Featured Timeline Entries
June 5, 2024 - Report: J6 Committee delayed Secret Service driver from refuting false limo story

Cassidy Hutchinson gave two hours of testimony on national television that cast Trump as enraged, June 28, 2022. (Credit: Jacquelyn Martin/AP)

Just the News is reporting that the January 6th Committee rebuffed repeated efforts from a Secret Service agent to refute the false story related by Cassidy Hutchinson alleging a violent episode with Trump in the presidential limousine during the Capitol riots. The J6 Committee staff repeatedly delayed the testimony of the agent to disprove the widely reported allegation.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the chairman of the House subcommittee that is investigating the Jan. 6 riot, has obtained a transcript of the driver’s interview that was conducted months after he first offered to testify. However, it turns out that committee staff were asked repeatedly by counsel for the agent to let him present evidence debunking the claim. Despite being reported by virtually every news outlet, the Committee slow walked his appearance as the story went viral.

The transcript of the driver’s testimony contains express objections by the lawyer that his client had offered to testify in July, August and September of 2022, but was “rebuffed” by the committee.

The account reaffirms a major criticism of the committee. After Democrats refused to allow the GOP to pick its members (as a long-accepted practice in the House), the Democrats selected two anti-Trump Republicans who did little to push for a full and fair display of witnesses and facts. The Committee was chaired by Rep. Benny Thompson, a Democrat, with Rep. Liz Cheney, as Vice Chairwoman.

Cheney and the committee members clearly knew that Hutchinson’s account was debunked by the very driver who allegedly struggled with Trump. Yet, they allowed the media to report the incident for months while rebuffing the requests of the driver. Loudermilk is quoted as saying “We’re talking about the driver of the limousine, and the head of the entire protective detail. They were brought in by the select committee to testify, but they weren’t brought in until November.”

The false account was given by Hutchinson in June of that year.

The Secret Service driver testified Trump never tried to reach for or grab the wheel of the SUV.

Notably, the transcript shows Cheney trying to explain the delay as due to the need for the Secret Service to produce all documents in the January 6 investigation. (Read more: Jonathan Turley, 5/05/2024) (Archive)

June 6, 2024 - Bannon defied J6 Committee subpoena due to executive privilege; is ordered to prison for contempt of Congress

Judge Carl Nichols was appointed by Trump in 2019. (Credit: public domain)

Former top Donald Trump advisor Steve Bannon was ordered by a federal judge on Thursday to report to prison by July 1 to begin serving his four-month sentence for contempt of Congress.

Bannon, 70, was convicted of contempt in July 2022 for defying a subpoena to testify before the congressional panel that investigated the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol by Trump supporters.

One of the masterminds behind Trump’s successful 2016 presidential campaign, he was sentenced to four months in prison in October 2022, but has remained free while appealing his conviction.

A US federal appeals court upheld the conviction last month. US District Judge Carl Nichols revoked his bail at a court hearing Thursday and ordered him to report to prison by July 1. (Read more: (Breitbart, 6/06/2024) (Archive)

June 6, 2024 - General Milley and Army Secretary McCarthy issued January 5 memo that gummed up National Guard response on Jan 6 - Milley's Insurrection

During his interview with the January 6 Committee, Milley explained that in preparation for January 6, the role of the D.C. National Guard was defined in a memorandum he described as “very strict on the use of the military.” Milley detailed how the memorandum prohibited the use of any riot control agents, stating, “We’re not doing it … and not only not doing it, you’re not going to have it. You’re not going to have the opportunity to use it.” Additionally, he mentioned that while such measures might be authorized under different circumstances on another day, they were explicitly forbidden “at that time, on this day.”

Ryan D. McCarthy is approved by the Senate as Army secretary on Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019. (Credit: Joe Gromelski/Stars and Stripes)

This directive was ultimately issued by Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy to Major General William Walker, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard, on January 5, 2021. Milley disclosed to the committee that he was actively involved in advising McCarthy on the memorandum, “line by line going through this, lining it out, editing, and stuff like that, resulting in this memo.”

The January 5 memo, carefully crafted by Milley and McCarthy, authorized 340 D.C. National Guard personnel to assist law enforcement with traffic control points and metro station support, and stationed 40 personnel at Joint Base Andrews to serve as the Guard’s Quick Reaction Force (QRF) in case of an emergency. However, this memo restricted General Walker from employing the QRF without explicit personal approval from Army Secretary McCarthy—a condition previously not imposed.

In March 2021, General Walker testified before the Senate Rules and Homeland Security Committee, stating that he had the authority to employ the Guard’s QRF before January 6 and described the new restrictions as “unusual.”

Major General William Walker, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard (Credit: public domain)

He also testified to the January 6 Committee about his inability to reach Secretary McCarthy on January 6, revealing that it was the first time he found the phone number he had for McCarthy to be out of service. Additionally, General Walker noted that Colonel Earl Matthews, who had McCarthy’s private number due to their social acquaintance, was also unable to reach him.

This breakdown in communication occurred just one day after McCarthy had issued the memorandum requiring General Walker to obtain explicit approval from him for employing the Guard’s QRF. What could possibly account for McCarthy’s unavailability during those critical hours? Did McCarthy somehow overlook the crucial role he had defined for himself with the new restrictions imposed just a day earlier?

Where’s McCarthy?

On January 6, Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller approved the deployment of the D.C. National Guard by 3:04 p.m. The protocol then required Army Secretary McCarthy to convey this authorization to General Walker to enable the deployment of the D.C. National Guard. However, McCarthy never conveyed this authorization, resulting in the more than 3 hour delay.

The January 6 Committee’s final report states that after Defense Secretary Miller authorized the deployment at 3:04 p.m., Secretary McCarthy called General Walker, instructing him to “mobilize the entire Guard.” However, General Walker “categorically denies” receiving such a call. “Here’s the bottom line,” he said, “The Secretary was unavailable to me, and he never called me.”

