug 27, 2024 //

“I just feel sick about what he did to the Capitol and the country today,” Pelosi said as she slumped, visibly exhausted, in the back of her SUV in the pre-dawn hours of Jan. 7. “He’s got to pay a price for that.” //

In the aftermath, Pelosi and her cronies discussed who should be fired for the security failure—Capitol Police officials, Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, anybody but themselves. But then she honed in on her real target:

“Typical Trump,” [former House Majority Leader Steny] Hoyer piped in [commenting on Trump’s statement about the protests].

After a beat, Pelosi said: “Insurrection. That’s a crime, and he’s guilty of it.” //

Greg Price
@greg_price11
·
Follow
Replying to @greg_price11
Once again President Trump was right: The biggest reason J6 happened was because Nancy Pelosi turned down the Capitol Police's request for the National Guard and then lied about it.
0:22 / 2:03
9:43 PM · Aug 27, 2024

Attorney General Merrick Garland boasted on Friday how his office has prosecuted nearly 1,500 Americans for protesting the 2020 election, warning others they may face similar lawfare should they raise any concerns about the administration of the upcoming November election.

Speaking at a press briefing, Garland essentially said the Jan. 6 prosecutions should serve to remind Americans what happens if they raise questions about an election.

“I think our prosecutions have made clear what we think about people who try to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, which is [an] essential and fundamental element of our democracy. //

The Washington, D.C. bar recommended that Trump-era DOJ official Jeffrey Clark be suspended for at least two years because he drafted a letter to Georgia officials in which he said the DOJ “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the [2020] election in multiple States, including the State of Georgia.”

Notably, the 2020 election in Georgia was certified, though the State Election Board passed a motion this past May finding Fulton County double-scanned 3,075 ballots. The board did not issue a rule on the 17,852 votes that were, according to a complaint filed by Kevin Moncla and Joseph Rossi, allegedly missing ballot images in the county.

RNC Research @RNCResearch
·
Crazy Nancy says newly released video of her saying she "takes responsibility" for the National Guard not being deployed on January 6 is "revisionist history" 🤔

7:15 PM · Jun 10, 2024 //

But the funny thing was her claiming the production of her own words was "revisionist history."

In a manner of speaking, she's right; it does revise and help undermine the Democratic narrative. But she can't blame her own words on the GOP or Trump. She's the one admitting it, on video taken by her own daughter. //

Then the man who was the Chief of the Capitol Police at the time, Steven Sund, also weighed in, and he didn't hold back on Pelosi's comment.

Chief Steven Sund @ChiefSund
·
Pelosi was surprised we didn’t have National Guard on Jan6?? I was denied National Guard support multiple times before January 6, and repeatedly for 71 minutes ON January 6.
MY STORY HASN’T CHANGED!

@RepLoudermilk @oversightadmn

Oversight Subcommittee @OversightAdmn
🚨 Since January 6, 2021, Nancy Pelosi spent 3+ years and nearly $20 million creating a narrative to blame Donald Trump.

NEW FOOTAGE shows on January 6, Pelosi ADMITTED:

"I take responsibility."

WATCH:
Embedded video
5:53 PM · Jun 10, 2024. //

According to him, the House Sergeant at Arms told the Senate Sergeant at Arms they had to come up with another answer to Sund's request because Pelosi "would never go for it." Oh.

Then, too, Sund pointed out in Congressional testimony that Pelosi had, in fact, spoken to him that day contrary to what she claimed after Jan. 6. So he's saying what Pelosi said about that day wasn't true. //

SouthernRoots
an hour ago
If the FBI/DOJ/CIA/CP/DNC/HHS/ATF/CBS/ABC/CNN had so many "informants" and special agents embedded in all these organizations around the country and onsite in DC, why were they so woefully unprepared for a peaceful event to turn into a mostly peaceful riot?

Who unlocked the capitol doors?
Who refused National Guard assistance?
Who ordered Capitol Police to fire on the crowd with rubber bullets or whatever?
Who planted the bombs at the DNC and RNC?

Who has been charged with insurrection and been convicted of same?
Why are J6'rs still being held without a trial?
What are the jail conditions for them?
Why aren't their 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 14th Amendment rights not being upheld?

Democrats still have a lot to answer for.

There's a bombshell video that has just been released by House GOP investigators about what former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said as she was leaving the Capitol after the rioting on Jan. 6, 2021.

