The FBI division overseeing the investigation of former President Trump’s handling of classified material at his Mar-a-Lago residence is also a focus of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation of the bureau’s alleged abuses of power and political bias during its years-long Russiagate probe of Trump.

The FBI’s nine-hour, 30-agent raid of the former president’s Florida estate is part of a counterintelligence case run out of Washington—not Miami, as has been widely reported—according to FBI case documents and sources with knowledge of the matter. The bureau’s counterintelligence division led the 2016–2017 Russia “collusion” investigation of Trump, codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane.”

Although the former head of Crossfire Hurricane, Peter Strzok, was fired after the disclosure of his vitriolic anti-Trump tweets, several members of his team remain working in the counterintelligence unit, the sources say, even though they are under active investigation by both Durham and the bureau’s disciplinary arm, the Office of Professional Responsibility. The FBI declined to respond to questions about any role they may be taking in the Mar-a-Lago case.

In addition, a key member of the Crossfire team—Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten—has continued to be involved in politically sensitive investigations, including the ongoing federal probe of potentially incriminating content found on the abandoned laptop of Biden’s son Hunter Biden, according to recent correspondence between the Senate Judiciary Committee and FBI Director Christopher Wray. FBI whistleblowers have alleged that Auten tried to falsely discredit derogatory evidence against Hunter Biden during the 2020 campaign by labeling it Russian “disinformation,” an assessment that caused investigative activity to cease.

Auten has been allowed to work on sensitive cases even though he has been under internal investigation since 2019, when Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz referred him for disciplinary review for his role in vetting a Hillary Clinton campaign-funded dossier used by the FBI to obtain a series of wiretap warrants to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Horowitz singled out Auten for cutting a number of corners in the verification process and even allowing information he knew to be incorrect slip into warrant affidavits and mislead the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court.

In congressional testimony this month, Wray confirmed that “a number of” former Crossfire Hurricane team members are still employed at the bureau while undergoing disciplinary review. In the meantime, Wray has walled off the former Russiagate investigators only from participating in FISA wiretap applications, according to the sources.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has asked Wray for copies of recent case files and reports generated by Auten and whether he is included among the team the FBI has assembled to determine which of the seized Trump records fall within the scope of its counterespionage investigation and which fall outside of it.

Some former FBI officials worry that Auten, a top bureau expert on Russia and nuclear warfare, will have a hand in analyzing the boxes of documents agents seized from Trump’s home on Aug. 8 to help determine if any of the alleged Top Secret material he kept there might have been compromised, potentially putting national security at risk.

“It is a disgrace that Auten is still even employed by the bureau,” said 27-year FBI veteran Michael Biasello. “I would substitute other analysts and agents.”

An examination of the bureau agents involved in the Mar-a-Lago raid reveals other connections between them and FBI officials who played key roles in advancing the Russiagate hoax.

Sources told RealClearInvestigations that Jay Bratt, the top counterintelligence official in Justice’s national security division, who happens to be a Democratic National Committee donor, has been coordinating the Mar-a-Lago investigation with Alan Kohler, who heads the FBI’s counterintelligence division.

Kohler replaced Bill Priestap in that post after Priestap stepped down from the bureau amid criticism of his role in the Russiagate probe. Kohler had worked at FBI headquarters under Priestap, specializing in countering Russian intelligence threats.

Before that, he worked in London as the FBI’s liaison with British intelligence and law enforcement. The sources say Kohler was close to Stefan Halper, an academic and longtime FBI contractor whom the bureau ran as an informant in a failed effort to suborn Trump campaign officials. He also worked closely with Stephen Somma, a lead case agent in the Crossfire Hurricane probe whom Horowitz said was “primarily responsible” for some of the worst misconduct in the FISA warrant abuse scandal. Somma is a counterintelligence investigator in the FBI’s New York field office, where he has been reassigned to the China desk.

In 2019, Kohler was promoted to special agent in charge of the counterintelligence division at the FBI’s Washington field Office, where he worked alongside then-assistant agent-in-charge Timothy Thibault, who was reassigned by Wray just days prior to the Mar-a-Lago raid, after whistleblowers raised questions about political bias. They asserted that Thibault, who has taken aim at Trump and Republicans on social media, worked with Auten to falsely discredit evidence of alleged money laundering and other activities against Hunter Biden and prevent agents from investigating them.

The Washington field office’s counterintelligence division is now run by Anthony Riedlinger, who previously worked at FBI headquarters as a section chief under Priestap. Some of the agents involved in the raid on Trump’s home came from that Washington field office, according to the sources and FBI case documents.

Bratt, the top counterintelligence official at Justice, traveled to Mar-a-Lago in early June and personally inspected the storage facility while interacting with both Trump and one of his lawyers. Trump allowed the three FBI agents Bratt brought with him to open boxes in the storage room and look through them. They left with some documents. After leaving, Bratt made a request to Trump’s lawyer for increased security at the facility and asked to see surveillance footage from the security cameras. The lawyer complied with the requests. Months went by before the Justice Department took the politically explosive step of sending FBI agents unannounced to Trump’s home, seizing documents, photos, and other items not just from the storage facility but from multiple rooms on the property, including the former president’s office.

Former assistant FBI director Chris Swecker said the search warrant that agents obtained is quite wide-ranging. He pointed out that it authorized the seizure of any information in any form related to “national defense information,” which he said “does not necessarily include classified material.”

“This is a huge, broad search warrant and a huge, broad investigation leveled against the former president,” Swecker said.

What’s more, he said the physical search of the former president’s residence was far more sweeping than first reported and included unsupervised snooping in several dozen bedrooms, as well as numerous storage rooms and closets, including those of the former first lady. FBI agents took numerous boxes and containers of documents and other material, including several binders of photos and even three passports held by the former president.

Although Attorney General Merrick Garland has said that the DOJ seeks to “narrowly scope any search that is undertaken,” details of the warrant reveal agents had the authority to seize entire boxes of records—including those potentially covered by attorney-client privilege and executive privilege—if just a single document inside the container were marked with a classified marking.

Agents were allowed to also seize any containers or boxes “found together with” ones containing classified papers, according to ATTACHMENT B (“Property to be seized”) of the warrant. In addition, the FBI agents were given the authority to confiscate “any government and/or presidential records created between Jan. 20, 2017, and Jan. 20, 2021,” which covers Trump’s full term in office. That meant they were able to take any item related to the Trump administration.

All told, dozens of boxes and containers were removed from Trump’s residence, very few of which actually contained classified information, the sources said.

According to Federal Election Commission records, Bratt has given exclusively to Democrats, including at least $800 to the Democratic National Committee. The sources said he is close to David Laufman, whom he replaced as the top counterintelligence official at Justice. An Obama donor, Laufman helped oversee the Russiagate probe, as well as the Clinton email case, which also involved classified information.

A Senate investigator told RCI that Laufman was the “mastermind” behind the strategy to dust off and “weaponize” the rarely enforced statutory relic—the Foreign Agents Registration Act—against Trump campaign officials, a novel legal move that the investigator noted is similar to the department’s current attempts to enforce the Presidential Records Act against Trump—which is a civil, not a criminal, statute—by invoking the Espionage Act of 1917.

Laufman signed off on the wiretapping of Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, which the Department of Justice inspector general determined was conducted under false pretenses involving doctored email, suppression of exculpatory evidence, and other malfeasance.

Suddenly resurfacing as a media surrogate for the Justice Department defending the Mar-a-Lago raid, Laufman has been a key source for stories by the Washington Post, CNN, and other outlets.

On CNN, for instance, he claimed the documents seized from Trump’s storage were “particularly stunning and particularly egregious,” and their discovery ”completely validates the government’s investigation” into the former president—though he quickly added, ”Whether this investigation transforms into an outright criminal prosecution remains to be seen.”

Swecker said that there is strong reason to fear that the FBI’s counterintelligence division might politicize this case.

“For sure, the FBI has dug themselves into a huge hole because of how they handled the Clinton (email) case and then Crossfire Hurricane and Hunter Biden,” Swecker said. “Myself and many of my colleagues think they are treading on very thin ice here.”

“Unfortunately,” he added, “you can’t recuse an entire FBI division.”

Patel: ‘It’s Just Insane’

Former federal prosecutor and Trump administration official Kash Patel said the FBI may have a personal interest—and a potential conflict—in seizing the records stored by Trump.

He noted that Trump in October 2020 authorized the declassification of all the investigative records generated from the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane as well as the Clinton email investigation, codenamed “Midyear Exam,” and he said that the FBI may have confiscated some of those records in its raid, ensuring they won’t be made public. In addition, he said, the agency may be digging for other documents to try to justify, retroactively, their questionable, politically-tinged 2016 opening of the Trump-Russia “collusion” case, which came up embarrassingly short on evidence.

“Tragically, the same FBI characters that were involved in Russiagate are the same counterintel guys running this ‘national security investigation’ against Trump,” said Patel, who deposed Crossfire Hurricane team members as a former House Intelligence Committee investigator.

Patel noted that the Horowitz report indicated FBI analyst Auten hid exculpatory information about Trump’s adviser Page from other investigators and the FISA court, which should be more than enough to keep him at arm’s length from other investigations involving Trump.

“And to top it all off, this guy admits [to Horowitz’s investigators] he’s unrepentant about his role in making up the biggest hoax in election history, and Wray still lets him be a supervisor at the FBI,” he said. “It’s just insane.”

The Justice Department’s national security division has ultimate authority over the grand-jury probe of Trump for possible violations of the Espionage Act, including alleged mishandling of classified material—the same statutes invoked in the Clinton email investigation. (In that case, in contrast, the FBI never searched the former secretary of state’s Chappaqua, N.Y., mansion, where she set up an unsecured basement server to send and receive at least 110 classified emails and where she also received government documents by fax.)

Former FBI counterintelligence official and lawyer Mark Wauck said he is troubled by signs that the same cast of characters from the Russiagate scandal appears to be involved in the Mar-a-Lago investigation.

“If these people, who were part of a major hoax that involved criminal activity and displays of bias and seriously flawed judgment, are still involved, then that’s a major scandal,” he said in an interview.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, a key figure in a December 2020 White House meeting seeking to encourage then President Donald Trump to investigate allegations of election fraud, has filed a motion in the Department of Justice’s investigation of Trump, calling for the release of the key document justifying the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.

Agents on Aug. 8 seized more than two dozen boxes of records from Trump’s Florida resort, which contained 11 sets of documents with classified markings, according to an FBI property receipt made public on Aug. 12.

Trump has said that he had declassified all the confiscated records before leaving office and demanded the immediate release of unredacted affidavit behind the FBI warrant.

Byrne, who recently testified before the House Jan. 6 Committee, argued in his Aug. 18 motion that Trump had such powers to declassify as president, citing a meeting in the Oval Office in December 2020 where he said the former president twice exercised the same presidential authority.

The affidavit should be unsealed along with other records shedding light on the raid to promote transparency and accountability in government, Byrne argued in the court filing.

“Trump’s position was that … if this was not just some police state raid but there was a good reason for this raid, then, let’s see it,” Byrne told The Epoch Times.

“If Trump was telling the truth” and he in fact declassified all the documents, and the FBI submitted an affidavit accusing Trump of mishandling classified documents, “that means they were lying to the court,” he said.

“Trump was only mishandling classified documents if those documents were in fact, classified, but if he declassified then he was not mishandling classified documents.”

Byrne during the closed door meeting at the White House on Dec. 18, 2020, urged the former president to launch a probe into the election fraud allegations.

Related Coverage

EXCLUSIVE: Patrick Byrne on His December 2020 White House Meeting With Trump

Frustrated with the suggestion of having former Trump attorney Sidney Powell appointed special counsel to spearhead a limited investigation into alleged fraud, then White House Counsel Pat Cipollone allegedly told Trump: “Hey if you want to do this you don’t need my permission. You don’t even need a pen or a piece of paper. You can just say, ‘I hire Sidney Powell as White House Special Counsel,’ and it’s done,” Byrne wrote in the filing.

Later, responding to questions about Powell’s lack of a security clearance, General Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser who was present at the meeting, allegedly told Trump that he could “ do the same thing with a clearance.”

“You can grant any clearance you want, on the spot, verbally,” according to a sworn affidavit by Byrne filed with the court.

According to him, Trump acted on the suggestions, verbally appointing Powell a White House special counsel and granting her top secret security clearance. He says after that the White House attorneys angrily left the room but didn’t dispute Trump’s actions.

Trump ultimately rescinded the decision upon the persuasion of his then-personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, according to Byrne.

“He doesn’t have to sign anything, if he gives an order, that makes it legally effective,” Byrne told the court, describing it as “the Trump White House standard operating procedure.”

Backing Trump’s Claims

Mike Davis, a former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, has also backed Trump’s claims.

Trump “has the constitutional authority to declassify anything he wants,” he told NTD, a sister media of The Epoch Times, in a recent interview. “And so, when he sent boxes out of the White House, he declassified them.”

Davis said the Justice Department should have released the affidavit but would likely try to “hide it as much as they can.”

A federal judge on Friday signaled a willingness to release a redacted version of the affidavit despite opposition from the government lawyers, who argued that doing so could undermine ongoing investigations and imperil the safety of witnesses involved.

Byrne saw the judge’s move as a “judicious decision.”

“The FBI should not have to reveal whoever was their sources, they should protect their sources,” he said. “But beyond that, they shouldn’t be able to keep this affidavit a secret.

“I think the country needs to know what the FBI is saying that caused the attorney general to sign off on this extraordinary application. Unprecedented.”

Because of the raid and activities of the kind, the FBI has become “so delegitimized now in the eyes of so much of the public,” Byrne said. “It’s creating a terrible fear and oppression in the minds of the American public.”

“I talked to a lot of non-Republicans and they’re all starting to sound like Republicans. They see this as police state tactics.”

FBI Director Christopher Wray has come out in defense of his agency, saying agents have received “deplorable and dangerous” online threats in the wake of the raid.

“I like Christopher Wray,” said Byrne. “But I think he’s got a very narrow window to save his organization. And I hope he does.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A document made public on Aug. 18 for the first time shows that an FBI agent authored the request for a search warrant for former President Donald Trump’s resort in Florida.

The document, an application for a warrant (pdf), was made by an FBI special agent.

The document also shows that an agent, possibly the same one, authored the affidavit, or a sworn statement that outlined to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida why it should grant the application.

The identity of the agent who signed the application and the name of the agent who signed the affidavit are redacted.

The application was made on Aug. 5, and approved the same day by U.S. District Judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the unsealing of the application on Aug. 18.

Agents executed the warrant on Aug. 8, taking boxes of items and documents from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.

While opposing the release of the affidavit, government lawyers said in a recent filing that they did not object to making public other documents related to the raid, including the application, as long as minor redactions could be made “to protect government personnel.”

Releasing the affidavit, on the other hand, would harm an ongoing investigation into potential criminal conduct by Trump, the lawyers argued.

Reinhart on Friday ordered them to produce a redacted version of the affidavit to him by Aug. 25 at noon. He said he was leaning towards releasing a redacted copy, though a lawyer for media outlets calling for its release said the process will take weeks.

“I find that on the present record the Government has not met its burden of showing that the entire affidavit should remain sealed,” Reinhart said in a written order after a hearing.

A slew of documents have been filed under seal in the case. Some, including the warrant itself, were unsealed by Reinhart with light redactions on Aug. 12.

Neither federal lawyers nor Trump’s counsel opposed the release of those documents, which indicated that the FBI’s Washington Field Office was running point on the raid. The warrant was predicated on the belief that Trump has likely violated laws governing the transmittal of defense information, concealment of records, and destruction of records. Trump has said he is innocent and being politically targeted.

U.S. lawyers filed the application with the court on Aug. 15. Until Friday, none of its details could be viewed by the public.

Other documents were also unsealed: a criminal cover sheet showing U.S. Attorney Juan Gonzalez or the Southern District of Florida stating the case did not originate from several pending matters, a motion to seal the warrant and related documents, and the approval of the motion to seal.

Correction: This article has been updated to clarify the government did not object to the release of some warrant materials, and to show the judge approved the unsealing of the application on Aug. 18. The Epoch Times regrets the errors.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

For a damning picture of the modern left, it doesn’t get much clearer than this.

The Democratic Party, which spent the 2020 presidential election year trashing the police and cheering on rioting mobs wreaking havoc on American cities is now desperately trying to rebrand itself for the midterm election year as the party of loyalty to federal law enforcement agencies hellbent on pursuing former President Donald Trump and his supporters.

But as a Twitter post published Wednesday by a member of the previous Democratic administration shows, all it’s really proving is basic ignorance, or utter contempt, for the foundations the country was built on.

The post was published by Tommy Vietor, now a co-host of the blasphemously liberal podcast “Pod Save America,” but a man who rose to public attention as one of the more abrasively juvenile members of the Obama administration.

The tweet included a link to a CNN report (of course) about the surveillance footage that was taken of last week’s FBI raid on Trump’s home in South Florida’s Mar-a-Lago Club, and a comment from Vietor that probably said more about the mindset of the modern left than Tommy ever intended.

The staff at the Trump household had refused an FBI request to turn off surveillance cameras in the home, which would have left the agents free to do anything they chose without fear of exposure.

“Very confused about how you can refuse a direct order from the FBI while they are in the process of executing a search warrant, especially given the context here when the concern is about unauthorized release of highly classified information,” Vietor wrote.

Very confused about how you can refuse a direct order from the FBI while they are in the process of executing a search warrant, especially given the context here when the concern is about unauthorized release of highly classified information. https://t.co/J6l1gtMpMc

— Tommy Vietor (@TVietor08) August 17, 2022

He’s “very confused” about an American household disobeying an order from the FBI? And a “direct order” at that?

It’s a good bet he wasn’t at all confused by the George Floyd rioters failing to follow the orders of local police as they set about looting and torching businesses in the name of “social justice” in the summer of 2020.

For many Democrats, anarchy in the streets, theft and destruction of property, even outright murder are completely acceptable (just ask the gangsters who benefited from the bail organization Vice President Kamala Harris supported).

But failing to fall into lockstep obedience with the feds when they show up armed with a search warrant and plenty of weaponry? That passes Vietor’s comprehension.

Naturally, being a blue-checked liberal, Vietor has plenty of simpering sympathizers in the social media world (even the Twitter bots Elon Musk talks about have more brains than that herd), but fortunately for the future of the republic, there were more than a few responses to set Vietor straight:

See Teachers’ Union Ad Attack ‘Extremists’ Who Are a Threat to Education, But It’s Not Who You Think

Lol “direct order”. Under what authority?

— Eager Beaver (@_eager_beaver) August 18, 2022

You say, “No thank you, I prefer to film my home during your official duties.” The official duties of the officer are not private, and first amendment permits filming officers.

— Zag (@hoperidesagain) August 18, 2022

It sounds to me like the .@FBI is hiding more than they accused Trump of.

— Paul M. (@ArizonaPaul) August 18, 2022

And then there was this classic:

If they told you to do the hokey pokey, would you do that too?

— AmericanIPA8 (@AmericanIpa8) August 18, 2022

Now, it’s easy to dislike Vietor and the rest of the coterie of sophomoric arrogance that surrounded the Obama White House. (The State Department’s Marie Harf was another, along with Harf’s old boss Jen Psaki.)

With Obama administration posts that included membership in the National Security Council and special assistant to the president, Vietor helped saddle the country with the bogus Iran nuclear deal that even Ben Rhodes, deputy national security advisor to the Obama White House, admitted had been sold in an “echo chamber” of mainstream media ignorance. (And to New York Times Magazine, no less.)

But he’s worth paying attention to, if only to see where the leftists of the Obama years are leading their party and — regrettably — the country today.

His podcast is an influential voice in leftist politics — the DigitalTrends website ranked it as the third-best political podcast for 2022. (No. 1 was NPR’s “The NPR Politics Podcast,” which says everything that needs to be said about DigitalTrends’ political preferences.)

To his marginal credit, Vietor appeared to learn something from his Twitter post, as one respondent explained a search warrant does not give law enforcement — even the big, bad FBI — powers to do more than search the premises involved.

“A search warrant authorizes…a search, per 4th Amd. It does not create other powers or cancel out civil liberties,” the user wrote.

“I remember when people used to be skeptical of the police, *especially* when they were dealing with someone we thought was a criminal.”

— Daniel Laufer (@lauferdaniel) August 17, 2022

Vietor seemed to get the message — or maybe he’d just finally realized how cringingly submissive his initial tweet came off and remembered that he’s supposed to be a man.

“Interesting — thank you. Wonder if they made this ‘order’ because of the risk of exposing the information, but that does seem a little ridiculous,” he wrote.

Interesting — thank you. Wonder if they made this “order” because of the risk of exposing the information, but that does seem a little ridiculous.

— Tommy Vietor (@TVietor08) August 18, 2022

“A little ridiculous” should have been a first reaction to the blatantly political operation. “Outrageous!” “Infuriating!” “Totalitarian BS!” would have been even better.

But for the leftist mindset of 2022, steeped in the openly anti-American tradition birthed by the disastrous Obama years, the initial reaction is not to defend American freedoms but to question why Americans can refuse a “direct order.”

This is a man who served in the Obama White House, remember, where the abuse of power at federal agencies — such as the IRS, with the likes of Lois Lerner; the FBI with the “leadership” of James Comey; and the Justice Department under political grifters like Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch — had to have been considered almost commonplace.

It’s a basic distortion of the country’s foundation of law and order, pervasive among leftists in the mainstream media, in popular culture and in the Democratic Party from local governments through the House, the Senate and the White House:

They have nothing but contempt for the law; they worship orders.

There are many sorry countries, with many sorry histories, where that attitude is the norm. The United States isn’t one of them.

A new report connects a case involving tapes made by former President Bill Clinton with the FBI’s raid on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

“Judge’s ruling over audio tapes hidden in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer could significantly impact Donald Trump’s effort to contest FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago,” journalist John Solomon tweeted Thursday.

Judge’s ruling over audio tapes hidden in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer could significantly impact Donald Trump’s effort to contest FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago | Just The News https://t.co/MBCisbJ1rg

— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) August 18, 2022

The ruling involved audio tapes Clinton stashed in a sock drawer that he used for his autobiography and that were also mined by writer Taylor Branch in Branch’s book, “Wrestling History: The Bill Clinton Tapes,” about Clinton, according to CBS.

The tapes became controversial when the watchdog group Judicial Watch went to court to demand the tapes be given to the National Archives and Records Administration, so the American people could hear them.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rejected the suit in March 2012.

In a report for Just the News, Solomon pointed to a few paragraphs of the 27-page ruling as significant because they indicated a president had wide latitude concerning documents under the Presidential Records Act.

“Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion,” Jackson wrote.

“Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records,” the judge wrote.

The ruling also indicated seizing such records was not appropriate.

“Because the audiotapes are not physically in the government’s possession, defendant submits that it would be required to seize them directly from President Clinton in order to assume custody and control over them,” Jackson noted. “Defendant considers this to be an ‘extraordinary request’ that is ‘unfounded, contrary to the PRA’s express terms, and contrary to traditional principles of administrative law.’ The Court agrees.”

So how does that connect to Trump? As Solomon noted, the former president has said records that were seized were both declassified and personal.

Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, said the connection between the cases is profound.

Forget the Trump Nuclear Codes Rumor – Clinton Allegedly Lost Nuclear Codes for Months During Lewinsky Scandal

“The government, the lawyer for the Archives, said, ‘You know what? If documents are in the former President’s hands, where they’re presumptively personal, we just, you know, we presume they’re personal,’” Fitton said, Just the News reported.

“The Justice Department previously had told us in response to a question about Bill Clinton: ‘Tough luck, it’s his.’ But they changed their mind for Donald Trump?” he said. “The law and court decision suggests that Trump is right. And frankly, based on this analysis, Trump should get every single document they took from him back. It’s all personal records.”

As noted by Politico, Fitton felt differently at the time.

“We respectfully disagree with the Court,” he said then. “The idea that a president could spirit official recordings and documents out of the White House and that there is nothing that can be legally done about it is a misreading of the Presidential Records Act.  It is ironic that a law passed in response to the Nixon tapes controversy would allow Bill Clinton to keep tapes of his official actions secret and unavailable to the American people.”

Kevin Brock, former assistant FBI director for intelligence, said the search warrant used by the FBI was faulty and over broad, according to Just the News.

“Specificity is important in order to protect Fourth Amendment rights from exuberant government overreach designed to find whatever they can,” he said.

The warrant “apparently makes a novel legal assertion that any presidential record kept by a former president is against the law,” Brock said.

“You have to wonder what the other living former presidents think about that. They have the right and, apparently, clear desire to remain silent.”

Several establishment media giants have asked a court to unseal all of the documents related to the FBI’s search of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home last week.

The move came after the Justice Department filed its own request for some of the materials to be released, CNN reported.

Lawyers representing major media outlets like CNN, The Washington Post and NBC News appeared on Thursday before Judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the warrant for the Mar-a-Lago raid, according to The Epoch Times.

Reinhart said he was “inclined” to release some of the affidavit from the raid and instructed the DOJ to redact any parts of the document that would undermine its investigation, The Washington Post reported. The judge said he would make a decision after the department submits its proposed redactions next Thursday.

Trump himself has said that he wants the affidavit unsealed.

“In the interest of TRANSPARENCY, I call for the immediate release of the completely Unredacted Affidavit pertaining to this horrible and shocking BREAK-IN,” Trump posted on Truth Social on Tuesday.

The news outlets cited “the public’s clear and powerful interest in understanding what occurred in these circumstances” in their filing with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The DOJ itself set things in motion last week when Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the department’s request for documents to be released. Garland said the DOJ wants the search warrant and property receipt from the FBI’s raid of Mar-a-Lago.

However, unlike the media companies, which asked for all the documents to be unsealed, the DOJ did not seek the release of the affidavit filed in support of the search warrant.

In fact, federal prosecutors investigating Trump asked a judge on Monday not to release the affidavit for national security reasons, The Hill reported.

“There remain compelling reasons, including to protect the integrity of an ongoing law enforcement investigation that implicates national security, that support keeping the affidavit sealed,” a filing from the prosecutors reads.

But the media companies argued in their request that “the tremendous public interest in these records in particular outweighs any purported interest in keeping them secret.”

For once, these outlets may be correct.

Though they wave the flag of “public interest” in requesting the unsealing of the documents, make no mistake — the media would simply make more money and be able to drag this story out longer if all the documents were revealed.

High-Ranking Disney Exec Jumps Ship to Join Major Conservative Company

But though the media’s motivation may be selfish, it actually would benefit the American people to have access to the documents.

The raid is a very public issue, and since it concerns a former president, the citizenry should (at least in principle) have the information, particularly surrounding what led to the search warrant.

Some have suggested that federal prosecutors’ attempt to keep the affidavit sealed is actually just an attempt to cover up some sort of corruption in the process of the search.

The media outlets are even being reasonable in their request for the documents. If national security is at risk, the government has the right to redact parts of the documents. But that doesn’t mean they should be sealed altogether.

“Even when the government can demonstrate compelling interests, the court must examine ‘whether there are alternative means available’ to address them, such as redaction of a document rather than sealing it in its entirety,” the filing reads.

It doesn’t make sense any longer to keep all the documents sealed. The details of the raid, how it was conducted, the nature of the documents searched for and more have already been made very public. Trying to hide anything else at this point smells of corruption.

The media outlets are right. It’s time to unseal the documents.

“Transparency serves the public interest in understanding and accepting the results. That’s good for the government and for the court,” Charles Tobin, a lawyer representing the outlets, said in court on Thursday, according to The Washington Post.

“You can’t trust what you cannot see.”

Since we learned of the unprecedented raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago compound last week, millions of Americans have questioned the political neutrality of the Department of Justice. Federal law enforcement is facing a legitimacy crisis—at least in the eyes of half the country—thanks to the fake and overhyped scandals it drummed up during the Trump years.

So MSNBC’s Morning Joe invited the former FBI official Peter Strzok to assure viewers the bureau was on the level. “Absolutely the American public should trust what the FBI is doing,” he said Monday. 

You may remember Strzok from such FBI scandals as Russiagate, the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, or his affair with FBI lawyer Lisa Page. As the man in charge of investigations into the two candidates in the 2016 presidential election, he was constantly texting Page about his hatred for Trump. Asking this man to vouch for the integrity of the FBI is like putting Bernie Madoff in charge of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Strzok’s commentary is a microcosm of the mainstream media’s approach to coverage of the Mar-a-Lago raid, about which we still know precious little— except, we are told, that the integrity of our law enforcement officials shall not be questioned! 