It appears, however, that McCarthy changed his story after initially telling the committee that he had called General Walker. The committee’s final report addresses this inconsistency by detailing McCarthy’s actions and whereabouts on January 6 to explain the delay. It explains that starting around 3:00 p.m. on January 6—shortly after Defense Secretary Miller approved the Guard’s deployment at 3:04 p.m.—“25 minutes of Army Secretary McCarthy’s time was spent reassuring members of Congress that the Guard was indeed coming,” even though he had not yet conveyed the order to General Walker. The report continues, stating that by 3:45 p.m., McCarthy had completed his calls—none of which were to General Walker—and after picking up some items from his office, he headed to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) headquarters to draft a concept of operations, a process that took an additional 20 minutes.

D.C. National Guard Brigadier General Aaron Dean II (Credit: public domain)

However, when Brigadier General Aaron Dean, another Defense Department witness who testified before the House Oversight Committee, was asked whether he ever saw the plan McCarthy claims to have prepared, he responded, “Not only did I not see the plan, but he was also at the wrong agency.” He elaborated that the lead federal agency for this particular event was the United States Capitol Police, and questioned why McCarthy was at MPD headquarters instead of coordinating with Capitol Police, who were responsible for the security of the Capitol.

The January 6 Committee report also touches on this oversight, noting that no plan from Army leaders ever made it to the troops. “If they came up with a plan, they never shared it with us,” General Walker said, “I never saw a plan from the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army.”

The committee’s report further states that by 4:35 p.m., McCarthy was ready to authorize the deployment of the Guard, but “miscommunication” led to yet another half-hour delay. McCarthy told the committee that he tried to issue the “go” order through his subordinate, General LaNeve—a claim General Walker disputes, insisting the call never occurred. McCarthy rationalized not communicating directly by stating he was at the time drafting his talking points for a planned press conference with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, explaining, “I wanted to get my thoughts collected.”

Authorization finally came at 5:09 p.m. during an ongoing video teleconference that had started at 2:30 p.m.. Defense Department witnesses present with General Walker on January 6 testified to the House Oversight Committee that General James McConville, Chief of Staff of the Army, mentioned during the conference that they had received authorization. Colonel Earl Matthews, who was present in the conference room next to General Walker, clarified that, “General McConville is not in the chain of command, so it wasn’t his order to give.” He added that General McConville was merely conveying that they were authorized to deploy. Matthews further specified that the actual authorization did not come from Secretary McCarthy but instead from Secretary Miller. (Read more: Julie Kelly/Declassified/Substack, 6/06/2024)  (Archive)

June 6, 2024 - House Republicans demand comms between Cassidy Hutchinson, Fani Willis’ office for J6 investigation

(Credit: Robert Gouvia/Rumble)

House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk intends to send a letter to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis seeking information about an interview her office allegedly conducted with key Jan. 6 Committee witness Cassidy Hutchinson.

The Daily Caller first obtained a copy of the letter in which Loudermilk requests to review copies of all communications between Hutchinson and the Fulton County DA’s office. The Subcommittee has obtained messages showing that Willis’ office tried to reach Hutchinson, but it remains unclear exactly what was said and how much information was exchanged.

“I write to you today to request your cooperation in my investigation into the security failures at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. Based on information recovered by this Subcommittee, we have reason to believe that your office interviewed Ms. Cassidy Hutchinson, who also provided testimony to the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (‘Select Committee’),” Loudermilk, who represents Georgia’s 11th congressional district, wrote in the letter. “The testimony provided by Ms. Hutchinson in the course of your investigation is relevant to our evaluation of her testimony and the direct implications her testimony has on the security of the United States Capitol.”

“This Subcommittee obtained evidence that your staff in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office made numerous attempts to reach out to Cassidy Hutchinson to seek her testimony. Specifically, individuals from your office reached out to Ms. Hutchinson’s mother in an attempt to reach Ms. Hutchinson,” Loudermilk continued. “The Subcommittee is evaluating the reliability of Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony, which was heavily relied on by the Select Committee, and the findings related to the security of the United States Capitol, it is crucial for us to review any documents and records you have provided by or obtained from Ms. Hutchinson.”

Loudermilk followed these observations with a single question: “Did anyone affiliated with the Fulton County District Attorney’s communicate with Ms. Hutchinson at any time between January 1, 2021, and today, June 5, 2024?”

“If the answer to this question is yes, please provide the names of the individuals who communicated with Ms. Hutchinson and the dates of these communications. Additionally, please provide my staff copies of these communications to aid in our investigation,” he added. (Read more: The Daily Caller, 6/06/2024) (Archive)

June 7, 2024 - America First Legal launches 3 investigations into the improper involvement of the Biden DOJ in the Manhattan DA’s prosecution of President Trump

The number 3 guy at the DOJ, Matthew Colangelo, takes a cut in pay and joins Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s team to prosecute Trump, December 2022. (Credit: DOJ, LinkedIn/Alvin Bragg, Michael B Thomas/Getty Images, Graphic by MEAWorldWide )

Full Text:

Since the political conviction of President Donald Trump in Manhattan last week, AFL has…

1️⃣Sued the DOJ to compel the immediate release of Matthew Colangelo’s gov’t records discussing President Trump before leaving the government to help orchestrate Alvin Bragg’s political prosecution.

2️⃣Launched 3 investigations into Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s abusive prosecution of President Trump to obtain records such as communications between Bragg’s office with outside groups like the DNC and Biden Campaign, communications with Judge Merchan, and Bragg’s calendar.

3️⃣Launched 3 investigations into the improper involvement of the Biden DOJ in the Manhattan DA’s prosecution of President Trump to obtain communications from top Biden DOJ officials, such as Matthew Colangelo, Matt Klapper, and Marshall Miller.

4️⃣Filed a formal request with the State of New York Ethics Commission for the Unified Court System for the release of Judge Merchan’s financial disclosures.

5️⃣Filed a federal civil rights complaint with the EEOC and state law complaint with the NY Department of Labor against Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s office for alleged racial and sex discrimination in hiring and recruitment.

