It’s the greatest political drama since the Watergate hearings. The committee that was formed to investigate the riot that led to the breach in security at the U.S. Capitol building by a semi-organized mob has created a prime-time extravaganza, carefully crafted by a Hollywood scriptwriter. It features a glittering cast of Democratic Party political characters with one goal in mind: to destroy the Republican Party.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson tore into the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot for dredging up the past while the United States has “never in its history been closer to a nuclear war.”
“In the 18 months since January 6, gas prices have doubled, drug [overdoses] have reached their highest point ever, U.S. economy is now [heading for a] devastating recession,” he told his listeners during his opening monologue Thursday. “And scariest and least noted of all, this country has never in its history been closer to a nuclear war. Yet the other networks couldn’t be bothered to cover any of that tonight.”
The special committee set up by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to “investigate” the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol started out badly. Pelosi refused the GOP’s nominees for the committee and to her own party’s picks added a couple of rabidly anti-Trump GOP members, making the entire process partisan.
Then it has demanded testimony from hundreds of witnesses, and even has attacked members of the U.S. House with subpoenas and threats, unprecedented in House disputes.
Observers have noted it has made clear from the outset that the results of the investigation are to be that President Trump is to be punished, no matter the facts.
What the Sussmann trial really showed.
With 3 Clinton donors on the jury and a judge who is the poster boy for conflicts of interest, the outcome of the Michael Sussmann trial was never in doubt. But these are also the same conflicts that made Russiagate possible and trying a Russiagate case in D.C. entirely hopeless.
D.C.’s professional class build their careers around a web of personal connections. And no one was better at pulling on all those connections than the Clintons who had spent a generation assembling their own political machine of careerists and loyalists by offering them positions in the government and their non-profit organizations. The Clintons had built an army and a state within a state. Russiagate, at the most basic level, was an attempt by corrupt careerists before the election to protect their future jobs and after the election to exact an embittered revenge.
Reporter Robert Costa asked, “Are you confident that what you have found as a committee will somehow grab the American people by the lapels and say, ‘Wake up: You have to pay attention’?”
Cheney said, “I am. The threat, and it’s an ongoing threat, you know, we are not in a situation where former President Trump has expressed any sense of remorse about what happened. We are, in fact, in a situation where he continues to use even more extreme language, frankly, than the language that caused the attack. And so, people must pay attention. People must watch, and they must understand how easily our democratic system can unravel if we don’t defend it.”
Dinesh D’Souza’s election fraud documentary, 2000 Mules, is bolstering concerns among millions of voters that the Trump-Biden election was rife with problems.
In a new Rasmussen Reports survey on the film shared with Secrets, 77% said that the movie “strengthened their conviction that there was systematic and widespread election fraud in the 2020 election.”
And that is significant because the poll also suggested that over 20 million voters have viewed the documentary that debuted last month at Florida’s Mar-a-Lago resort, former President Donald Trump’s winter residence.
Former President Donald Trump sent a letter last week threatening to sue the Pulitzer Committee if they do not withdraw prizes given to journalists from The New York Times and the Washington Post.
In a May 27 letter to Pulitzer Prize administrator Marjorie Miller, Trump threatened to sue the Pulitzer Prize Board if it did not rescind the awards it gave to New York Times and Washington Post for publishing “false and fabricated” allegations that the Trump campaign and administration colluded with Russian entities.
Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann was found not guilty Tuesday on the false statements charge of concealing his representation of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign from the FBI when he pushed since debunked Trump-Russia claims to the bureau in 2016.
The verdict is a significant loss for John Durham’s investigation of the investigators, with the special counsel losing the first case that he has brought to trial.
The day after the 2020 presidential election, I predicted the left was going to target any attorney who dared to get involved challenging election fraud. They’d already started successfully targeting conservative attorneys, it just hadn’t gotten much attention yet. Since most people are bored by legal issues, they fly under the radar. I wrote about it over a year ago, and things have gotten far worse since then. This year, they launched “The 65 Project” to brazenly accomplish it, named after the 65 lawsuits Trump-affiliated attorneys filed after the election.
It shows the FBI’s top brass to be partisan dolts.
The Michael Sussmann trial has shed light on the partisan clown show James Comey ran at the FBI. The trial so far is not an indictment of the FBI’s little fish — the nonpartisan agents in the trenches who suspected Sussmann’s Trump-Russia yarn was nonsense — but the big fish, Comey’s liberal leadership on the 7th floor of the FBI. It has come out in the trial that an FBI supervisor wrote a lower agent: “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server” — a reference to Sussmann’s claim that a secret channel existed between the Trump Organization and a Kremlin-linked bank.
FBI agent Curtis Heide testified in court Tuesday that he is currently the subject of an internal investigation into allegations that he withheld key evidence from an application to surveil a figure in the bureau’s probe into former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Mr. Heide took the stand in U.S. District Court in Washington in the criminal trial of former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann. The FBI agent said that others in the bureau are also being investigated, but he did not say how many or what positions they hold.
It is the first time anyone associated with the FBI has confirmed that an internal probe into agents’ handling of its Trump-Russia collusion investigation is ongoing.
Proving that what’s old is new again, here is how the late William Safire began his New York Times column of Jan. 8, 1996:
“Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.
“Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.”
Former President Donald Trump responded angrily to the revelation that 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton approved the spread of a false allegation that the Trump campaign had links to a Russian bank.
On Friday, former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said Clinton approved sharing information linking Trump to Alfa Bank. The comment came during the trial of Michael Sussman, an attorney who has been accused of making a false statement to the FBI when he tried to interest the agency in the alleged connection.
George Washington University law professor and self-proclaimed liberal Jonathan Turley said Friday on Fox News’ “Special Report” that Hillary Clinton will probably avoid “direct responsibility” in the Durham probe because of her “Voldemort-like status.”
The first trial to emerge from Special Counsel John Durham’s probe finally got underway Tuesday – as prosecutors accused former Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann of trying to engineer an ‘October surprise’ when he sought out a top FBI official to discuss an allegation about Trump and Russia.
The allegation didn’t pan out, but the meeting itself constituted an effort to ‘use and manipulate’ federal law enforcement for political ends, prosecutors argued.