In it, Pelosi takes responsibility for the failure to have adequate security in the place at the Capitol to deal with the riot. //

“We have responsibility, Terri," Pelosi is heard saying on the videotape to her chief of staff, Terri McCullough. "We did not have any accountability for what was going on there, and we should have. This is ridiculous.” //

Pelosi also said: “You’re going to ask me – in the middle of the thing when they’ve already breached the inaugural stuff – ‘should we call the Capitol Police, I mean the National Guard?’ Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?”

McCullough, replied as the speaker’s SUV raced through an underground parking garage: “They thought that they had sufficient ... resources."

Pelosi responded, clearly frustrated: "No, that’s not a question of how they had ... they don’t know. They clearly didn’t know. And I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more.” //

The video was taken by Pelosi's daughter Alexandra as part of her HBO documentary. The House Administration Oversight Subcommittee requested the video from HBO as part of their investigation. The material they obtained has never been released before.

Why is this only coming out now? Why did it take so long to get it? //

RedinOR
5 hours ago edited
I expected to hear her admit she intentionally held back any help (which is what many conservatives believe). In the video, it sounds like she's trying to sound sorry for "not having them prepare for more." To me, this is less a bombshell and more "she really wanted to do the right thing but underestimated" message. It feels staged.

To this point, the conservative justices have shown some skepticism of the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is presenting. On that front, Justice Neil Gorsuch asked a question that many of us have been pondering. Namely, he asked whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), who pulled a fire alarm before an important House vote and impeded a congressional proceeding, could be charged under the same statute. Astonishingly, the government responded with a "no." //

Returning to Bowman, he pulled a fire alarm during a voting session in the House of Representatives. Congressional members had to be evacuated, and the vote was postponed. That is a textbook example of obstructing an official proceeding, and the government's justification for not charging him is basically "because we say it doesn't count." //

etba_ss
an hour ago
I'm not sure they really care at this point. They've milked and milked and milked J6 as much as they can. They've set an example and a standard that they can do whatever they want to you if your politics do not align. The time to have been providing relief in these cases is not April 2024, but in April 2021.

I don't mean to say that it doesn't matter, but this is one of those issues that the damage has largely been done on. The whole point of J6 is to influence elections and suppress dissent, including covering up fraud and electioneering during the 2020 election. All serious efforts at exposing the issues in 2020 stopped after J6. That was the main purpose and it was instantly successful.

The time is coming where Governors, state legislators, sheriffs, etc. decide if they will follow the law and the Constitution or the federal government and the court system. The two things are not the same. We shouldn't ignore the courts for "light and transient causes", but if our Founders were willing to pick up a musket and risk the very real possibility of being hung for traitors, telling the federal government and/or the federal courts "no" isn't too much to ask. Again, you don't do this because you disagree with some largely irrelevant statute, but when it comes to such basic things as border security, liberty and political prosecution, those things aren't "light and transient causes", but ones that are fundamental to the existence of a constitutional republic. //

etba_ss Hallen
38 minutes ago edited
The problem with the court upholding the law, even if they thought it was valid and could be applied is that selective prosecution violates a higher law. The Constitution is supreme to the court or to any Congressionally issued statute or law. The Constitution includes "equal protection under the law". Selective prosecution on the basis of political connections or ideology is a direct violation of the US Constitution. So Congress could pass a law saying that it is illegal to be a Republican. That law would violate the Constitution and be thrown out.

So either the law itself must be thrown out, or at least its application in this case must be thrown out. It is a gross violation of the Constitution, which is what Gorsuch is pointing out.

Unfortunately, the Court instructed the jury that the First Amendment provided no defense whatsoever for Rebecca at the U.S. Capitol. We believe the instructions were improper and we intend to appeal her convictions. We are very disappointed in the verdict.

Lavrenz is facing a sentence of up to a year in prison, along with fines exceeding $200,000.

Maximus Decimus Cassius fIA
17 hours ago edited
Take it back in 2024, TRUMP and Vote out all Democrats! 🇺🇸

I have sad news for one and all. If anyone is paying attention to the inexplicable "early retirements" of House Republicans, there can only be one reason: the Deep State is forcing a change in the House to the advantage of Democrats BEFORE the November election. Think it through without pretending, without rationalizing, even if it confirms your worst fear.

We are NOT voting ourselves out of this, and PDJT will never see the inside of the White House again.

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had ‘no evidence’ to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had asked for 10,000 National Guard troops. //

In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato’s first transcribed interview with the committee was conducted on January 28, 2022. In it, he told Cheney and her investigators that he overheard White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows push Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to request as many National Guard troops as she needed to protect the city.

He also testified President Trump had suggested 10,000 would be needed to keep the peace at the public rallies and protests scheduled for January 6, 2021. Ornato also described White House frustration with Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller’s slow deployment of assistance on the afternoon of January 6, 2021.