Full Text:

LAWFARE: While judges in New York criminal trials are theoretically supposed to be randomly selected, it is statistically improbable (1 in over 15,000) for Acting Justice Juan Merchan to be assigned all three Trump-related trials by chance. In reality, these cases were assigned by Ellen N. Biben, the Administrative Judge of the New York County Supreme Court, Criminal Term. Biben, a lifelong Democrat with a history at Sullivan & Cromwell, has the authority to assign specific cases to judges with specialized experience. Notably, before being appointed as an Acting Justice, Merchan had limited experience, having served less than three years in a Bronx family court. It raises questions about whether his ‘specialized experience’ might be influenced by his daughter’s role as a prominent Democrat fundraiser in New York.

June 8, 2024 - James Clapper refuses to retract the letter he signed that discredits Biden laptop as Russian disinfo

James Clapper (Credit: public domain)

Former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper says he would not retract the letter he signed about first son Hunter Biden’s laptop.

In 2020, Clapper along with 51 other officials signed a letter saying that Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” was Russian disinformation.

When Clapper recently was asked if he would retract the letter he signed, he told Fox News in a one word answer, “no.”

The infamous laptop story that was originally perceived by media outlets as “Russian disinformation” was resurrected during Hunter’s gun trial.

Hunter Biden was charged in Delaware by Justice Department Special Counsel David Weiss with three felony crimes in connection to 2018 firearm purchase while he was using drugs.

FBI Agent Erika Jensen testified that the laptop was real, according to NBC News. She said that information on the laptop contained evidence about the gun purchase. (Just the News, 6/08/2024)  (Archive)

June 11, 2024 - Congressional report finds Fauci's NIAID hid plans to create a deadly mutant monkeypox virus

In October 2022, Dr Bernard Moss revealed a team of scientists wanted to equip Clade II Mpox with genes from the more dangerous Clade I strain (Credit: The Daily Mail)

Dr Anthony Fauci‘s former department ‘deceived’ Congress over its plans to create a Frankenstein monkeypox virus that had pandemic potential, a new report says.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) submitted plans to create a more transmissible and more lethal strain of Mpox in 2015, when Dr Fauci was still in charge of the agency.

The plans only received widespread attention in late 2022 – amid concerns that Covid may have been borne out of similar experiments using US government grant money in China.

The blueprint to create a mutant Mpox virus raised major concerns among experts and led to an investigation by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which released the results from its year-and-a-half probe this week.

The report said the HHS, NIAID and NIH repeatedly ‘obstructed and misled the committee’ about whether the risky experiments had been approved and conducted, describing their cooperation with the probe as ‘unacceptable and potentially criminal.’

Investigators added: ‘HHS and the NIH repeatedly told the Committee the… experiments had not been “formally proposed” or “planned,” had never been approved or conducted, and were not currently under consideration.

‘[These] repeated assertions were false.’

They also said NIAID, a branch of the NIH, should not be trusted to carry out this type of research: ‘The primary conclusion drawn at this point in the investigation is that NIAID cannot be trusted to oversee its own research of pathogens responsibly.

‘It cannot be trusted to determine whether an experiment on a potential pandemic pathogen or enhanced potential pandemic pathogen poses unacceptable biosafety risk or a serious public health threat.’

Monkeypox, which is in the same family of viruses as smallpox, causes a rash and flu-like symptoms and sparked a global outbreak in 2022, infecting tens of thousands of people.

There are two types of monkeypox viruses: Clade I, which causes severe illness and has killed up to 11 percent of people in previous outbreaks, and Clad II, the type that caused the global outbreak in 2022. These infections are more transmissible but less severe and nearly 100 percent of people survive.

In October 2022, a team of government scientists wanted to insert genes from the more dangerous Clade I Mpox into Clade II, making a hybrid strain that could have been both more lethal and more contagious.

Investigators said this would be classified as gain-of-function, which is research that can result in deadlier and more transmissible viruses and is feared to be behind the creation of Covid.

It was estimated the new Mpox virus would have had a fatality rate of up to 15 percent and a reproductive rate of 2.4, meaning one sick person could infect more than two other people.

At this rate, the hybrid strain would have had pandemic potential.  (Read more: The Daily Mail, 6/12/2024)  (Archive)

June 11, 2024 - Kevin Spacey talks about Epstein, Maxwell, Clinton, young girls on flights and his "humanitarian work" for the Clinton Foundation

Kevin Spacey talks about Jeffrey Epstein, Maxwell, Bill Clinton, and Young Girls on Flights to South Africa

Of course he “didn’t know” anything about Epstein or Maxwell…

He then says he was carrying out “humanitarian work” for…. Guess who…

The Clinton Foundation…

h/t @seacaptim

June 10, 2024 - New video reveals Pelosi understood her responsibility for the unprotected Capitol on Jan. 6

Just a day before, this was reported:

June 11, 2024 - Four Democrat officials in Bridgeport, Connecticut are charged and arrested for mail-in ballot fraud

Wanda Geter-Pataky placing absentee ballots into election drop boxes in October 2023. (Credit: screenshot/X)

City Councilman Alfredo Castillo, Vice Chair of Bridgeport’s Democrat Party Wanda Geter-Pataky were charged with election tampering.

Two campaign workers Nilsa Heredia and Josephine Edmonds were charged with election fraud and unlawful possession of another person’s ballot

Four Democratic campaign workers have been arrested in a Bridgeport mayoral primary election controversy, prompting Republican legislators to increase their calls Tuesday for new legislation to deter election fraud.

Wanda Geter-Pataky, the vice chairwoman of the city’s Democratic Town Committee, and city council member Alfredo Castillo were among those arrested in a high-profile case brought by the chief state’s attorney’s office regarding the misuse of absentee ballots.

Moore, who is not seeking reelection for her seat as state senator, was stunned by Edmonds’ arrest.