“The FBI is not the enemy,” was the headline of the Washington Post’s lead editorial. The New York Times over the weekend labored to link a nutjob who shot up an FBI office in Ohio with, you know, the “bellicose, dehumanizing, and apocalyptic” language of people like us. It’s extraordinary to hear that sort of tut-tutting from the same crowd that insisted for most of Trump’s presidency that he was a fascist and a Kremlin agent. 

Strzok would know something about that—in fact, he’s free to run his mouth on television because the FBI canned him after the Justice Department’s inspector general concluded his anti-Trump texts cast a cloud over the bureau’s investigation into Trump. Strzok personally interfered with the agent overseeing the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn to stop him from closing the file after the evidence against him didn’t pan out.

And his team pushed to include opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign in an application for a secret surveillance warrant on former Trump adviser Carter Page. That debacle led to the nullification of two of the four warrants and a scathing inspector general’s report that “identified multiple instances” in which the factual assertions the bureau made in the application for the Page warrants “were inaccurate, incomplete, or unsupported by appropriate documentation, based upon information the FBI had in its possession at the time the application was filed.”

Perhaps, when we know all the facts, we will find that the FBI raid on Trump’s Florida home was justified. Until then, we reserve our right to question the integrity of the federal law enforcement officials who have demonstrated their willingness to behave like political hacks and abuse the power with which they are entrusted to punish their political opponents. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Former President Donald Trump will likely not be arrested on charges stemming from the FBI’s raid last week, according to a former Harvard Law School professor.

“Yes, it’s possible [but] I don’t think it’s going to happen,” Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax on Tuesday about whether Trump would be arrested. People who believe that prosecution and an indictment would keep Trump away from the 2024 campaign are “dead wrong,” he remarked.

“He can run for president even if he’s indicted, convicted, and wearing striped shirts, prison garb,” he added to the channel. “The Constitution provides only four bases for disqualification for president, and being convicted of a crime is not one of them. Congress can’t change the criteria that are in the Constitution for the election of the president.”

Echoing statements made by Trump and some Republicans, Dershowitz said the affidavit used to justify the FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago should be released.

“You can redact the names of agents, you can redact sources and methods, but what we want to know is what the basis of probable cause that they have,” he said.

A U.S. magistrate judge in the case, Bruce Reinhart, ordered the unsealing of a warrant and property receipt. The warrant shows Trump is under federal investigation for possibly several U.S. Code violations, while the receipt shows agents found allegedly classified and top secret material at Trump’s home.

Affidavit

Reinhart scheduled a Thursday hearing on whether the affidavit and other materials related to the case should be released.

Lawyers for the Department of Justice on Monday argued that releasing the affidavit would damage the agency’s investigation and argued that unsealing a version with redactions “would not serve any public interest.” Several media outlets, watchdogs, and other entities have filed motions to release the affidavit.

“Disclosure of the government’s affidavit at this stage would also likely chill future cooperation by witnesses whose assistance may be sought as this investigation progresses, as well as in other high-profile investigations,” the Justice Department wrote. “The fact that this investigation implicates highly classified materials further underscores the need to protect the integrity of the investigation and exacerbates the potential harm if information is disclosed to the public prematurely or improperly.”

The former president on Monday said that FBI agents took three passports from him before a spokesperson confirmed that a Department of Justice official said they were returned. Hours later, he called for the Justice Department to release the affidavit, which would provide insight into why the Department of Justice believes it is justified in trying to obtain the search warrant.

“There is no way to justify the unannounced RAID of Mar-a-Lago, the home of the 45th President of the United States … in the interest of TRANSPARENCY, I call for the immediate release of the completely Unredacted Affidavit pertaining to this horrible and shocking BREAK-IN. Also, the Judge on this case should recuse!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former Vice President Mike Pence broke with former President Donald Trump and other Republicans and said Wednesday they should stop criticizing the FBI following the bureau’s raid targeting the former president’s home.

“I also want to remind my fellow Republicans, we can hold the attorney general accountable for the decision he made without attacking the rank-and-file law enforcement personnel at the FBI,” said Pence during an event at St. Anselm College.

“The Republican Party is the party of law and order,” Pence stated, according to The Associated Press. “Our party stands with the men and women who stand on the thin blue line at the federal and state and local level, and these attacks on the FBI must stop. Calls to defund the FBI are just as wrong as calls to defund the police.”

Pence also told a crowd he would give “due consideration” if he is asked to testify before the House Jan. 6 committee.

Trump and some Republicans say the FBI has unfairly targeted conservatives and has not done enough to curb left-wing extremists, including those who threatened pro-life groups and pregnancy centers this summer after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

Some have also pointed to how some Jan. 6 detainees have been treated while under federal custody.

Two-Tiered System?

Former Trump administration official Kash Patel told The Epoch Times last week, that after the raid, the United States is descending toward the third world and that Americans are suffering under a two-tier system that treats Republicans and Trump less favorably than Democrats.

Examples he gave include the FBI’s apparent hesitance to investigate Hunter Biden’s laptop and overseas business deals as well as the bureau illegally spying on Trump’s former aide, Carter Page.

With his comment on Wednesday, Pence appears to be strategically distancing himself from his former boss. Observers say Pence, with recent speeches and events, is trying to gear up for a 2024 presidential run.

Last month, Pence and Trump appeared at separate rallies in Arizona, with Pence backing GOP gubernatorial candidate Karrin Taylor Robson, who was ultimately defeated by Trump-backed Kari Lake.

Their paths diverged on Jan. 6, 2021, as Trump criticized the former vice president for not objecting to or delaying the certification of the election.  Earlier this year, in February, Pence again claimed that he had no power during the Jan. 6 certification process.

“If the Vice President [Mike Pence] had ‘absolutely no right’ to change the Presidential Election results in the Senate, despite fraud and many other irregularities, how come the Democrats and RINO Republicans … are desperately trying to pass legislation that will not allow the Vice President to change the results of the election?” Trump said in a statement in February after Pence’s comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Joe Biden’s administration on Aug. 15 urged a federal court to keep the affidavit that led to the approval of a search warrant on former President Donald Trump’s resort shielded from the public.

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers said unsealing the affidavit would “irreparably harm the government’s ongoing criminal investigation.”

“Even when the public is already aware of the general nature of the investigation, revealing the specific contents of a search warrant affidavit could alter the investigation’s trajectory, reveal ongoing and future investigative efforts, and undermine agents’ ability to collect evidence or obtain truthful testimony,” they wrote in a 13-page filing to U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who is overseeing the case.

“In addition to the implications for the investigation, the release of this type of investigative material could have ‘devastating consequences’ for the reputations and rights of individuals whose actions and statements are described,” they added, citing a previous decision in a different case.

A slew of parties, including Judicial Watch, media outlets, and the Florida Center for Governmental Accountability, have lodged motions after the Aug. 8 raid of Mar-a-Lago, arguing it is in the public interest to unseal the affidavit and other related documents.

The government and Trump’s lawyers agreed on some of the documents, and Reinhart unsealed the search warrant and several attachments on Aug. 12, revealing that the government believes Trump violated multiple laws.

‘Different Set of Considerations’

“The department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the former president’s public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances, and the substantial public interest in this matter,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in prepared remarks three days after the raid.

Those documents were made public with few redactions.

“The affidavit supporting the search warrant presents a very different set of considerations. There remain compelling reasons, including to protect the integrity of an ongoing law enforcement investigation that implicates national security, that support keeping the affidavit sealed,” DOJ lawyers said in the new filing.

Affidavits are documents filed in court that outline why certain actions are needed. In this case, a law enforcement official filed an affidavit attempting to convince Reinhart to approve the warrant. The affidavit was successful.

The government has considered whether the affidavit could be released with redactions but “the redactions necessary to mitigate harms to the integrity of the investigation would be so extensive as to render the remaining unsealed text devoid of meaningful content, and the release of such a redacted version would not serve any public interest,” government lawyers said in a footnote in an Aug. 15 brief.

“Nevertheless, should the Court order partial unsealing of the affidavit, the government respectfully requests an opportunity to provide the Court with proposed redactions,” they said.

The filing was part of a flurry of activity in the case on Aug. 15, which included several other entries being sealed until further notice.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Fourteen FBI whistleblowers have come forward to provide information to Republican congressional investigations, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said on Aug. 14, about a week after the FBI raided former President Donald Trump’s Florida home.

“Fourteen FBI agents have come to our office as whistleblowers, and they are good people,” Jordan told Fox News. “There are lots of good people in the FBI. It’s the top that is the problem.”

“Some of these good agents are coming to us, telling us … what’s going on—the political nature now of the Justice Department … talking about the school board issue, about a whole host of issues,” he added.

Two months ago, Jordan said that six FBI whistleblowers approached the committee. Two came forward about a memo related to alleged violence and intimidation at school board meetings and four in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach. In the Senate, meanwhile, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in July that whistleblowers had come to his office to provide information, including disclosures relating to investigations into Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings.

“It’s becoming a well-worn trail of agents who say this has got to stop, and thank goodness for them and that American people recognize it, and I believe they’re going to make a big change on Nov. 8,” Jordan said, referring to the midterm elections.

In June, Jordan sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray warning that several former FBI officials were coming forward, while alleging the agency is “purging” employees who have conservative views.

“In one such example, the FBI targeted and suspended the security clearance of a retired war servicemember who had disclosed personal views that the FBI was not being entirely forthcoming about the events of January 6,” Jordan wrote in a statement. “The FBI questioned the whistleblower’s allegiance to the United States despite the fact that the whistleblower honorably served in the United States military for several years—including deployments in Kuwait and Iraq—valiantly earning multiple military commendation medals.”

It comes as Republicans stepped up calls on Aug. 14 for the release of an FBI affidavit showing the justification for its seizure of documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.

A search warrant released on Aug. 12 after the unprecedented raid on Aug. 8 showed that Trump allegedly had 11 sets of classified documents at his home. The Justice Department also claimed to have had probable cause to conduct the search based on possible Espionage Act and obstruction of justice violations.

Republicans are calling for the disclosure of more detailed information that persuaded a federal judge to issue the search warrant, which may show sources of information and details about the nature of the documents and other classified information.

Reuters contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former President Trump said Monday morning that he “will do whatever” he can “to help the country” following the FBI’s unprecedented search of his Mar-a-Lago property last week.

“The country is in a very dangerous position. There is tremendous anger, like I’ve never seen before, over all of the scams, and this new one—years of scams and witch hunts, and now this,” Trump told Fox News in an interview on Monday. “If there is anything we can do to help, I, and my people, would certainly be willing to do that,” the former president added.

Trump said that with the raid, “there has never been a time like this where law enforcement has been used to break into the house of a former president of the United States.”

“I think they would want the same thing—I’ve never seen anything like this,” Trump continued. “It is a very dangerous time for our country … I will do whatever I can to help the country.”

Last week, Trump announced on social media that the FBI raided his Florida property. It wasn’t until several days later, on Thursday, that Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a public statement about the search, confirming that he signed off on the Justice Department’s attempt to seek a warrant in the case.

On Friday, Aug. 12, a U.S. magistrate judge in the case unsealed the warrant and property receipt, showing that the FBI is targeting Trump for alleged Espionage Act violations and obstruction of justice while agents recovered allegedly classified or top secret documents from Mar-a-Lago. But Trump said that he declassified the documents as president and said he was cooperating with the federal government.

The affidavit in the case that would possibly show the federal government’s justification for its raid and seizure of documents at Mar-a-Lago has not been unsealed.

More Details

“First, I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter,” Garland said during the press conference last week. “Second, the Department does not take such a decision lightly. Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search, and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.”

On Sunday, the former president said that privileged materials were taken by FBI agents, including documents that could fall under attorney-client privilege.

“Oh great! It has just been learned that the FBI, in its now famous raid of Mar-a-Lago, took boxes of privileged ‘attorney-client’ material, and also ‘executive’ privileged material, which they knowingly should not have taken,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Attorney-client privilege is a legal privilege that allows communications between a client and their attorney confidential.

“By copy of this TRUTH (post), I respectfully request that these documents be immediately returned to the location from which they were taken. Thank you!” Trump also wrote Sunday morning.

Republicans say the raid suggests that the FBI and Department of Justice have been politicized and demanded oversight investigations.

However, Trump told Fox News on Monday that Americans are “so angry at what is taking place” and that “the temperature has to be brought down in the country.” Because, he added, “if it isn’t, terrible things are going to happen.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Heritage Foundation Oversight Project Director Mike Howell is demanding copies of all communications between the White House, Department of Justice (DOJ), the FBI, and former President Donald Trump’s staff about the Aug. 8 FBI raid on the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla.

To that end, Howell—who is a veteran of major congressional oversight projects and a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—has filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), which is the federal government’s central custodian of official documents, and each of the relevant agencies.

“The Biden Department of Justice has crossed the Rubicon. This raid showed that the administration is unafraid to weaponize the power of the deep state against its political enemies—even a former sitting president,” Howell said in a statement issued shortly after Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to answer any questions about the raid during a brief appearance in the DOJ media conference room on Aug. 11.

“We are filing this request because the American people deserve the answers Joe Biden and Merrick Garland will not give them. There is no reason NARA cannot fulfill our request for these documents, as they should have nothing to do with any ongoing investigation,” Howell continued.

“Ultimately, it looks like the Biden administration raided President Trump’s home over a document dispute—let’s see if they comply with our legal document demand, or if they’re complete hypocrites. Rest assured, we will fight to get the truth about this unprecedented act,” he added.

The Heritage Oversight Project requested that federal officials process the FOIAs on an expedited basis, which would allow 10 days before the agencies must either affirm or deny the requests, or face litigation.

The request to NARA was signed by Heritage’s Senior Investigative Counsel, Roman Jankowski, who is also a contributing writer for the conservative nonprofit’s Daily Signal.

“This raid, and what transpired before and after it, has affected American public confidence. As per the Trafalgar Group poll conducted after the Trump raid, 53.9 percent of likely general election voters believe Trump’s political enemies are behind the FBI raid on President Trump’s private home, and only 35.3 percent of likely general election voters believe it is due to an impartial justice system,” Jankowski said in the request.

Howell signed the lengthy, eight-page request to DOJ, which seeks all of the communications mentioning Trump since Jan. 20, 2021, between and among DOJ’s Office of the Attorney General, Office of the Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Associate Attorney General, Office of the Solicitor General, Office of Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Policy, Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and U.S. Marshals Service.

Heritage President Kevin Roberts issued a separate statement regarding the Mar-a-Lago raid in which he observed that it “represents yet another example of the federal government weaponizing law enforcement to punish political enemies, silence critics, and send a message to those whom it views as enemies. The Biden administration and the D.C. swamp are making it very clear that they will use all the power of the state to intimidate anyone who stands in their way.”

Roberts added that “the timing is suspect at best, given the upcoming elections and the Senate’s passage of a bill that would authorize the hiring of 87,000 new IRS agents, who will be unleashed to target working and middle-class Americans in order to fund the left’s radical agenda.”

Roberts’ comment may have been a product of the fact the Heritage Foundation and other conservative think tanks were subjected to multiple time-consuming and costly IRS audits during the Clinton administration, none of which ever turned up any wrongdoing.

In a related development, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the top Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, similarly demanded in an Aug. 10 letter that NARA turn over all communications and documents concerning the raid. Comer was joined on the letter by the panel’s other 19 Republican members.

“Law enforcement raiding a former president’s residence is unprecedented. Committee Republicans are concerned that NARA would utilize the FBI to gather documents that the president, by the very nature of his constitutional role, could declassify himself, if this was indeed the case as media has reported. The Biden administration is continuing to weaponize the FBI against political rivals,” the Comer letter told NARA.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said he intends to investigate the FBI’s raid of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort if Republicans take back the Senate during the 2022 midterms.

In an interview on Saturday, Grassley said that with Trump, “the FBI over a long period of time has kind of a double standard. You know, you can go back to the Steele Dossier.”

“And it just seems to me like they there’s political bias in the FBI,” he told Breitbart News. “And then I have recently—you’ve heard me give evidence of political bias of starting a Trump investigation and then quitting a Hunter Biden investigation. So it’s legitimate to raise the question about the extent to which there’s still political bias and what we’re doing now.”

Grassley then took issue with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s comments on transparency, saying that “he should make sure that the affidavits follow up on the warrant.”

So far, the Department of Justice has not released the affidavit that would explain why the FBI needed to obtain a warrant to search Trump’s property. Garland and the FBI have remained mostly silent on the raid, with Garland issuing a brief statement during a news conference on Aug. 11.

On Aug. 12, a judge in the case unsealed part of the warrant the FBI used to search Trump’s property. A property receipt said the FBI seized classified documents, although it’s not clear what they were.

The search and seizure warrant shows FBI agents targeted “the ’45 Office,’ all storage rooms, and all other rooms or areas within the premises used or available to be used by FPOTUS (former president of the United States) and his staff and in which boxes or documents could be stored, including all structures or buildings on the estate.”

Agents were granted authority to seize “all physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed,” according to the warrant. That includes documents with classification markings and presidential records that were drafted between Jan. 20, 2017, and Jan. 20, 2021—the entire time Trump was in office.

On Truth Social, Trump argued that those documents were declassified and termed the FBI’s latest actions as a “witch hunt.” Trump on Sunday wrote that FBI agents obtained “boxes of privileged ‘attorney-client’ material, and also ‘executive’ privileged material” and demanded their return.

“By copy of this TRUTH (post), I respectfully request that these documents be immediately returned to the location from which they were taken. Thank you!” he wrote.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said in an interview with CNN on Aug. 11 that he never witnessed “intentional destruction of important papers” during his time in office.

Mulvaney, who served the Trump administration for 15 months and has been a critic of former President Donald Trump since, told CNN’s “New Day” host Brianna Keilar, “I never saw the intentional destruction of documents for the purpose of keeping anything from the National Archives or the public in the future.”

According to Mulvaney, all White House staff were well aware of how to comply with paper destruction regulations.

“We knew the rules, we taped them back together, and we made copies. As long as copies are preserved, you can pretty much do whatever you want to with the other documents,” he said.

Grilled by Keilar if he had ever seen Trump rip documents, Mulvaney said he had, but asserted that documents were all handled “in the ordinary course of business.”

“The flushing,” the host said, referring to claims made by New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman. “You never heard about him flushing documents?”

“Not a single time,” he said.

Denied Report

Mulvaney’s account contradicts Haberman’s report claiming, “White House staffers regularly found ripped-up printing paper in the toilet of the presidential residence during Trump’s term in office.”

The statement came with a pair of photos from an anonymous source purporting to show notes written by Trump in a toilet allegedly at the White House.

Trump swiftly denied her account, calling it “another fake story” when it first emerged back in February.

“Also, another fake story, that I flushed papers and documents down a White House toilet, is categorically untrue and simply made up by a reporter in order to get publicity for a mostly fictitious book,” Trump said in an emailed statement to the New York Post.

Haberman doubled down on her claim in an interview with CNN on Aug. 8, the same day that the FBI conducted a search at Trump Mar a Lago residence and just ahead of the October publication of her book on Trump, “Confidence Man.”

Her account this time was again dismissed by a spokesman for the former president.

“You have to be pretty desperate to sell books if pictures of paper in a toilet bowl is part of your promotional plan,” Taylor Budowich told Axios, referring to Haberman, adding that there are “enough people willing to fabricate stories like this in order to impress the media class—a media class who is willing to run with anything, as long as it’s anti-Trump.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Top House Democrats asked intelligence officials to review alleged national security damage from former President Donald Trump’s mishandling of government documents, a day after the release of the search warrant used by the FBI on its Mar-a-Lago raid.

The federal agents executed a search warrant of Trump’s Florida estate last Monday, before an inventory accompanying the search warrant was made public on Aug. 12. A property receipt obtained by The Epoch Times shows the FBI removed approximately 20 boxes, including one set of materials labeled as “various classified/TS/SCI documents,” referencing top secret or sensitive compartmented information.

“Former President Trump’s conduct has potentially put our national security at grave risk. This issue demands a full review, in addition to the ongoing law enforcement inquiry,” House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) wrote on Aug. 13 to Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines.

Despite Trump declaring the documents taken by federal agents were “all declassified,” the three-page letter (pdf) seeks a classified briefing on the review “as soon as possible.” The two lawmakers specifically asked for the DNI’s office to initiate a damage assessment, in a bid to evaluate any damage to national security related to Trump’s handling of official records.

The latest action is the first major move by House committees following the Aug. 8 raid of Trump’s Florida resort.

The Saturday letter also cited previous reports by legacy media claiming that FBI agents were searching for highly classified documents on “nuclear weapons” at Mar-a-Lago, a claim that has been slammed by the former commander-in-chief, who called it a “hoax.”

The Democrat-led House Oversight Committee stepped up in February an investigation into Trump’s alleged violation of federal records laws by removing White House records—something Trump denied.

While federal law bars the removal of classified documents to unauthorized locations, Trump could argue that as president, he was the ultimate declassification authority.

Prior to Trump, his lawyers have said that the former president used his authority as president to declassify the material before he departed office in early 2021.

“They didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything,” the former president said in a statement on Friday afternoon. “They could have had [the documents] at anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former President Donald Trump said Sunday that privileged material was taken during the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago property and demanded it back.

“Oh great! It has just been learned that the FBI, in its now famous raid of Mar-a-Lago, took boxes of privileged ‘attorney-client’ material, and also ‘executive’ privileged material, which they knowingly should not have taken,” the former president wrote on Truth Social, as he posted a Fox News article that cited anonymous sources for the claims.

Attorney-client privilege makes reference to a legal privilege that allows communications between a client and their attorney confidential.

“By copy of this TRUTH (post), I respectfully request that these documents be immediately returned to the location from which they were taken. Thank you!” Trump also wrote Sunday morning.

The FBI said it took classified records from Trump’s Florida residence during an unprecedented raid last week, which was announced by the former president himself. It’s not clear what the documents entailed.

According to a property receipt that was unsealed on Aug. 12 by a judge in the case, some of those documents were marked top secret, and a warrant in the case said Trump is being investigated for possibly violating provisions under the Espionage Act as well as obstruction of justice.

Since the raid was announced on Aug. 8, both the FBI and Department of Justice have remained mostly tight-lipped about what the FBI was searching for and why.

Tight-Lipped

It wasn’t until the afternoon of Aug. 11 that Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a terse statement during a news conference, saying he personally authorized the raid. He did not elaborate on the FBI’s investigation. The affidavit in the case has not been unsealed—only the warrant and property receipt.

“First, I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter,” Garland said during the press conference. “Second, the Department does not take such a decision lightly. Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search, and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.”

The warrant and receipt were unsealed on Aug. 12 by Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart after several news outlets and transparency watchdogs requested that it be released to the public.

“The locations to be searched include the ‘45 Office,’ all storage rooms, and all other rooms or areas within the premises used or available to be used by FPOTUS and his staff and in which boxes or documents could be stored, including all structures or buildings on the estate,” the warrant stated.

The warrant also provided agents the authority to take “all physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed” that violate the U.S. Code. That includes classified documents and materials with presidential seals created throughout the entirety of Trump’s presidency.

The FBI and Department of Justice have not returned requests for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former White House official Kash Patel on Sunday revealed former President Donald Trump has been involved in a battle with the federal government to declassify documents before last week’s FBI raid.

Patel, who was a top official in the Department of Defense, said Trump declassified numerous documents.

“President Trump made me his representative a month ago, and we’ve been in a bureaucratic battle,” he told Fox News on Sunday morning. “We found whole sets of documents we got out to the American public … about 60 percent.”

Patel, who hosts “Kash’s Corner” for Epoch TV, added that Trump “made it his mission to declassify and be transparent.”

“In October 2020, he issued a sweeping declassification order for every single Russiagate document and every single [former Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton document,” Patel said, adding that “whole sets of documents” were declassified under his watch.

“And this is a key fact … President Trump, as a sitting president, is a unilateral authority for declassification,” he continued. “He can literally stand over a set of documents and say ‘these are now declassified,’ and that is done with definitive action immediately.”

Patel further noted that due to the Department of Justice’s latest actions and the FBI’s ongoing investigation, Americans “will never be allowed to see the Russiagate docs or any other docs that President Trump lawfully declassified, and they will hide it from the public.”

Other Details

Late last week, a U.S. magistrate judge ordered the release of the FBI warrant and property record used to raid Trump’s Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach. The documents showed the FBI seized alleged classified documents and said the former president may be under investigation for possibly violating the 1917 Espionage Act and obstruction of justice, although neither the Justice Department nor FBI have released the affidavit in the case.

In late 2020, Trump issued a declassification memo that referred to materials connected to the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation, which has been the subject of intense controversy and scrutiny. Republicans and Trump have long asserted the investigation used fabricated information and anonymous leaks to the press to denigrate the former president.

“I hereby declassify the remaining materials in the binder. This is my final determination under the declassification review and I have directed the Attorney General to implement the redactions proposed in the FBI’s January 17 submission and return to the White House an appropriately redacted copy,” then-President Trump wrote on Dec. 30, 2020, or just three weeks before Joe Biden was sworn in as president.

After the warrant and property receipt were unsealed, Trump posted to his Truth Social page that the materials the FBI allegedly took were “all declassified.”

“They didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything. They could have had it anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago. It was in secured storage, with an additional lock put on as per their request,” he wrote on the website on Aug. 12.

On Sunday, the former president wrote that among other items that were taken by agents, attorney-client material and executive privileged material were removed from Mar-a-Lago.

“By copy of this TRUTH, I respectfully request that these documents be immediately returned to the location from which they were taken. Thank you!” Trump wrote.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Democrats have one priority, and it’s not the United States, Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) says. Instead, Democrats want to destroy former President Donald Trump, and they’ll do “everything they can” to accomplish that goal.

Nehls, along with the Republican Study Committee, spent three hours with Trump after the raid and said the former president not only firmly grasps the situation but also fully understands that Democrats are out to “get him.”

“They’ve been out to get him with one impeachment, two impeachments, the Russia hoax. … Democrats will do everything they can to keep him off the ballot in 2024,” Nehls told The Epoch Times and NTD as part of a special EpochTV report on the raid.

Nehls, who has a law enforcement background and was a sheriff for several years, said that to obtain a search warrant, you first have to obtain a “probable cause” affidavit. Once you have a signed affidavit, you can get a search warrant to look for specific items in a person’s home.

Unfortunately, according to Nehls, probable cause affidavits can be “very, very weak,” but if you find a “friendly judge” to sign it, it doesn’t matter; you can search a person’s home for whatever is on the warrant.

Furthermore, Nehls said everyone in law enforcement knows a judge who will rubber stamp affidavits and search warrants and said that’s what happened to Trump and the “raid” on Mar-a-Lago.

“They found the friendly judge there, with Reinhardt in the Southern District. … These guys are big Obama supporters, … and they got the judge to sign the warrant.”

Garland Approves Unsealing of Warrant

Concerning Attorney General Merrick Garland stating he approves unsealing the warrant, Nehls said that’s only part of what needs to be released.

Specifically, Nehls said he wants to know if the person who tipped off the Department of Justice (DOJ) is an FBI informant.

“Who is the individual that said … the former president has a bunch of these documents inside … the basement of Mar-a-Lago and … they’re classified or not classified, and we need to do something?”

Nehls said seeing the affidavit and the warrant would let people know what the FBI was “really looking for.”

Indeed, Nehls is skeptical about the FBI’s stated reason for raiding Trump. Instead, he thinks it’s likely that the FBI is creating a false pretext to destroy Trump.

Nehls pointed out that Democrats, the DOJ, and the FBI have targeted Trump and his family for the past few years, claiming they colluded with Russia. In the end, however, the evidence exonerated the past president.

Now, the DOJ and Democrats are up to the same old tricks. But instead of “Russia Collusion,” it’s “Jan. 6.”

Nehls argued that the FBI has lowered its standards and is now going after political adversaries at the behest of former President Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Nehls concluded that he expects Biden and his lackeys to go after Trump “until they can find a way to destroy him.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Roger Stone, a longtime ally of Donald Trump, said he found it “a little perplexing” that the former president’s grant of clemency for him topped the list of Mar-a-Lago materials FBI agents seized.

The clemency letter that Trump issued in December 2020 was among around 20 boxes of items the agents removed during a raid of Trump’s Florida residence on Aug. 8, along with documents marked as classified, top secret, and confidential, although Trump said that the documents were “all declassified.”

In an interview with The Epoch Times shortly after the FBI search warrant was unsealed, the political lobbyist wondered why the clemency letter became a focus of the federal agency’s attention.

“Why these documents are being struggled over between the president and the National Archives, I have no idea other than to say everything was done perfectly legally,” said Stone.

