Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Tucker Carlson Jan 6 Exposé – Partly True and Also Kinda Dumb

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    20
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Tucker Carlson’s misguided attempt to use cherry-picked moments of the newly released video of Jan. 6 to argue that nothing bad happened at the Capitol that day, is horribly timed and very dumb. 

    As I wrote the day after I personally observed events at the Capitol that day, January 6 was neither a deadly coup, insurrection nor peaceful guided tours of the Capitol. 

    It was a mixture of some of those things, none of those things, and everything in between.

    And Tucker would have been far more effective, and credible had he used the video to show that the Left’s Jan. 6 narrative was incomplete, distorted, and totally one-sided, rather than trying to say it was totally false.

    Because the truth is that Jan 6 was like the story of the blind men and the elephant, each one grasping one part of the animal, like the leg, tail, or trunk, and describing the giant beast as something totally different.

    On Jan. 6 what began as a massive peaceful rally of tens of thousands of pro-Trump protesters, soon degraded when smaller elements (a few hundred) of the much larger peaceful crowd broke off and did conduct a violent attack on parts of the Capitol.

    Hundreds more just stupidly followed the initial ‘attack mob’ inside.

    In the first group, some had military training, used stack formations, and were very organized and intent on forcefully breaching the building. 

    While none were found with, or used firearms, during the riot, there was violence with sticks, flagpoles, and pepper spray.

    I called these violent rioters, thugs, and criminals.

    They were similar to the violent BLM rioters who had violently attacked police at the White House in the summer of 2020 or besieged the Portland Federal Courthouse for months.

    On Jan. 6 police officers were similarly attacked and beaten, and the Capitol was ultimately breached unlawfully.

    Inside, one non-violent protester, Ashley Babbitt, an Air Force security forces veteran, was shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Likely, unjustly. 

    She was the only person killed during the riot.

    All this occurred in the span of just a few hours.

    But the Capitol complex is massive, and what was happening violently on one end was not being replicated at other parts of the Capitol. 

    As much of the Tucker video showed truthfully, in many places and entrances, Capitol Police had allowed protesters inside, in some cases escorted them around. 

    In other cases, the police simply stood by as the ‘tourist’ protesters milled around and took selfies or acted stupidly.

    Still, ever since then, there has been a profound narrative battle pitting those fanatics on the right who said nothing at all happened and the fanatics on the left who claim Jan. 6 was worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11, and an insurrection that risked the essence of American democracy. 

    Sadly, neither side is correct, but only the most extreme one-sided ‘insurrection’ narrative was put forward by the left and last Congress’ Democratic-run Jan. 6 committee, and repeated daily by the partisan, anti-Trump media.

    The insurrection narrative was pushed by cherry-picked videos and photos of the same short-lived Capitol violence from different views and angles, repeated in a nearly constant loop for the most distorted and dramatic effect possible.

    But now Tucker has done the same.

    As Politico reported:

    Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger wrote in an internal message to officers that Carlson’s Monday night primetime program “conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video” to incorrectly portray the violent assault as more akin to a peaceful protest. He added that Carlson’s “commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments.”

    And many Republican leaders agreed.

    The timing is also horrible.

    As Politico reported:

    “It’s definitely stupid to keep talking about this … So what is the purpose of continuing to bring it up unless you’re trying to feed Democrat narratives even further?” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said in an interview, noting the videos didn’t show “anything we don’t already know.”

    “I don’t really have a problem with making it all public. But if your message is then to try and convince people that nothing bad happened, then it’s just gonna make us look silly.”

    So how should we view the events of the January 6 riot accurately and fairly?

    Probably the best description was provided by Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) when he said he has “a hard time with all of it.”

    He added that Jan. 6 “was not a peaceful protest. It was not an insurrection. It was a riot that should have never happened. And a lot of people share the blame for that. The truth is always messier than any narrative.”

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

    Amanda Head: My Thoughts On Last Night And What’s To Come

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Election results are still pouring in on Wednesday as Americans wait with anticipation to see which party will gain control of Congress.

    Watch Amanda break down the situation below:

    Marine Vet – Hero or Criminal?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0

    ANALYSIS – Everyone knows crime has exploded in New York City (NYC). This is especially true in the city’s subway system where aggressive mentally ill vagrants and homeless people abound. 