(…) “If she broke the law, she deserves the same treatment as anybody else who broke the law,” Moore told the Courant. “But I don’t encourage that. I didn’t encourage it, and I wouldn’t encourage it.”

Moore noted that she won at the polls, but then lost the race after the absentee ballots were counted. While saying that she was not sure if she would ever run again for mayor, the 75-year-old Moore added, “I want Joe Ganim to get out of my seat right now. That’s all.”

If the defendants are convicted, Moore is calling for severe penalties. The defendants, except Edmonds, have all worked at Bridgeport city hall. (Read more: Hartford Courant, 6/11/2024)  (Archive)

 

June 12, 2024 - House moves to defund Ukrainian NGO that issued an 'Enemies List' of Americans

Partners listed on Data Journalism Agency website.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) has taken swift and decisive action against the Data Journalism Agency (texty.org.ua), a Ukrainian NGO with US State Department links that recently published an ‘enemies list’ of individuals and organizations opposed to the war in Ukraine.

Texty founder Anatoly Bondarenko (Credit: Yhiah Information Agency)

Following a letter sent by Banks to his Republican colleagues, the House Appropriations Committee has passed a provision that would prohibit US funding and sever ties with the NGO, which deemed 76  organizations and 388 individuals as enemies of Ukraine – including ZeroHedge and prominent American politicians opposed to the war in Ukraine.

“Federal bureaucrats should not support or partner with foreign groups that attempt to intimidate and silence U.S. citizens and lawmakers,” Banks wrote in his letter. “I am urging the Appropriations Committee majority to support efforts in the Fiscal Year 2025 SFOPS bill to force the State Department and USAID to end all relations with foreign NGOs like TEXTY that seek to silence the speech of Americans they dislike and to sway U.S. policymakers to serve their own interests.”

Texty.org.ua was founded by Anatoly Bondarenko, a participant in the State Department’s TechCamp program, which aims to train foreign journalists and activists in digital skills. The relationship between Bondarenko and the State Department has been publicly acknowledged, adding layers to the debate over the NGO’s activities and its impact on U.S. interests.

This legislative action occurs amidst broader discussions about foreign influence in American politics, with increasing scrutiny on how foreign entities may use U.S.-linked platforms or resources to sway public and political opinion in the United States. As this bill moves forward, it sets the stage for further debates on the balance between global cooperation and safeguarding national sovereignty in the realm of information and policy.

On Tuesday, Banks sent a letter to journalist Jack Posobiec informing him that his name appears on the TEXTY list, and notifying him of his intent to put a stop to US taxpayers funding the organization. (Read more: Zero Hedge, 6/12/2024)  (Archive)

June 13, 2024 - Rep. Massie highlights Congress paid over $17 million taxpayer dollars from a ‘Sexual Harassment Slush Fund’

Is Congress’s $17 million sexual misconduct hush money fund campaign finance violations?

Rep. Thomas Massie highlights that Congress’s hush money payments would be considered campaign finance violations under Alvin Bragg’s novel theory used to target President Trump.

“Congress has paid over $17 million in hush money for sexual misconduct inside of the offices in these buildings. And what’s more, is that it was taxpayer money. The allegation is that President Trump paid $130,000 of his own money.

But here in Congress, there might be some here on this dais who had the taxpayer pay for their sexual misconduct charges. And I do know that not a single penny of it has been turned in as a campaign finance expense.”

Former FEC Commissioner Trey Trainor explains that Alvin Bragg’s novel interpretation of the law does not align with “normal campaign finance law.”

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey points out that the Trump verdict will likely be overturned after the 2024 election, citing constitutional violations, due process issues, and prosecutorial misconduct.

Thanks to the relentless political targeting of President Trump, there’s been a spotlight on the use of “hush money” and secret funds to sweep indiscretions under the rug in politics. This shouldn’t come as a shock to many, given the nature of fame and power, but where do we draw the line? When is it acceptable for politicians to dip into taxpayer-funded slush funds to settle their sexual indiscretions privately and without fanfare, and when is it deemed unacceptable for a private political candidate to do the same with personal funds? Here’s the thing that’s got everyone scratching their heads: Trump’s stuck in this political circus over “hush money,” where they’re all too eager to drag him through the mud over what amounts to a flimsy misdemeanor at best.

[…]

Meanwhile, our elected officials are dipping into our tax dollars to clean up all their messes. Don’t forget revelations from a few years ago that Congress has its own secret slush fund of hush money—all courtesy of you, the hapless taxpayer. Funny how that works; it’s like one rule for them and another for everyone else.

Indeed, the Office of Congressional Compliance (OOC), which was set up to ensure compliance with the ludicrously named 1995 Congressional Accountability Act, controls a whole treasure chest of disputes involving congressional officials—not just congressional officials, in fact. You’ll be pleased to know that the Capitol Police, the Congressional Budget Office, and many other legislative groups get to wet their beaks in this slush fund as well. Recent reports have indicated that over $17 million has been used from this fund to take care of various “hush” projects on behalf of members of Congress and other agencies.

[…]

The most infamous sexual abuse case we do know about involves a now-deceased former high-falutin Democrat lawmaker from Michigan named John Conyers. This article is from 2017 and basically blew the lid off the secret “sexy slush fund.”

Mr. Conyers wasn’t paraded into court for using our tax dollars to quiet down a victim, was he? We’d love to do a little digging and see if any other lawmakers or federal employees got the same treatment as President Trump, but guess what? We don’t know the names of the federally employed folks who dipped into this congressional “hush money” honey pot.

What we’re witnessing in the United States is a prime example of peak corruption in action. Federal employees can get away with sexual assault left and right, and when they’re caught, the slush fund jumps into action to hush it up, no questions asked. And instead of these scumbags facing the music, it’s President Trump who’s under the microscope and being dragged through a sham political trial. (Read more: Revolver, 6/15/2024)

June 13, 2024 - The Stanford Internet Observatory shuts down their censorship operation

Alex Stamos (left); Stanford President Richard Saller (center); Renée DiResta (r) (Credit: Public/Substack)

Over the last 18 months, Public has extensively documented the mass censorship effort led by the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) for the United States government. Accounts vary, but either the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asked SIO to lead the effort or SIO’s ostensible leader, Alex Stamos, proposed the idea.

