Opinion

Home Opinion

New House Subcommittee Takes Aim at ‘Weaponized’ Federal Agencies

8
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – LONG OVERDUE – The new Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government will soon be investigating federal agencies that have abused their power and violated Americans’ rights.

The spotlight should be especially focused on those federal agencies in the law enforcement and intelligence arenas. 

As I have repeatedly argued, this subcommittee is long overdue and badly needed, as the always growing behemoth that is our federal government has in recent years been fully weaponized for partisan gain and abused citizens of all stripes.

The active partisan involvement by the FBI in helping cover up Hunter Biden’s laptop, along with current and retired senior officials in the intelligence community working to discredit the laptop, should be front and center of these investigations.

As should the entire Hillary Clinton campaign contrived Trump-Russia-collusion hoax.

More recently, new bombshells of this vast federal overreach and abuse have been dropped by Elon Musk’s ‘Twitter Files’ expose’.

These files show a deep unconstitutional collusion between the FBI and a multitude of federal agencies and Big Tech, especially Twitter to censor and block online content posted and read by millions of Americans.

This illegal activity violating Americans’ first amendment rights is also a huge concern.

According to The Epoch Times:

For now, the subcommittee will specifically look at abuses by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI, the legality of vaccine mandates, disinformation about conservative-sponsored election security laws, and censorship by big tech firms under government pressure, according to subcommittee members.

While created by Republicans the new select subcommittee has a broad mandate. It will be chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Since its creation, some Democrats have called the panel a Republican ploy to deflect from ongoing investigations into the Jan. 6 Capitol breach and former President Donald Trump.

On January 10, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) using every leftist talking point and incendiary partisan term he could muster, called it “nothing more than a deranged ploy by the MAGA extremists who have hijacked the party and want to use taxpayer money to push their far-right conspiracy nonsense.”

Republican subcommittee members dismissed these allegations, with one congressman saying that this vast federal overreach which they will be investigating represents “the signature abuse of power of our time,” in much the same way Watergate defined another era.

ET adds:

The new panel will examine how these abuses happened, how to correct them, and how to make sure the abuses won’t happen again, subcommittee member Rep. Mike Johnson told The Epoch Times.

“Since the beginning of the Biden administration, some federal agencies designed to serve and keep Americans safe have instead been turned against them,” he said.

“This fact is beyond dispute. The Biden Administration has used counterterrorism resources against the parents of school children, raided the homes of political opponents, targeted conservative states over their election integrity laws, inflated domestic extremism statistics, and instituted illegal vaccine mandates, just to name a handful of examples,” he added.

However, the members emphasized that the subcommittee won’t be limited to investigating specific abuses, like the Russian collusion hoax or specific agencies.

“We have a very broad charter. We’re not limited to [investigating the] DOJ and FBI,” said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).

That is a good thing, because the abuse and corruption at our federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies extends far beyond the DOJ and the FBI.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Poll Shows Americans Evenly Split On Sending Trump To Prison. Do You Agree?

0
Image via Pixabay

A new Associated Press poll finds Americans are almost evenly split on whether former President Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison after being found guilty of falsifying business records in New York.

“The public is divided over whether Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison for his felony conviction for falsifying business records in the hush money case,” the AP reports. “Opinions on the conviction itself have remained stable in the weeks since the decision was announced on May 30 with nearly half approving of the jury’s decision and about a quarter disapproving. The public is also divided on whether Trump has received fair treatment from the legal system.”

Trump, convicted in June, is scheduled to be sentenced Sept. 18, just weeks ahead of the November election.  Experts predict Trump will likely receive probation and a fine, but a prison sentence is a distinct possibility.

The AP/NORC poll, conducted June 20-24, finds 48 percent believe Trump should receive a prison sentence, while 50 percent disagree.  That gap is within the poll’s margin of error, meaning Americans are essentially evenly split.

Among independent voters, who will decide the election, 50 percent believe Trump should be imprisoned while 46 percent disagree.

While Americans are split on whether Trump should go to prison, the number who support Trump’s conviction outnumber those who oppose it by nearly a two-to-one margin.