    But when a white, 24-year-old Marine veteran on the subway tries to subdue a “threatening” black, mentally ill man (with a rap sheet as long as his arm – including an outstanding warrant for felony assault) – the left can only see one thing – ‘racist murder.’

    The Marine vet used a chokehold to subdue the aggressive 30-year-old homeless man, Jordan Neely on Monday. 

    The hold reportedly lasted 15 minutes. He was assisted in subduing Neely by at least two other riders, one of whom was black.

    The apparent effort to protect passengers on the F train from Neely’s “threatening” behavior proved to be fatal. Sadly, Neely later died.

    Many argue the Marine was justified. One witness told the New York Post that the man was screaming in a threatening manner.

    “He said he had no food, he had no drink, that he was tired and doesn’t care if he goes to jail,” said Juan Alberto Vazquez. “He started screaming all these things, took off his jacket, a black jacket that he had, and threw it on the ground.”

    But before the coroner had issued a cause of death, leftist agitators were calling it murder.

    “NYC is not Gotham. We must not become a city where a mentally ill human being can be choked to death by a vigilante without consequences. Or where the killer is justified & cheered,” City Comptroller Brad Lander tweeted Tuesday.

    The next day, in response to a cautious and responsible statement from NYC mayor Erik Adams, where he said he was going to wait for more facts, Democrat NYC Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pushed back on a statement, calling the incident a “public murder,” and saying fellow Democrat Adams had reached “a new low” with his response.

    Adams, who was once a transit cop during his career with the NYPD, seemed to focus on the mentally ill Neely then also called on elected officials and advocacy groups to: “Join us in prioritizing getting people the care they need and not just allowing them to languish.”

    The far-left Working Families Party ripped the initial response from Adams, calling the death “a modern-day public lynching,” said in a statement.

    The New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner ruled the death a homicide Wednesday evening, though it needs to be clear that this does not equate to murder.

    Homicides can be accidental or unintentional.

    And even the conservative news outlet Daily Caller sensationalized the Marine’s action in their tweet:

    While leftists tried to demonize the blonde, shaggy-haired Marine, and make Neely into an innocent victim, Newsweek reported that Neely had 42 prior arrests between 2013 and 2021, including four for assault. 

    And considering NYC’s violent subway crime wave, including people getting shoved in front of trains, subduing Neely seems reasonable.

    The New York Times (NYT) reports that since 2019, the rate of violent crimes — murder, rape, felony assault and robbery — has more than doubled in the New York City subway system, even as ridership has dramatically decreased. 

    “There were 10 killings on the subway last year, compared with an average of two annually in the five years before the pandemic.”

    This fear was highlighted in January 2022 when Michelle Alyssa Go, a 40-year-old Asian-American woman who worked at the consulting firm Deloitte, was shoved in front of an R train in Times Square by a homeless man who police said had a history of crime and mental illness.

    Meanwhile, the Soros-backed, ‘progressive,’ Manhattan District Attorney, or DA (yes, the same one gunning for Trump), Alvin Bragg, who is black, has said his office is now investigating the incident.

    In a statement, the DA’s office said:

    As part of our rigorous ongoing investigation, we will review the Medical Examiner’s report, assess all available video and photo footage, identify and interview as many witnesses as possible, and obtain additional medical records. This investigation is being handled by senior, experienced prosecutors and we will provide an update when there is additional public information to share.

    Much more to come, but maybe not as quickly as some would like.

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

    Judge Again Blocks Biden From Violating 1st Amendment

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

    ANALYSIS – Even when presented with overwhelming evidence that Team Biden colluded intimately with Big Tech social media companies to censor conservative Americans, the White House doubled down on violating the 1st Amendment. 

    As I wrote last week, on July 4th a federal judge blocked “federal agencies from communicating with Big Tech firms to censor posts.”

    This, after a lawsuit against the Biden administration by three Republican state Attorney Generals (AGs).

    According to the judge, Terry A. Doughty, the AGs “have produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.” 

    “If the allegations made by plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States history,” Doughty wrote in his preliminary injunction against more than 40 administration officials. 

    “In their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the federal government, and particularly the defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech.”