The brains of the SIO operation was Renée DiResta, an ostensibly “former” CIA employee. Senate Democrats, the New York Times, and other news media close to the Intelligence Community (IC) heavily promoted DiResta starting in 2018, when she spread disinformation exaggerating the influence of Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election. In 2020 and 2021, DiResta and SIO led a DHS effort that successfully pressured social media platforms to censor disfavored views of Covid and interfere in the 2020 elections.

Now, in a major victory for free speech advocates, SIO has decided not to renew its contracts with DiResta and Stamos, who have both left the organization. A blog called “Platformer,” which is sympathetic to SIO’s censorship efforts, reported yesterday that “the lab will not conduct research into the 2024 election or other elections in the future.”

Stanford cut funding from a donor named Frank McCourt to SIO. “While SIO still had other sources of funding,” reports Platformer, the McCourt funding decision was seen by some at SIO as a clear signal that Stanford had soured on its commitment to their work.” The announcement came just two days after DiResta published a book that spreads disinformation about her critics, including me. (Read more: Public/Substack, 6/14/2024)  (Archive)

June 14, 2024 - Criminal referral requests against Fauci, Birx, Walensky, and other public health officials, have been submitted to district attorneys in Louisiana

(Credit: Vires Law Group website)

The Vires Law Group, in conjunction with the Edward L. Tarpley, Jr., APLC and bolstered by the support of the Former Feds Group Freedom Foundation, has announced the submission of criminal referral requests to the District Attorneys of nine Louisiana parishes.

The referrals call for the initiation of criminal investigations against Dr. Anthony Fauci, Deborah “Scarf Lady” Birx, Rochelle Walensky, Peter Daszak, and other public health officials for alleged crimes committed against Louisiana citizens preceding and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The parishes of Caddo, East Baton Rouge, Jefferson, St. Tammany, Orleans, Lafayette, Lafouche, Tangipahoa, and Rapides are the focus of these 30-page criminal referrals, detailing accusations that have stunned the local communities, according to the press release.

Funded by contributions from entities like the Diamond Mind Foundation and the Fight Like A Flynn PAC, this legal action raises significant questions about the conduct of public health officials during one of the most devastating health crises of our time.

Attorneys Rodriguez, Miller, and Tarpley have requested that the District Attorneys refer these cases to Attorney General Liz Murrill for further investigation and potential charges.

These referrals are made on behalf of next-of-kin relatives of nine victims in Louisiana who have sought legal assistance in investigating the deaths of their loved ones.

Allegations include mismanagement of COVID-19 infections under hospital protocols, intentional suppression, and denial of life-saving treatments within Louisiana hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities.

The criminal referrals accuse Dr. Fauci, current and former federal officers, and hospital systems providing care within Louisiana of committing crimes as per Louisiana criminal code. The alleged crimes include:

  • Terrorism – by Causing Intentional Killing or Infliction of Serious Bodily Injury (La. R.S.
14:128.1(A))
  • First Degree Murder (La. R.S. 14:30)
  • Second Degree Murder (La. R.S. 14:30.1)
  • Manslaughter (La. R.S. 14:31(A)(3))
  • Human Trafficking (La. R.S. 14:46.2)
  • Prohibited Racketeering Acts (La. R.S. 15:1353)
  • Cruelty to Persons with Infirmities (La. R.S. 14:93.3)
  • False Imprisonment (La. R.S. 14:46)
  • Second Degree Kidnapping (La. R.S. 14:44.1)
  • Battery (La. R.S. 14:33)
  • Simple Battery of Persons with Infirmities (La. R.S. 14:35.2)

(Read more: The Gateway Pundit, 6/14/2024)  (Archive)

June 16, 2024 - House Intel Chairman Mike Turner explains how his team and intel community will control Speaker Johnson and MAGA Republicans

This interview by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner is buckets of interesting and simultaneously very revealing.

Playing along with the big club intelligence game as framed by Margaret Brennan, HPSCI Chairman Turner showcases his weasel nature and alignment with the worst actors in the Intelligence Community from the outset.  Watch it closely and you will notice that Turner frames national intelligence activity as a political product.

Instead of telling Ms Brennan that it is impossible to hold a public hearing on terror threats because her President refuses to declassify the intelligence, thereby limiting conversation to only closed-door hearing discussion, Turner intentionally obfuscates to cloud the issue.

Then the bigger reveals start to happen as Ms. Brennan brings up the fabricated issues around Scott Perry and Ronny Jackson.  Brennan says Perry is under FBI investigation (Perry is not and Turner knows he is not), but Turner refuses to say that Perry is not under investigation.  Brennan then makes an outlandish claim of Representative Jackson taking perfectly legal medication to help him sleep.  Instead of quashing the ridiculous narrative, Turner plays along with the intent to hold leverage over Jackson (think blackmail).

Representative Mike Turner really is one of the worst members of congress.  I would rank Turner’s corrupt and Machiavellian status right next to SSCI Chairman Mark Warner.  Turner will defend the corrupt IC Deep State even more than Marco Rubio.  Remember, it was Turner who manufactured the letter of support for his FISA renewal strategy, falsely attributing supportive signatures of Devin Nunes and John Ratcliffe.

IF you are good at spotting corruption, WATCH between the lines and the Turner comments shout at you:

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re going to begin with the Republican Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Ohio Congressman Mike Turner.

Welcome back to Face the Nation.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER (R-Ohio): Good morning, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Chair Turner, last week, as you know, there were federal immigration arrests of these eight individuals with suspected ties to ISIS. They were rounded up in Philadelphia, Los Angeles and New York.