No ‘Corrupt Bargain’

Trump issued the pardon in December 2020 to Stone as his term as the 45th U.S. president was nearing the end, saying that the then-68-year-old had “numerous medical conditions” and had been “treated very unfairly” due to “prosecutorial misconduct.”  ​

Stone, who served briefly as a Trump campaign adviser in 2015, was arrested in January 2019 in connection with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia in influencing the 2016 presidential election.

Mueller’s report in April 2019 stated there was no evidence Trump or his associates had knowingly conspired with Russia.

Stone acknowledged that he had made misstatements to Congress under oath but maintained that they were “all innocuous” and “immaterial.”

“One cannot lie to Congress about Russian collusion, if no Russian collusion took place, can they? So I was framed solely for the purpose of pressuring me into giving false testimony against the president,” Stone said during the interview.

According to Stone, in July that year, prosecutors told his attorneys that if he agreed to testify falsely against the president regarding some 26 phone conversations they had during the 2016 presidential campaign, they would argue for his leniency with the judge, an offer he said he refused. Trump commuted Stone’s sentence that same month, a day before he was due to begin serving a term of three years and four months over the Russian interference probe.

He speculated that the FBI agents may be looking into the records indicating “a corrupt bargain or some impropriety,” which he insisted was “not true.”

“There was no communication whatsoever between me and the president, or my lawyers and the president’s lawyers, or myself and the president through any other third party from the time I was charged, till the time that he called me to tell me he was commuting [my] sentence. No communications whatsoever,” he said.

“So any insinuation that there’s something improper about the clemency in my case, that would be categorically false.”

‘It’s About Intimidation’

Stone had a taste of the FBI raid himself on the day of his arrest in 2019.

At six o’clock that morning, 29 FBI agents swarmed his residence in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, with 17 armored vehicles, a government helicopter overhead, and two amphibious units. The agents were there for 13 hours, he recalled.

Like how the agents went through former First Lady Melania Trump’s wardrobe, Stone said they also searched all of the personal items and clothing of his wife.

He stressed that nothing from the raid on his home, office, and Manhattan apartment was used against him at trial.

“So it’s about intimidation,” he said. “The whole purpose of this is to intimidate the former president, which, having known him for 42 years, Donald Trump cannot be intimidated. If anything, they have galvanized his resolve to run again.”

He sees the raid as “the latest in a series to disqualify Trump” from running for president in 2024, following the two impeachment attempts while Trump was in office and the ongoing Jan. 6 Committee probe.

One federal code listed in the search warrant concerns the willful and unlawful concealment, removal, or mutilation of public records, which could cause the individual to “forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

But a hypothetical conviction under the statute is still not a legal basis barring the former president from seeking a second term, some legal experts have argued, as the statute cannot override or supersede qualifications for the presidency as set out in the Constitution—minimum age of 35, and being a natural-born citizen who has lived in the country for at least 14 years.

It’s a signal that Trump’s opponents are “desperate” for legal ways to thwart his presidential ambitions, suggested Stone.

“They must not feel that they have any kind of viable case against the president regarding Jan. 6, and therefore they’re using this new rubric as an excuse to try to eliminate him as a candidate in 2024.”

Stone said his time going through the political prosecution has revealed to him a “two-tiered justice system,” contrasting what he saw as a differential treatment between those on the Democrat camp, such as Hunter Biden, the second son of Joe Biden who had engaged in foreign ventures while his father was holding a public office, and the handling of those on the Republican side.

“If you’re a liberal Democrat, you have nothing to fear from the FBI or the justice system. If you’re a supporter of Donald Trump, if you’re a Republican, well then you’re a target.”

The FBI declined to comment. The Epoch Times has contacted the Department of Justice over Stone’s statements.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A former director of national intelligence said Aug. 12 that it is “virtually impossible” to prosecute people for mishandling classified documents, and asserted that former President Donald Trump has the “ultimately declassification authority” in terms of such documents.

“The president does have ultimate declassification authority. He can literally declassify—and President Trump had that authority, and could declassify anything you want while he was president,” John Ratcliffe, a Republican congressman before Trump appointed him to be director of national intelligence, said on Fox News.

According to documents unsealed earlier Friday, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was raided by FBI agents on Aug. 8 because of potential violations of several laws, including the Espionage Act, which some legal experts say relates to possessing classified defense information.

An inventory showed that agents seized what they listed as classified, secret, and top secret documents.

Ratcliffe said on Fox that before the search warrant materials were made public, he didn’t believe the raid was about classified materials.

“It has to be more than that because the Department of Justice and the FBI have already set a standard that makes it virtually impossible to prosecute a case like that,” he said, pointing to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s possession of classified documents was handled by the FBI, including then-Director James Comey.

“As people talk about Espionage Act and classified documents and all of that, the standard was set in 2016. Remember the Department of Justice and the FBI took the official position that Hillary Clinton, who was in possession of classified documents … that [being] in possession of that, that wasn’t enough, and that being grossly negligent and being careless, Jim Comey told us, that’s not enough under the Espionage Act. You have to know you’re violating the law,” Ratcliffe said.

“Even if you assume the worst case scenario for President Trump, that there were classified documents in his possession at Mar-a-Lago, that only puts him where Hillary Clinton was. And what the FBI and the Department of Justice would have to show is that he knew the documents were there and he didn’t think they were declassified,” he added.

Trump wrote on Truth Social that all the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago were declassified.

“He had a standing order that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken into the residence were deemed to be declassified,” a Trump spokesperson told Just the News. “The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the President of the United States. The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat, with classification authority delegated BY THE PRESIDENT, needs to approve of declassification is absurd.”

Others weren’t sure.

“He can’t just wave a wand and say it’s declassified,” Immerman said. “There has to be a formal process. That’s the only way the system can work,” Richard Immerman, an assistant deputy director of national intelligence during the Obama administration, told NBC News. “I’ve seen thousands of declassified documents. They’re all marked ‘declassified’ with the date they were declassified.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said the FBI search of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was “unbelievable” and “unprecedented,” while demanding that Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray face Congress so they can be grilled about the raid.

“This makes absolutely no sense,” Jordan said of the raid in Friday remarks to Fox News, while calling on Garland and Wray to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, on which Jordan serves as ranking member.

“Why not come talk to us and answer the questions that the American people have about this unprecedented event that took place on Monday night?” the Republican lawmaker said.

Jordan made a similar demand during an earlier appearance on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle, where he called on the pair to testify before the Judiciary Committee “so we can ask them the questions that the American people deserve answers to.”

“This is unbelievable,” Jordan said. “We deserve answers now.”

With his demand for Garland’s and Wray’s testimony, Jordan joins other Republicans who have expressed outrage at what they say is score-settling by Trump’s political foes.

‘Assault’ and ‘Surprise Attack’?

The Justice Department and FBI have remained mostly quiet about the aim and probable cause behind the Mar-a-Lago raid and have declined to publicly comment to The Epoch Times and other news outlets.

Garland did tell reporters on Aug. 11, however, that he “personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter” and that the Justice Department “does not take such a decision lightly.”

Wray said a day earlier that he wouldn’t discuss any details of the FBI search of Trump’s property, saying it’s “not something I can talk about, and I’d refer you to the department.”

It was Trump who on Aug. 8 revealed the FBI had executed a search warrant at his Palm Beach home, with the former president portraying the raid as an act of political retribution.

“Such an assault could only take place in broken, Third-World Countries. Sadly, America has now become one of those Countries, corrupt at a level not seen before,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

In a later statement, Trump called the search a “surprise attack, POLITICS, and all the while our Country is going to HELL!”

‘Illegally Possessed’ Documents and Records?

The raid appears to have been part of a probe into whether Trump unlawfully removed White House records as he left office, some of which investigators suspect were classified, according to the FBI search warrant made public on Aug. 12.

The warrant was issued in relation to a possible violation of federal laws, including the Espionage Act, with the warrant authorizing the seizure of documents and records at Mar-a-Lago that may have been “illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 793, 2071, and 1519.”

One of the statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 793, is part of the Espionage Act of 1917, which prohibits a series of actions regarding sensitive government records, including gathering, transmitting, or losing information related to national defense.

Another, 18 U.S.C. § 2071, prohibits concealing, removing, mutilating, obliterating, or destroying government records.

Finally, 18 U.S.C. § 1519 prohibits altering or destroying records with the intent to obstruct or influence federal investigations.

The most serious of these carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, though the listing of the statutes in the warrant is not equivalent to a formal charge.

Trump has not been accused of any crimes in connection with the raid.

‘Obvious Damage Control’

An inventory list attached to the unsealed warrant says FBI agents seized around 20 boxes from Trump’s residence, including materials marked classified, secret, and top secret.

Lawyers representing Trump have argued that he used his presidential authority to declassify the materials before he left office in 2021.

“The Biden administration is in obvious damage control after their botched raid where they seized the President’s picture books, a ‘hand-written note,’ and declassified documents,” Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich told Fox News on Friday.

“This raid of President Trump’s home was not just unprecedented, but unnecessary—and they are leaking lies and innuendos to try to explain away the weaponization of government against their dominant political opponent. This is outrageous,” Budowich added.

Trump on Friday said the documents the FBI seized were “all declassified” and denounced as a “hoax” anonymously sourced reporting from The Washington Post claiming some of the documents related to nuclear weapons.

Jack Phillips and Zachary Stieber contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former President Donald Trump on Friday said that the allegedly classified materials the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) sought in the agency’s raid of his Mar-a-Lago resort were “all declassified.”

“Number one, it was all declassified,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday, shortly before the court unsealed the search warrant the FBI used for its Aug. 8 raid of his Florida resort.

Trump’s comments directly contradict legacy media news reports following the raid that the documents were top-secret, with The Washington Post citing anonymous sources who claimed that the documents contained information about nuclear weapons. Trump panned the claim, calling it a “Hoax.”

“Nuclear weapons issue is a Hoax, just like Russia, Russia, Russia was a Hoax, two Impeachments were a Hoax, the Mueller investigation was a Hoax, and much more,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday morning.

The nature of the document is important, for it determines whether the FBI’s raid is justified by a cause heavy enough to outweigh the political ramifications of such an action conducted in the home of a former U.S. president.

The Search Warrant

Trump’s comments came shortly before Bruce Reinhard, the magistrate judge who approved the search warrant, unsealed the search warrant following requests from both the Department of Justice and Trump.

While the warrant did not pinpoint what probable cause the FBI established to conduct the raid, it showed the items that federal agents took from the former president’s resort, which included “Various classified/TS/SCI documents,” binders of photos, a “Grant of Clemency” to Roger Stone, a “Confidential Document,” “Miscellaneous Secret Documents,” and “Miscellaneous Top Secret Documents.”

The question becomes whether Trump, by simply possessing any of these documents, would have violated any federal codes listed in the search warrant, which the federal agents pursued:

• 18 USC 2071: Concealment, removal, or mutilation (of public records)
• 18 USC 793: Gathering, transmitting, or losing defense information
• 18 USC 1519: Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy

Presidential Declassification Powers

According to Mike Davis, President of the Article III Project and a former law clerk under Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, the president of the United States can declassify records by simply leaving the White House with them.

“The President of the United States has both the constitutional (and statutory) power to declassify anything he wants,” Davis wrote on Twitter on Aug. 11. “If President Trump left the White House with classified records, they are declassified by his actions.”

“As discussed, the Office of Former President Trump—like every other former president’s federal office—is equipped and secure enough to handle these declassified records,” Davis added. “This is a routine dispute with bureaucrats at the National Archives whether these are presidential records.”

Davis cited Department of Navy v. Egan (ruling), a 1988 Supreme Court decision that Davis says shows the president possesses the constitutional power to “classify and declassify” records “regardless of any statute passed by Congress.”

“The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States,’” The Supreme Court ruled at the time. “His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”

“When President Trump had the records sent to Mar-a-Lago, they were declassified,” Davis explained. “Former presidents don’t have this power. But Trump did this as the president.”

Trump: It’s a Political ‘Witch Hunt’

Trump and his allies have characterized the raid as a “witch hunt” driven by political motives, especially considering no former presidents had been prosecuted for the reason that the FBI allegedly told sources close to Trump that motivated the raid; namely, Trump was nominally required by the Presidential Records Act to return the materials to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) upon the conclusion of his term, but allegedly didn’t.

“NARA’s singling out of President Trump’s handling of official records stands starkly in contrast to the way NARA has treated far clearer violations committed by politicians and officials who are not Republicans,” 20 Republicans, including numerous Committee ranking members, wrote in an Aug. 10 letter addressed to U.S. Acting Archivist Debra Wall, first published by Politico. The lawmakers cited reports that point to recent U.S. administrations’ violations of the Presidential Records Act, listing Bill Clinton as an example.

“The seeming weaponization of the federal government against [Joe] Biden’s political rivals cannot go unchecked, and if NARA is working to further these efforts, it will be only the latest agency to lose its credibility in the eyes of the American people under the Biden Administration,” the Republican lawmakers wrote.

Meanwhile, Trump revealed earlier this week that the FBI had recently been given a tour of where the records were stored, with the FBI only suggesting that Trump further secure the storage space.

“In early June, the DOJ and FBI asked my legal representatives to put an extra lock on the door leading to the place where boxes were stored in Mar-a-Lago – We agreed,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Aug. 10.

“They were shown the secured area, and the boxes themselves,” Trump added. “Then on Monday, without notification or warning, an army of agents broke into Mar-a-Lago, went to the same storage area, and ripped open the lock that they had asked to be installed. A surprise attack, POLITICS, and all the while our Country is going to HELL!”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Christina Bobb, an attorney for former President Donald Trump, dismissed a Washington Post report alleging that the FBI was looking for records including classified documents related to nuclear weapons during its raid of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property on Aug. 8.

Bobb alleged the report, which cited unnamed people familiar with the FBI investigation, was an attempt by the Democrats to cause fear.

“This is what the Democrats do. They don’t have any good reason for doing what they did. The pathetic presser that Merrick Garland held for three minutes was insufficient, so they had to create fear,” Bobb told Fox News on Aug. 11.

“Normally, they should come out with exactly what happened, and why, and explain themselves and if it was a good reason, they would have solid ground,” Bobb continued. “They are not on solid ground.”

“So they had to come up with something that would potentially terrify the American public into freely giving up their constitutional freedoms,” Bobb added.

On Thursday, Attorney General Merrick Garland told reporters in a brief statement how he “personally approved” the FBI raid against Trump’s resort in Florida.

“I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter,” Garland said. “The Department does not take such a decision lightly.”

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee also took notice of the close timing between Garland’s press appearance and the Washington Post’s publication of the report.

“So hours after Merrick Garland says that DOJ [Department of Justice] only speaks through its filings in court, they go out and leak this story to the Washington Post,” House GOPs on the Judiciary Committee wrote on Twitter.

Bobb said it would be a different scenario if the United States were on the brink of war.

“If we are on the verge of nuclear war, giving up the nuclear codes, maybe it’s acceptable that they violated the president’s constitutional rights,” she said. “It was not acceptable, and they’re trying to come up with reasons to make it sound appropriate and make it sound OK, because they don’t actually have a good reason for doing what they did.

Garland also told reporters on Thursday that the DOJ has asked a federal court to unseal the search warrant the FBI obtained and executed on Trump’s property. The warrant was signed off by U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, a judge at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Many Republican lawmakers have since criticized Garland for failing to tell the public more information on the FBI raid.

“AG Garland spent four minutes reading an empty and inconsequential statement, and then refused to take questions,” Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) wrote on Twitter. “We STILL don’t know the reason for the raid, the nature and extent of probable cause, and why the DOJ felt it necessary to take such extreme and intrusive measures.”

“AG Merrick Garland gave a useless statement on the Mar-a-Lago raid that included zero useful information, then refused to take questions,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) wrote on Twitter. “The House will be back in Washington tomorrow, he should come over and answer some real questions. And bring FBI Director Wray with him.”

House lawmakers are scheduled to reconvene briefly on Aug. 12 from summer recess.

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee took exception to one of Garland’s comments, when he said the Justice Department applies the law “evenly without fear or favor.”

“Think Merrick Garland will apply the same standards to Hunter Biden?” the Republicans wrote. “Nope.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Aug. 11 said he personally approved the FBI’s raid earlier this week of the personal Mar-a-Lago residence of former President Donald Trump.

The FBI usually seeks approval from the top before conducting a raid on a political target. Garland’s confirmation was the first public statement from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI on the unprecedented search.

Garland told reporters that his agency filed a motion on Aug. 11 to unseal the court-approved search warrant that was executed at a home “belonging to the former president,” after Trump confirmed the raid, “as is his right.”

“I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter. … The Department does not take such a decision lightly,” Garland said.

He said copies of the warrant were provided to Trump’s lawyers on Aug. 8 by FBI agents.

The attorney general claimed that FBI agents are “patriotic” and “dedicated” public servants who protect Americans against violent crime and terrorism. “I am honored to work alongside them,” he said.

So far, the Justice Department and FBI have remained mostly quiet about the purpose and probable cause behind the raid and have repeatedly declined to publicly comment to The Epoch Times and other news outlets. Only alleged anonymous sources within the FBI and Justice Department have sporadically provided details about the incident to legacy media since Aug. 8.

A day before Garland’s statement, FBI Director Christopher Wray declined to speak about the FBI search, saying that it is “not something I can talk about, and I’d refer you to the department.”

The White House, meanwhile, said it wasn’t aware of the FBI raid. On Aug. 9, when asked by reporters about what Garland told him, President Joe Biden didn’t answer.

The judge who reportedly signed off on the warrant in the case, Bruce Reinhart, ordered the Justice Department on Aug. 10 to file a response before Aug. 15 after Judicial Watch and others asked the court to unseal the warrant.

Republicans in Congress have repeatedly called on the Justice Department to release documents and other information about the raid, with some arguing that it appears to be politically motivated. Even some Democrats, including former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, asserted that the agencies need to provide answers about the raid.

Because of the extraordinary targeting of a former U.S. president, many have speculated that officials at the highest levels of the Biden administration, including Garland and Wray, would have signed off on it. Meanwhile, news of the incident has triggered a political firestorm with just 90 days to go before the 2022 midterms and a possible announcement that Trump might run for president in 2024.

What Comes Next

It was Trump on Aug. 8 who confirmed the FBI raid at his Palm Beach home. The former president reportedly wasn’t there when it happened, and his lawyers said they weren’t able to observe the agents.

“Such an assault could only take place in broken, Third-World Countries. Sadly, America has now become one of those Countries, corrupt at a level not seen before. They even broke into my safe!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website.

Members of Trump’s family and his lawyers said in multiple media interviews that agents went into several rooms in Mar-a-Lago, including Trump’s bedroom and office. The agents, his son Eric Trump said, didn’t provide lawyers with a copy of the warrant before the search and wouldn’t answer questions.

When speaking on Fox News about the search, Eric Trump said it was done because the “National Archives wanted to … corroborate whether or not Donald Trump had any documents in his possession.” Trump was referring to the National Archives having confirmed in February that classified documents were allegedly among several boxes that Trump took to his Florida residence last year.

As for Garland, some Republican lawmakers warned that he could be investigated or even impeached over the Aug. 8 raid if the GOP takes the House in 2022. The party of the president tends to lose seats in midterm elections, and Democrats currently hold slim majorities in both chambers of Congress.

“I’ve seen enough. The Department of Justice has reached an intolerable state of weaponized politicization,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a statement. “When Republicans take back the House, we will conduct immediate oversight of this department, follow the facts, and leave no stone unturned.”

In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) suggested that if it’s found that Garland engaged in anything improper, he could face impeachment.

“Now, this is really something that’s going to require an investigation,” Paul said. “And I wouldn’t be surprised if the investigation leads to abuse of power that this could even lead to an impeachment of the attorney general.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A person close to the Trump family suggested the FBI may have planted “listening devices” during a raid targeting former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence earlier this week.

Lawyers for the former president previously said that FBI agents would not allow Trump’s team to observe or supervise their search of Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach. One lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, told Fox News on Thursday that agents are believed to have searched Trump’s bedroom, office, and a storage room.

Because the FBI allegedly “didn’t allow anybody to supervise what they were doing, and they specifically requested to turn off the security cameras,” Kimbery Guilfoyle, Donald Trump Jr.’s fiancée and an advisor to the former president’s 2020 campaign, told Newsmax. “Why? Because they didn’t want to be caught with what they were doing. How do you know there weren’t listening devices planted or evidence planted there?

“It’s something that has to be investigated and checked out, and we want to see the affidavit and what was their probable cause to be able to go in there and break into the president’s home,” she added. For her claim, Guilfoyle did not provide evidence.

Trump’s son Eric Trump told the Daily Mail on Wednesday that security cameras remained on when the agents carried out their search, accusing the agents of refusing to hand over a warrant and kicking lawyers off the premises. Agents, he said, told Trump’s team to turn off the cameras but they remained on, and those agents went to places “they shouldn’t have been.”

No Response

The FBI and Department of Justice have not responded to requests for comment. The judge who approved the FBI warrant, Bruce Reinhart, ordered the Justice Department on Wednesday to respond to requests to unseal the warrant in the case.

The White House said Joe Biden was not aware of the FBI search before it was announced earlier this week. Top Republicans have called on the Department of Justice to release documents pertaining to the raid or to have Attorney General Merrick Garland speak about the matter.

Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray have remained silent on the Mar-a-Lago search. But on Wednesday, Wray complained to reporters in a press conference about alleged violent threats levied against federal law enforcement agents in the wake of the raid.

The former president on Wednesday took to his Truth Social app and speculated on whether the FBI planted evidence. Members of Trump’s team said he wasn’t there while the raid occurred.

“The FBI and others from the Federal Government would not let anyone, including my lawyers, be anywhere near the areas that were rummaged and otherwise looked at during the raid on Mar-a-Lago,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Everyone was asked to leave the premises, they wanted to be left alone, without any witnesses to see what they were doing, taking or, hopefully not, ‘planting.’”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Justice Department has to respond to motions to unseal a warrant that triggered the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, according to a magistrate judge who reportedly approved the search.

Judicial Watch and the Albany Times Union newspaper filed a motion to unseal the document earlier this week, which was granted by a judge in the case.

“On or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August 15, 2022, the Government shall file a Response to the Motion to Unseal,” wrote U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart on Wednesday afternoon, referring to the Department of Justice.

“The response may be filed ex parte and under seal as necessary to avoid disclosing matters already under seal. In that event, the Government shall file a redacted Response in the public record. If it chooses, the Government may file a consolidated Response to all Motions to Seal,” he wrote.

Neither the FBI nor Justice Department has issued public comments about the raid, which was first confirmed by Trump on Monday evening.

The FBI declined to comment when contacted by The Epoch Times, and the Justice Department has not responded to several requests for comment.

As for the White House, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden was not aware of the raid before Trump’s announcement. Her claim was refuted by Trump on his social media platform, Truth Social.

“What I can tell you definitively and for sure, he was not aware of this,” Jean-Pierre said of Biden. “Nobody at the White House was. Nobody was given a heads up and we did not know about what happened yesterday.”

Requests

On Wednesday, the Times Union’s managing editor, Brendan J. Lyons, wrote to Reinhart to ask for the warrant to be unsealed.

“Given that the search warrant(s) have been executed, and the target of that search has full knowledge of what occurred, there is no impediment to any ongoing investigation from the disclosure of the search warrant order or the returns. As such, these records should be unsealed,” the letter to the Florida judge reads.

Judicial Watch asked for the warrant as part of an investigation into “the potential politicization of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice and whether the FBI and the Justice Department are abusing their law enforcement powers to harass a likely future political opponent of President [Joe] Biden.”

“If the Court were to unseal the materials, Judicial Watch would obtain the materials, analyze them, and make them available to the public,” the letter said. “Unsealing the records therefore would further Judicial Watch’s mission of educating the public.”

It comes as Eric Trump, a son of the former president, told the Daily Mail that a Trump attorney at Mar-a-Lago, Christina Bobb, asked FBI agents Monday about seeing a warrant.

“They would not give her the search warrant,” he told the outlet, referring to Bobb. “So they showed it to her from about 10 feet away. They would not give her a copy of the search warrant.”

Top Republicans, meanwhile, demanded an investigation into the raid and argued that it was politically motivated to wound the GOP ahead of the 2022 midterms. Some have said the Justice Department immediately needs to release documents pertaining to the raid.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said there needs be a “thorough and immediate explanation” of how the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was approved. Legal historians have said that such a raid against a former president is unprecedented.

“Attorney General Garland and the Department of Justice should already have provided answers to the American people and must do so immediately,” McConnel added.

Trump on Monday said that federal agents entered Mar-a-Lago despite him having cooperated with federal officials for months to return documents that he allegedly took from the White House after leaving office last year.

Reinhart came under fire Tuesday amid reports from several news outlets that found he had a connection to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Reinhart left his job as an assistant United States in early 2008 before he began representing some of Epstein’s workers.

According to a 2018 Miami Herald report, two of Epstein’s accusers alleged Reinhart left his prosecutor job to give Epstein inside information. Reinhart denied those allegations.

As his connection to the Epstein case went viral on Tuesday, it appeared the U.S. Southern District of Florida removed the judge’s page from its website, according to archived versions of the website.

“Access denied,” Reinhart’s page reads. “You are not authorized to access this page.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

On Tuesday, only one day after the FBI’s controversial raid of Mar-a-Lago, former President Donald Trump’s Florida resort, federal agents seized the cellphone of Republican Congressman Scott Perry of Pennsylvania.

Perry revealed as much via a statement Tuesday.

The congressman had been traveling with his family at the time. Then, federal agents approached him, issued a warrant and requested he turn over his phone.

“This morning, while traveling with my family, three FBI agents visited me and seized my cellphone. They made no attempt to contact my lawyer, who would have made arrangements for them to have my phone if that was their wish,” Perry said via his statement, according to Fox News.

“I’m outraged — though not surprised — that the FBI under the direction of Merrick Garland’s DOJ, would seize the phone of a sitting Member of Congress.”

“My phone contains info about my legislative and political activities, and personal/private discussions with my wife, family, constituents and friends. None of this is the government’s business.”

Perry went on to connect his encounter with the FBI to Trump’s on Monday.

“As with President Trump last night, DOJ chose this unnecessary and aggressive action instead of simply contacting my attorneys. These kinds of banana republic tactics should concern every Citizen — especially considering the decision before Congress this week to hire 87,000 new IRS agents to further persecute law-abiding Citizens,” Perry said.

Although it remains unclear if the seizure is at all connected to the FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago, Fox News noted that both Trump and Perry have both been targetted by the Democrat-led Jan. 6 House select committee.

The Department of Justice has yet to release a statement regarding either the seizure of Perry’s phone or the raid of Mar-a-Lago.

Regarding the raid, it is believed that FBI agents were looking for classified documents that Trump had taken with him after leaving the White House.

After news of the raid broke, conservatives and Republicans took to social media to voice their outrage.

Some supporters even went to Mar-a-Lago to support the former president.

Trump released a statement on Monday responding to the raid.

Related:

Trump Hits Biden with Major Accusation in Wake of Mar-a-Lago Raid

pic.twitter.com/1SqRDsVKLL

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 8, 2022

“These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump wrote in a statement on Monday.

“Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before. After working and cooperating with the relevant Government agencies, this unannounced raid on my home was not necessary or appropriate.”

“It is prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the Justice System, and an attack by Radical Left Democrats who desperately don’t want me to run for President in 2024, especially based on recent polls, and who will likewise do anything to stop Republicans and Conservatives in the upcoming Midterm Elections.”

There’s reason to suspect that the FBI search of the Florida residence of former President Donald Trump was improperly intrusive, according to several lawyers. The raid prompted a rebuke from Trump and Republicans more broadly and further escalated political tensions in the nation.

About two dozen FBI agents entered Trump’s Palm Beach resort of Mar-a-Lago at about 9 a.m. on Aug. 8 and left about 10 hours later with “a handful of boxes of documents,” one of Trump’s attorneys on the scene, Christina Bobb, told Insight.

“I didn’t actually get to oversee the search, they wouldn’t let anybody see what they were doing,” she said.

It isn’t clear what legal basis the FBI had for the raid. The agents had a search warrant signed by a judge. However, the affidavit explaining the basis—its probable cause—was filed under seal, and Trump’s lawyers weren’t allowed to examine it, Bobb said.

In general, the agents were looking for “what they deemed to be presidential records,” she said.

“I don’t think there was anything of substance.”

Trump’s legal team will take steps to obtain the affidavit, according to Bobb.

There has been a dispute between the National Archives and Trump about whether he has documents that should be stored at the archives under the U.S. Presidential Records Act.