The poll finds 46 percent of Americans support the jury’s decision to convict Trump, while 27 percent disapprove and 25 percent are unsure.

Among independents, 32 percent agree with the conviction, 21 percent disagree and 47 percent are unsure.

The nationwide poll was conducted June 20-24, 2024 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago. 

The poll, using online and telephone interviews using landlines and cell phones, was conducted with 1,088 adults. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.0 percentage points.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.

FBI Retaliated Against Whistleblowers Who Exposed ‘Politicized Rot’

2

ANALYSIS – Things at the FBI just seem to get worse. A new House report shows that FBI special agents, and other key employees, who exposed the “politicized rot” within the bureau were suspended or had their security clearances revoked.

The interim staff report from the House Judiciary Committee and the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government describes that ‘rot’ as the deep partisan politicization of the FBI’s leadership and the concerted weaponization of the law enforcement agency against conservatives.

The report, released Thursday morning, also described the FBI’s alleged “retaliatory conduct” against the whistleblowers “after making protected disclosures about what they believed in good faith to be wrong conduct.”

The committee’s report likened the bureau’s actions to “engaging in a ‘purge’ of agents who hold conservative beliefs.”

The FBI has responded to the accusations in a letter discussed below.

The Bureau’s politicized rot spiked after the Capitol Riot in 2021, and the subsequent Democrat effort to highlight the alleged threat of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE), also known as MAGA Republicans, pro-life Christians, and other traditional conservatives.

Among the whistleblower’s key accusations is that the bureau opened improper investigations into a large group of individuals who simply attended the pro-Trump political rally in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021. 

They claimed that the Bureau had “no specific indication” that 138 of the people “were involved in any way in criminal activity.”

“The only basis for investigating these people was that they shared buses to Washington with two individuals who entered restricted areas of the Capitol that day,” they explained in the report.

But it’s more than that.

The committees’ report reveals new whistleblower testimony from several current and former FBI employees that exposes other “abuses and misconduct in the FBI.”

The report states that:

Some of these employees—Special Agents Garret O’Boyle and Stephen Friend, Supervisory Intelligence Analyst George Hill, and Staff Operations Specialist Marcus Allen—have chosen to speak on the record about their experiences. The disclosures from these FBI employees highlight egregious abuse, misallocation of law-enforcement resources, and misconduct with the leadership ranks of the FBI.

It added that, in order to bolster the Democrat narrative that DVE was “organically rising around the country,” the FBI pressured staff to “reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism, and even manufactured DVE cases where they may not otherwise exist.”

Friend specified that the FBI’s handling of Jan. 6-related investigations “deviated from standard practice and created a false impression with respect to the threat of DVE nationwide.”

This is something I have argued and written about repeatedly.

The deliberate mishandling of these cases greatly inflated the number of alleged DVE cases in the country and has been used as an excuse to divert massive amounts of federal law enforcement funds and resources to this grossly exaggerated threat.

One of the whistleblowers called the bureau “cancerous” because it has “let itself become enveloped in this politicization and weaponization.”

Allen reportedly had his security clearance suspended for performing case-related research using open-source news articles and videos about the Capitol riot and sending his results to his task force colleagues for “situational awareness.”

Meanwhile, the FBI argued in a letter to the Committee Chairman, that the clearance suspensions and other disciplinary actions were taken purely out of security concerns or violations by the FBI employees.

However, among the counter allegations in its letter, the FBI said:

Specifically, the Security Division found Mr. Allen espoused alternative theories to coworkers verbally and in emails and instant messages sent on the FBI systems, in apparent attempts to hinder investigative activity.

The letter noted that despite multiple directives from his supervisor to “stop circulating these materials,” Allen “continued.” 

The report states that: “Because these open-source articles questioned the FBI’s handling of the violence at the Capitol, the FBI suspended Allen for ‘conspiratorial views in regard to the events of January 6th.”

To come to your own conclusions, I recommend reading the House report and the FBI’s letter linked above. 

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: Judge Denies Hunter’s Plea Deal!