They traveled from Central Asia, Tajikistan, across the southern border into the U.S. Do you have any indication that there is an act of terror plot?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, Margaret – I’m – your – I can neither confirm nor deny all the details that you’ve just reported.

But what’s important about these reports and what we’re seeing, especially in conjunction with Director Wray’s public statements that we are at the highest level of a possible terrorist threat, that the administration’s policies have absolutely – you know, directly related to threats to Americans.

These are no longer speculative, no longer hypothetical. And we have actual administration officials stepping forward. And, certainly, our committee and our committee members have concurred on the intelligence that we’re seeing, that, as a result of the administration’s policies allowing people to cross the border unvetted, we have terrorists that are actively working inside the United States that are a threat to Americans.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the issue, as we understand it from our reporting, is that there was vetting, but that the vetting didn’t turn up any derogatory information.

Doesn’t that indicate that there’s a broader problem with the system that Congress would also have to address?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, Margaret, as you know, there – there are those who are vetted and – and in the vetting process.

They – there is no evidence the United States currently has that they’re actively engaged in terrorist plotting or engaged with terrorist groups, organizations. And this administration, by their own policy, are then allowing those individuals in, instead of fully vetting them, fully understanding what the risk is to the United States, and for the fact that they’re letting them in, and there they are – they’re entering the United States through the southern border illegally.

And that’s what the threat is. That’s what Director Wray is identifying and is bringing forward. This administration’s policies are directly resulting in people who are in the United States illegally who have ties to terrorist groups and organizations, and this is a threat.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The U.S. has already been in a heightened threat environment.

But, this past week, our CBS colleague and the former Deputy CIA Director Mike Morell wrote a piece in “Foreign Affairs” warning that the United States faces a serious threat of terrorist attack in the months ahead.

He called on Congressional Intelligence Committees, like the one you chair, to have public hearings with the director of national intelligence, the CIA, the FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center. Will you commit to doing that?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, we have.

In fact, the testimony that you just played of Director Wray…

MARGARET BRENNAN: Public unclassified information from those individuals?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: The – the – the testimony that you just played of Director Wray was a result of the Intelligence Committees, including mine – Director Wray was testifying before my committee and said exactly the same thing publicly of the threat.

What we have done, and continue to do, and what this administration needs to be held to, is that they need to declassify the information of the terrorist threats that they’re seeing, so that there can be a public discourse concerning what the administration’s risk and threats are.

You know, this was notable and expected as a result of the Biden administration’s policy of an open southern border. And we are seeing it absolutely across the country. The – and my – my committee has been open, my members have been open…

MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: … and publicly discussing this threat and pointing the finger directly at the administration’s policies.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as you know, the administration points back at Congress, saying they asked for more authorities and Congress refused to act.

But I want to ask you about the Intelligence Committee. You’ve tried to keep it nonpartisan, as you’ve said on this program. Speaker Johnson, though, recently decided, as you know, to add two congressmen, Scott Perry and Dr. Ronny Jackson, to your committee, reportedly at the behest of Donald Trump.

One of your members, Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan, referred to Perry as a threat to intelligence oversight – quote – “He will be on the very committee that oversees the FBI while he is directly under investigation by this very agency.”

Do you think that is a disqualifying conflict of interest?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, being concerned, obviously, about that issue, and being the chairman, I contacted the I.C. to see whether or not there was an issue that, you know, in due diligence from our committee, that we needed to – to resolve or address.

They indicated that there was not an – a – an ongoing or continuing issue or even a current issue that we needed to address.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The FBI told you that?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: The issue, I think, here that’s most important – the I.C. told us that.

I think what’s very important here is that the speaker makes this appointment and then what he’s done since. The speaker has absolutely committed himself to these two individuals following the rules, not only the laws. Both of them have military experience. Both of them have had access to classified information before.

And there’s been no reports of any incidences of their handling – mishandling of classified information. The speaker has met with our committee, Republican members. He has spoken directly to Jim Himes. We’ve had a meeting with Mr. Perry, myself and the speaker, where all of these assurances have been made.

But the speaker has said this, that he’s going to continue to monitor the situation, if there’s any indication of anything improper happening, that he will intervene. And I believe the speaker will assert leadership here.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And withdraw that nomination potentially?

Well, look, I – Scott Perry has come out and took aim at you, as you know, because he said, if he gets on this committee, he’ll conduct “actual oversight, not blind obedience to some facets of our intelligence community.”

And he claimed they’re spying on the American people. How do you respond to that?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Well, he has – he has apologized. And, certainly, those are – are the types of words that you would not want from somebody who’s joining a committee that is obviously very dedicated to national security and very dedicated to working in a bipartisan way.

I think that, upon him joining the committee, and looking at the work that both he gets to do and the work that we’re doing, that he’ll be absolutely satisfied that he can play a role to – in the work that we’re doing for national security.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, I – I understand you said you’ve – you received assurances about their ability to handle classified information that they’ll have access to.

But, as you know, Dr. Ronny Jackson was demoted by the Navy because a Pentagon inspector general report found that he had been taking sedatives while providing medical care to two U.S. presidents. That kind of compromising behavior would be disqualifying for most people when it comes to receiving a security clearance or having any access to the nation’s secrets.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I’m aware of those reports.

I – as you have just indicated, though, they are unrelated to the handling of classified information. And, certainly, the individuals in his district believe that those issues are resolved. He presents himself to – to Congress with his military background.

And we’re going to be certainly working with the speaker and with Mr. Jackson so that – again, that he is a very productive member of our committee. And, if there are any incidences, the speaker has indicated that, as with Mr. Perry, that he will enforce our rules.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But there are – these seats could be filled by Republicans with national security backgrounds who don’t have these kinds of compromising situations over their heads.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: There certainly was a broad range of individuals who – who sought these seats.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You were with Donald Trump when he was on Capitol Hill this past week and he met with lawmakers.

Is it true, as Congressman Matt Gaetz claims, that Mr. Trump said “Ukrainians are never going to be there for us” and that he was trashing the Ukraine aid bill to Speaker Johnson’s face, which Gaetz said is – “so epic.”