Trump has been cooperative on that front and had previously invited the FBI to Mar-a-Lago to examine the White House records he had in storage at the time, Bobb said.

“Nothing had been hidden, and nothing had been kept secret from them, which makes this all the more ridiculous,” she said.

Potentially Illegal

“I’m stunned and dismayed,” Marc Ruskin, a 27-year FBI veteran and former federal prosecutor, told Insight. “The disregard for traditional norms and apparent lack of concern with the appearance of impropriety is indicative of an abandonment of even a veneer of independence and objectivity.”

Former federal prosecutor Mike Davis went even further, saying the raid may have been illegally invasive.

“Under the case law, you can’t do a home raid if you can secure the documents through less intrusive means,” he told “Bannon’s War Room” on Aug. 9.

The FBI had to first determine that requests for the documents or even subpoenas wouldn’t be sufficient, said Davis, who formerly advised Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on judicial nominations and now heads The Article III Project.

“There’s zero evidence” that Trump wouldn’t have cooperated, he said.

“There was no allegation or evidence that he [Trump] was destroying any of this evidence or putting it into the wrong hands. This is banana republic-level tactics from the Biden Justice Department.”

Even if Trump took classified documents, he took possession of them when he was still chief executive and had the authority to declassify them, according to Davis.

Bobb suggested that the invocation of classified documents was a disingenuous attempt of “shrouding this in a national security blanket.”

“They don’t want to disclose what they’re doing, because what they’re doing is wrong. And so they want to hide it behind the premise of  ‘Oh, it’s a matter of national security and classified documents, so we can’t disclose to you what we’re doing or why we’re doing it. But just trust us. We’re not lying to you,’” she said. “Well, no, the American people aren’t going to stand for that anymore.”

Even if the DOJ tried to charge Trump with withholding documents, it wouldn’t hold up because the statute in question requires a “willful” violation, and Trump would have had to have “some malicious intent” to take specific documents, according to Bobb.

“They would have to lay the foundation that Donald Trump actually packed up his own office” or ordered somebody what specifically to take, she said.

History of Missing Documents

If Trump had documents that should go to the archives, it would add him to a lineup of former government officials.

Former FBI Director James Comey took his handwritten notes when he was fired by Trump in 2017. His home wasn’t raided. He handed the notes to FBI agents who came to interview him.

The Obama administration didn’t just fail to hand over documents, tens of thousands of its documents went missing or were destroyed. No homes were raided.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to hand over tens of thousands of emails and documents from her server, claiming that they were of a personal nature. The FBI was able to retrieve some of the documents, revealing that many were work-related. Moreover, the documents were under congressional subpoena at the time when a Clinton aide deleted them.

Immediate Skepticism

The raid prompted an immediate wave of skepticism, particularly because the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have a history of breaking protocol, misrepresentations, and even forging evidence in their case against Trump and members of his campaign.

“After six years of unfounded, absurd investigations of President Trump, the presumption is that any investigation of President Trump is politically motivated, and the burden of proof is on FBI/DOJ to prove otherwise,” Will Chamberlain, senior counsel at the Internet Accountability Project, wrote in an Aug. 9 Twitter post.

In 2017, the FBI and DOJ obtained two extensions of a spying warrant on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page even though the warrant was based on false or unsubstantiated allegations. The FBI later acknowledged that spying based on the extensions was illegal.

The FBI also has a history of harsh treatment of people associated with Trump. His aides have been arrested at gunpoint, handcuffed, and “perp-walked,” and their homes and offices have been raided in pursuit of trivial or nonviolent offenses, even when the targets were cooperating with the government.

Shoe on the Other Foot

The Trump raid increased the already polarized political playing field, as Republicans can now argue that home raids of former presidents are acceptable.

“They’re setting a very dangerous precedent where you can do a home raid of a former president of the United States,” Davis said, noting that such a thing has never happened “in our 250 years as a republic.”

Already, Republican lawmakers are promising to subject the DOJ and the FBI to intense scrutiny, with the expectation of reclaiming the majority in the House after the November midterms.

“When Republicans take back the House, we will conduct immediate oversight of this department, follow the facts, and leave no stone unturned,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in an Aug. 8 statement. “Attorney General Garland: preserve your documents and clear your calendar.”

Judge’s Epstein Connection

The search warrant was issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart in the Southern District of Florida. Reinhart was a senior prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida when the office reached a nonprosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who was later indicted for sex trafficking children and died by apparent suicide in a New York jail.

Upon leaving office, Reinhart went into private practice and represented multiple Epstein associates and employees in civil cases against Epstein by his alleged victims.

Reinhart was appointed a magistrate judge in 2018 by the district judges in the Southern District of Florida.

The warrant was issued on Aug. 5, the day after FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee and was questioned about multiple whistleblower reports alleging the politicization of the bureau. Wray cut the questioning short because he said he had to urgently travel. Flight records indicate he flew in the FBI private jet to his vacation retreat in the Adirondacks, according to New York Post columnist Miranda Devine.

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated the time around which the search of Donald Trump’s residence started. The raid started at about 9 a.m. Insight regrets the error.

Update: The article has been updated with a comment from Marc Ruskin.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other GOP leaders have responded to an FBI search of the 45th President’s Florida Mar-a-Lago home after former president Donald Trump said it was “currently under siege, raided, and occupied” on Aug. 8.

Decrying the alleged raid in a post on his social media app, Truth Social, Trump said, “these are dark times for our Nation.”

“After working and cooperating with the relevant Government agencies, this unannounced raid on my home was not necessary or appropriate,” he said.

Taking to Twitter following Trump’s post, Republican leaders condemned the alleged raid, with several warning that such a move could set a dangerous precedent, while others accused the Biden administration of weaponizing the Justice Department for political purposes.

Pompeo, the former secretary of state under Trump, said that executing a warrant against a former president of the United States was a “dangerous” precedent to set.

“The apparent political weaponization of DOJ/FBI is shameful. AG must explain why 250 yrs of practice was upended with this raid,” Pompeo wrote. “I served on Benghazi Com where we proved Hilliary (sic) possessed classified info. We didn’t raid her home.”

The raid is mostly likely connected to an investigation regarding Trump’s handling of official papers. His lawyer, Christina Bobb, confirmed with CNN on Monday night that the FBI had seized documents during their search at his Mar-a-Lago home.

The FBI is directed by Christopher Wray who was appointed by Trump.

‘Banana Republic’

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said the raid of Trump’s home represents “another escalation in the weaponization of federal agencies against the Regime’s political opponents,” while noting that people like Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden “get treated with kid gloves.”

Hunter Biden is currently under federal investigation for alleged tax fraud, lobbying crimes, and money laundering in a probe dating back to as early as 2018.

“Now the Regime is getting another 87k IRS agents to wield against its adversaries? Banana Republic,” DeSantis said.

Elsewhere, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) noted on Twitter that the midterm elections aren’t far off. Trump has hinted that he will run for president again in 2024, and teased last week that he could make an official announcement soon, either before or after the November elections.

“Time will tell regarding this most recent investigation. However, launching such an investigation of a former President this close to an election is beyond problematic,” Graham wrote.

Trump Family Reacts to FBI Raid of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) questioned why the FBI had declined to raid the homes of previous administrations, including the Clintons and Obama.

“Bill and Hillary Clinton took $28,000 worth of furnishings from the White House. Obama violated the Presidential Records Act. Why did the FBI not raid their houses? This is a political witch hunt to take down President Trump,” the GOP lawmaker said.

Kevin McCarthy, the Republican minority leader in the House, said in a statement that the justice department had reached “an intolerable state of weaponized politicization” and vowed that, when Republicans take back the House, they will “conduct immediate oversight of the department, follow the facts and leave no stone unturned.”

“Attorney General Garland: preserve your documents and clear your calendar,” he added.

‘Start With Hunter Biden’s Laptop’

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) also said on Twitter that the FBI raid on Trump’s home was “unprecedented and highly concerning,” and that “if the FBI is looking for classified info or incriminating evidence, they should start with Hunter Biden’s laptop.” He added the hashtag “#Demdoublestandard.”

Meanwhile, Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, said: “Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Countless times we have examples of Democrats flouting the law and abusing power with no recourse.”

“Democrats continually weaponize the bureaucracy against Republicans. This raid is outrageous. This abuse of power must stop and the only way to do that is to elect Republicans in November,” McDaniel added.

The FBI has declined to comment to The Epoch Times on the alleged raid.

While GOP lawmakers condemned the move, the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump PAC, alleged in a statement that the raid is a “positive sign that Donald Trump may be brought to justice for the myriad of criminal offenses committed by him and his family while President.”

“Never before has a former President’s home been raided in a criminal probe. While this search warrant is seemingly for the mishandling of classified material, it is a serious crime that must be fully investigated,” the group said, adding that the raid is the “first step for law enforcement, or Congress, of holding Donald Trump accountable for the orchestration of a conspiracy to remain in power that resulted in the January 6th attack on our nation’s capital.”

Trump expressed anger at the move, alleging in his Monday statement that it was part of the “political persecution” that has been targeting him now for years “with the now fully debunked Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, Impeachment Hoax #1, Impeachment Hoax #2, and so much more, it just never ends. It is political targeting at the highest level!” he wrote.

“Such an assault could only take place in broken, Third-World Countries,” Trump added. “Sadly, America has now become one of those countries, corrupt at a level not seen before.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

House GOP leaders have pledged to take action on the “weaponized politicization” of the Department of Justice (DOJ) “when Republicans take back the House” in the midterm elections, after federal agents raided former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property on Monday.

“I’ve seen enough,” House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in a statement late Monday. “The Department of Justice has reached an intolerable state of weaponized politicization.”

“When Republicans take back the House, we will conduct immediate oversight of this department, follow the facts, and leave no stone unturned,” McCarthy added.

“Attorney General Garland: preserve your documents and clear your calendar,” McCarthy said.

McCarthy’s comment came after the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property on Monday. Trump has characterized the raid as “prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the Justice System, and an attack by Radical left Democrats who desperately don’t want [him] to run for President in 2024.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Ranking Member on the House Judiciary Committee, which provides oversight over the DOJ, called on House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) to bring FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland onto the House floor for questioning on Friday.

“What was on the warrant? What were you really doing? What were you looking for? Why not talk to President Trump and have him give the information you’re after?” Jordan asked in an interview with Fox on Monday night. “We deserve answers now, and this Friday would be a good time.”

“Jerry Nadler: call up Christopher Wray, call up Merrick Garland, bring them in front of the House Judiciary Committee, so we ask them the questions that the American people deserve the answers to.”

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), House Minority Whip, called the raid the “weaponization of the FBI by Biden’s DOJ against his political opponent.”

“Let’s be clear: This is a brazen weaponization of the FBI by Biden’s DOJ against his political opponent—while giving their political allies free passes,” Scalise said in a statement published late Monday. “It’s exactly why the IRS shouldn’t get an army of 87,000 more agents.”

“House Republicans will hold them accountable next year,” the lawmaker added.

Rep. Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Conference, called Monday “a dark day in American history” and said that the “political weaponization of the FBI and Department of Justice is an actual threat to democracy.”

“There is a reason that Americans no longer trust these agencies,” Stefanik said in a Monday statement. “This is the same corrupt agency that illegally fabricated FISA warrants, knowingly deceived Americans about Russian ‘collusion’ for years, and weaponized itself to perpetuate this hoax with their all-too-eager mainstream media accomplices.”

“There must be an immediate investigation and accountability into Joe Biden and his Administration’s weaponizing this department against their political opponents—the likely 2024 Republican candidate for President of the United States,” the congresswoman added.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), vice chair of the House Republican Conference and a part of Trump’s legal defense team during the Democrats’ 2019 attempted impeachment of Trump, said Biden and Garland “completely weaponized the DOJ” and “eroded the people’s faith in our system of justice.”

“Today’s raid on the former President’s home in the middle of an election season looks like another egregious & unprecedented abuse of power,” Johnson said in a statement on Monday.

“We will restore order & accountability as soon as we regain the gavels for a Republican majority in November. It can’t happen soon enough!” he added.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former President Donald Trump said his Florida Mar-a-Lago home is “under siege” and “occupied by a group of FBI agents” in a statement late Aug. 8.

“These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

“After working and cooperating with the relevant Government agencies, this unannounced raid on my home was not necessary or appropriate,” Trump said.

The FBI declined to comment on a press inquiry from The Epoch Times. Its parent agency, the Department of Justice (DOJ), did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump’s lawyer Christina Bobb confirmed with CNN on Monday night that the FBI seized documents from Mar-a-Lago.

“President Trump and his legal team have been cooperative with FBI and DOJ officials every step of the way. The FBI did conduct an unannounced raid and seized paper,” Bobb said.

The alleged raid by the FBI came two days after Trump’s latest hint at a 2024 run, in which he stopped short of giving an official announcement.

“Well, it’s not a long period, regardless, whether you go before or after, certainly not a very long period of time,” the former president said when responding to questions from the press before he took the stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Dallas, Texas, on Saturday.

“It’s coming,” Trump said, “and I think people are going to be very happy.”

“Our country has never been in a position like this. We lost everything. We’ve lost energy independence. We’ve lost our prestige. We’ve lost every single thing you can lose,” Trump said during the event, noting the withdrawal from Afghanistan, which he previously called “the greatest tactical mistake in history,” and the border crisis.

Lawmakers React

‘Weaponized’ Justice System

The 45th president said during his speech that he may be the “most persecuted” person in the history of America.

“A friend of mine recently said that I was the most persecuted person in the history of our country,” Trump said during his speech at CPAC. “And then I thought about it, because I didn’t have time to think much because I’m always being persecuted, and I felt he may very well be right.”

Trump called the raid “prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the Justice System, and an attack by Radical Left Democrats who desperately don’t want [him] to run for President in 2024, especially based on recent polls,” adding that Democrats “will likewise do anything to stop Republicans and Conservatives in the upcoming Midterm Elections.”

“Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before,” Trump said.

During an America First Policy Institute event in July, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), who was part of Trump’s legal defense team during the Democrats’ 2019 attempted impeachment of Trump, told The Epoch Times in an interview that the Biden administration has completely “weaponized” the Department of Justice (DOJ).

By design, the American justice system “is a bulwark against tyranny,” Johnson said. “But if the Department of Justice, for example, is weaponized for political purposes—which is what we’re seeing right now in the Biden ministration—that jeopardizes that foundational pillar itself.”

“Today’s raid on the former President’s home in the middle of an election season looks like another egregious & unprecedented abuse of power,” Johnson said in a statement on Monday.

“We will restore order & accountability as soon as we regain the gavels for a Republican majority in November. It can’t happen soon enough!” Johnson added.

‘Third-World Marxist Dictatorship’

“Such an assault could only take place in broken, Third-World Countries,” Trump said in his Monday statement. “Sadly, America has now become one of those Countries, corrupt at a level not seen before.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) echoed Trump’s comment.

“Using government power to persecute political opponents is something we have seen many times from 3rd world Marxist dictatorships,” Rubio said in a statement on Twitter late Monday. “But never before in America.

“After today[‘]s raid on Mar A Lago what do you think the left plans to use those 87,000 new IRS agents for?

“The FBI isn’t doing anything about the groups vandalizing Catholic Churches, firebombing Pro-Life groups or threatening Supreme Court justices. But they find time to raid Mar A Lago,” Rubio said.

Outcry from Republicans

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem said in a statement on Monday: “The FBI raid on President Trump’s home is an unprecedented political weaponization of the Justice Department. They’ve been after President Trump as a candidate, as President, and now as a former President. Using the criminal justice system in this manner is un-American.”

“The DOJ & FBI are being weaponized like never before to target political opponents. This Admin has thrown the rule of law and faith in our democratic institutions out the door,” said Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) in a Monday Twitter post. “Joe Biden and Merrick Garland must answer immediately for today’s raid against an American president.”

“The inconsistent and partisan application of the law by the FBI has gone too far,” Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-Tenn.) said on Monday. “The Democrats, for too long, have used our government agencies from the FBI to the IRS to target their political opponents. This inconceivable raid is an attack on our Republic.”

“This action, a raid on a former President and political rival, is something we would expect from Putin on his rivals… not here, not in the USA,” Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) said.

“The weaponization and politicalization of federal agencies is egregious and scary. These are Gestapo-like tactics. If the FBI can do this to President Trump, what do you think 87,000 new IRS agents will do to the American people?” Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) said. “Did Biden sign off on this raid? The American people deserve answers.”

“I stood up to America’s bureaucratic corruption, I restored power to the people, and truly delivered for our Country, like we have never seen before. The establishment hated it,” Trump said in his Monday statement.

“Now, as they watch my endorsed candidates win big victories, and see my dominance in all polls, they are trying to stop me, and the Republican Party, once more. The lawlessness, political persecution, and Witch Hunt must be exposed and stopped,” Trump said.

“I will continue to fight for the Great American People!”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

My blood is boiling.

The Deep State Cabal inside the DOJ and FBI went out of their way to hinder the investigation of Hunter Biden’s laptop just weeks before the 2020 Presidential election. By blocking the disastrous news, it kept America in the dark and aided Biden’s so-called victory.

When America was being distracted with COVID, mandates, lockdowns, and BLM riots, our freedom was being taken away without most people noticing because our government was conspiring against us.

How can we trust our so-called “top law-enforcement” agency to do their job when they actively hid Hunter’s investigation in a RESTRICTED SUBFOLDER on their network?

Now Biden’s handpicked Attorney General has no problem turning a blind eye to the actions of the Biden family. This isn’t just refusing to investigate Hunter’s laptop, this is ACTIVELY HIDING EVIDENCE so no one else would investigate.

That’s why you and I must continue to stand up to them.

If you want to see Hunter investigated and the Big Guy impeached, then I need your URGENT Contribution of $25, $50, or $100 today!

We need to let these Deep State hooligans know that we’re going to do the job they were supposed to do. I’m opening up a congressional investigation into the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop and exposing the criminality of Hunter and the Big Guy. I told you my blood is boiling, right?

If the DOJ didn’t cover up Hunter’s crimes and the intelligence officials didn’t peddle the lie that Hunter’s Laptop was “Russian Disinformation,” Donald Trump might still be President.

The 18-month-long nightmare we all have been living under Biden’s illegitimate reign would not have happened.

No hyper-inflation. No borrowing trillions of dollars to pay for Marxist social programs. No baby formula shortages or selling of oil reserves to Hunter’s friends in China.

That’s what the DOJ took away from us when they covered for the Biden family’s criminal enterprise.

If you’re as upset as I am, then chip in $50, $100, or $250 today to help me investigate and expose the truth behind Hunter’s and the Big Guy’s criminal enterprise… and those who helped cover it up!

Here’s the problem. The Swamp knows I’m a woman of my word. They know that I will not rest until Congress finally investigates Hunter and impeaches Joe Biden.

That’s why they have been working overtime to make sure I’m not in Congress after November. From filing lawsuits to kick me off the ballot to donating millions to my Democrat opponent, I’m having everything AND the kitchen sink thrown at me.

Do you really think Nancy Pelosi has ignored the behavior from AOC and the Jihad Squad by mistake?

Do you think the Democrats accidentally forgot to sanction their own member who gave the middle finger on National TV to GOP Members of Congress at the Congressional Baseball game the other day?

Somehow no one is being held accountable for their actions… except me. Because in Washington, some people do as they’re told while I’m fighting to do what Americans expect from their duly elected Representatives—SERVE THE PEOPLE!

That’s why I URGENTLY need your help to fight back and win this November with your $100, $500, or $1,000 donation today. Otherwise, Hunter and Brandon are going to keep enriching themselves off the backs of the U.S. government and no one will stop them.

But if I win in November, all bets are off.

That’s why we can’t let Hunter and Brandon get away with it simply because I wasn’t there to lead the charge in Congress. Help me win so I can investigate Hunter and impeach Joe Biden! Please donate today.

Thank you. God Bless America.
Marjorie Taylor Greene
Congresswoman (R-GA)

Democrats continue to say that “democracy is in danger” if voters don’t give liberals the majority in November, but violence by the left has defined the summer politically so far, conservative observers have told The Epoch Times.

As Democrats continue to use the Jan. 6 Committee hearings over the summer to make a special case that somehow conservatives pose a danger to the country, the violence from the left has been ongoing, one victim told The Epoch Times.

The issues affronting progressives are numerous, including the reversal of Roe v. Wade, non-action on a climate change scheme, and the lack of momentum of progressive policies under Joe Biden, which stand out as sources of anger and mounting frustration for leftist activists.

In June, a pro-life pregnancy center in Buffalo, New York, was burned out, allegedly by the radical leftwing, pro-abortion, militant group Jane’s Revenge, said the health pregnancy center called CompassCare, which helps women keep their babies rather than abort them.

“We actually saw the type of [violent] Jane’s Revenge activity happening around our Buffalo location that they were fomenting with their followers” prior to the firebombing of the clinic Rev. James Harden, CEO of CompassCare, told The Epoch Times.

“So we reported it to local law enforcement as well as the FBI two weeks in advance of the firebombing,” added Harden, who said Molotov cocktails were used to set the blaze to the CompassCare clinic.

Harden blames local and national progressive politicians for the violence, calling measures that the state of New York have taken under Democratic Gov. Kathleen Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James to investigate crisis pregnancy centers like CompassCare as “essentially joining Jane’s Revenge in attacking pro-life pregnancy centers.”

Jane’s Revenge

The Jane’s group said that they were also responsible for attacks on pro-family clinics in Dearborn, Michigan, Asheville, North Carolina, and more than a dozen other sites around the country in response to the Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade.

“You have seen us in Madison WI, Ft. Collins CO, Reisertown MA, Olympia WA, Des Moines IA, Lynwood WA, Washington DC, Ashville NC, Buffalo NY, Hollywood FL, Vancouver WA, Frederick MA, Denton TX, Gresham OR, Eugene OR, Portland OR, among others, and we work in countless locations invisibly,” said the group in a manifesto published on Abolition Media, an anarchist website.

So far, no arrests have been made in connection with any of the acts claimed by Jane’s Revenge manifesto, although the Catholic News Agency has reported that some youths have been arrested in acts of vandalism not associated with Jane’s Revenge.

Jason Rantz, a conservative talk show host in Seattle, told The Epoch Times that several churches and pro-life crisis pregnancy centers have been attacked in Washington state as well, with no arrests other than one that doesn’t seem to be connected to the abortion issue.

Like CompassCare’s Harden, Rantz makes no bones about pointing the finger for the violence at some progressive politicians, but not all.

“We had a story that I broke several weeks ago where a Democrat state Senator up for reelection … she produced a video that was celebrating the vandalism” against a pro-life billboard in Gorst, Washington.

The video was subsequently posted on Instagram.

“They don’t really hide their intent to promote this kind of violent response when they don’t get their way politically,” said Rantz.

2020 Redux?

Seattle was the scene of some of the worst violence during the Black Lives Matter protest and riots of the summer of 2020, with sections of the downtown area made unhabitable and unpoliceable for over a month.

While stopping short of calling the 2020 riots a dress rehearsal for today’s more targeted and politically-motivated violence, Rantz does think the violence in 2020 and today are connected in that Democrats think they are best served by allowing the violence to continue.

“I also think that as with the case in 2020, that a lot of the Democrats thought that they would benefit politically from the violence so they don’t want to get too involved” in calling for more rational means of political opposition.

Targeted Assassination Attempt

The Buffalo center of CompassCare was burned out just days after a California man was arrested near the house of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in an alleged aborted effort to kill the conservative jurist.

Nicholas John Roske was arrested with a black tactical chest rig, and a tactical knife, along with a Glock 17, clips, ammunitions, and zip ties, according to the probable cause statement filed with the court.

The FBI said that Roske traveled cross-country in what they are now saying was an attempt to kill as many as three Supreme Court Justices.

Roske, 26, said that he was upset over the Supreme Court decision that reversed Roe v. Wade which returned the question of abortion back to individual states.

Roske also expressed concern that upcoming decisions by the nation’s highest court would tend to favor conservative views on the Constitution, said an FBI warrant obtained by Fox News.

‘Democracy in Danger’

According to talk show host Rantz, Democrats have become obsessed with the idea that merely having differing views on political issues of the day from those of Democrats somehow threatens the fabric of democracy.

That message was conveyed by Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-Va.), whose re-election campaign sent a handwritten postcard to at least one constituent warning that “Democracy is at stake this election day. Republicans are the problem.”

The postcard, obtained by The Epoch Times, appeared to have no identification, such as a signature, but just referred to the need to re-elect Wexton or democracy will be in danger. The flip side of the postcard was marked as having been sent by “Jennifer Wexton for Congress.”

Wexton is being opposed by GOP nominee and Vietnamese refugee, Hung Cao.

Cao, a retired special forces operator who left the Navy as a captain—one rank below the flag rank of admiral—took umbrage at the apparent suggestion by Wexton’s campaign that he would endanger democracy.

“Jennifer Wexton should immediately apologize for her campaign’s claims,” said a Cao campaign spokesman in a statement to The Epoch Times.

“Hung Cao has fought for our country honorably for 25 years. He’s put his life on the line for his fellow Americans to protect our constitution. Wexton ought to be ashamed of her campaign slandering an immigrant to this country who wore our uniform in combat,” added the campaign.

Congress Targeted

The Capitol Police stepped up security for this year’s Congressional Charity baseball game, citing threats by leftist climate activists who have threatened to disrupt the game if climate bills aren’t passed by Congress, or at least are on the verge of passing.

“The real violence being committed at this baseball game is by Congress, by Manchin, by his Republican allies and by everybody in Congress who’s failing to take action on climate change, therefore consigning millions of people to die and millions more livelihoods to be destroyed,” said Dan Sherrell, an organizer for the protest at the baseball game.

The threats came years after the game was targeted by a left-wing gunman in 2017, who opened fire on a practice field for the Congressional baseball game, critically wounding then-House Majority Whip Steve Scalise and three others before being killed by Capitol Police.

The 66-year-old former construction worker and Bernie Sanders supporter, James T. Hodgkinson, attempted to kill Scalise and others because he “hated Republicans,” according to a report by the Los Angeles Times.

Accepting Political Violence?

A pre-print of a study published in July, which has yet to be peer-reviewed, found that “[s]ubstantial minorities of the [US] population endorse violence, including lethal violence, to obtain political objectives,” with nearly 8 million people in the United States at least “somewhat willing” to kill others to advance their political goals.

Published at MedRxiv, the paper concentrated on concepts like QAnon, Donald Trump, stolen elections, and Western European traditions as justifications by conservatives who find political violence acceptable.

Yet the paper also found that the largest minority of people who feel political violence is justified are those who find race-based violence justifiable.

“More than a third of respondents (36.2%) reported that violence was at least sometimes justified ‘to prevent discrimination based on race or ethnicity,’” with nearly 10 million Americans saying that violence was always justified to prevent racial discrimination.

With the contemporary expansion of the meaning of words like “discrimination,” to encompass concepts such as “microaggressions,” it’s much easier to see how violence is becoming more commonplace in a future that appears bleak, observers say, even as progressive seek to further expand definitions to widen their dispute on conservatives.

“When you have Joe Biden, two weeks ago, asking Merrick Garland to investigate crisis pregnancy centers for fraud, it’s an all-out war on these pregnancy centers,” said Harden, who points out that they provide their services for free so fraud would be impossible—unless you redefine the meaning of the word fraud.

Harden was referring to a provision in a July 8 executive order “to protect people seeking reproductive health services from fraudulent schemes or deceptive practices.” Biden has appointed Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta to head up the Department of Justice’s task force on abortion. Gupta has been accused in the past of calling crisis pregnancy centers like the one Harden runs “fake clinics,” raising worries that the DOJ will try to shut down pro-life clinics under an expanded definition of fraud.

“It’s like a dystopian novel,” said Harden.

The Epoch Times has reached out to the White House and Hochul, James, and Wextons’ offices for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Agents at the FBI are being pressured by superior officers to massage reports and pad the resulting data on the number of incidents involving Domestic Violent Extremists (DVE), according to information provided by agency whistleblowers to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Jordan is presently the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee and likely to become chairman of the panel if the GOP retakes the majority in the lower chamber of Congress in the November elections.

The Ohio Republican made public late Wednesday his letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray explaining that Republicans on the judiciary panel “continue to hear from brave whistleblowers about disturbing conduct at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

“From recent protected disclosures, we have learned that FBI officials are pressuring agents to reclassify cases as ‘domestic violent extremism’ even if the cases do not meet the criteria for such a classification,” the letter reads (pdf).

“Given the narrative pushed by the Biden Administration that domestic violent extremism is the ‘greatest threat’ facing our country, the revelation that the FBI may be artificially padding domestic terrorism data is scandalous.”