1
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

In a brutal blow to Hunter Biden, a judge has rejected his sweetheart plea deal. What comes next?

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Biden NSC Spokesman Drops Israeli War ‘Truth Bomb’ On Lefty Reporters

0

ANALYSIS – As most of my readers know, I’m not a big fan of Joe Biden, or any of his lefty White House minions. This includes retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, the oftentimes Democrat hack, previously Pentagon press secretary, and currently coordinator for strategic communications at the National Security Council (NSC).

Watching this former senior military officer try to spin ridiculous and dangerous Biden foreign and defense policies is often stomach churning.

But, if nothing else, I try to be fair and honest, and can applaud my opponents when they occasionally get something right.

And this time Kirby not only got things right, but he surprisingly dropped a major ‘truth bomb.’ And even Biden played a part.

On Wednesday Biden correctly responded to a lefty reporter’s loaded question about Israel causing civilian casualties in Gaza by saying he can’t trust the civilian casualty numbers disseminated by the Gaza Ministry of Health, controlled by Hamas. They are, essentially, terrorist propaganda.

In his response the elderly Biden referred to Hamas as “the Palestinians,” but it’s clear what who was talking about.

“What they say to me is I have no notion that the Palestinians are telling the truth about how many people are killed. I’m sure innocents have been killed, and it’s the price of waging a war,” Biden said. 

“But I have no confidence in the number that the Palestinians are using.”

And that was spot on. The figures coming from Palestinian Hamas officials in Gaza are worse than worthless, they are lies.

Biden’s accurate observation was followed on Thursday by a question from another lefty reporter asking Kirby if Biden would apologize for his remarks since they had angered the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who called his comments “shocking and dehumanizing.”

Referring to Biden’s remarks, the reporter asked Kirby:

Don’t you think it is insensitive? There [is] very harsh criticism about it. For example, the Council of American-Islamic Relations said it was deeply disturbed and called on the president to apologize. Would the president apologize, and does he regret saying something like that?

To provide some background here, we need to note that while CAIR pretends to be a Muslim human rights group, it often traffics in anti-Jewish rhetoric. 

CAIR’s Executive Director has claimed that ‘Zionist organizations’ in the U.S. are “enemies of the Muslim community” and that “Zionist organizations make up the core of the Islamophobia network in the United States.” 

He has also used the trope that pro-Israel groups have “corrupted” the U.S. government and that Israel doesn’t have a right to exist. It’s really just another front group for promoting Islamism and antisemitism in the U.S.

So, it was refreshing to hear Kirby provide the biased reporter a firm and simple “no,” Biden won’t apologize.

Kirby then dropped the major ‘truth bomb’ about the Israeli-Hamas conflict. As Blaze Media reported:

“What’s harsh is the way Hamas is using people as human shields. What’s harsh is taking a couple of hundred hostages and leaving families anxious, waiting, and worrying to figure out where their loved ones are. What’s harsh is dropping in on a music festival and slaughtering a bunch of young people just trying to enjoy an afternoon,” he said.

“That’s what’s harsh. And being honest about the fact that there have been civilian casualties — and that there likely will be more — is being honest, because that’s what war is. It’s brutal. It’s ugly. It’s messy,” he continued. “I’ve said that before. President also said that yesterday. Doesn’t mean we have to like it. And it doesn’t mean that we’re dismissing any one of those casualties — each and every one is a tragedy in its own right.”

Kirby, moreover, revealed that the U.S. government is helping Israel minimize civilian casualties but highlighted how Hamas is making that difficult.

“It would be helpful if Hamas would let [Gazan civilians] leave,” he pointed out. “We know that there are thousands waiting to leave Gaza writ large, and Hamas is preventing them from doing it. That is what is harsh.”

BOOM! That truth bomb was a direct hit and must have caused some casualties among the leftist press corps. Well done, Admiral Kirby. Now can you tell the truth about Iran, the border, etc., etc.?

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: McCarthy Critic Gives The Speaker an ‘A’

2
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy delivers remarks at the 2021 Capitol Christmas Tree lighting ceremony in Washington DC, December 1, 2021. USDA Forest Service photo by Tanya E. Flores.