Is that true? And did anyone push back?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I don’t believe that the president – Trump did that. I was certainly present. He did raise issues of how the Ukraine issue is being handled.

I think there’s certainly enough criticism to go around the Ukrainians not being given the authority to use weapons inside Russia to hit targets that are hitting them. But I think, overall, what was important is that – that Trump was very focused on what his issues were as to why he was seeking the presidency and the changes in policies in the Biden administration.

Border was an issue. Energy was an issue. The economy, China and inflation were an issue, all ones where he had real, concrete things that the Biden administration did to reverse his policies that have resulted in negative consequences for our country that he intends to reverse back.

MARGARET BRENNAN: We will see if he stands by Ukraine, then, if he is elected.

Chair Turner, thank you for your time.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: I believe he – I believe he will. And – and, certainly, the – of the members who are strongly supporting Ukraine…

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: … we certainly believe that he will, and it certainly is essential.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Chair Turner, thank you for your time this morning.

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL TURNER: Thank you.

[Transcript END]

(Conservative Treehouse, 6/16/2024)  (Archive)

June 17, 2024 - New docs: FBI knew since 2016 Hunter Biden nearly scored $120 million Ukrainian deal while Joe was VP; At same time Trump was impeached for Ukraine phone call

The FBI learned as far back as 2016 that Hunter Biden and his partners had plotted to set up a new venture in tax-friendly Liechtenstein that would be capitalized by a whopping $120 million investment from the controversial owner of the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings, according to documents obtained by Just the News that have been kept from the American public for eight years.

The mega-deal was not referenced inside Hunter Biden’s now infamous laptop or during the 2019 impeachment proceedings involving Ukraine, but was instead chronicled in a trove of 3.39 million documents the FBI seized from Hunter Biden and his business partners during an investigation of securities fraud nearly a decade ago.

Devon Archer is reportedly in talks to speak about Joe and Hunter Biden’s alleged $10 million bribes. (Credit: Alec Tabak/New York Post)

The cache of documents was recently turned over by former Hunter Biden business partner Devon Archer to the House Oversight Committee as part of its impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden’s conduct.

The new evidence shows the major investment plan was being built at the time when Hunter Biden was serving on Burisma’s board of directors and Joe Biden was still serving as Barack Obama’s vice president in charge of U.S.-Ukraine policy.

The memos state Hunter Biden was also supposed to serve on the board of the new company called Burnham Energy Security LLC, and it was going to be capitalized in 2015 by Burisma owner Nykola Zlochevsky, who at a time was trying to get out from under corruption allegations in his home country.

The Hunter Biden-connected Burnham entity was slated to get a quarter of the new venture’s net revenues without putting up any cash, according to recent testimony to Congress from one of the partners.

Zlochevsky, the Ukrainian oligarch, meanwhile was committed to “$120 Million over thirty-six (36) months to be invested in exploration and leasehold improvements” in the new venture designed to make Burisma a global energy leader, according to a prospectus for the project.

Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, did not respond to a request for comment from Just the News.

Hunter Biden’s “credibility” for venture

Zlochevsky’s top lieutenant, Vadym Pozharskyi, wrote in an August 2015 email that it was important to his boss for Hunter Biden to be involved with Burnham Energy.

“You mentioned to me that it’s also you and HB [Hunter Biden] who will be the founders of the Llc in Delaware. Cliff mentioned only yourself,” Pozharskyi wrote Archer in August 2015 in one email obtained by Just the News. “For credibility ‘Ukrainian’ purposes you both would be better.”

HunterBidenLichstensteinUkrainewantsHB-1.pdf

It is unclear exactly what Pozharskyi meant by “credibility,” but Just the News previously reported that Burisma saw Hunter Biden’s involvement on its board as a form of protection, especially from pressure by its own government, according to Archer’s testimony for the House impeachment inquiry.

Another partner, Jason Galanis, testified to Congress that he believed Archer and Biden were placed on the board to protect the company from Ukrainian investigations and prosecutions. (Read more: Just the News, 6/17/2024)  (Archive)

June 18, 2024 - The DoD admits it has no idea how much money it gave China to make viruses more dangerous

Sen. Rand Paul questions Anthony Fauci during a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee about the ongoing response to the COVID-19 pandemic on November 04, 2021. (Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The year millions of people were killed worldwide by a virus likely engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese scientists in Beijing began toying with a more deadly coronavirus variant called GX_P2V that killed humanized mice 100% of the time, largely with late-stage brain infections. While not formally linked, the study referenced parallel work executed by Wuhan Institute of Virology scientist Dr. Shi Zhengli.

In March, Chinese researchers at the Hebei Medical University revealed they had created a mutant version of the virus vesicular stomaitis, known to infect cattle, by giving it a protein from the Ebola virus. The hamster test subjects infected with the recombinant virus suffered weight loss, ulcerated eyes, inflammation, multi-organ failure, and then all died.

Apparently, the Pentagon has no idea to what extent it has bankrolled these kinds of potentially ruinous experiments in communist China.

The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General released a partially redacted report Tuesday detailing the results of its efforts to track down the money the Pentagon has invested helping the communist Chinese enhance deadly pathogens.

The report made clear it was referring to gain-of-function experiments, referencing a definition published in the journal Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, which states, “The term ‘gain-of-function’ means ‘to enhance a function by genetic manipulation’ or ‘to add a new function’ and applies to much research involving genetic recombination and genetic manipulation.”

The DOD Office of Inspector General sought specifically to track the amount of federal funds given either directly or indirectly by the Pentagon to:

  • the communist regime itself;
  • the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other organizations administered by the Chinese Academy of Sciences;
  • Peter Daszak’s scandal-plagued and debarred EcoHealth Alliance, whose gain-of-function subcontractor was among the likely patients zero;
  • the Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences; and
  • any other related lab in the Asian nation.