Jordan noted that the FBI’s definition of DVE’s is “an individual based and operating primarily within the United States or its territories without direction or inspiration from a foreign terrorist group or other foreign power who seeks to further political or social goals wholly or in part through unlawful acts of force or violence.”

Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland have repeatedly claimed that violence perpetrated by DVE’s, including the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, represent the greatest domestic security threat facing the United States.

Timeline of Events in DC on Jan. 6

Wray told Congress last year, according to Jordan, that the FBI has established a “very, very active domestic terrorism investigation program” and “doubled the amount of domestic terrorism investigations,” while Garland has said the “number of open FBI domestic terrorism investigations this year has increased significantly.”

Jordan said the whistleblowers are FBI employees concerned about improper pressures being brought to bear against field agents to misrepresent what they are seeing.

“We have received accusations that FBI agents are bolstering the number of cases of DVEs to satisfy their superiors. For example, one whistleblower explained that because agents are not finding enough DVE cases, they are encouraged and incentivized to reclassify cases as DVE cases even though there is minimal, circumstantial evidence to support the reclassification,” Jordan told Wray.

“Another whistleblower—who led at least one high profile domestic terrorism investigation—stated that a field office Counterterrorism Assistant Special Agent in Charge and the FBI’s Director of the Counterterrorism Division have pressured agents to move cases into the DVE category to hit self-created performance metrics,” Jordan added.

The artificial performance metrics are being used to determine which agents receive promotions and bonuses, according to the information the whistleblowers have given to Jordan.

Jordan pointed out to Wray that the allegations from the whistleblowers confirm concerns that the congressman has repeatedly expressed to the FBI chief.

“These whistleblower allegations that the FBI is padding its domestic violent extremist data cheapens actual examples of violent extremism. This information also reinforces our concerns—about which we have written to you several times—regarding the FBI’s politicization under your leadership,” Jordan explained in the letter.

“As we have detailed, multiple whistleblowers have disclosed how the Biden FBI is conducting a ‘purge’ of FBI employees holding conservative views. You have ignored these concerns. It appears instead that the FBI is more focused on classifying investigations to meet a woke left-wing agenda,” he continued.

Jordan requested that by Aug. 10, Wray provide copies of “all documents and communications” concerning all “preliminary investigations, and full investigations classified as domestic violent extremism” since January 2020.

In addition, Jordan told Wray he wants copies of all documents and communications between or among employees of the FBI and Department of Justice, with anybody in the Executive Office of the President. Jordan also wants the total number of Confidential Human Sources working for the FBI who have reported incidents alleged to involve DVEs since January 2020.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which works closely with the FBI on domestic security issues, published a June 7 advisory that warned “as the United States enters mid-term election season this year, we assess that calls for violence by domestic violent extremists directed at democratic institutions, political candidates, party offices, election events, and election workers will likely increase.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Department of Justice’s third-ranking official has a history of calling crisis pregnancy centers “fake clinics,” a false, inflammatory description employed by terrorist groups that have recently attacked the pro-life organizations.

Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta deployed the rhetoric in a 2020 letter urging senators to vote against a Trump judicial nominee. Nearly 60 crisis centers, which counsel women on alternatives to abortion, have been firebombed or vandalized over the past two months. An anarchist group that has claimed responsibility for many of the attacks, Jane’s Revenge, has used the same “fake clinic” rhetoric as Gupta.

The Biden administration has repeatedly accused Republicans of causing acts of violence through their rhetoric. The White House baselessly claimed a GOP-backed bill in Florida to restrict teaching about sexual orientation to young children “encourages bullying and threatens students’ mental health, physical safety, and well-being.” Democrats tried to link Rep. Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) to a mass shooting in Buffalo, N.Y., in May that left 10 people dead. They claimed that Stefanik’s opposition to mass illegal immigration echoed the Buffalo shooter’s writings about “great replacement theory.”

Gupta’s remarks carry new significance after she was appointed this month to lead the Justice Department’s reproductive rights task force, formed to protect access to abortions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Gupta also supervises the Justice Department’s civil rights division, which prosecutes attacks against reproductive health facilities, a classification that includes crisis pregnancy centers.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.), who introduced a bill this month to expand criminal penalties for attacks on the centers, said Gupta’s remarks are “no surprise” given the Justice Department’s “disregard” for the assaults on pro-life organizations.

“It’s shameful that Joe Biden’s Department of Justice—responsible for enforcing our laws—is ignoring the epidemic of violent attacks against organizations that are just trying to provide health care to women in need,” Hawley told the Washington Free Beacon.

While it has moved to protect abortion clinics, the Justice Department has largely ignored the violence against pro-life centers. Gupta and other DOJ leaders met with civil rights and pro-abortion groups this week to update them on the task force’s work. The Justice Department does not appear to have met with pro-life groups that have sought meetings with the agency over the firebombing.

Gupta slammed crisis pregnancy centers while opposing the nomination of Judge David Dugan because of his affiliation with a center in Illinois. At the time, Gupta led the civil rights group Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

The head of one pro-life group that has sought a DOJ meeting says Gupta’s remarks make her “unfit” to lead the task force.

“Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta’s attacks on pregnancy resource centers which help pregnant women in need are shameful and utterly irresponsible,” said CatholicVote president Brian Burch.

“Ms. Gupta should be investigating and prosecuting the radical criminals who are vandalizing and firebombing pregnancy resource centers nationwide,” Burch told the Free Beacon, adding that Attorney General Merrick Garland should “immediately rescind” Gupta’s appointment.

Gupta is not the only high-ranking DOJ official to attack crisis pregnancy centers. Kristen Clarke, the head of the agency’s civil rights division and a task force member, called the centers “harmful” and “predatory” after a 2018 Supreme Court ruling in favor of the facilities in 2018, the Free Beacon reported.

As part of its work, the task force is centralizing information about the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a federal statute that makes it a crime to threaten or attack reproductive health centers. The Justice Department has brought multiple cases against activists who blocked the entrances of abortion clinics, but none so far against people who firebombed pro-life organizations.

The Justice Department did not address questions about Gupta’s comments. The agency provided comment from the FBI, which said it is investigating “a series of attacks and threats targeting pregnancy resource centers, faith-based organizations, and reproductive health clinics across the country, as well as to judicial buildings, including the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“The incidents are being investigated as potential acts of domestic violent extremism, FACE Act violations, or violent crime matters, depending on the facts of each case,” an FBI representative told the Free Beacon.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) alleged on July 25 that there were “systemic and existential problems” within the Justice Department and the FBI, after “highly credible” whistleblowers informed his office that officials from the bureau labeled evidence against Hunter Biden as disinformation.

“The allegations provided to my office appear to indicate that there was a scheme in place among certain FBI officials to undermine derogatory information connected to Hunter Biden by falsely suggesting it was disinformation,” Grassley wrote in a letter (pdf) to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Grassley, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the “volume and consistency” of the whistleblowers’ allegations “substantiate their credibility.”

The latest revelation is part of Grassley’s ongoing effort to probe into Hunter Biden’s business activities. In September 2020, he and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) released a report, discovering that there was “potential criminal activity relating to transactions among and between Hunter Biden, his family, and his associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakh, and Chinese nationals,” while Joe Biden was vice president during the Obama administration.

In March, the two senators presented bank records on the Senate floor showing CEFC China Energy, a now-defunct company, made payments to Hunter Biden. Currently, the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware is investigating Biden for possible tax violations.

Whistleblowers

According to whistleblowers, the FBI came into possession of information about Hunter Biden’s “criminal financial and related activity” in 2020, which prompted FBI supervisory intelligence analyst Brian Auten to open an assessment in August 2020, according to the letter. An FBI headquarters team subsequently used the assessment to “improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation” and caused the bureau’s investigation on Hunter Biden “to cease.”

A month later, the FBI team placed findings by FBI agents involved in Auten’s assessment in “a restricted access sub-file.” Grassley said the decision was “problematic.”

“[I]t does not allow for proper oversight and opens the door to improper influence,” Grassley explained.

Auten was previously known for being under investigation for failing to properly vet the now-discredited Steele dossier, which contained false and fabricated claims accusing former President Donald Trump of colluding with Russia.

In October 2020, “an avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting” surfaced, and the reporting was “verified or verifiable via criminal search warrants,” whistleblowers told Grassley. However, the FBI did not pursue the reporting after Timothy Thibault, an assistant special agent in charge of the Washington field office, shut it down.

“Thibault allegedly ordered the matter closed without providing a valid reason as required by FBI,” the letter said. FBI officials, including Thibault, then tried to “improperly mark the matter in FBI systems so that it could not be opened in the future.”

In May, Grassley requested an Inspector General investigation into Thibault, expressing concerns about how the agent had demonstrated “a pattern of active public partisanship,” in violation of his “ethical obligation as an FBI employee.” In his letter (pdf) to Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz at that time, Grassley documented Thibault’s left-wing social media posts, including retweeting a post from the anti-Trump political-action committee the Lincoln Project.

In response to Grassley’s letter, Horowitz wrote back (pdf) saying that Thibault may have violated the Hatch Act, and asked the Office of Special Counsel to review the case. The Act, passed in 1939, bans federal government officials from taking in certain political activities.

Request

Grassley said Garland and Wray must take the whistleblower allegations seriously.

“If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are—and have been—institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law,” Grassley wrote in his letter.

Grassley ended his letter by asking Garland and Wray to turn over records and information relating to the Biden family, Austen, and Thibault before Aug. 8.

The senator requested “all leads” that were either “ordered closed” or denied further review by Thibault.

“All records related to derogatory information on Hunter Biden, James Biden, and their foreign business relationships,” Grassley wrote as one of his requests.

The FBI said it has received the letter but declined to comment further.

Eva Fu contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former First Lady Melania Trump said Thursday that she was not aware of the events taking place during the U.S. Capitol breach on Jan. 6, 2021.

“On January 6, 2021, I was fulfilling one of my duties as First Lady of the United States of America, and accordingly, I was unaware of what was simultaneously transpiring at the U.S. Capitol Building,” Trump told Fox News.

She added that “it was my obligation to record the contents of the White House’s historic rooms, including taking archival photographs of all the renovations.”

“Several months in advance, I organized a qualified team of photographers, archivists, and designers to work with me in the White House to ensure perfect execution,” she continued. “As required, we scheduled January 6, 2021, to complete the work on behalf of our Nation.”

Trump also cast doubt on claims made by her former press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, who has often criticized former President Donald Trump and the former first lady after they left office.

“Ms. Grisham was not in the White House on January 6, and her behavior in her role as Chief of Staff ultimately amounts to dereliction of duty,” Trump said, while adding that normally, the first lady’s chief of staff “provides detailed briefings surrounding our Nation’s important issues.”

“In fact, Ms. Grisham failed to provide insight and information into the events surrounding January 6 as she had abandoned her post in Washington, D.C.,” she said. “Shamefully, this behavior has only partially become public knowledge; yet was consistent for Ms. Grisham.”

Trump added: “It is evident that Grisham’s recent betrayals are a last-ditch attempt to resuscitate her ruined career and reputation.”

Text Message

Grisham responded to Trump’s statement Thursday with a cryptic Twitter message that read: “Lol. That’s truly all I’ve got.” The Epoch Times has contacted her for comment.

Last month, she posted on Twitter a screenshot of a conversation she allegedly had with Trump on Jan. 6.

“Do you want to tweet that peaceful protests are the right of every American, but there is no place for lawlessness & violence?” Grisham allegedly texted Trump, who was listed as “MT,” with the response in the conversation being simply “No.”

The screenshot text message that was posted by Grisham, who also served as the White House press secretary, has not been confirmed by Trump or an official source.

Grisham also issued a response Thursday speculation she doctored the screenshot, writing: “I’m actually not smart enough to do that.”

Adding to Fox News, Trump said that if she was “fully informed of all the details … I would have immediately denounced the violence that occurred at the Capitol Building.”

“And while Ms. Grisham’s behavior is disappointing, it is not surprising or an isolated incident,” she continued.

Her statement comes as the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 incident is continuing to hold public hearings on the Jan. 6 breach. Some Republicans and former President Trump say the panel is an attempt to distract Americans from more pressing issues such as the economy, inflation, gas prices, and illegal immigration.

On Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland weighed in the Jan. 6 hearing, saying that “no person is above the law.” That comment came in response to a question about a memo the Justice Department reportedly sent out noting a longstanding agency practice of not making politically contentious prosecutions in the lead-up to federal elections.

“I can’t say it any more clearly than that. There is nothing in the principles of prosecution, in any other factors, which prevent us from investigating anyone who is criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election,” Garland told reporters at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Ruling against EPA sets precedent for a series of lawsuits against agency overreach

As the Biden administration reels from a string of recent legal defeats, political analysts hail the U.S. Supreme Court’s latest ruling, West Virginia v. EPA, as but one component of a new, broad-based approach that the courts are taking to halt a century-long effort by progressives to empower the administrative state and rule Americans by bureaucratic decree.

Dating back to President Woodrow Wilson 100 years ago, progressive presidents, including Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, have worked to transfer law-making authority from Congress to their executive agencies. Wilson, the father of modern-day progressives, believed the Constitution, with its separation of powers, was an outdated document and that professional bureaucrats were superior at decision-making, compared to the time-consuming and compromise-ridden process of passing laws through elected representatives.

Wilson wrote in the 1887 article “The Study of Administration” that “the many, the people, who are sovereign [under the Constitution] have no single ear which one can approach, and are selfish, ignorant, timid, stubborn or foolish.”

“The greatest revolution since the Constitution in many ways has been this movement away from legislatures into agencies,” Matthew Spalding, Dean of Hillsdale College’s Graduate School of Government, told The Epoch Times. “The crisis here is the movement away from consent,” as Americans increasingly lose their right to have a voice in setting the laws and regulations that control their lives.

In 1984, for example, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that came to be known as the Chevron Doctrine, ruling that federal agencies had the authority to decide the scope of their power in situations where congressional authorization was ambiguous. Since this ruling, Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council, the courts have sided with federal agencies in cases where the authority of agencies was challenged.

Now, for the first time in a century, a series of rulings from federal courts have put up a roadblock to halt administrative encroachment. Two factors have brought about this change. First, the appointment by the Trump administration of 234 federal judges, including three Supreme Court justices. And second, the Biden administration’s unusually brazen attempts to push federal agencies well beyond their legal authority in order to impose a left-wing agenda on the United States without popular consent.

West Virginia Ruling

In the case of West Virginia v. EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attempted to force America’s electric utilities to switch from fossil fuels to wind and solar. On June 30, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration had no authority to do so.

“For years, unelected bureaucrats in the administrative state have been trying to destroy our fossil fuel industries by transforming the EPA into a communist-style central planning authority because they know they can’t get their radical environmental policies passed through Congress,” said West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore in an official statement, lauding the decision as “a victory for the rule of law.”

“Part of the problem is Congress writing these broad laws that leave a lot of room for interpretation by the agencies that are supposed to execute the laws,” William Shughart, senior fellow at the Independent Institute, told the Epoch Times. “That has led to this explosive growth in the administrative state. The West Virginia ruling applies the brakes to that growth.”

‘Major Questions Doctrine’

One of the key components of this Supreme Court ruling is the “major questions doctrine.” This is the concept that agencies, which are unelected by and unaccountable to the public, cannot make up rules on issues of major importance to Americans without clear authorization from elected representatives.

“The Supreme Court decision speaks to the legal flaws with trying to mark an entire industry for termination,” Jonathan Berry, a partner at Boyden Gray & Associates, told The Epoch Times. “What the Supreme Court is saying is that when you take on initiatives of major economic or political significance, those measures have to be authorized by a clear statement from Congress.”

“One of the most profound aspects of this ruling is its portability across regulatory regimes,” Berry said. In rendering its West Virginia decision, the Supreme Court looked at prior rulings, including those against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). “The common thread across those cases is the executive branch using an administrative agency to wade into policy areas beyond what Congress authorized,” Berry added.

In August 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the CDC did not have legal authority to ban landlords from evicting non-paying tenants. In January of this year, the Court ruled that OSHA did not have authority to force employees of large companies to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

“What we’re seeing here is extremely significant,” Spalding said. “The way the Court works is they do these things in different cases here and there, but they’re putting a doctrine together that ultimately builds up to a larger case. The heart of the matter is the unconstitutionality of essentially shifting legislative authority outside of the legislative branch into these agencies.”

“There are already tons of lawsuits out there that have been winding their way through the legal system for years,” Bonner Cohen, senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research, told The Epoch Times. “Some of those lawsuits will eventually make it to the Supreme Court, but a lot of them may be dealt with at lower court level simply because people can now point to the precedent that was set in West Virginia v. EPA.”

Administrative Overreach

Last week, a Trump-appointed federal judge temporarily blocked orders by the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) that attempted to force states to, among other things, allow transgender children to compete in sports in schools according to their gender identity rather than their gender at birth. Twenty state attorneys general brought a suit against the DOE directive, arguing that the authority to decide such policies “properly belongs to Congress, the States, and the people.”

Two other areas where administrative overreach by the Biden administration will likely be challenged next are a directive from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding “green accounting” (that is, accounting that factors environmental costs in the financial results of operations) and gun control initiatives from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF).

In a case that closely parallels West Virginia v. EPA, the SEC issued a directive that all listed companies must provide audited reports on the greenhouse gas emissions of their operations, as well as those of their suppliers and customers. In addition, companies must detail their strategies to reduce such emissions. Critics believe this will open companies up to a rash of environmental lawsuits and actions by activist asset managers like BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey was among the first state officials to threaten legal action in response.

The ATF has been attempting to expand the legal definition of which gun parts constitute a firearm in an effort to implement a Biden administration initiative, which failed to pass Congress, against unregistered homemade guns, thus turning a formerly legal practice into a felony. A lawsuit against this has already been filed by the Gun Owners of America. In addition, the ATF was found to be keeping records of “several hundred million” gun purchases, despite the fact that Congress explicitly outlawed a federal gun registry.

Loss of Public Trust

Such attempts to circumvent public consent by legislating through unelected federal agencies inevitably lead to a loss of public trust in government.

“If there’s no consent, no responsibility, no check-back system, then you really are undermining public confidence in that process,” Spalding said. Regarding the ATF and gun control measures, a June poll by NPR/Ipsos found that, while most gun owners said they would accept universal background checks, they “harbored a deep distrust of government.”

“The more that this administration steps over the line and claims for itself powers that the peoples’ representatives in Congress have not given it, the more we should expect a decline in trust and in legitimacy,” Berry said.

As the courts begin to push back against administrative overreach, however, the backlash from the political left has been escalating, including demands for “packing” the Supreme Court with more left-leaning judges, or even abolishing the Court altogether.

Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, President Biden stated, “We cannot allow an out-of-control Supreme Court, working in conjunction with extremist elements of the Republican Party, to take away our freedoms and our personal autonomy.” A recent survey by Rasmussen and the Heartland Institute found that, in the wake of the EPA decision, the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and the pro-Second Amendment Bruen decision (regarding concealed weapons), most Democrats and younger voters see the Court as a racist and sexist institution and want to pack it with progressive judges, remove it, or replace it.

“These findings clearly show that most Democrats and young Americans do not respect the sanctity of the Supreme Court when it issues decisions that run counter to their agenda,” Heartland Institute Research Fellow Chris Talgo told The Epoch Times. “As a former U.S. history and American government teacher, I can say without a doubt that our education system is not teaching the basics when it comes to civics. Most American students cannot name the three branches of government, let alone understand the role of separation of powers. This does not bode well for the future of freedom, seeing as how young voters are hostile to the very institutions that preserve our freedom.”

The Justice Department, for example, permitted weeks of intimidating protests outside the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices after the opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade was prematurely leaked prior to the formal ruling. Following the arrest in June of an armed man who was charged with attempted murder at the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) demanded that U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland “detail the steps the Department of Justice is taking to protect our Supreme Court Justices in the wake of an unprecedented harassment and intimidation campaign.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was criticized for taking weeks to bring a bill protecting Supreme Court justices and their families to a vote, even after the alleged assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh. When the bill was put to a vote, 27 Democrats voted against it.

Granting Power to Experts

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who disagreed with the majority in the West Virginia case, argued that the courts must defer to the EPA, which she deemed the “expert agency,” and allow the agency to interpret the scope of its own power. Critics of this approach, however, remain skeptical of granting too much power to experts and question whether administrators are in fact experts when it comes to issues like national energy policy or making personal medical decisions.

“These are career government employees,” Cohen said. “They are not experts.”

“Look at the experience the country had during the pandemic, where we had such experts as Dr. [Anthony] Fauci and Dr. [Deborah] Birx and others throughout the federal government who completely mishandled the public health response to COVID-19,” Cohen said. “If these are the experts, we need to free ourselves from experts, because they got it spectacularly wrong.”

One of the methods used to expand administrative power has been the declaration of government health emergencies, including the pandemic health emergency, the climate health emergency, the racism health emergency, and the “gun violence” health crisis.

“Anytime you encounter the word ‘emergency,’ anytime you encounter the word ‘crisis,’ be careful,” Cohen said. “It may in fact be a crisis because those things happen, but it may be nothing more than a pretext for a power grab.”

“The invocation of an emergency is not a justification for combining the powers of government into a single person,” Berry said. “That’s the definition of tyranny.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

As House Democrats tout a renewed effort to expand the Supreme Court (SCOTUS), Senate Democrats remain divided on both the feasibility and value of the scheme.

The plan, contained in Rep. Hank Johnson’s (D-Ga.) Judiciary Act, would add four new seats to SCOTUS.

The renewed push to pack the bill comes in the wake of SCOTUS’ landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which it overturned the abortion standard put in place by Roe v. Wade in 1973. The 6–3 decision was supported by all of the court’s six conservative justices and opposed by the three liberals on the court.

Following that decision, SCOTUS’ conservative justices also struck down a New York State gun control law that it deemed unconstitutional, in addition to a decision that severely constricted the scope of carbon regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency.

This string of conservative decisions, particularly the decision in Dobbs, has left Democrats scrambling for solutions to weaken the power of the court’s conservatives.

During a July 18 press conference, several progressive Democrats in the House renewed calls to expand SCOTUS and add four new seats, a scheme that critics have long referred to as “court-packing.”

Democrats insisted that they were not packing the court, but that conservatives had already done so under President Donald Trump, likely a jab at then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) refusal to consider the nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s unexpected death. Later, McConnell also quickly moved forward with the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, even going so far as to change filibuster rules to ensure her confirmation in the GOP-controlled Senate.

“The nightmare scenario of GOP court-packing is already upon us,” said Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.). “That’s how they got this far-right 6–3 majority in the first place.”

Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) expanded on Mondaire’s claim, arguing that Republicans have for a long time emphasized judicial nominations to cement their control over the federal government.

Following the successful confirmation of three conservative justices under Trump, which left SCOTUS’ liberal branch substantially outnumbered, SCOTUS has “gone rogue” and “become a radical institution,” Takano claimed.

Johnson, who sponsored the Judiciary Act, said that the conservative majority has left “[the] Supreme Court at crisis with itself and with our democracy”; because of the majority, Johnson added, “basic freedoms are under assault.”

Though Johnson’s bill is not unprecedented—the Supreme Court has been expanded several times before—the last such expansion of the court, which raised the number of seats from seven to nine, came under President Andrew Jackson in 1837.

The move, which may be able to win the support needed to pass the House, is more contentious in the Senate.

Some lawmakers in the upper chamber, including Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), have called for the overturn of the filibuster to pass the Judiciary Act, which would have little chance of passing the evenly-divided Senate.

“We need to repeal the filibuster so that we can expand the Supreme Court to reclaim the two stolen seats on a now illegitimate court, which are stealing the rights of American people,” Markey, who appeared at House Democrats’ July 18 press conference,  said shortly after the overturning of Roe.

Similar calls have been echoed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who in the past has said that “the court’s 6–3 supermajority will continue to threaten basic liberties for decades to come.”

However, more vulnerable Senate Democrats facing tough reelection battles have suggested their opposition to the proposal.

“You’d have to talk about specific details, but I have not been in favor of expanding the size of the court,” said Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), whose 2020 victory saw Arizona send two Democrats to the Senate for the first time in decades. Republican strategists generally consider Kelly’s seat to be among the most vulnerable in this year’s midterms.

Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), similarly, has called for his party to focus on fighting back inflation for the time being.

“Right now, I’m focused on lowering costs for Georgians who are pushing their way back and want to see us cap the cost of insulin, which is a bill we need to get done,” Warnock said on July 12.

Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), who in 2016 won her seat by a .16 percent margin, has also suggested that she opposes expanding the court.

Given moderate opposition to the House plan, it is highly unlikely that the effort will go anywhere. In the Senate, Democrats supporting the bill would need the support of at least 60 members to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold, or would need to sway moderates like Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) in favor of a filibuster carve-out.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is withholding records related to high-profile investigations, including the probe into resident Joe Biden’s son, according to a new lawsuit.

Protect the Public’s Trust, a watchdog group, is seeking records seeking ethics waivers and determinations on allowing potentially conflicted employees to work on cases, but has been stymied.

The group submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) records request on June 1, 2021, but didn’t receive a response for more than a year, according to the suit.

After inquiring about the status of the request on June 10, the watchdog received an acknowledgment that had been sent to the wrong email address. But the records still haven’t been sent, nor have key determinations about which records will be provided, which violates federal law.

Based on the DOJ’s recent email, “it appears that the Department has no intention of responding to Plaintiff’s request anytime soon,” Protect the Public’s Trust said in the filing in federal court in Washington. “Given these facts, it appears that absent litigation the Department has not and does not intend to meet its statutory obligations to provide the requested records.”

The documents would help shed light on potential conflicts of interest, including whether Joe Biden-appointee Nicholas McQuaid, a top DOJ official, is at all involved with the investigation into Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, according to the watchdog.

McQuaid’s former colleague is representing Hunter Biden, who has said that he’s under investigation for tax-related issues. Documents obtained by The Epoch Times indicate that the probe touches on Hunter Biden’s business dealings with China.

Susan Hennessey was hired in 2021 from CNN to be a lawyer at the DOJ. Before she was hired, she described the investigation from special counsel John Durham, which has uncovered more details about the effort to spy on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and his associates in 2016, as “partisan silliness.”

“Have these officials been granted waivers to participate in these matters, which would likely fall into their portfolios?” Protect the Public’s Trust said in a statement. “By its refusal to properly respond to this FOIA request, as required by law, DOJ is hiding this information from the American public.”

The DOJ didn’t respond to a request for comment but has said that it doesn’t comment on pending lawsuits.

Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, issued a memorandum to agencies across the federal government that he said would “strengthen the federal government’s commitment to the fair and effective administration of FOIA.”

“Transparency in government operations is a priority of this Administration and this Department. We stand ready to work with each of you to make real the Freedom of Information Act’s promise of a government that is open and accountable to the American people,” he said at the time.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Biden Justice Department has yet to take action against abortion extremists menacing pro-life clinics and members of the Supreme Court. Republican lawmakers are resolved to hold leadership accountable after the midterm elections—even if that means impeaching Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio), who is in line to take over the House Judiciary Committee if Republicans prevail in November, didn’t take a Garland impeachment inquiry off the table in an interview with the Washington Free Beacon. Jordan cited a range of alleged misconduct, from failure to enforce black-letter law to protect clinics and justices, to secret collusion with leftwing groups opposed to parents protesting woke curricula changes.

“That’ll be a decision that will be made by the entire conference,” Jordan said of an impeachment push.

The oversight planning is a response to conflict roiling the country following the High Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Pro-abortion protesters tried running Justice Brett Kavanaugh out of a downtown Washington, D.C., steakhouse on Wednesday night, weeks after a gunman came to his home planning to assassinate him. And the militant pro-abortion network Jane’s Revenge has claimed responsibility for more than a dozen acts against pro-life clinics and churches, ranging from vandalism to fire-bombing.

It is a federal crime to demonstrate outside of a judge’s home with intent to influence deliberations. Regular pro-abortion demonstrations outside the homes of the conservative justices seem to fit that bill exactly. The Justice Department has taken no action against protesters as of this writing. Local police told inquiring neighbors that federal agencies are declining to enforce the judicial anti-picketing law, according to a Fox News report.

Jordan wonders whether the Justice Department and the White House are following a template.

“The key question we would like to find out, if in fact the American people put us in control, is was this similar to what happened with parents at school board meetings? In other words, was the Biden White House working with some outside left wing influence groups, and also then communicating that information to the DOJ?” Jordan said.

The Ohio Republican added that a dozen whistleblowers have quietly come forward to speak about the Biden Justice Department and FBI matters, though he declined to get into specifics.