    Please note – ‘disinformation’ is any information the left and Team Biden don’t like.

    This is serious constitutional stuff. One would think the White House might say, “ok, we overstepped a bit.”

    But not Team Biden.

    Using the Orwellian doublespeak, the left always uses to hide the truth, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said: “We are going to continue to promote responsible actions.” 

    She added: “That is something that we’re going to continue to do to make sure we protect public health and make sure there is safety and security.”

    Using similar verbiage, the Department of Justice announced later that same day that it would appeal the decision, to protect public health, safety, and security.

    Basically, Team Biden said, we don’t care, we want to keep violating the Constitution and censoring our opponents. And we are going to request an emergency order from the judge to do it.

    The Daily Caller reported:

    Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey and Louisiana Attorney General Jeffrey Landry opposed the Biden administration’s attempt to stop the injunction in a court filing Sunday, writing the administration was essentially asking to “continue violating the First Amendment.”

    “In essence, Defendants argue that the injunction should be stayed because it might interfere with the Government’s ability to continue working with social-media companies to censor Americans’ core political speech on the basis of viewpoint,” they wrote in the court filing. “In other words, the Government seeks a stay of the injunction so that it can continue violating the First Amendment.”

    Thankfully, on Monday the same federal judge blocked Biden again, denying the administration’s attempt to pause the injunction. 

    The Washington Post reported that Judge Doughty noted again that the plaintiffs (the state AGs) would likely succeed in proving the government colluded with social media companies “to engage in viewpoint-based suppression of protected free speech.”

    Responding to the hysteria surrounding his initial injunction, Doughty also wrote:

    Although this Preliminary Injunction involves numerous agencies, it is not as broad as it appears. “It only prohibits something the Defendants have no legal right to do—contacting social media companies for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner, the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms. 

    Rejecting the administration’s argument that the order could chill law enforcement activity to protect national security, the judge added that It also contains numerous exceptions for communications related to criminal activity, explicit dangers to national security, and foreign election interference.

    Meanwhile, this important battle will continue as the AGs’ lawsuit works its way through the legal system.

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

    Is Vivek Ramaswamy The GOP’s New Trump ‘Lite’?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    13
    Vivek Ramaswamy speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

    ANALYSIS- Who is this skinny guy with the funny-sounding name? (That was his opening line at the debate). Vivek Ramaswamy wasn’t supposed to be at the center of the first Republican presidential candidate debate in Milwaukee.

    Ron DeSantis was supposed to be the viable GOP alternative to Donald Trump. A two-term governor of the third most populous state in the union, DeSantis, a Navy veteran who served in Iraq, is as conservative as they come.

    And he has a proven track record of fighting the left in Florida – and winning.

    But despite his solid bona fides and resume, DeSantis has a personality problem. He just doesn’t exude charm or confidence, and that’s hurting him – a lot.

    Meanwhile, Ramaswamy the 38-year-old Trump-defending, Cincinnati-born, biotech billionaire (worth at least $950 million), son of Pakistani immigrants, kind of stole the show at the debate.

    According to former FBI agent and body language expert, Joe Navarro: “[Ramaswamy] consistently looked the most comfortable on stage.”

    He was also the most openly and unabashedly pro-Trump. He was the first candidate to raise their hand when asked who would support the former President as the party nominee even if he is convicted on felony charges that he’s facing.

    He has also promised to pardon Trump if elected. But he went even farther than that.

    “President Trump, I believe, was the best president of the 21st century,” Ramaswamy said in a clip from the debate Trump posted on Truth Social.

    And Trump loved it.

    “This answer gave Vivek Ramaswamy a big WIN in the debate because of a thing called TRUTH. Thank you, Vivek!”

    The ever-smiling political newbie Ramaswamy, who seemed to be having a blast on stage, was also the target of many of his GOP rivals.

    As TIME reported:

    Maybe it was Ramaswamy’s consistent and confounding defense of All Things Trump. Maybe it was his smooth talk and culture-war acumen. Maybe it was just the fact that Ramaswamy frankly does not care how things were done before and might just have enough self-made money to go the distance.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie snarled that he had “had enough already tonight of a guy who sounds like ChatGPT,” an A.I. battery. He then dismissed Ramaswamy as someone on the same level as a political figure universally loathed in the GOP. “The last person in one of these debates… who stood in the middle of the stage and said, ‘What is a skinny guy with an odd last name doing up here?’ was Barack Obama. And I am afraid we are dealing with the same type of amateur standing on the stage tonight,” Christie said.