Of special concern was whether and where funds were spent on “research or experiments that could have reasonably resulted in the enhancement of any coronavirus, influenza, Nipah, Ebola, or other pathogen of pandemic potential or chimeric versions of such a virus or pathogen.”

The conclusions of the report were damning.

The Pentagon has admitted that it has no idea to what extent it has funded the creation of deadly viruses in an adversarial nation it has identified as its “top pacing challenge” — a country whose overall biorisk management score is less than stellar.

The report noted at the outset that Army officials had identified 12 relevant research programs and that for “seven awards, a prime awardee provided funds to a subawardee or contracting research organization in China or other foreign countries for research related to potential enhancement of pathogens of pandemic potential.”
The Inspector General’s Office could also account for over $54 million given to EcoHealth Alliance for 13 projects executed from 2014 through 2023 but suggested that none of this funding went to China or its affiliates for gain-of-function research.
After accounting for the top of the Pentagon funding iceberg, the report indicated what lies below the surface is wholly “unknown.” (Read more: The Blaze, 6/21/2024)  (Archive)

June 20, 2024 - Marc Elias law group files suit in Nevada to prevent election integrity group from cleaning up voter rolls

Attorney Marc Elias preps Aug. 3, 2016, before the hearing for his lawsuit against Arizona over voting rights. (Credit: David Jolkovski/Getty Images)

(…) Marc Elias has been involved in dozens of lawsuits to make it easier for Democrats to steal elections.

Then in 2022, Marc Elias told MSNBC that the results in the midterm elections would not be known for days. This is the line they use when you know Democrats are going for another steal.

In May, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled 7-0 in favor of a voter ID ballot initiative.

Now, Marc Elias is hoping to overturn a Nevada election law that forces election administrators to clean up the voter rolls.

Why would Marc Elias and the Democrats be against this?

The Federalist reported:

Bogus Russian dossier peddler and Democrat Party problem fixer Marc Elias has again injected himself into a key election integrity case to “defend the broken status quo.”

Swing-state Nevada’s dirty voter rolls include hundreds of suspect addresses, at bars, strip clubs, empty parking lots, and other commercial addresses, according to an investigation by the Public Interest Legal Foundation. Doing so is clearly against the law.

“In Nevada, by the state law, you are required to be registered where you actually live, where you sleep. Not where you work, not at a P.O. Box. So we’re trying to get elections officials to enforce the law,” Lauren Bis, PILF’s director of communication and engagement, says in a video tracking bad addresses in the Las Vegas area.

To that end, the foundation has filed a petition in Washoe County, Nevada’s second-most populous county, to force elections officials to investigate and fix commercial addresses on the voter roll. PILF investigators found addresses on the rolls reported as liquor stores, empty lots, and even the Nevada Gaming Control Board, among others.

Elias Law Group and a band of leftists have sought to intervene in PILF’s petition for a writ of mandamus, arguing that forcing Washoe election administrators to follow the law and clean up the county’s dirty voter rolls will “threaten” voting rights.

For the record, Nevada is still a member of ERIC, a shady group linked to the left that is a blight on this country’s elections. (Read more: The Gateway Pundit, 6/20/2024) (Archive)

June 21, 2024 - AFL Part 2 - New docs from disbanded DHS group reveal the Biden admin views Trump supporters as “domestic terrorism threats”

(Credit: Adobe Stock Images / Gorodenkoff)

Today, America First Legal (AFL) is releasing the second tranche of internal files from the “Homeland Intelligence Experts Group,” obtained exclusively through AFL’s litigation with Ambassador Ric Grenell against the Biden Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This is the second installment of #DeepStateDiaries, a multi-part series of releases including newly obtained documents.

Yesterday, AFL released documents showing how the Deep State’s DHS intel group proposed expanding DHS’s reach into local communities in an “ambiguous” and “non-threatening” way and contemplating ways to get teachers and mothers to report their children.

Today’s installment exposes how the Biden Administration classifies someone as a person likely to commit “domestic violent extremist” attacks, particularly those who support President Trump, are “in the military,” or are “religious.”

Under the Brennan-Clapper committee’s approach to national security, when all else fails, DHS should use being “in the military” or “religious” to profile people and tag them as having  “indicators of extremists and terrorism” as a pretext to allow DHS to spy on them. According to the Group, “we should be more worried about these.”

 

The group went on to discuss how “most of the Domestic Terrorism threat now comes from supporters of the former president,” i.e., Trump supporters.

 

Read the first installment of #DeepStateDiaries here.

(America First Legal, 6/21/2024)  (Archive)

June 21, 2024 - Left wing fact-checker, Snopes, finally admits Trump didn't call Charlottesville neo-Nazis ‘very fine people’

The left-leaning fact-checking website Snopes acknowledged Saturday that former President Trump never called neo-Nazis “very fine people” during his press conference following the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally in 2017.

Critics of Trump have claimed for years that he equated neo-Nazis with counterprotesters following the event. President Biden was chief among those critics, citing the supposed incident as a main reason for launching his 2020 campaign.

“While Trump did say that there were ‘very fine people on both sides,’ he also specifically noted that he was not talking about neo-Nazis and White supremacists and said they should be ‘condemned totally.’ Therefore, we have rated this claim ‘False,'” Snopes wrote.

The Snopes fact check now aligns with years of arguments from Trump’s camp, who long stated, backed by transcript and video, that his comments were taken out of context. The fact-checker notes that the false claim about Trump’s comments “spread like wildfire” on the left, eventually being cited as a cornerstone of Biden’s election campaign.

When Biden released his 2020 campaign announcement video, the first words he said in it were “Charlottesville, Virginia.”

“The president of the United States assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it,” Biden claimed in the video. “And in that moment, I knew the threat to this nation was unlike any I’d ever seen in my lifetime.”

Snopes’ ruling removes key ammunition from Biden’s arsenal just days before he and Trump are scheduled to meet in their first debate this week. (Read more: Fox News, 6/23/2024)  (Archive)