The Free Beacon was first to report that White House aides colluded with the National School Boards Association to push the Justice Department into investigating parents protesting critical race theory and gender ideology as domestic terrorists.

It’s also a federal crime to attack or destroy houses of worship and clinics for pregnant women. Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who enforces those laws, has derided pro-life clinics in the past. While Biden administration officials have shared intelligence assessments with clerics and local law enforcement, the administration has yet to make even a single arrest or indictment related to dozens of attacks on churches and pro-life crisis pregnancy centers.

There have been almost 50 documented instances of violence, vandalism, or intimidation at houses of worship and pro-life clinics since the Dobbs draft leaked, according to a June report from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

House Republicans will be better positioned than their Senate counterparts to force Biden officials to cooperate if they stonewall investigators. Senate committee rules incentivize, but do not require, bipartisan cooperation when issuing subpoenas. The House has no such constraints. And House committees have historically taken the lead on compelled testimony and sharing of evidence.

Republican senators are putting public pressure on federal law enforcement to take immediate action. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to FBI director Christopher Wray in June requesting a briefing on the bureau’s efforts to combat pro-abortion extremism.

“Our law enforcement officers are obliged to duly enforce the laws of our country—not just those that are politically suitable to the current administration,” Grassley’s letter reads.

“We’re usually the tip of the spear in terms of shining a light on issues and embarrassing an agency into compliance,” a Republican Senate aide told the Free Beacon. “The more attention they get for ignoring congressional oversight, the worse it looks for them. And that’s a pretty effective tactic for us.”

Outside groups are also pressing GOP lawmakers for accountability. Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project, said there is ample reason to remove Garland from office. Davis was nominations chief for Grassley during the Kavanaugh confirmation and led the outside support team for Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation.

“When Republicans reclaim the House in January, they must impeach Attorney General Merrick Garland,” Davis told the Free Beacon. “There must be consequences for his dangerous dereliction of duty that has led to highly dangerous attacks on the Supreme Court of the United States.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The governors of Virginia and Maryland responded to a letter from the Supreme Court’s top security official calling on them to provide more police resources to prevent protests outside the homes of justices following the landmark ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Left-wing protesters have continued to appear outside their homes since the ruling. Over the July 4 weekend, more protesters were seen picketing outside the justices’ homes, located in suburban areas in Virginia and Maryland.

“The governor agrees with the Marshal that the threatening activity outside the Justices’ homes has increased,” Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin spokesperson Christian Martinez said in a statement after Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley called on the governor to “enforce state law” that prohibits demonstrations outside the homes of justices.

“He welcomes the Marshal of the Supreme Court’s request for Fairfax County to enforce state law as they are the primary enforcement authority for the state statute,” the statement added, adding that Attorney General Merrick Garland needs to “do his job” by enforcing federal laws.

“Every resource of federal law enforcement, including the U.S. Marshals, should be involved while the Justices continue to be denied the right to live peacefully in their homes,” according to the statement. However, from the statement, it’s not clear if Youngkin’s administration is going to take concrete steps to provide more law enforcement at their homes.

Another Response

After receiving Curley’s letter on Friday night, a spokesman for Republican Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan responded by saying that Garland needs to act.

“Two months ago, Governor Hogan and Governor Youngkin sent a letter calling on Attorney General Garland to enforce the clear and unambiguous federal statutes on the books that prohibit picketing at judges’ residences,” Hogan spokesman Michael Ricci wrote on Twitter. “A month later, hours after an assassination attempt on Justice Kavanaugh, the Department of Justice finally responded, declining to enforce the laws.”

The spokesman was referring to an incident involving 26-year-old Nicholas Roske, a California man who was arrested at Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home last month and allegedly told officials that he was plotting to kill the justice because he would support overturning Roe v. Wade and support expanding Second Amendment protections.

“Now a different federal official is writing to us with conflicting information,” his statement continued. “Had the marshal taken time to explore the matter, she would have learned that the constitutionality of the statute cited in her letter has been questioned by the Maryland Attorney General’s office.”

Hogan has instructed Maryland State Police to further review law enforcement options after the letter was sent, Ricci said.

Federal law stipulates that it’s illegal to attempt to influence a judge’s ruling or interfere with their duties. But the Department of Justice has, so far, failed to take action against the constant protests outside the homes of Republican-appointed justices including Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, and Kavanaugh.

The demonstrations, meanwhile, come amid rampant vandalism and arson attacks against churches, pregnancy centers, and pro-life groups. Some left-wing extremist groups have said they will carry out more attacks if their demands aren’t met. Last weekend, dozens of people were arrested across the U.S. following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Top Department of Justice (DOJ) officials have chastised the House of Representatives committee investigating the U.S. Capitol breach that took place on Jan. 6, 2021, for not handing over transcripts of interviews they’ve conducted.

“It is now readily apparent that the interviews the Select Committee conducted are not just potentially relevant to our overall criminal investigations, but are likely relevant to specific prosecutions that have already commenced,” Assistant Attorney Generals Kenneth Polite Jr. and Matthew Olsen wrote to the panel in a letter dated June 15 that was docketed in a federal court on Thursday.

“The Select Committee’s failure to grant the Department access to these transcripts complicates the Department’s ability to investigate and prosecute those who engaged in criminal conduct in relation to the January 6 attack on the Capitol,” they added later, urging the panel to reverse its position.

Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, also signed the missive.

The office of Graves submitted the letter in a case against members of the Proud Boys who are charged with crimes in relation to Jan. 6.

Prosecutors said the DOJ “has neither access to the transcripts, nor the ability to compel Congress, a co-equal branch of government, to provide copies of the transcripts.” They also said they do not oppose pushing back the trial of the defendants due to the transcripts not being available.

“We got the letter yesterday, we are reviewing it, we will respond to it, but we are in the midst of conducting our hearings,” Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the chairman of the House panel on Thursday.

We have a program to get over, we have to get the facts and circumstances behind Jan. 6. We will work with them, but we have a report to do. We are not going to stop what we are doing to share the information that we have gotten so far with the Department of Justice. We have to do our work,” he added.

Thompson told reporters in May that he rebuffed a request from DOJ officials to turn over transcripts, describing them at the time as “the committee’s work product.”

The transcripts would be shared after the panel’s work is done, Thompson added.

Lawmakers on the panel cannot bring criminal charges, but they can make criminal referrals. Thompson said recently that the panel wouldn’t make any referrals; some members said that decision has not been made yet.

Attorney General Merrick Garland, head of the DOJ, told reporters this week that he is watching the hearings the panel is holding. “And I can assure you that the January 6 prosecutors are watching all of the hearings as well,” he said at an unrelated briefing in Washington.

Garland said the DOJ is working to “hold all perpetrators who are criminally responsible for Jan. 6 accountable, regardless of their level, their position, and regardless of whether they were present for the events of Jan. 6.”

The Jan. 6 House panel has interviewed over 1,000 people in its probe, including many who have not been charged with a crime. The list includes former President Donald Trump’s daughter and adviser, Ivanka Trump; former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani; and Bill Stepien, who managed Trump’s 2020 campaign.

The panel is holding hearings in June, with the third one of the month completed Thursday. Leaders have said they plan to issue a report by the end of the year.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/department-of-justice-criticizes-jan-6-committee-for-not-turning-over-interview-transcripts_4538552.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-17-2&utm_medium=email&est=9rZsiqB042CRTvCG5vIJtr%2F11tisORDXdfj3fmWFmsHKM15Oi4XjQ6tG0dV4b025vg%3D%3D

The Justice Department official who investigates attacks on reproductive health care facilities has been a staunch critic of pro-life crisis pregnancy centers, dozens of which have been vandalized by abortion supporters over the past month. 

Civil rights division chief Kristen Clarke criticized the centers following a Supreme Court decision issued in their favor in 2018. Clarke said the centers, which counsel pregnant women on alternatives to abortion, were “harmful” and “predatory” against women of color. She also referred to them with the hashtag, “ExposeFakeClinics.” 

Clarke’s stance on the centers offers a potential explanation for the Justice Department’s refusal to investigate a string of attacks on pro-life centers since the May 2 leak of a draft Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) asked Attorney General Merrick Garland last week to investigate the incidents as acts of domestic terrorism. Garland has yet to open an investigation, even though he said on Sept. 6 he would investigate crimes against “reproductive health center[s]” under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act). 

Clarke oversees investigations of potential FACE Act violations. She charged nine people under the statute in March for blocking the entrance to a Washington, D.C., abortion provider. 

The attacks on crisis pregnancy centers, churches, and other pro-life organizations have run rampant since the leak of the Roe v. Wade draft opinion last month. Twenty-four crisis centers have been vandalized or set on fire since the leak, according to a group that tracks the incidents. In the latest assaults, a facility in Buffalo was firebombed on June 7. A center in Gresham, Ore., was hit with an “incendiary device” over the weekend. 

The attacks are part of a broad intimidation campaign by left-wing activists upset that Roe may be overturned. Activists have protested outside the homes of conservative justices. A radical left-wing group hatched plans to shut down the Supreme Court using tactics that “stretch the bounds of constitutionally protected speech.” One abortion supporter attempted to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh last week. 

Clarke showed her opposition to crisis pregnancy centers following a Supreme Court ruling in June 2018 that struck down a California requirement that the centers inform patients about state abortion services. 

“The anti-choice movement will stop at nothing,” wrote Clarke, using left-wing activist jargon to refer to pro-life groups. She added the hashtags, “#EndTheLies” and “#ExposeFakeClinics.”

Clarke also said the centers prey on women of color. She said the Supreme Court decision would have “harmful consequences for women, especially women of color who are often targeted by predatory [crisis pregnancy centers].” 

The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a civil rights group Clarke led at the time, alleged that crisis pregnancy centers “target some of the most vulnerable women in communities today.” 

Asked about Clarke’s tweets, Rubio said she should be disqualified from overseeing any eventual investigation into the crisis pregnancy center attacks. 

“Kristen Clarke never should have been confirmed,” Rubio told the Washington Free Beacon. “Her disdain toward the very people now under threat was predictable and it should be disqualifying. Attorney General Garland should make clear that Clarke will have no involvement in any of these cases as those move forward.” 

The Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment about Clarke or whether the agency is considering investigations into the attacks. 

Clarke has a long history of making controversial statements about issues she now oversees as civil rights chief. She wrote in support of the movement to defund the police in 2020 but denied to Republicans during her confirmation hearing that she wanted to defund police departments. In 2019, Clarke criticized the Chicago police department for requesting access to the cell phone of Jussie Smollett, the actor found to have staged a hoax in which he falsely claimed Trump supporters attacked him because he is black and gay. Clarke has criticized conservative Supreme Court judges, many of whom are now the target of left-wing radical protesters. She claimed that Kavanaugh’s presence on the bench would be “dangerous.” She called him a “man who harbors such bias, rage, fury and is so easily unhinged.”

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/pro-life-facilities-are-under-attack-a-top-doj-official-called-them-fake-clinics/

The Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB) has terminated its membership with the National School Boards Association (NSBA) amid controversy over a letter sent to the Biden administration likening concerned parents at school board meetings to “domestic terrorists.”

WASB voted Tuesday not to renew its membership with NSBA, joining a number of states which have opted to do so since the letter came to light last year, Fox News reported.

“Actions by the NSBA’s leadership last fall needlessly harmed school board relationships and inflamed partisan tensions,” WASB said in a statement to its members. “Those actions caused more than half of the state school board organizations across the nation to distance themselves from the NSBA or drop membership entirely.”

The WASB noted that it is “encouraged by the NSBA’s new executive director Dr. John Heim,” according to Fox.

The Epoch Times has contacted the WASB for comment.

‘Angry Mobs’

It comes after the NSBA sent a letter (pdf) to resident Joe Biden on Sept. 29, 2021, asking for federal law enforcement and other assistance to “deal with the growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation,” and characterizing disruptions at school board meetings as “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime.”

The letter was in response to parents at school board meetings raising issues regarding COVID-19 restrictions like mask mandates that were being imposed on their children, as well as the teaching of Marxist critical race theory.

The letter also referred to the groups of parents raising issues as “angry mobs” that had forced the meetings to “end abruptly.”

“Local school board members want to hear from their communities on important issues and that must be at the forefront of good school board governance and promotion of free speech. However, there also must be safeguards in place to protect public schools and dedicated education leaders as they do their jobs,” the letter noted.

Days after the letter was sent, on Oct. 4, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing federal law enforcement to meet to discuss an alleged “disturbing trend” in “violent threats against school officials and teachers.”

However, following backlash over its letter, the NSBA underwent an independent review to identify the events and procedures that led to its sending of the letter.

That review was completed in May and saw the board implement “a number of action items moving forward” based on its findings while noting that the letter had not been “widely reviewed or approved within the organization, and the finalized letter was not disclosed to the full NSBA Board of Directors or NSBA members until after it was submitted.”

The Board of Directors also apologized in October 2021 for the letter and announced new executive leadership for the organization in November 2021, with Heim replacing former Interim Executive Director and CEO, Chip Slaven.

“The letter directly contradicts our core commitments to parent engagement, local control, and nonpartisanship,” Heim said at the time. “The sentiments shared in the letter do not represent the views or position of the NSBA. The NSBA does not seek or advocate for federal law enforcement intervention at local school board meetings.”

Despite the apology and an independent review, a string of school boards have cut ties with the NSBA since 2021, including in North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Missouri, Nebraska, and Minnesota.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-school-board-group-cuts-ties-with-nsba-over-letter-comparing-parents-to-terrorists_4534434.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-15-2&utm_medium=email&est=w2%2BSxfsWIpRcx1HW191ed9SeMDsFf1HVZ%2BADsznTRjw%2FxyBX6eB54djmkEMieY%2Btxw%3D%3D

Members of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol say they have enough evidence to indict former President Donald Trump.

“I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump,” said committee member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

The Hill has more on Schiff’s remarks:

“The evidence is very powerful that Donald Trump … began telling this big lie even before the elections, that he was saying that any ballots counted after Election Day were going to be inherently suspect,” Schiff told moderator Martha Raddatz on ABC’s “This Week.”

Since its first public hearing last week, the committee has argued that Trump fueled the anger that day that resulted in violence, threats to lawmakers, the injury of dozens of police officers and the death of Ashli Babbitt.

Schiff also said that there is enough evidence that links Trump with white nationalist groups before the riot, adding that the connection will be a clear focus of their investigation.

“Let me ask you, is there an actual conversation between people in Trump’s orbit and Proud Boys, Oathkeepers?” Raddatz asked Schiff. 

“Well, you know, as I think the committee already disclosed and has been publicly reported, of course, there are connections between these white nationalist groups and some in Trump’s orbit,” Schiff exclaimed, although he added that he wouldn’t get into specifics until the hearings got to that point.

Committee members were tight-lipped on other Sunday news shows about what viewers can expect at this week’s hearings. However, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) agreed with Schiff that there is “overwhelming” evidence Trump participated in a “criminal conspiracy.”

The announcements have prompted speculation that the Jan. 6 committee is paving the way for U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict Trump on criminal conspiracy charges.

Others were decidedly more skeptical.

Anyone expecting Merrick Garland to indict Donald Trump for felony sedition or conspiracy might consider that he was unwilling to charge either Mark Meadows or Dan Scavino with misdemeanor contempt.June 4, 2022

The first hearing claimed that multiple congressmen asked for pardons following the Capitol riot, but only named one, Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.).

Members of the committee, including Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said they believed the request for pardons showed Perry and others knew they had done something illegal.

Perry has vigorously denied ever asking Trump for a pardon.

Three days of hearings have been scheduled for the coming week, on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday.

CNBC adds:

Monday’s hearing is slated to begin at 10 a.m. ET. The committee is expected to focus on Trump’s misinformation campaign and the lack of evidence supporting allegations of election fraud.

https://www.americanliberty.news/capitol-hill/jan-6-committee-says-it-has-enough-evidence-to-indict-trump/phouck/2022/06/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ae01&seyid=6225

‘Tonight, they’re going to scream their lie loudly and often with much Hollywood drama. They hope you will buy it as truth. Do not be deceived.’

Ahead of the first of six televised House committee hearings related to the protests that took place at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021, a Jan. 6 prisoner has issued a warning to the American people regarding the “farce” they are about to witness.

On the evening of June 8, The Epoch Times received an audio recording from Jeremy Brown, which he addresses to the American people. The transcript of the recording can be found here.

“I am coming to you today on the 253rd day of my illegal, unconstitutional imprisonment to advise and warn the American people that what you are about to see is part of this compromised government’s well-orchestrated, highly-produced lie, meant to target the minds and perception of the uninformed and misinformed masses with the intent to demonize and dehumanize their opposition,” Brown begins.

He also advises that “their opponents are anyone who disagrees or even asks questions about their false authority and their anti-American and anti-liberty agenda.” He says “their goal is to take down America and ‘Build Back Better’ in a form suitable to their authoritarian utopia dreamland, also known as the Great Reset.”

Brown is a 20-year United States Special Services Master Sergeant and combat veteran. Brown is also a candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, District 62. As a self-described “January 6 political prisoner of war,” Brown is currently being held in the Pinellas County Jail in Clearwater, Florida, where he is awaiting trial for two misdemeanor charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021 protest in Washington: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds and disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds.

However, Brown contends he is being held, not because of what the government claims he did, but because the FBI and Department of Justice are aware that he knows “the truth” about what they did. In an alleged effort to keep him from exposing that truth, they have denied him access to any evidence in his case for over eight months. He also reminds Americans that the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force already attempted to recruit him “to be part of their fraud.”

“But I turned them down,” he said, noting that he even recorded the encounter in order to expose them, and it was after that recording got out that they had him arrested “and planted evidence” in order to keep him incarcerated.

In an open letter titled, ‘”Don’t Do Nothing,” exposed in an exclusive story by The Epoch Times on April 13, Brown outlined how the government is trying to take control over the American people through intimidation and fear and to silence those who dare to take a stand. The entire letter is available here. The actual recording of the agents attempting to recruit Brown is available at the Gateway Pundit and at JeremyBrownDefense.com.

“They’ve had me locked away for 253 days in hopes of shutting me up,” Brown insisted, saying that will never happen “because they are sloppy.”

He predicts he will soon be free. But after that, “they will manufacture a new reason” to put him back in jail or to silence him “in other ways.”

“But even in death,” he vowed, “I have a plan to expose the truth.”

“Just look round,” Brown challenged, noting how “bodies of unelected, global elites like the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and many others” are simultaneously and systematically destroying every aspect of what has made America “the most free and powerful nation on earth.”

“Their goal is to convince us that we are global citizens, not Americans,” Brown said, suggesting they are using a strategy of chaos in an effort to divide Americans by race, gender, medical mandates, the education of America’s children, “and even the weather” in order to turn them against each other.

“They need us to blame each other so we don’t blame and hold them accountable,” He asserted, adding that “their gloves are off and they’ve crossed the Rubicon.”

“Their fake cultural revolution has been building for decades,” Brown said, with the caveat that it is now “out in the open for all to see and that those who seek to rule over [Americans] must seize total control before [Americans] recognize what is going on.

“But will you recognize it?” he asks rhetorically, and he dares Americans to look at the condition of their country, at what is going on with their children, in their workplace, in their communities, and in their culture. He challenges them to look at the empty supermarket shelves, the cost of gas, and the evaporation of their life’s savings. “Do you see it?” he asks, inquiring further that with all of the current problems, why are gun control and domestic terrorism “the D.C. topics of the day?”

“At a time when violent crime and property crime are skyrocketing faster than inflation and gas prices, your government wants you disarmed,” he noted.

In the wake of the tragedy in Uvalde, Texas, House Democrats passed the FY2022 National Defense Authorization Act to enact Red flag laws, which will ultimately enable the government, through law enforcement and the courts, to target law-abiding gun owners by stripping away their Second Amendment rights based on allegations that lack due process, reasonable suspicion, and probable cause.

Brown further notes that while the government is using American tax dollars to arm Ukraine, they are actively seeking to take away guns from the American people. Why?

“Think about this statement,” Brown challenged. “When politicians want to take away your guns, that is exactly when you need your guns, and the Founding Fathers knew and lived through this. These criminals know the people are waking up to their corruption and when the lights come on they’ll be the rats and roaches running to hide. What you’re going to see tonight is their attempt to fortify their false narrative and they hope to see this as their final justification to pass laws making all of us domestic terrorists.”

After the National School Board Association sent a now-scrubbed letter (pdf) to President Joe Biden asking him to label parents who showed up to school board meetings to express their anger over mask mandates and critical race theory as a form of “domestic terrorism” and to use the Patriot Act against them, an Oct. 4, 2021 memorandum from United States Attorney General Merrick Garland to the FBI says the bureau was using a “threat tag” system to track and access those “threats” and that “the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”

“Tonight, they’re going to scream their lie loudly and often with much Hollywood drama,” Brown predicted. “They hope you will buy it as truth. Do not be deceived.”

He said the American people must watch the investigative hearings and realize that what they are watching “is a farce.”

Stewart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers, also recorded a message to the American people, which was also obtained by The Epoch Times. The transcript of the recording can be found here. Rhodes, charged with seditious conspiracy and “other charges,” is being held in a jail in Virginia. Like many other Jan. 6 defendants, Rhodes is being held without a trial.

Rhodes also contends the hearings are nothing more than “a war against the entire MAGA movement” and an effort to destroy it. He said they are using the manufactured narrative created by “someone who rolled over and agreed to test a lie, to falsely testify, bear false witness” and they are trying to use “this grand lie” that Jan. 6 was a “planned conspiracy” in order to “stick that to President Trump” and to destroy “the two groups they hate the most, the Oath Keepers and everyone who is part of the MAGA movement.

“So just understand that,” Rhodes warned. “God bless everybody, take care.”

Brown tells the American people to learn his story. Then compare his account of what happened on Jan. 6 “to what you hear and see from the politicians that are responsible for most of the problems in this county and lie to your face for a living.”

“Judge for yourself what rings true to you,” he said, adding that he isn’t running for office from jail “to win.” He’s “running to warn.”

“Tonight, gather your family and friends and watch what is going on,” he admonished, advising them to “watch with a discerning eye and listen closely to their words.”

Ask yourself tough questions and then seek the truth on your own. Once you find the truth, don’t do nothing because today America needs us to be Americans. Today, it’s time for patriots not politicians, warriors not wimps, leaders not leaches, champions not cowards. It is time for winter soldiers to defend our republic, not sunshine patriots who profit from its destruction. Evil tells you who they are and we must believe them. My name is Jeremy Brown, imamate 1875858, and this is my warning to America.

“God bless your families and the truth seekers,” Brown concluded. “May God hear our prayers and cries for liberty and justice to be restored. De oppresso liber. Liberty or death.”

Joe Hanneman and Joseph Lord contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-ahead-of-televised-investigative-hearing-farce-jan-6-prisoner-issues-warning-to-americans_4522315.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-09-4&utm_medium=email&est=GbUf4hz%2Fu8hSxf0EHOdL1T%2BUz76NLOiXRFSxOuyxclWOSrm83Un1lQZQD0RUt3Kguw%3D%3D

The White House has responded after a man was arrested for allegedly attempting to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh on June 8.

“The president condemns the actions of this individual in the strongest terms and is grateful to law enforcement for quickly taking him into custody,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Air Force One en route to California.

“As the President has consistently made clear, public officials, including judges, must be able to do their jobs without concern for their personal safety or that of their families. And any threats of violence or attempts to intimidate justices have no place in our society,” she added.

Nicholas Roske, 26, of Simi Valley, California, was arrested in the early hours of Wednesday near Kavanaugh’s home in Chevy Chase. Authorities said he had a gun, a knife, and various other items, such as duct tape, and planned to break into Kavanaugh’s house and kill the justice.

Roske said in federal court in Greenbelt during his initial appearance that he “wouldn’t say I’m thinking clearly.” He said he had taken medication prescribed to him by a doctor.

According to charging documents, Roske hatched the plan because he was upset about the recent Supreme Court draft decision that was leaked. The decision indicated the court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, giving authority to regulate abortion back to states. Roske also expressed concern that Kavanaugh “would side with Second Amendment decisions that would loosen gun control laws.”

It wasn’t clear whether Kavanaugh, who has a wife and two daughters and was appointed by former President Donald Trump, was home when Roske was arrested.

Before boarding Air Force One in Maryland, Biden didn’t address the arrest. Some lawmakers had called on the president to personally condemn violent threats and actions against justices.

Around the same time, Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, told reporters at the Department of Justice that “this kind of behavior is obviously behavior that we will not tolerate” and that prosecutors would work to hold the man who was arrested accountable.

Federal authorities have neglected thus far to charge the protesters who have gathered outside the homes of Kavanaugh and others since the draft opinion was leaked with crimes, despite legal experts saying they are in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1507, which prohibits picketing or parading near a judge’s residence “with the intent of influencing” the judge.

Protesters are seeking to convince the four justices who reportedly signed onto Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion against Roe v. Wade to shift positions.

Garland did order around-the-clock security for all nine justices’ homes, and two deputy U.S. Marshals were said to have locked eyes with Roske when he arrived outside Kavanaugh’s abode before he walked down the street and called 911 on himself.

Roske was charged with violating a different law, 18 U.S.C. § 115, which bars attempting to kidnap or murder, or threatening to assault, kidnap, or murder federal judges.

Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters in May that the White House encouraged peaceful protests outside of judges’ homes, while avoiding questions of the apparent violations of federal law.

On Wednesday, Jean-Pierre said that the Department of Homeland Security is working with partners in the government and private sector “to share timely information and intelligence to prevent all forms of violence and to support law enforcement efforts to keep our communities safe.” She also said that the president supports legislation that would fund increased security for the Supreme Court and the justices. The bill was passed by the Senate in May but remains stalled in the House of Representatives over efforts to extend protection to clerks.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/white-house-responds-after-man-allegedly-tried-killing-supreme-courts-kavanaugh_4521213.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-06-09&utm_medium=email&est=c%2F6OHpGT3CveKO8uq08K3fkWeuETSHMwAm1l0IvoLDsztFFMAvIgdxU1MBxIioJBnw%3D%3D

Abortion activists firebombed a pro-life pregnancy center outside Buffalo, N.Y., the latest in a series of attacks on pro-life offices and churches since the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

The pro-life organization CompassCare reported that early Tuesday morning, activists smashed windows and set fires in the group’s Amherst, N.Y., medical office. The assailants graffitied the phrase “Jane Was Here” on the building, a tagline associated with a group called Jane’s Revenge that has claimed responsibility for attacks on pro-life institutions across the country.

The attack comes as Supreme Court justices and pro-life advocates face heightened threats this month of leftwing violence over the Court’s looming Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision. Jane’s Revenge took credit for the firebombing of a pro-life office in Wisconsin last month. And anarchists who vandalized four churches in Washington State claimed association with Jane’s Revenge. The Department of Homeland Security has warned law enforcement about potential violence against justices, clerks, and even clergy members in the wake of the Dobbs ruling. Pro-abortion violence is not the only kind tacitly supported by the left. The Washington Free Beacon reported on Tuesday how two Ivy League lawyers who lobbed a Molotov cocktail into a police car during the summer 2020 riots worked out a sweetheart plea deal last month with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Justice Department.

CompassCare CEO Jim Harden condemned the attack and called for Democratic New York officials to protect pro-life organizations.

“Because of this act of violence, the needs of women facing unplanned pregnancy will go unmet and babies will die,” Harden said.

The Supreme Court is expected to overturn Roe‘s recognition of a right to abortion in the Dobbs case, returning the issue of abortion access to the states.

https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/abortion-activists-firebomb-another-pro-life-office/

Biden DOJ asks judge to go easy on Ivy League firebombers

On the cusp of nonstop, around-the-clock (primetime!) coverage of the Jan. 6 committee hearings, a couple of domestic terrorists are actually getting their day in court, and it is informative to see how Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is handling their prosecution.

Recall Garland’s breathless declaration, during his confirmation hearings, that “150 years after the Department’s founding, battling extremist attacks on our democratic institutions also remains central to its mission.”

Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman were arrested in the “mostly peaceful” protests following George Floyd’s murder. The two lawyers handed out Molotov cocktails to the crowd, and Rahman tossed one into a police car before fleeing the scene in Mattis’s van. They reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors in October 2020 that wiped out six of the seven charges against them. Those prosecutors, nonetheless, sought a maximum 10-year sentence and argued that the incident qualified for a so-called terrorism enhancement that would turbocharge sentencing—a determination with which the U.S. Probation Office concurred.

Ginning herself up to distribute explosives to the crowd, Rahman gave a video interview in which she declared, “This shit won’t ever stop until we fuckin’ take it all down,” adding that “the only way [the police] hear us is through violence.”