Not only did the committee not accurately characterize the interview, they suppressed the transcript from public review. //

Cheney frequently points skeptics of her investigation to the Government Publishing Office website that posted, she said, “transcripts, documents, exhibits & our meticulously sourced 800+ page final report.” That website provides “supporting documents” to the claims made by Cheney and fellow anti-Trump enthusiasts.

However, transcripts of fewer than half of the 1,000 interviews the committee claims it conducted are posted on that site. It is unclear how many of the hidden transcripts include exonerating information suppressed by the committee. //

Ornato said White House concerns about January 6 were related to fears that left-wing groups would clash with Trump protesters and that no one in the White House anticipated a riot at the Capitol. Antifa and other left-wing groups were planning protests for the same day. Left-wing groups had been involved in violent assaults on Trump supporters following public protests. //

Once the Capitol was breached, the Trump White House pushed for immediate help from Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and grew frustrated at the slow deployment of that help, according to the testimony. //

Days prior, Cheney had “secretly orchestrated” a pressure campaign to prevent the Defense Department from deploying resources on January 6, 2021. She organized an op-ed for the Washington Post from her father and other former secretaries of defense specifically to discourage Miller from taking action. //Cheney hid this testimony and instead asserted in her report that President Trump “never gave any order to deploy the National Guard on January 6th or on any other day. Nor did he instruct any Federal law enforcement agency to assist.” //

Because Ornato’s corroborating information had been suppressed from the public record by the January 6 committee, the Colorado Supreme Court improperly dismissed evidence.

Did Donald Trump request National Guard troops to protect the Capitol Building on January 6th? That claim has been a point of contention for years, with figures like Liz Cheney steadfastly claiming no evidence exists to support it. Now, newly unearthed testimony, allegedly suppressed by the January 6th committee for years, is telling a different story.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finds Brock did not “substantially interfere with administration of justice” – ruling could apply to other J6 defendants as well //

GWB | March 4, 2024 at 10:28 am
The “sentencing enhancement” at issue is found in the 2021 version of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.)
Wait a minute. The crime committed was committed only 6 days into that year. Is it possible the guidelines were revised in the first 6 days of 2021? Yes. Is it likely? No.
So, these were (aside from the issue noted by the panel) sentencing guidelines not in effect at the time of the crime? How is that no ex post facto?

The newly disclosed video shows a dark SUV pulling up to the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C., at 9:44 a.m. on Jan. 6, 2021. It sits for several minutes until a uniformed man with a bomb-sniffing dog enters from the right and steps up to the vehicle. The driver complies with his command, the dog sniffs inside and outside the car which is soon allowed to enter the parking garage. The man and his dog exit back to the right.

This scene is unremarkable except for one detail: The uniformed man and his trained canine came within a few feet of where a plainclothes Capitol Police officer would soon discover a pipe bomb that had been planted there the night before. The bomb, which the FBI has described as viable and capable of inflicting serious injury, along with a similar one found at the headquarters of the Republican National Committee, would appear to be the most overt act of violence perpetrated on Jan. 6.

Responding to the video discovered by this reporter, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the Georgia Republican who chairs the House Oversight Committee subcommittee now conducting a separate inquiry into Jan. 6, asked, “How could a bomb-sniffing dog miss a pipe bomb at the DNC? We’ll add this to our long list of unanswered questions and continue getting to the truth.”

The number of anomalies surrounding this still-unsolved case continues to grow. These include: ... //

The greatest mystery may be why official Washington has lost interest in this alleged act of domestic terrorism. In the three years since Jan. 6, the DOJ has conducted what Attorney General Merrick Garland describes as a criminal investigation proceeding at an “unprecedented speed and scale” into the protests. Casting a wide dragnet for Capitol protesters across the country, federal and local authorities in Washington have tracked down and prosecuted more than 1,300 defendants, almost all of whom were unarmed, including 62 individuals so far this year.

Yet the perpetrator of what could have been the only deadly attack by a civilian that day appears to have vanished without a trace. He or she also seems to have slipped down the official memory hole. Although the Washington FBI field office recently issued a statement saying the “suspect may still pose a danger to the public or themselves” and upped the reward to $500,000, Washington appears to have lost interest in the pipe bomb whodunnit. //

This represents another aspect of the congressional investigation that did not reach an edifying conclusion. A suspected Trump supporter planted a bomb that could have killed the first female and person of color to hold the office of the vice presidency — and it only merited one sentence in an 840-page report.