    But the quick witted Ramaswamy’s riposte to Christie was a zinger: “Give me a hug like you did to Obama, and you’ll help elect me just like you did to Obama. Give me the damn hug, brother.”

    Ramaswamy was referring to the 2012 incident when Christie was accused of “hugging” Obama during his visit in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy which hit days before the 2012 presidential election.

    It’s a claim that Christie has been denying since then, saying: “I didn’t hug him.”

    Photos at the time seem to back up Christie, but the zinger still worked.

    Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN under Trump, and ex-South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, who is of Indian descent, hit Ramaswamy too: “You have no foreign policy experience, and it shows.”

    I would agree with that assessment and believe he has made a few deeply flawed important national security statements – including on Ukraine and Israel.

    But he is super smart and can learn quickly.

    Then Vice President Mike Pence took a Christie-like jab at Ramaswamy, attacking the very same quality that originally helped raise Trump in the GOP base – that he is not a politician.

    “Now it’s not the time for on-the-job training,” retorted Pence. “We don’t need to bring in a rookie. We don’t need to bring in people with no experience.”

    AS TIME noted: “Attacks during debates are the norm but this was different. Ramaswamy’s competitors really don’t like him. Not even a little.”

    However, there is one important GOP rival who seems to like Ramaswamy – Donald Trump. And that could be all that matters.

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

    Did Fauci Lie To Congress? New Investigation May Reveal The Truth.

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    1
    National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony S. Fauci. Photo Credit: Fogarty International Center from Bethesda, MD, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

    In the wake of revelations that the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci may have knowingly lied to Congress in sworn testimony, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is asking the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation.

    Paul has asked U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Matthew Graves to open an investigation into testimony Fauci made to the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) on May 11, 2021, in which Fauci denied funding research at viral laboratory in China where the COVID-19 virus reportedly originated.

    “The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Fauci said under oath in May.

    But a month later a June 14, 2023,  Government Accountability Office report concluded the Wuhan Institute of Virology did receieve NIH funding.

    There are concerns the COVID-19 virus “may have been genetically engineered because gain-of-function research was taking place in Wuhan before the pandemic,” Paul reports.

    Now Paul wants to determine if Fauci’s statements were illegal.

    “I warned Dr. Fauci of the criminal implications of lying to Congress and offered him an opportunity to recant his previous statement,” Paul wrote in a letter to Graves. “Dr. Fauci’s testimony is inconsistent with facts that have since come to light.”

    “Before Congress, Dr. Fauci denied funding gain-of-function research, to the press he claims to have a dispassionate view on the lab leak hypothesis, and in private he acknowledges gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to his colleagues. His own colleagues have acknowledged Dr. Fauci’s inconsistency. A congressional hearing, however, is not the place for a public servant to play political games – especially when the health and well-being of American citizens is on the line,” Paul writes.

    Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 it is a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.”

    The penalty for an offense includes criminal fines and imprisonment of up to five years.

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

    READ NEXT: Ukrainian Special Forces Reportedly ‘Pinned Down’ During Night Raid In Crimea By Security Guard In Underwear

    Congress Reveals Stunning New Information on January 6 Attacker

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    7

    Members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee investigating the federal government’s response to the January 6, 2021 incidents at the U.S. Capitol now reveal that a pair of pipe bombs planted at the Capitol Hill offices of the Republican and Democrat parties may have been a diversion to distract law enforcement from other events.

    They also reveal that while the bombs contained live explosives, it does not appear the timers were operable, and the FBI may not even have interviewed the witnesses who discovered them.

    In response, Chairmen Thomas Massie (R-KY), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Jim Jordan (R-OH), and Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray “revealing new information surrounding the FBI’s investigation into pipe bombs placed near the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) on January 5, 2021,” the Judiciary Committee reports.

    “On June 7, 2023, the Committee on the Judiciary conducted a transcribed interview of Steven D’Antuono, the former Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI Washington Field Office (WFO),” the Committee announced.