Then, Garland and the U.S. attorney for New York’s Eastern District, Breon Peace, who’s handling the prosecution, took office, and you won’t believe what happened next!

In mid-May, the same career DOJ prosecutors who argued for that 10-year sentence were back in court withdrawing their plea deal and entering a new one that allowed the defendants to cop to the lesser charge of conspiracy. It tosses out the terrorism enhancement entirely.

The new charge carries a five-year maximum sentence, but the prosecutors are urging the judge to go below that, asking for just 18 to 24 months on account of the “history and personal characteristics of the defendants” and the “aberrational nature of the defendants’ conduct.” Because, you know, Mattis graduated from Princeton and New York University Law School and was an attorney at the white-shoe law firm Pryor Cashman, and Rahman was a public-interest lawyer whose “best friend,” Obama administration intelligence official Salmah Rizvi, guaranteed the $250,000 required to release her on bail.

Law360, which reported on the events, calls the new deal an “unusual step.” James Trusty, a former prosecutor in the Department of Justice’s criminal division, broke it down for us this way: “Swapping in a softer plea agreement after having gone through the plea hearing is an exceedingly rare event in federal court.” It can happen, he said, if there is “truly some new development or understanding about the defendants that merits a fresh look.”

In this case, the new development is the political persuasion of the folks running the Justice Department, and for them, Mattis and Rahman are the right kind of domestic terrorists—the ones whose cases and conduct will never be the subject of a congressional hearing or plastered from wall to wall on cable television.

Remember their names, and the special treatment they received at the hands of the Biden Justice Department, when the broadcasts begin on Thursday and when Garland next has the gall to feign concern about political violence directed at our democratic institutions.

Mattis and Rahman Change of Plea Hearing by Washington Free Beacon on Scribd

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/how-the-left-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-domestic-terrorism/

A probe of the National School Boards Association’s call for federal investigations of parents as domestic terrorists found the White House was involved in the drafting process that led to the controversial request.

The association commissioned an internal investigation following outcry from parent groups and association board members who were upset by the inflammatory rhetoric in a Sept. 29 letter to President Joe Biden. The group found that Chip Slaven, then-CEO of the National School Boards association, told a White House senior policy adviser on Sept. 21 that he planned to ask Biden to use the FBI and Justice Department to investigate threats against school board members under counterterrorism statutes and the Patriot Act.

The White House adviser, Mary C. Wall, solicited Slaven for examples of threats made against school board members in advance of a Sept. 22 meeting with the Justice Department and other White House offices. The association detailed these previously unreported exchanges in a report released Friday.

“Evidence indicates that White House officials discussed the existence of the Letter, its requests, and the contents of the Letter with Department of Justice officials more than a week before the Letter was finalized and sent to President Biden,” the report says.

The letter sparked controversy at the time after Attorney General Merrick Garland formed a federal task force to monitor threats against school boards and teachers. Parent groups and Republicans accused the Biden administration of colluding with the NSBA to use the letter to justify scrutiny of school board meetings. They’ve questioned the involvement of federal investigators in local school board issues and alleged that the federal task force is intended to intimidate parents who voiced concern over schools’ coronavirus policies and left-wing curricula. Members of the association also complained about the contents of the letter, as well as being left out of the loop before it was sent.

The Washington Free Beacon reported on Oct. 21 that the White House was in contact with the National School Boards Association before the group sent the letter. But it was not known then that the White House knew of the controversial rhetoric in the document.

“It is inexcusable that a senior White House adviser would have the audacity to collaborate on a public request to use the Patriot Act against families,” Nicole Neily, the president of Parents Defending Education, said in a statement about the association’s report. “This is, quite literally, a betrayal of trust by the highest levels of government.”

Sen. Ben Sasse (R., Neb.), who questioned Garland about the federal task force in a Senate hearing last year, said the association report showed the letter was a “political hack job … drummed up by progressive activists and their partners in the Biden White House to chill parents’ exercise of free speech.”

The association said in a statement that the letter did not represent its views and that it does not support federal intervention in school board meetings. The report places most of the blame for the letter on Slaven, who served as the group’s interim CEO until November.

According to emails included in the report, Slaven began toying with the idea of asking the White House for federal support at school board meetings on Sept. 8. He told other association executives about a complaint from an Ohio school board member who received a threatening letter from a parent. Slaven said the intense atmosphere at school board meetings reminded him of the aftermath of “Waco or Ruby Ridge.”

Slaven shared his concerns with Wall, the White House adviser, on Sept. 14. Wall asked Slaven to provide her with some of the “egregious examples” of threats made against school board members. She followed up on the request on Sept. 21, saying that she wanted to cite them in a meeting the next day with the Justice Department.

Slaven gave Wall several examples from across the country. He also shared a summary of a letter he planned to send to the White House. Slaven told Wall he planned to ask Biden to use the FBI and Justice Department to use its counterterrorism divisions to investigate threats against school board members. Slaven also made reference to the Patriot Act and “domestic terrorism” investigations.

Slaven sent Wall a final copy of the letter hours before publishing it on Sept. 29. The White House official raised no objections to the language in the letter, and instead offered Slaven support.

“Thank you for sending in advance,” she wrote. “We will review, and we remain committed to working with you on these very important issues. As the President has stated, we stand with educators who are doing right by kids—and we know they/you all need to be protected now more than ever.”

Slaven was in contact with other federal officials after sending the letter to Biden. Anthony Coley, a Justice Department adviser to Garland, asked Slaven for a phone call on Oct. 4, the day that Garland formed the task force to monitor school board threats. Coley sent Slaven a preview of the statement before the Justice Department released it.

The Department of Homeland Security also contacted the association on Oct. 4.

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/report-reveals-white-house-involvement-in-letter-that-compared-parents-to-domestic-terrorists/

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland to ask why an attack on a Madison, Wisconsin, pro-life center wasn’t being investigated as an act of domestic terrorism.

Late on May 8, the Wisconsin Family Action clinic in Madison was attacked with a Molotov cocktail following the leaked release of a draft Supreme Court majority opinion suggesting the high court would overturn the Roe v. Wade case that made abortion constitutionally protected.

“Attacking a pro-life organization in a manner that could have injured or killed the office’s occupants due to differing political ideologies fits these definitions,” Johnson wrote. “I am unfortunately compelled to write to you about this matter because DOJ [Department of Justice] has a track record of not prosecuting left-wing violence as we have seen with the summer of 2020 riots that occurred nationwide.”

The FBI says domestic terrorism, he added, is an “ideologically driven criminal act, including threats or acts of violence made to specific victims, made in furtherance of a domestic ideological goal that has occurred and can be confirmed.”

The senator also made note of protests, including some that were held over the recent weekend, outside the homes of Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices, describing such incidents as intimidation and a violation of federal law.

“The intimidation of sitting Supreme Court justices is a clear violation of federal law, and, once again, DOJ, FBI, and [the Department of Homeland Security] have yet to condemn these activities,” Johnson wrote. “Compare your silence on these events to your robust actions against parents attending public school board meetings to voice their concerns about far-left ideologies being integrated” in public schools.

Officials in Wisconsin told The Epoch Times last week that they were aware of a left-wing group that carried out the attack on the Madison pro-life group’s office. The group claiming responsibility, Jane’s Revenge, sent a statement to Bellingcat that the arson was a “warning.”

“Next time the infrastructure of the enslavers will not survive,” the group said, adding that if pro-life groups and clinics weren’t disbanded within the next month, it would carry out further attacks.

“Wisconsin is the first flashpoint, but we are all over the U.S., and we will issue no further warnings,” the statement said, adding that they would “adopt increasingly extreme tactics to maintain freedom over our own bodies.”

In the letter, Johnson made reference to the group’s apparent threat.

The Department of Justice didn’t respond by press time to a request for comment.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/sen-ron-johnson-to-ag-garland-why-is-wisconsin-pro-life-center-attack-not-domestic-terrorism_4468035.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-15-4&utm_medium=email&est=Zi8cPCNZm0LkmVTD%2Fc6P3BKrG303hnI83NAXc9BBajSoNIsW5JvG4lDreGHvr3MxHw%3D%3D

The Department of Justice (DOJ) must address deepening concerns that it’s not insulated from political influence, the agency’s watchdog stated in a new report.

The DOJ failed to follow policies and procedures designed to protect it from accusations that it’s politicized or partially applying the law in a number of cases, including while investigating Donald Trump’s campaign during the 2016 election and in leaks to the media, Inspector General Michael Horowitz noted.

“Numerous national events in the past year have crystalized the urgency for the department to address this challenge in a meaningful way,” he wrote, including the discovery that the DOJ under the Trump administration obtained communications to and from members of Congress and accusations that protesters were cleared from Lafayette Square in Washington on June 1, 2020, for political purposes.

Such events “have all raised questions about the department’s objectivity and impartiality” and “negatively impacted the perception of the department as a fair administrator of justice,” Horowitz said.

As proof, the watchdog cited a 2020 poll from the Pew Research Center, which found favorable views of DOJ among Democrats dropped sharply during the Trump administration. Republican views grew more favorable during the same time.

DOJ officials didn’t respond to requests by The Epoch Times for comment.

Critics on both the left and right have said the DOJ in recent years has acted wrongfully. Democrats repeatedly criticized the department during the Trump era, including over its bid to lower the jail sentence of Trump ally Roger Stone. Republicans also found problems with the agency, in particular over its handling of the probe into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia that relied heavily on the now-discredited Steele dossier.

Just this week, fresh strong reactions were triggered after a whistleblower said internal documents showed the DOJ used counterterrorism tools against parents.

The documents “prove that the FBI was, in fact, using counterterrorism tools to investigate concerned parents who have attended school board meetings—which directly contradicts Attorney General Merrick Garland’s sworn congressional testimony,” Parents Defending Education said in a statement.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told The Epoch Times that the DOJ “has had a cloud hanging over its credibility for years.”

“From the [Hillary] Clinton email investigation to the Russia probe and targeting parents exercising their First Amendment rights at school board meetings, there’s not been much to boost the public’s confidence that DOJ is apolitical. The inspector general’s assessment seems right on the money to me,” he wrote in an email.

“I hope the department, and its components like the FBI, begin turning a corner to regain some of their previous non-partisan, beyond-reproach reputations. The inspector general also said that he needs testimonial subpoena authority and the ability to independently investigate attorney misconduct. Those two things will go a long way toward ensuring bad apples at FBI and the department are truly held accountable.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/doj-inspector-general-says-justice-department-must-address-concerns-about-politicization_4109873.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-11-17-3&mktids=d35d8fbbb78ed06b2196c19bad19302d&est=QhfJyWNj%2F09tUzRriABPLe1mbW0LHgsb4lQkLOPShdPdh1odqrphtvgSKYgBRLnF0w%3D%3D

Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) publicly released a letter addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland questioning contradictory claims by the Department of Justice (DOJ) about Hunter Biden’s connection to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) interests.

The son of President Joe Biden has been in the spotlight since the 2020 election, when a laptop recovered at a computer repair shop revealed distasteful information about the private life and business dealings of Hunter Biden.

However, Hunter Biden was in the crosshairs of the DOJ long before the 2020 presidential election: In a 2018 court filing, the DOJ expressed its intention to gather information under the standards set out in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on one of Hunter Biden’s many foreign business associates, Chi-Ping “Patrick” Ho (pdf), who is associated with CCP intelligence services.

The DOJ’s request to gather this information was approved by a federal court.

In Dec. 2017, Ho was charged with international bribery and money laundering for the China Energy Fund Committee, a subsidiary of one of China’s largest corporations, which itself has extensive links to the CCP. Ho was a top executive at the firm.

In March of this year, Grassley and Johnson submitted a request to the DOJ, now led by Biden-appointed Garland, asking for information related to investigations concerning Hunter Biden’s foreign relationships.

Following that request, the DOJ sent a belated reply to the senators in July, telling them that the DOJ is “not in a position to confirm the existence of the information that is sought” (pdf).

Now, Grassley and Johnson are asking the DOJ to reconcile these conflicting claims.

“Based on the extensive relationships between and among Hunter Biden and individuals connected to the communist Chinese regime, our letter requested ‘all intelligence records, including but not limited to, all Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act-derived information,’” wrote the senators.

“Our request was based, in part, on reporting and a federal court filing by the Department that said it had obtained at least one Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant relating to Patrick Ho, indicating his potential counterintelligence threat to the United States,” the letter added.

The senators then cited the DOJ’s own words from its 2018 filing, which reads in part, “The United States intends to offer into evidence, or otherwise use or disclose in any proceedings in the above-captioned matter, information obtained or derived from electronic surveillance and physical search conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.”

“Despite this sworn acknowledgement by the Department you oversee, your July 12, 2021, response to our letter denied knowing whether the Department even possessed the information,” Grassley and Johnson continued.

The duo then blasted the DOJ for the apparent contradiction.

“Both statements cannot be true. Either the statement in your July 12, 2021, letter is true—that the Department is unaware of whether it possesses the relevant material—or the Department’s February 8, 2018, statement to federal court that the Department is aware of the fact that it possesses the relevant material is true,” Grassley and Johnson wrote. “Therefore, one statement is false.”

To reconcile this inconsistency, Grassley and Johnson have demanded an official DOJ response to their letter by no later than Nov. 22 and for the DOJ to “either amend [its] July 12, 2021, letter to correct the inaccurate statement or confirm in writing that the Department’s February 8, 2018, court filing stating that the Department possesses FISA-related information on Patrick Ho was an inaccurate statement to federal court.”

Thus far, the DOJ has not publicly responded to Grassley’s and Johnson’s allegations in the letter.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for a comment on the letter.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/grassley-johnson-question-doj-over-contradictory-claims-about-hunter-biden-associate_4108177.html

On Oct. 27, Attorney General Merrick Garland sat before Congress and claimed the FBI would not be flagging parents protesting at local school board meetings as potential domestic terrorists.

Whistleblower documents released on Tuesday, however, suggest this may have been an outright lie.

The documents, sent to House Republicans by an anonymous FBI staffer, show that the FBI’s counterterrorism and criminal investigative divisions were tracking threats against teachers by flagging certain instances with “threat tags.”

FROM THE WHISTLEBLOWER: pic.twitter.com/4IfJRPVKMk

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) November 16, 2021

Mistrial Motion Filed: Binger Withheld HD Drone Footage from Rittenhouse Defense

Questions over whether or not the FBI was improperly investigating parent protesters first arose after Garland sent an Oct. 4 memo to the FBI directing the agency to track “threats” against public school officials. This memo came shortly after the National School Boards Association penned a letter to President Joe Biden demanding he treat “the growing number of threats” against school board members as acts of domestic terrorism.

Garland claimed during his Oct. 27 testimony that his memorandum did not rely upon the NSBA’s letter. However, according to Fox News, recently released internal emails show that both the White House and the Department of Justice coordinated with the NSBA prior to the release of Garland’s memo.

Following its release, Republicans quickly became concerned over Garland’s order, given that the attorney general had no examples to point to as credible “threats” against school officials. This led many to believe the target of these orders was actually the growing number of parents protesting against critical race theory, masking policies and other left-wing policies spreading throughout the American school system.

Concerns that such “threats” were being overly exaggerated seemed to be confirmed by the NSBA itself on Oct. 22 when the group apologized for its letter, saying “there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter.”

Did Garland lie to Congress?

According to CNN, Garland dismissed accusations that his order would be used to target parents, claiming the directive he gave the FBI was merely meant to respond “to concerns about violence, threats of violence, other criminal conduct.”

Here is the clip of AG Merrick Garland telling Congress that he “could not imagine any circumstance” that parents complaining about their school boards would be “labeled as domestic terrorism.”

He lied pic.twitter.com/t3as9v1MLI

— American Principles 🇺🇸 (@approject) November 16, 2021

“That’s all it’s about, and all it asks, is for federal law enforcement to consult with, meet with local law enforcement to assess the circumstances, strategize about what may or may not be necessary to provide federal assistance, if it is necessary,” Garland told Congress.

Given the leaked documents, these claims appear to be outright false.

Breaking: Steve Bannon Indicted for Contempt of Congress

The documents show that the FBI set up an investigative process to track potential threats against school board members and teachers by assessing “threat tags.” Whether or not these “threat tags” are being or have been applied to protesting parents remains unclear.

According to one of the leaked documents, threat tags are to be used in all “investigations and assessments of threats specifically directed against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”

In a statement provided to The Wall Street Journal, the FBI maintained it “has never been in the business of investigating parents who speak out or policing speech at school board meetings, and we are not going to start now.”

In a letter addressed to Garland, House Republicans are demanding the attorney general provide answers regarding the whistleblower documents and his Oct. 27 testimony.

🚨🚨🚨#BREAKING: Whistleblower Discloses Explosive Documents Showing FBI Using Counterterrorism Tools to Investigate Parents pic.twitter.com/HpbdtinJQo

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) November 16, 2021

“We are now in receipt of a protected disclosure from a Department whistleblower showing that the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division is compiling and categorizing threat assessments related to parents, including a document directing FBI personnel to use a specific ‘threat tag’ to track potential investigations,” House representatives said in the letter.

“This new information calls into question the accuracy and completeness of your sworn testimony.”

“This disclosure provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents.”

Republican Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Virginia Foxx of North Carolina are seeking access to communications between the Department of Education and the National School Boards Association over a letter from the latter comparing protesting parents to domestic terrorists.

In a letter to Education Secretary Miguel Cardona exclusively shared with the Washington Examiner, the representatives demanded the department turn over all communications with the NSBA, the Department of Justice, and the White House regarding the September letter asking President Joe Biden to investigate protesting parents as domestic terrorists.

Jordan told the Washington Examiner the push for accountability from the agency is important because “moms and dads should be the ones making decisions about their kids, not the government. This idea that somehow the government is smarter than parents is ridiculous.”

NSBA HEAD GOT BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ROLE AFTER CALLING PARENTS ‘DOMESTIC TERRORISTS’

The NSBA has since apologized for the September letter, which infamously prompted Attorney General Merrick Garland to issue a memo forming an FBI-DOJ task force to investigate parents protesting at school board meetings. Emails later showed the White House had coordinated with the NSBA on the release of the letter.

Jordan and Foxx are the ranking members for the House Judiciary Committee and the Committee on Education and Labor, respectively.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The letter asks for communications between administration officials and the NSBA regarding the appointment of the association’s president, Viola Garcia, to the National Assessment Governing Board, which publishes the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the “nation’s report card.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/house-republicans-demand-education-department-communications-over-nsba-parents-as-terrorist-letter

The action against James O’Keefe has prompted concern about the Biden administration’s commitment to the First Amendment.

The Biden administration’s effort to establish itself as a committed champion of press freedom is facing new doubts because of the Justice Department’s aggressive legal tactics against a conservative provocateur known for his hidden-camera video stings.

A predawn FBI raid last weekend against Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe and similar raids on some of his associates are prompting alarm from some First Amendment advocates, who contend that prosecutors appear to have run roughshod over Justice Department media policies and a federal law protecting journalists.

Adding to the drama surrounding the brewing court showdown: It stems from a politically sensitive investigation into the alleged theft of the diary of President Joe Biden’s daughter Ashley.

That document made it into the hands of O’Keefe’s organization, Project Veritas, which never published anything on the subject and eventually turned the document over to police.

An ensuing federal investigation resulted in the FBI raid on O’Keefe’s home in Westchester County, N.Y., at 6 a.m. last Saturday to seize his cell phones pursuant to a court order. O’Keefe says he stood handcuffed in his underwear in a hallway as almost a dozen agents — one carrying a battering ram — searched for the phones.

The politically fraught episode is shaping up as an early test of the vows from Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland to show greater respect for the media and to back away from the confrontational, often hostile approach favored by former President Donald Trump and his administration.

“This is just beyond belief,” said University of Minnesota law professor Jane Kirtley, a former executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “I’m not a big fan of Project Veritas, but this is just over the top. I hope they get a serious reprimand from the court because I think this is just wrong.”

O’Keefe’s lawyers complained to a federal judge this week that the raid unfairly denied him the legal protections afforded to journalists.

“The Department of Justice’s use of a search warrant to seize a reporter’s notes and work product violates decades of established Supreme Court precedent,” O’Keefe lawyer Paul Calli wrote to prosecutors.

O’Keefe’s lawyers are demanding that the court appoint a special master to supervise the review of the information on his phones, which they contend contains sensitive details about confidential sources, as well as privileged communication with Project Veritas’ attorneys.

Such a process is uncommon, but has been used in recent years to sift through information seized in federal investigations into two of Trump’s personal attorneys, Michael Cohen and Rudy Giuliani.

On Thursday, Manhattan-based U.S. District Court Judge Analisa Torres issued a one-page order giving prosecutors one day to confirm they have “paused [their] extraction and review of the contents” of O’Keefe’s cell phones. Torres — an appointee of President Barack Obama — has not yet ruled on O’Keefe’s request for a special master, who is typically a retired judge.

Project Veritas was facing a jury trial in Washington next month in the suit brought by Democracy Partners, a Democratic consulting firm it infiltrated, but on Thursday, a judge postponed the trial due to the raids and the unfolding legal fight over them.

At the center of the gathering legal storm is a pivotal question: Is O’Keefe a journalist in the eyes of the law?

O’Keefe’s attorneys insist that despite his evident political bent and his unorthodox — sometimes deceptive — tactics, he qualifies as a journalist under a federal statute and Justice Department regulations aimed at sharply restricting the use of search warrants and similar steps against members of the media.

Prosecutors insist they’ve complied with those requirements, but have thus far been cagey about whether or not they’re treating O’Keefe as a member of the press.

“The Government hereby confirms that it has complied with all applicable regulations and policies regarding potential members of the news media in the course of this investigation, including with respect to the search warrant at issue,” prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s office in Manhattan wrote Monday in a letter to O’Keefe’s lawyers obtained by POLITICO.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last month, Garland was asked who qualifies as a journalist under Justice Department policies. “It’s very difficult to make that kind of definition,” he said.

INSURRECTION FALLOUT

Steve Bannon indicted for defying Jan. 6 committee investigation

BY KYLE CHENEY, BETSY WOODRUFF SWAN, NICHOLAS WU AND JOSH GERSTEIN

O’Keefe is certainly not a typical journalist. Indeed, several of his outfit’s major hidden-camera exposés have been directed at employees of major news organizations such as CNN and NPR, seeking to paint them as left-wing activists. (At least one such attempt was foiled in 2017 when Washington Post reporters suspected they were being set up and effectively turned the tables on O’Keefe’s operatives.)

While many of O’Keefe’s tactics are unsavory, they are far from unknown in the mainstream press. Hidden-camera stings and undercover reporting have fallen out of fashion at most traditional news organizations, but they were once a staple of network television news magazines.

In the 1970s, the Chicago Sun-Times bought a rundown bar and rigged it out with hidden cameras, successfully capturing city inspectors demanding bribes. NBC’s popular and controversial series, “To Catch a Predator,” revolves around hidden-camera stings.

O’Keefe’s rather overt political agenda is also in line with a long American tradition of advocacy journalism. And many conservatives view mainstream news outlets as pervasively liberal in their worldview even as most claim to be neutral in their reporting.

Some of O’Keefe’s practices do seem highly unusual. A poorly redacted pleading filed in the civil suit Project Veritas was set to face trial on next month indicates that O’Keefe encouraged a colleague to tell potential donors they could provide “input” on the timing of release of Project Veritas’ work, raising the specter that O’Keefe was essentially operating under the direct control of political benefactors.

“Real news organizations — whether Fox News, the New York Times or any other recognized media outlet — do not go to their donors, or advertisers, and ask for their ‘input’ on when stories should be run,” attorneys for Democracy Partners said in the court filing.

Kirtley, the Minnesota law professor, warned against denying legal protections to Project Veritas based on its political outlook or its tactics. She also noted that Trump repeatedly accused mainstream media outlets of both unethical practices and of having a political ax to grind.

“Trump’s been saying that about the New York Times for seven years,” she said. “It’s very dangerous to try to categorize people doing journalistic-type work, even if they’re not doing it the way I would do it or the way the mainstream media would do it or the way ethical journalists would do it,” Kirtley said.

Another First Amendment advocate, Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, also said the raids on Project Veritas were worrying.

“I don’t personally like Project Veritas at all, but imagine this was a liberal org under Trump. Not a good precedent,” he wrote on Twitter.

However, legal experts cautioned that even if Project Veritas and O’Keefe qualify as journalists under the law or Justice Department policy, that did not give them license to violate the law.

“If they’ve got evidence that [Project Veritas] has broken the law, then we’re in a completely different world here,” Kirtley said.

Precisely how the Biden daughter’s diary came into the organization’s possession is unclear, but there have been no public indications thus far that — if the diary was stolen — the conservative group planned the theft or helped carry it out.

Court papers provided to the Project Veritas founder when his phones were seized last weekend indicate that his devices were taken as part of an investigation that prosecutors are conducting into potential conspiracy to traffic stolen goods across state lines, as well as accessory-after-the-fact and misprision of a felony.

Precisely what the government told U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave to get the warrant used to seize O’Keefe’s phones is unclear and remains under seal.

But the bare-bones outline of the investigation contained in the warrant has fueled the concerns of First Amendment advocates because the Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that media outlets cannot be held liable for publishing information that may have been obtained illegally, as long as they themselves obtained the material legally.

Project Veritas’ lawyer, Calli, acknowledged in an interview on Fox News’ “Hannity” last week that O’Keefe’s group “agreed to pay money for the right to publish” the purported Biden diary. Calli said lawyers for the sources assured Project Veritas that the diary had been obtained lawfully, but the group’s only information on how it was obtained came from the sources.

Calli told the court in a letter earlier this week that the sources told Project Veritas they obtained the diary after Ashley Biden abandoned it at a home in Delray Beach, Fla.

Lawyers tracking the case say the publicly available facts suggest two possibilities: the Justice Department deemed O’Keefe did not qualify as a journalist under DOJ guidelines and federal law known as the Privacy Protection Act, or concluded that he was a member of the media, but that Project Veritas’ personnel may still have committed a crime.

Some language in the warrant suggests prosecutors are examining whether a bidding process for the diary violated laws against fencing stolen items.

However, Calli insists that even if the FBI suspects O’Keefe or others of crimes, Justice Department policy required prosecutors to negotiate for Project Veritas’ materials rather than seizing them.

“The principles that informed this guidance are no less applicable where the news-gathering activities focus on the President’s daughter,” Calli wrote in the motion seeking a special master.

Emails obtained by POLITICO show prosecutors declined to tell Calli whether the Project Veritas searches were approved by a Justice Department committee that oversees investigations impacting the news media.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan declined to comment on the office’s handling of the inquiry. A Justice Department spokesperson also declined comment.

Over the past six months, Biden and Garland have introduced extraordinarily protective policies toward the press, protections so robust that some national security professionals have raised concerns. However, the fight with Project Veritas raises questions about how broadly the new administration intends to apply those robust protections.

“This is really a test in this administration of whether they’re going to put their money where their mouth is,” Kirtley said. “If they’re trying to be seen as great champions of press freedom, this is a pretty bad way to start.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/13/raid-veritas-okeefe-biden-press-521307

The North Carolina School Boards Association (NCSBA) withdrew its membership from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) on Thursday.

NCSBA’s separation follows the South Carolina, Ohio, and Missouri School Board Associations’ cutting ties from the NSBA after its Sept. 29 letter to the White House comparing parents to domestic terrorists.

Union County Public Schools Board Chair Melissa Merrell was on her way to an NCSBA convention when she received an alert from the NCSBA announcing its separation.

“It was a pleasant surprise,” Merrell told The Epoch Times. “I definitely did not see this coming. I’ve had a couple of board members who had been requesting and sending emails to the NCSBA asking if it were going to withdraw our membership from the NSBA, and they (the NSBA) had asked for our feedback, and then, on the way to the convention, we saw this message.”

Merrell said nothing was mentioned at the convention about the NCSBA’s departure from the national board.

According to Parents Defending Education (PDE), an organization that investigates indoctrination in schools, as of Nov. 9, 26 states have distanced themselves from the NSBA after the letter.

The NSBA, which represents more than 90,000 school board members and 14,000 public school districts in the United States, had written a letter to President Joe Biden asking that the parents who have protested COVID-19 restrictions and the teaching of critical race theory in public schools be regarded as domestic terrorists that should be investigated by agencies such as the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI.

This led to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Oct. 4 memorandum to the FBI directing the agency to work with U.S. attorneys to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.”

“The September 29 letter from NSBA to President Biden, in both its inflammatory language and the request for federal agencies to intervene in our communities, was just one in a series of lapses in governance,” said NCSBA President Amy Churchill in a press release. “NCSBA shares its members’ concerns about safety at school board meetings. As a proponent of local control, NCSBA believes that local law enforcement is in the best position to respond to those concerns and seek outside assistance if necessary.”