What did you think of President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address?

Pivoting to House Republicans, one of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s most ardent critics is reviewing the Speaker’s work so far and he has plenty to talk about…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: CNN Stabs Biden!

0

Is the mainstream media finally waking up? Not so fast…

However, tensions between the press and the Biden administration are definitely heating up after what has been widely regarded as a friendly relationship…

Let Amanda explain the rising feud below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Walz Family Members Buck VP, Endorse Trump

5

The family of vice presidential candidate Tim Walz aren’t fans of his politics…

An image circulating online shows family members of vice presidential candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz openly supporting former President Trump.

The photo was shared online by former Nebraska Republican gubernatorial candidate Charles Herbster. It shows eight people wearing “Nebraska Walz’s (sic) for Trump” T-shirts.

“Tim Walz’s family back in Nebraska wants you to know something…” Herbster wrote on X. 

Family members told Fox News they consider themselves “distant” from Walz and have never met or spoken with him. One person in the photo who wished to remain anonymous said they are supporting Trump because “he supports our values.”  

Trump replied on Truth Social to the image, implying that he plans to “meet” with Jeff Walz, the older brother of the Minnesota governor. 

New Poll Exposes Democrats’ True Thoughts About Biden

1
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

There’s a wealth of new polling data on the Democratic presidential nomination contest, with polls from The Wall Street Journal and Associated Press both finding that even Democratic voters are concerned that President Joe Biden is too old to run.

The AP/NORC poll of adults (not registered voters) found that 77 percent of respondents believed Biden was too old to serve another term.

And for the hardened Team Blue partisans who shout “ageism!” at such findings…69 percent of self-identified Democrats said Biden’s age is a big issue (among Republicans, it was a whopping 89 percent – which shouldn’t come as a surprise).

But this must be a fluke, an outlier, and a one-off. Surely, the age issue can’t be that big a deal for Mr. Biden. Except The Wall Street Journal poll confirmed it is.

The Journal asked a split question – one if voters think Biden’s mental fitness is sufficient for the job, the other specifically on whether he is “too old.”

On the mental ability, 60 percent questioned Biden’s mental ability. On age, a total of 73 percent said he is “too old.”

What are the comparable numbers for former President Donald Trump?

A 49-46 split says Trump isn’t mentally up for the job. On age, another spilt, with 47 percent saying he’s too old and 45 saying he isn’t.

As always with polls, the numbers are snapshots in time and subject to change.

What these data points do, though, is reinforce narratives that have long been whispered in Democratic circles: Biden’s time has passed, and he would be wise to bow out and allow someone else to take the fight to what looks like Donald Trump in 2024.

But such whispers against an incumbent are very hard to translate into hard reality. What could bring them a tad bit closer to the fore are the other items in the Journal poll, particularly the sense that most people think the economy has hit a rough patch, and they are feeling the effects:

…58% of voters say the economy has gotten worse over the past two years, whereas only 28% say it has gotten better, and nearly three in four say inflation is headed in the wrong direction. Those views were echoed in the survey by large majorities of independents, a group that helped deliver Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential race. Voters were almost evenly split on the direction of the job market.

It’s not a wipeout for Biden, but the data are hardly comforting to an incumbent who has staked his presidency on a massive reworking of the economy, with government intervention and support leading the way. Team Blue partisans will say it’s early, these things take time, etc., etc. And they aren’t entirely wrong.

But there’s also the iron law of politics to contend with: if you’re explaining, you’re losing. And until the data show voters are feeling better about their own particular economic situation, then Mr. Biden will need more than a slogan – “Bidenomics” – and promises of widespread prosperity to save his own political future.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

False AP Report About Russian Missiles Hitting Poland Could’ve Triggered WWIII

0
Main Directorate of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine in Kyiv, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Last week the world was hit by the purported news of a Russian missile strike into NATO member country, Poland. 

And now the award-winning AP reporter who wrote it has been fired.