    “In that role, Mr. D’Antuono oversaw the WFO’s investigations into the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, including the placement of pipe bombs near the headquarters of the DNC and RNC on January 5, 2021. Mr. D’Antuono’s testimony provided new information about the FBI’s investigation into the pipe bombs and reinforces our concerns about the FBI’s handling of this matter,” the Committee revealed.

    In his transcribed interview, Steven D’Antuono “suggested that the FBI could not even determine whether the placement of the pipe bombs was a ‘diversionary’ tactic for the events of January 6,” the Committee also revealed.

    D’Antuono testified:

    MASSIE: Are you familiar with the diversion thesis, that these were set up to be a diversion?

    D’ANTUONO: Yeah, I’ve heard people say that, but if you watch – I’ve done a lot of media reports. I was trying to get the information out there, tips and stuff like that, right. I will not speculate. I’m not going to speculate on that. I think that’s speculation, at best, when people say that it’s a diversionary tactic. We’ll never know until we find the person that actually did – or persons that actually did it. So I can’t speculate on that. Could it have been? Yes, that’s one theory. Obviously, it’s one theory. But is it the only theory? I don’t – I really don’t know.

    MASSIE: It looks like the head Capitol Police [sic] believes it was a diversion.

    D’ANTUONO: So Steve Sund, chief of police, yes. I believe he wrote that in his book. Again, it’s pure speculation. There’s no intelligence – look, I ran the investigation for 2 years until I stepped out. We don’t know. We don’t even know the gender at this point as to – we could speculate, and there’s a lot of people that are speculating as to the gender.

    MASSIE: How confident are you that the individual depicted in the surveillance footage on January 5th set both of those pipe bombs in place?

    D’ANTUONO: So the video that we saw, I feel confident that by the video that we have, that that person planted those. 

    D’Antuono also testified on the “viability of the pipe bombs, which, according to reporting, were deemed to be ‘inoperable,’” the Committee reports.

    “D’Antuono referenced a report from the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, that the pipe bombs were viable, and ‘they could explode, and they could cause harm or death,’” the Committee notes, adding. “D’Antuono also acknowledged that the timer used on the pipe bomb could not have detonated the pipe bomb given the time already elapsed between placement and discovery.”

    He testified:

    MASSIE: Well, let me ask you this: Do you think it was technically possible for a kitchen timer . . . that has [a] 1-hour duration . . . to detonate a bomb 17 hours later?

    D’ANTUONO: No, I don’t. And I saw the same kitchen timer as you. I agree. I don’t know when they were supposed to go off. Maybe they weren’t supposed to go off. We can’t—we don’t know. We honestly don’t know, and that’s some of the pain . . . .

    D’Antuono’s testimony “provided additional details about the FBI’s use of geofencing technology to identify the pipe bomb suspect,” the Committee revealed.

    He testified:

    D’ANTUONO: So the – there’s a lot of phone data that came in. Yes, I’ve seen the same video. I’ve watched the same video. We put out the same video. It looks like a phone. Was it a real phone, a not a real phone, was it a ruse? Was it a – you know, I picked up my phone several times at meetings going, oh, yeah, I got to take this call, and walk out, right. The phone’s not on, right. So was the person just sitting there trying to pretend like they’re on a bench taking a phone call? We don’t know until we find the person, right, and ask them those questions.

    We did a complete geofence. We have complete data. Not complete, because there’s some data that was corrupted by one of the providers, not purposely by them, right. It just – unusual circumstance that we have corrupt data from one of the providers. I’m not sure – I can’t remember right now which one. But for that day, which is awful because we don’t have that information to search. So could it have been that provider? Yeah, with our luck, you know, with this investigation it probably was, right. So maybe if we did have that – that data wasn’t corrupted – and it wasn’t purposely corrupted. I don’t want any conspiracy theories, right. To my knowledge, it wasn’t corrupted, you know, but that could have been good information that we don’t have, right. So that is painful for us to not to have that. So we looked at everything.

    D’Antuono also testified that he did not definitively know if the FBI had interviewed the individual who discovered the pipe bomb at the DNC.

    He testified:

    MASSIE: So just to . . . put a fine point on it, you do not know whether they interviewed the person that discovered . . . the [bomb] at the DNC?

    D’ANTUONO: I don’t know.

    The Committee notes “D’Antuono conceded that it would be ‘investigation 101’ to interview the individuals who discovered the bombs, yet he was unable to confirm whether the FBI had taken this basic investigative step.”

    He explained:

    MASSIE: So – but the person who found – you either haven’t identified the person who found the second pipe bomb, or did you?

    D’ANTUONO: I – honestly, sir, I don’t know the granularity of everything my agents and analysts did in that matter. It’s just – it’s a whole host of stuff that’s going on. As the [Assistant Director in Charge], as like any senior leader, I’m getting briefed on things, and that part never came up, so –

    “D’Antuono’s testimony raises concerns about the FBI’s handling of the pipe bomb investigation, more than 890 days following the placement of the pipe bombs. To date, the FBI has failed to respond to the Committee’s requests for a briefing regarding the investigation,” the Committee concludes.

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

    Biden’s ‘Nixonian’ IRS Sends Agent to Intimidate ‘Twitter Files’ Journalist

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4

    ANALYSIS – The Musk ‘Twitter Files’ exposé showing links between the federal government, prominent Democrat politicians and unconstitutional censorship at Twitter, has been mostly ignored or dismissed by the establishment media.

    However, the Twitter censorship collusion saga is being pursued on Capitol Hill. And apparently, the issue is getting a bit hot for the increasingly Nixonian Team Biden. 

    So hot that Joe Biden’s IRS reportedly sent an IRS agent to harass and intimidate the long-time Rolling Stones reporter who has been doggedly pursuing this scandal since Elon Musk gave him access to a boatload of internal Twitter documents.

    An IRS agent suspiciously visited Matt Taibbi’s home the same day he was testifying before congress’ Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, according to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan.

    Why would Team Biden be worried?

    Well, Taibbi found in the Twitter Files that Big Tech has turned “the internet into an instrument of censorship and social control. [And] Unfortunately, our own government appears to be playing a lead role.”

    Plus, the timing of the IRS visit couldn’t be more sinister.

    Michael Shellenberger tweeted:

    While@mtaibbi & I were testifying before Congress on the weaponization of the federal government, an IRS agent showed up at his house. What an amazing coincidence

    Musk replied to the tweet, saying simply: “That’s very odd.”

    However, as the Blaze reported:

    Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) reckoned it was more than odd, tweeting, “This absolutely stinks to high heaven. The IRS has a troubling history of targeting the political enemies of Democrats. The IRS should NEVER be in the business of harassing the American people.”

    Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, responded, “Gangster government.”

    Jordan is demanding an explanation over the suspiciously timed IRS visit.

    It appears Team Biden is weaponizing the IRS to intimidate a witness testifying about how Team Biden is weaponizing the government. 

    The Blaze continued:


    Jordan noted that this interpretation may be apt in light of the “IRS’s history as a tool of government abuse” — citing its hounding of conservatives during the Obama administration” — and the “hostile reaction to Mr. Taibbi’s reporting among left-wing activists.”

    A federal agent appeared at Taibbi’s New Jersey home on March 9 and left a note, according to an editorial in The Wall Street Journal.

    The note reportedly instructed Taibbi to call the IRS four days later.

    When Taibbi did call, an agent told him his 2018 and 2021 tax returns had both been rejected due to identity theft concerns. Yet, Taibbi sees no reason for that visit, nor the alleged rejection which wasn’t communicated before to him or his accountant.

    And since when does the IRS send an agent to your house to leave a note over a simple tax return issue?

    Jordan called this an apparent executive branch “attempt to intimidate a witness before Congress.” On Monday he sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel and the Department of Treasury on Monday demanding answers.

    And he needs answers. As the Wall Street Journal noted:

    Mr. Jordan is right to want to see documents and communications relating to the Taibbi visit. The fear of many Americans is that, flush with its new $80 billion in funding from Congress, the IRS will unleash its fearsome power against political opponents. Mr. Taibbi deserves to know why the agency decided to pursue him with a very strange house call.

    This type of government harassment should worry all Americans, and its at the heart of why the GOP Congress has created the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

    We all need answers.

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

    Amanda Head: Everything You Need To Know About The Hunter Biden 1023!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0
    Amanda Head

    The never-ending drama surrounding Hunter Biden just keeps getting better.

    Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

    ‘Transnational Repression’ – FBI ‘Very Concerned’ by Illegal Chinese ‘Police Stations’ in US and Abroad

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Highlighting the real domestic security threat by China, the FBI is apparently ‘very concerned’ about, and investigating, the alleged Chinese Communist (Chicom) police stations likely set up illegally in New York, among other cities.

    This is yet another domestic security failure by a Biden administration obsessed with Jan 6 and persecuting conservatives instead of combatting real foreign threats to the nation.

    I have written about these dangerous and repressive Chicom police outposts in the U.S., Canada, and elsewhere before.  

    While ostensibly run by China’s Ministry of Interior via its police forces, and using ‘volunteers,’ the feared Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS) – which is both an intelligence and security service – is likely heavily involved with this effort.

    China claims the outposts are merely police service centers to help Chinese ex-pats living abroad. 

    But if you believe that, there is also a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

    These outposts are mostly being used to monitor, coerce, and sometimes forcibly remove Chinese dissidents living overseas.

    The heightened scrutiny on them follows a September report by Safeguard Defenders, a Europe-based human rights organization, that revealed the existence of dozens of Chinese police ‘service stations’ in major cities around the world, including New York.

    Safeguard Defenders reported that China has set up at least 54 “overseas police service stations” around the world, including one in New York City and three in Toronto. The group said its list was based on official statements, but the actual number may be higher.

    While tasked with cracking down on Chinese-related illegal activities overseas, the police stations represent “the latest iteration in [China’s] growing transnational repression, where it seeks to police and limit political expression far beyond its own borders,” the report said.

    While congressional Democrats obsessed myopically on Jan 6, Republicans in Congress have taken this Chicom threat seriously, requesting answers from Team Biden administration about their legality and influence.

    And finally, we see some response.

    As Reuters reported, Thursday, FBI Director Christopher Wray told lawmakers at the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that he is “very concerned about this. We are aware of the existence of these stations.” 

    However, Wray declined to detail the FBI’s investigations into this threat.

    Wray added: 

    I have to be careful about discussing our specific investigative work, but to me, it is outrageous to think that the Chinese police would attempt to set up shop, you know, in New York, let’s say, without proper coordination. It violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.

    When asked by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., if such stations violated U.S. law, Wray said the FBI was “looking into the legal parameters of it” and had talked to the Justice Department and the Department of State about unsanctioned operations.

    Wray added that the United States has indicted a number of Chinese government assets involved in harassing, stalking, surveilling, and blackmailing opponents of China’s leader-for-life Xi Jinping who are living in the United States.

    Many of these indicted assets were involved in a notorious Chicom effort to repatriate Chinese dissidents back to China known as “Operation Fox Hunt.”

    “It’s a real problem and something that we’re talking with our foreign partners about, as well, because we’re not the only country where this has occurred,” Wray said.

    According to AP most of the Chinese overseas police stations are concentrated in Europe. 

    The Irish government said last month it had asked China to shut down a police station operating in Dublin. The Dutch government said it was looking into whether two stations named in the report were established in the Netherlands.

    In the two months since the Safeguard Defenders’ report was released, at least 14 governments, including those of Britain, Canada and Germany, have opened investigations into the operations, according to Safeguard Defenders.

    VOA News reported that:

    In response to China’s increased use of transnational repression, the Biden administration has adopted a whole-of-government approach that includes visa restrictions, export controls, and the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators, Uzra Zeya, undersecretary of state for civilian security, democracy and human rights, told a congressional panel in June.

    These are all good first steps, but much more needs to be done to neutralize China’s extraterritorial repression in the U.S. and allied nations. 

    And do so quickly.

    Among additional moves, Team Biden must pressure all the nations listed as having extraterritorial Chinese police stations. This includes Germany, which sees no issues with the Chicom police outpost there.

    But as with its meekness in facing Russia, Germany has a history of turning a blind eye to the threat posed by the Chinese Communists as well.

    It’s time the U.S. makes a very public example of ‘delinquent’ Germany, as President Trump did earlier. 

    But don’t expect this current administration to do much.

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

    1...38394041Page 39 of 41
    © Great America News Desk 2022