Based only on a single, unnamed ‘senior U.S. intelligence official,’ the initial Associated Press (AP) story by James LaPorta, a former U.S. Marine who served in Afghanistan, was widely disseminated and quickly caused a barrage of other reporting.

Most of it was alarmist and panic-causing, with many in the news media and blogosphere quickly demanding harsh action against Russia.

As the Blaze reports:

Fox News and the Daily Mail similarly carried the AP reporter’s suggestion, the former running a piece entitled, “Russian missiles cross into NATO member Poland, kill 2: senior US intelligence official,” and the latter stating, “‘Russian bombs’ kill two in POLAND.”

CBS Evening News tweeted “RUSSIAN MISSILE STRIKE: Two Russian missiles crossed over the Ukrainian border into Poland, a NATO country, killing two civilians.”

A Russian attack on Poland could have triggered articles 4 and 5 of the NATO charter, potentially putting the U.S. into direct conflict with nuclear power.

Article 4 requires full consultation at the North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s political decision-making body, while Article 5 requires joint NATO action to repel an attack.

As MSN explains: “Article 5 states that the parties to the NATO treaty ‘agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.’”

Article 5 also states that each NATO member must take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

This of course would make the U.S. a direct combatant in this war and could escalate to a nuclear exchange.

As such, I wrote about the ‘errant’ strike the same day, albeit in more careful ways.

My headline was more matter-of-fact and far less alarming, and it didn’t mention a direct Russian missile strike: “Escalation in Russia-Ukraine War Leads to Emergency Crisis Meeting.”

In the piece I did note the ramifications of any foreign missiles crashing into Poland, writing: “In what might be the greatest (albeit perhaps accidental) escalation since Russia invaded Ukraine, the war just crossed the border into a NATO country.”

And, yes, I like to say ‘albeit.’

added:

According to a senior U.S. intelligence official, as Russia pounded Ukraine’s energy facilities Tuesday with the largest barrage of missile strikes to date, some reportedly ‘stray’ Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland and struck a site in Poland about 15 miles from the Ukrainian border.

The allegedly errant strike killed two persons in the Polish village of Przewodów and provoked an emergency crisis meeting of Poland’s national security team, which will be held Tuesday evening.

While I did refer to a Ukrainian Air Force spokesman who said Russia used X-101 and X-555 cruise missiles in the latest attacks against Ukraine, and reports that expressed the belief that “one or more of these cruise missiles were the ones that struck Poland,” I was very careful in how I reported all this.

Note the extensive use of the words “accidental,” “allegedly,” “reportedly,” “errant,” and “stray” missiles in my report. I also explained that the incident had provoked an “emergency crisis meeting” in Poland.

The rest of my piece focused on the confirmed, massive Russian barrage of missile strikes against Ukrainian energy and infrastructure targets throughout the country.

In the end it appears that the missile that struck Poland was a Russian-made Ukrainian air defense missile that missed its mark and fell back to earth rather than self-destructs.

And even after its country of manufacture was known, outlets like CNN kept calling it a ‘Russian-made missile’ without adding that Ukraine uses lots of Russian-made missiles.

Of course, in my view, Russia is still to blame for this, albeit indirectly, since no one would be firing armed missiles near a NATO country if it weren’t for the unprovoked Russian invasion, and its reckless and dangerous strikes near NATO’s borders.

The Blaze added that:

After having updated the initial report several times, the AP indicated [November 16] that a new assessment from three U.S. officials “contradicts information” in the original article. Shortly thereafter, the article was reportedly taken offline.

The AP issued a retraction later that day…

On Nov. 21, LaPorta was fired.

But let’s use this incident as a teachable moment. 

Lesson one – as sophisticated news consumers, be circumspect with the news you read until it is fully verified.

Lesson two – be wary of reports using only one or two anonymous sources.

And lesson three – journalists, and social media posters, should use words like ‘reportedly’ a lot more, and make it clear that there is room for doubt or questions when the reports are still fresh and early.

The most important rule I’ve learned in journalism, and in intelligence, and also during my stint on Wall Street, is that – it’s never as good (or as bad) as first reported. 

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.