On Oct. 22, the NSBA issued an apology, stating that “there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter.”

State Response

The PDE requested statements from 47 states affiliated with the NSBA, and reported that the Alabama Association of School Boards (AASB) said it “has withheld its dues to join the NSBA for the current membership year, though AASB’s bylaws require it to be an NSBA member.”

According to the PDE, the AASB said it would be voting in December on changes to its bylaws that would give the AASB board of directors authority to determine its membership with the NSBA.

The PDE said it received no response from the Massachusetts Association of School Committees (MSCA), prompting the PDE to file a public record request for emails “to get a sense of their position.”

“It turns out that Glenn Koocher, executive director of the MSCA, was so happy about the letter that he put it in an email to NSBA CEO Chip Slaven,” the PDE said.

“We in MASC are all very happy that the NSBA has reached out to the FBI and, based on local coverage, has been identified as a key agent for generating federal support,” Koocher said in the email.

South Carolina

Thirty-six Republican state representatives asked that the South Carolina School Boards Association (SCSBA) end its NSBA membership.

“NSBA has labeled parents as domestic terrorists, with no evidence to justify that term,” the House Republicans wrote in a letter to the SCSBA executive director. “The reality is that parents and stakeholders are beyond frustrated being ignored and left out of decisions with their child. The NSBA is detached from reality and fails to recognize that Americans are angered by what is happening in our classrooms.”

SCSBA Executive Director Scott Price told The Epoch Times that the decision to separate from the NSBA was “aimed at protecting our membership from fallout from NSBA’s September 29 letter.”

“Any pressure that SCSBA was under stemmed primarily from our desire to keep this from impacting our members (local school boards),” Price said.

The NSBA did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

GQ Pan and Ivan Pentchoukov contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/north-carolina-school-boards-association-withdraws-from-the-national-school-boards-association_4099135.html

NSBA leaders even altered the letter’s text to satisfy the Biden White House

Newly released internal emails reveal that the National School Boards Association coordinated with the White House and the Department of Justice before sending President Biden the notorious letter that compared concerned parents to domestic terrorists. Emails provided to Fox News show that NSBA had coordinated with the White House for weeks beforehand.

Viola Garcia, the NSBA president whom the Department of Education later named to a federal board, sent a memo to NSBA members on Oct. 11 (but dated Oct. 12), providing a timeline of the NSBA’s interaction with the White House ahead of the letter to Biden, which the NSBA sent on Sept. 29. 

Five days later, on Oct. 4, the DOJ issued a memo directing law enforcement to investigate threats to school boards. On Oct. 22, the NSBA issued an apology for the letter. 

LETTER CALLING PARENTS DOMESTIC TERRORISTS HAS ‘THROWN GASOLINE’ ON THE FIRE, PARENT ACTIVIST SAYS

“Concern over the current climate for school board members is also a top priority as disruptions at school board meetings grow and members face growing threats,” Garcia wrote at the time, according to the memo obtained by Parents Defending Education through a Freedom of Information Act request. “NSBA has been actively engaged with the White House, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Education, Surgeon General, and other federal agencies on pandemic related issues.”

(Oregon School Boards Association)

“In the September 14, 2021 meeting of the [NSBA Organization of State Association Executive Directors] liaison group, they were informed there had been a meeting with White House staff that morning and that NSBA was preparing to send a letter to the President. Subsequently, on September 17, 2021, the interim Executive Director emailed notice to the state association executive directors that indicated a letter requesting federal assistance would be sent.”

“In response to the letter sent by NSBA, on October 4, 2021 the Attorney General announced in a memorandum widely shared throughout the U.S. Department of Justice that he was ordering all U.S. Attorney Offices and local FBI offices to reach out to local and state law enforcement officials to coordinate efforts on this problem within 30 days of the memorandum,” Garcia also noted.

This statement appears to contradict Attorney General Merrick Garland’s testimony to Congress on Oct. 27. When Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked Garland if he had “second thoughts” following NSBA’s apology for the letter, he said that the DOJ memorandum did not rely upon the letter.

Sen. Tom Cotton calls for Merrick Garland’s resignation over schools memo

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., calls out the attorney general for his memo directing the FBI to look into reports of threats against school board members and has harsh words for teachers union leader Randi Weingarten.

“The letter that was subsequently sent does not change the association’s concern of violence or threats of violence. It alters some of the language in the letter … that we did not rely on and is not contained in my own memorandum,” Garland said.

MAJORITY OF VIRGINIA PARENTS WANT A SAY IN THEIR KIDS’ EDUCATION, FOX NEWS POLL FINDS

Neither Garland nor the DOJ responded to Fox News’ request for comment by press time. 

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland appears before the House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on Oct. 21. (Michael Reynolds/Pool via REUTERS)

Another email exclusively sent to Fox News revealed that NSBA had discussed the issues with the White House “for weeks” before sending the letter. Garcia and Chip Slaven, an NSBA executive, altered the text of the letter to satisfy the curiosity of White House staff.

“In talks over the last several weeks with White House staff, they requested additional information on some of the specific threats, so the letter also details many of the incidents that have been occurring,” Slaven wrote in a September 29, 2021, email to the NSBA board of directors.

Parents have spoken up at school board meetings around the country, protesting harsh COVID-19 mitigation measures like school closures, and raising their voices against transgender policies, critical race theory, and other issues. The letter warned that these parents pose a violent threat to school boards, even going so far as comparing them to domestic terrorists.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The fallout from the letter has proven particularly severe. Ohio’s, Wisconsin‘s, and the school boards of nine other states have reportedly terminated their relationships with NSBA, and parent’s education rights organizations have grown in prominence since the letter. The letter may have also emboldened concerned parents who supported Republican Glenn Youngkin, who won the Virginia governor’s race earlier this month.

Virginia Republican gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin gestures during a [Loudoun Parents Matter Rally] campaign event in Leesburg, Virginia, on Nov. 1, 2021. (REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz)

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nsba-coordinated-with-white-house-doj-before-sending-notorious-domestic-terrorists-letter-emails

Representative Paul Gosar accused the Biden administration of keeping “two secret lists” that it uses to deny constitutional rights to political opponents. He pointed to a specific instance of denying an opponent the ability to possess a firearm.

Laura Loomer, an activist and congressional candidate, was mentioned in particular by Gosar in his letter, detailing how she was put on one of these lists without any specific cause.

Gosar published the letter on October 28th, which was addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland, alluding to how the government is politicizing secret lists in order “to strip American citizens of their constitutional rights.”

“Between the No Fly List and the NICS List,” the letter asserted, “there are two secret lists the government uses to strip American citizens of their constitutional rights.  But they do so in secret. With no charges. No hearing. No due process.  It is a remnant from Soviet Russia and it needs to end.”

In the letter, Gosar wrote:

“I write to you today regarding innocent American citizens that are being stripped of their Second Amendment rights without due process and subjected to secretive lists that revoke constitutional rights without recourse. This troubling trend has affected an unknown amount of U.S. citizens. Secretive lists are increasingly being used to deny law abiding citizens, who have not committed a crime or used drugs, their constitutional rights.

This dubious practice by your department of disarming innocent Americans without due process is unacceptable and unconstitutional.”

Gosar was referring to a specific case, where Loomer found herself being mistakently listed as a prohibited possessor of a firearm. This was done despite Loomer not commiting any action to merit such a classification.

 “Laura Loomer, a former Arizona resident now U.S. congressional candidate in Florida’s 11th district,” Gosar added, “recently contested her listing on the NICS index.”

The Arizona Congressman expanded on the FBII’s abusive behavior:

“The FBI never notified Loomer that she was placed in the NICS database, despite the fact that she had a gun at the time she was in the NICS database. Loomer only found out she was on the NICS list when she applied for a concealed carry CCW permit in Florida, and her application was denied. Even after being denied, Loomer had to make several more inquiries as to why she was denied.”

As Gosar pointed out in the letter, had Loomer been caught possessing a firearm that she was legally allowed to own – despite the NICS database mistakenly showing otherwise – she could’ve ended up in a complete legal fiasco. Gosar added, “Loomer could have still legally had a gun in Florida without carrying, and she never would have known that the FBI had banned her from being able to own a firearm. This begs the question, was the FBI trying to entrap Ms. Loomer, and how many other American citizens who are also in the FBI NICS database have not yet been notified that they have also been banned from owning and possessing firearms?”

Loomer published her own statement addresing the matter, where she revealed that she’s going to be working with Gosar to resolve her predicament. “Congressman Gosar asked the FBI whether or not they were trying to entrap me when they illegally red flagged me,” Loomer stated, “BANNING me from ever being able to own or possess a firearm, without ever notifying me when they placed me on the NICS database after I confronted former FBI Director James Comey.”

Loomer continued:

“I’m pleased to announce I will be working with Congressman Gosar on ANTI-RED FLAG legislation so the FBI & DOJ can no longer politically target Americans & strip them of their Second Amendment Rights!”

Pro-Gun News reached out to Loomer for comment.

She noted that her episode with the anti-gun episode began after she “confronted James Comey.” Loomer added that the FBI is “clearly retaliating against people.”

Loomer stressed she “had a gun and was never notified that I was on the NICS list.”

This incident Loomer is currently facing just demonstrates how depraved the gun control regime in Washington, DC has become.

Any serious right-wing candidate would make the defunding, if not the outright abolition, of NICS a priority.

Lawful individuals should not be subject to federal gun control laws. Last time I checked, federal gun control regulations are not authorized by the Constitution.

https://progunnews.com/articles/laura-loomer

Call me unsurprised if FBI informants urged people to enter the Capitol on Jan. 6, as Fox News host Tucker Carlson apparently has been uncovering.

I witnessed similar shenanigans by an FBI informant while working on Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller’s campaign in Alaska in 2010, and his actions in all likelihood cost our candidate the race against incumbent RINO Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

Reuters reported on March 3 that U.S. Army Iraq War veteran Mark Ibrahim was fired from his job with the Drug Enforcement Administration and faces up to 15 years in prison for allegedly entering the Capitol on Jan. 6 and carrying a firearm.

Ibrahim denied entering the building and said the gun was his DEA service weapon, which he had with him though he was off duty at the time, according to the report.

Episode 2 of Carlson’s Fox Nation three-part series “Patriot Purge” featured Ibrahim, who recounted that he was invited to attend the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally by a person he knew from his military service who is allegedly an FBI informant.

NJ Senate Pres Won’t Concede to Conservative Truck Driver Who Beat Him: ‘12,000 Ballots Recently Found’

Carlson said in the program that the man confirmed he has been an FBI informant and that the bureau knew he was at the Capitol on Jan. 6, and that he invited Ibrahim to the protest.

This same person urged Ibrahim to enter the Capitol building, but the Army veteran knew it was illegal and refused to do so, Carlson said.

Last week on his Fox News program, Carlson also waded into the prospect that an Arizona man named Ray Epps, who reportedly was captured on film on Jan. 6 urging people to break into the Capitol, is likely an FBI informant.

The ongoing mystery of Ray Epps, who repeatedly appears in videos encouraging and inciting an invasion of the Capitol on 1/6 yet, for some reason, has not yet been indicted or charged, even as people with far less involvement have been: https://t.co/hzGZCo9MKe

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 26, 2021

Darren Beattie, who wrote a piece about Epps for Revolver News on Oct. 25, told Carlson, “He is calling for going into the Capitol the evening before Jan. 6, and this isn’t just a one-off, someone, some crazy who comes and goes.

“He goes repeatedly to group after group, redirecting them saying we need to go into the Capitol. … He is everywhere, he’s all around the Capitol shepherding people to go to the Capitol, where ‘our problems are.’”

“Very curiously, Ray Epps is not indicted. It doesn’t seem like the feds want him or have any interest in him — although they did,” Beattie said. “They had him for a while on their most-wanted page, until Revolver News did a report.”

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky showed a video of a man reported to be Epps to Attorney General Merrick Garland during a House oversight hearing last month. In the video, bystanders could be heard yelling, “Fed, fed, fed,” when Epps called for going into the Capitol.

The January 6th video I showed AG Garland, which he refused to comment on, now has 2.7 million views. The article linked here might explain why he won’t tell us if assets of the federal government were present and encouraging others to enter the Capitol: https://t.co/57L1X0VDyz https://t.co/KIrnI4NTzv

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) October 25, 2021

Sheriff Gives Update on Brian Laundrie Death, Reveals How He ‘Probably’ Died

The Arizona Republic reported last month that Epps “may have longtime ties to the Oath Keepers,” a group that describes itself as “a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, police, and first responders, who pledge to fulfill the oath all military and police take to ‘defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.’”

Beattie said that Stewart Rhodes, whom Revolver described in a June piece as “the founder, boss and kingpin of the Oath Keepers,” is also unindicted.

Revolver said the Oath Keepers are “the most extensively prosecuted paramilitary group alleged to be involved in 1/6.”

The USA Today list of those arrested in relation to the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion does not include either Epps or Rhodes, though it specifically notes that “Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes … has not been arrested or charged in relation to the riot.”

A search of the list includes more than 50 mentions of the Oath Keepers.

It’s odd that the leader of the group would escape any indictments while so many alleged members did not.

“So there is just a cast of curious characters unindicted,” Beattie told Carlson.

The Capitol incursion on Jan. 6 is not the only time that FBI informants were allegedly involved in a political operation.

BuzzFeed News reported in July that prosecutors revealed that there were a dozen informants working on a case involving the alleged 2020 plot by Michigan militia members to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer over her refusal to loosen COVID restrictions.

“Working in secret, they did more than just passively observe and report on the actions of the suspects. Instead, they had a hand in nearly every aspect of the alleged plot, starting with its inception. The extent of their involvement raises questions as to whether there would have even been a conspiracy without them,” the report said.

Then, of course, there was the FBI’s use of an informant to spy on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016 in an effort to find connections to Russia.

The New York Times reported in May 2019 that FBI informant Stefan Halper met with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in London in September of that year.

His bureau handlers instructed Halper to make the connection with Papadopoulos, who was put up in a five-star hotel and lured to London by the offer of $3,000 to write a policy paper on a Mediterranean natural gas pipeline project in which he was an expert, according to the report.

When they met, Halper immediately questioned him — in a “very belligerent” fashion, Papadopoulos recalled — about whether Russia was helping the Trump campaign.Are you concerned about the role the FBI informants are playing in U.S. politics?Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Papadopoulos told The Western Journal in June 2019 that he believed special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators “were simply looking to cover up surveillance abuse of the Obama administration upon the Trump team.”

Which takes me to my own campaign experience in 2010 when FBI informant Bill Fulton offered his security services to Miller’s campaign team and ended up arresting a reporter.

Miller shocked political watchers when he defeated Murkowski in the Alaska Republican primary in August of that year. He had been down more than 20 points just over a month before pulling off the upset win.

Murkowski responded by recanting on a pledge both candidates had made to honor the election results and ran in the general election as an independent.

Early polling in the contest gave Miller the edge, but the race deadlocked by mid-October thanks, in part, to Fulton’s decision to handcuff then-Alaska Dispatch editor Tony Hopfinger at a town hall event.

Fulton first showed up on primary election night in Anchorage, unsolicited, volunteering to provide security.

Miller did not use security during the campaign, with the exception of the town hall at an Anchorage middle school, where, according to the terms of the venue contract, it was required. A member of the campaign staff contacted Fulton.

I was at the town hall where the informant took it upon himself to handcuff Hopfinger after the event.

Miller had told the journalist he would not give him an interview that day and left the room where the town hall had taken place.

Hopfinger followed him out into the hallway and ended up pushing an attendee into a set of lockers (the attendee told me), apparently trying to catch up with the candidate. Miller left the building, and not long thereafter Hopfinger got into a scuffle with the security team headed by Fulton, who ordered the reporter to be detained.

I came out into the hallway in time to find Hopfinger in handcuffs, which I questioned Fulton about.

He insisted Hopfinger needed to be detained until the police arrived.

In a January 2013 Huffington Post article titled “How Bill Fulton Infiltrated Alaska’s Right Wing As An FBI Informant,” the subject revealed that he voted for former President Barack Obama and lauded his own actions that day at the Miller town hall.

“It completely solidified our position within the right wing,” Fulton said of the handcuffing incident. “Because there’s nothing the right wing likes more than you roughing up the left-wing media and such.”

It cannot be overstated the amount of negative media coverage the Miller campaign received as a result of the incident, with claims the candidate opposed freedom of the press. It did not matter that neither the campaign staff nor the candidate had directed the handcuffing or approved of it.

In 2013, Los Angeles Times reporter Kim Murphy also noted the role Fulton played in the 2010 race in an article headlined, “Why was FBI informant William Fulton involved in political campaigns?”

Miller pointed out in the piece that his race was the second in as many cycles in Alaska in which the FBI had played a part in the contest’s outcome, referring to a criminal investigation that almost certainly cost Republican Sen. Ted Stevens his 2008 re-election bid. Stevens’ conviction was overturned just months after he lost the race to Democrat Mark Begich.

Murkowski ended up beating Miller 39 to 35 percent, with the Democratic candidate taking the rest of the votes in the three-way race.

FBI assets have been doing some weird stuff in the political realm for years; it’s not very far-fetched to believe that they may have played a part in the events that unfolded on Jan. 6.

A group of House Republicans are demanding answers from all 93 U.S. attorneys about what steps they have taken since the U.S. Department of Justice issued a memo directing them to potentially crack down on parental protests.

“We are continuing to investigate the troubling attempts by the Department of Justice and the White House to use the heavy hand of federal law enforcement to target concerned parents at local school board meetings and chill their protected First Amendment activity,” the Republicans said in a letter (pdf) sent on Monday to every U.S. attorney in all 50 states and territories.

The DOJ memo, which sparked much controversy since its Oct. 4 release, directs the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to “convene meetings” with state and local governments to address an alleged “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against teachers and school leaders.

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland later revealed at a congressional hearing that his department issued the memo after communicating with the White House about a letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA). The NSBA letter characterized disruptions at school board meetings as “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime,” and urged the Biden administration to invoke counter-terrorism laws to handle “angry mobs” of parents seeking to hold school officials accountable for teaching the Marxist-inspired critical race theory and for imposing COVID-19 restrictions on their children.

“Concerned parents voicing their strong opposition to controversial curricula at local schools are not domestic terrorists,” the Republicans said, adding that state and local authorities are already equipped with legal tools in case any parent actually crosses the line to commit a violent act.

Although the NSBA has apologized for the letter which the DOJ memo was based on, Garland has yet to rescind the order, meaning that his directives to U.S. Attorneys are still in effect, the Republicans said.

They further noted that during Garland’s testimony before the House, “he appeared to have no idea whether the U.S. Attorney meetings he ordered were actually taking place.”

Specifically, the Republicans demand that the U.S. attorneys provide a trove of information, including all documents and communications related to convening meetings in their respective judicial districts in response to Garland’s memo, and the names of all individual employees involved and organizations that were invited to or attended such meetings.

The U.S. attorneys will have until Nov. 15 to hand in those materials.

The letter was co-signed by 19 Republican members of Congress, including Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/house-republicans-demand-answers-from-all-93-us-attorneys-on-doj-memo-targeting-parents_4082477.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

As of this writing, the school board associations of at least 11 states have withdrawn from the National School Boards Association.

I hope the number will rise to 50.

As many readers will know, the NSBA, a left-wing lobbying group, made headlines a couple of weeks ago.

Merrick Garland, attorney general of the United States, cited a letter from the group to the White House complaining about parents who had the temerity to vigorously criticize their local school boards for attempting to insinuate the Marxist teachings of “critical race theory” into schools, foisting virtue-signaling mask mandates on students, and injecting noisome gender-identity politics into primary and secondary schools.

The vocal criticism of those parents, the NSBA letter said, was “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

In response, Garland quickly issued a memorandum instructing the FBI and other DOJ entities to create a “Partnership among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement to address threats against school administrators, board members, teachers and staff.”

What threats?

The NSBA cites a score of incidents, but almost all involve nothing more than parents loudly criticizing members of their school board. A good example is this splendid performance by a parent called Simon Campbell, a Brit who understands the American Constitution much better than many Americans.

One example where there was violence involved Scott Smith, who was tackled by police, arrested, and found guilty of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct in Loudoun County, Virginia.

Smith claimed that his daughter had been raped by a “gender fluid” boy who entered the girl’s bathroom wearing a skirt.

At first the school denied that anything happened.

We now know that Smith was right and that the boy in question not only raped his daughter but then, having been quietly sent to another school, went on to sexually assault another girl.

The NSBA, panicked by the criticism and defections, issued an apology.

They didn’t really think “or at least they are no longer prepared to say” that parents who criticize school board members are “domestic terrorists” who are guilty of “hate crimes.”

But I suspect that this effort at damage control will fail. It is too little, too late.

Garland’s breathtaking memorandum was subject to instant and scathing criticism.

And remember, Merrick Garland was supposed to be a “moderate.”

When Barack Obama toward the end of his second term proposed him for the Supreme Court (for the seat that eventually went to Neil Gorsuch), even many conservatives rallied round to tout his credentials, talents, and impartiality.

It turns out that the Republicans who kept him off the Court were right: he was a left-winger masquerading as a moderate.

We got to witness exactly what sort of partisan operative he is during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s sometimes blistering cross examination of Garland last week.

Especially noteworthy were the exchanges between Garland and Senators Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, and Tom Cotton.

Among other things, Senator Cruz pushed the Attorney General on the interesting fact that his son-in-law is the founder and president of Panorama, a multimillion-dollar company that sells critical race theory and related ESG (environmental, social, and governance) materials to schools around the country.

Was Garland’s son-in-law, Senator Cruz wondered, likely to be enriched by more schools hopping on the critical race theory bandwagon, a predictable result of the Department of Justice’s threat to sic the FBI on parents who objected to the prospect of their children being indoctrinated.

All concluded their remarks calling on him to resign.

Tom Cotton found a silver lining, “Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.”

Far from repudiating his memorandum, the Attorney General repeatedly reaffirmed it. He himself worked on it. He said, “It reflects my view. I stand behind it.”

Which leaves us where?

I very much doubt that Merrick Garland will resign, at least not until Republicans retake the House and the Senate in fifteen months.

In the meantime, we are left with an Attorney General who is happy to mobilize the police power of the state to quash dissent.

Sure, he says he is in favor of the First Amendment, and he repeatedly stressed that he was only trying to protect school officials against violence.

But the “violence” at school boards is parents yelling ridicule at the board members, behavior they are entitled to engage in.

The journalist Chris Bray put his finger on our predicament in a thoughtful article at his substack about (in part) what is happening at school boards.

“The trap in our own moment,” he writes, “is that, first, governments have in many cases entirely stopped listening, as officials signal with growing clarity that they regard all grievances to their right as inherently without merit.”

Bray continues: “You express a grievance, and the school board orders the police to clear the room (and the police, incredibly, always do). But, second, resistance is coded as domestic terrorism at the first sign of raised voices, even if Merrick Garland pretends to be coy about the maneuver.”

Bottom line: “If you don’t resist, you won’t be heard; if you do resist, you’re a terrorist and a criminal and FBI SEARCH WARRANT—GET ON THE GROUND.”

You can ask Mr. Smith about how that works.

Bray concluded: “The game is that everyone takes their turn and then, whatever moves any players make, you lose.”

Maybe there is a silver lining here, too.

Despite the best efforts of the regime media to bury stories like the Attorney General’s police state memorandum, the word is getting out and people are angry and getting angrier.

The Obama administration was able to paint the Tea Party as a bunch of Bible-thumping rednecks and “deplorables.”

In fact, the vast majority were ordinary citizens: business men and women, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, doctors, even some teachers and lawyers.

But the campaign of vilification worked. The Tea Party was declawed, rendered irrelevant.

The strategy backfired, though, because those millions of people did not go way. They voted en masse for Donald Trump in 2016.

That is something that the agents of the administrative state might wish to keep in mind.

With every passing day, legitimacy drains from the Biden administration.

Terry McAuliffe will lose the Virginia Governor’s race on Tuesday.

Republicans will retake the House and the Senate in 2022.

You know what will happen in 2024.

It won’t necessarily be Trump, but it might be.

And if it isn’t it will be someone equally obnoxious to the Left.

Hold on, it is going to be a wild ride.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/garland-attempts-to-silence-opponents-but-they-will-vote_4080672.html

Way back in 1967, in that brief window of time between the media’s notice of the sexual revolution and its dawning awareness of second wave feminism, Hollywood made a movie called “A Guide for the Married Man,” which celebrated the joys of (male) adultery. Nowadays Tinseltown may practice it but doesn’t (usually) preach it; then it did both.

In one segment the mentor of a prospective adulterer answers the question of what to do if you are caught in the act by your wife by saying: “Deny, deny, deny.” There follows a vignette in which a man so caught does just that—until his partner in sin gets up, dresses and leaves.

“What woman?” says the husband.

“The one who just left,” says the wife.

“When?” says the husband.

“But, Charlie …” says the wife.

“What?”

“Aren’t you even ashamed of yourself?”

“Why?”

“Because of … Charlie?”

“What?”

“What would you like for dinner?”

Deplorable as the whole idea of such a movie is, there is a deep wisdom in this scene, which is this: when it ceases to be possible to catch someone in a lie, it also becomes impossible for that person to lie.

So long as the liar, like Charlie, holds the whip hand and therefore is powerful enough that it is impossible for anyone else to require him to admit to his lie, it’s not a lie.

The principle is basically the same as that expressed by the 16th century poet Sir John Harington:

“Treason doth never prosper; what’s the reason?

“For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

I tried to make a similar point, as you may remember, two weeks ago in this space, when I wrote that a lie that everybody knows to be a lie is no longer a lie but a kind of functional truth, since our knowledge that it’s a lie can reveal to us the truth.

It’s at that point, anyway, where those of us without the power to force an admission of lying can only shrug our shoulders and say of the liar, “Well, I guess he’s only expressing his truth.”

The examples I gave in that earlier column were taken from the collected works of President Joe Biden—most egregiously the obvious lies that the American evacuation of Afghanistan was “an extraordinary success” and that a $3.5 trillion spending bill would actually cost “zero.”

Of course, the power of the president to lie with impunity is not a constitutional one but is conferred upon him by the media, whose own greatest power is the power to ignore.

Applied to presidential lying, this power to ignore and therefore not to expose the lies means that, even if everybody knows they are lies, they can continue to function as truth—the president’s truth.

Despotisms have always functioned in this way, but usually through the despot’s direct control of the media. In America today the situation is somewhat different. The media’s power to ignore or to promote as truth the lies of the ostensible autocrat is assumed voluntarily and without constraint or fear of punishment.

Why should that be? I don’t know, but it suggests to me that it is not, under the Biden-style of despotism, the executive which is in control of the media but the media which is in control of the executive.

That would fit, too, with the sense that many of us have that, nasty as the old Joe Biden could be at times, the nastiness of his administration is no more all his own work than anything else that’s happened over the last nine months.

We caught a glimpse this week of how the process of collaboration between the media and Democrats in power to set the administration’s agenda works. The notorious letter from Attorney General Merrick Garland to the FBI, as reported in this space three weeks ago, setting up a task force to investigate as potential “domestic terrorism” any complaints by parents about left-wing curricular or other changes to public schools affecting their children turns out to have been not quite what it seemed at the time.

It was a result of collaboration between Garland and a few left wingers at the National School Boards Association, from which numerous state boards have since dissociated themselves, and was based at least in part on an incident in Loudoun County, Virginia, last June.

Then an aggrieved father, Scott Smith, was tackled by police and arrested at a school board meeting after complaining that his 15-year-old daughter had been raped in a girls’ restroom at Stone Bridge High School by a boy taking advantage of current left-wing orthodoxy to pose as a “transgender” girl.

On that occasion, Scott Ziegler, the Loudoun County school superintendent proclaimed that, “To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” adding on the authority of Time magazine that “the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist.”

This was a lie on both counts. The Daily Wire reported two weeks ago that numerous allegations of sexual assault at the school had not been reported, as state law requires school authorities to do.

That, apparently was why “we don’t have any record” of such assaults. They didn’t trouble themselves to make one.

Then, on Monday, the “transgender” predator was convicted of assaulting not only Smith’s daughter but another girl at another school to which he had been transferred later as a potential embarrassment to Stone Bridge’s transgender restroom policy.

At this writing, Superintendent Ziegler still has his job. Deny, deny, deny certainly seems to have worked for him.

And, although the National Association of School Boards has since repudiated its own letter calling for investigation into “domestic terrorism,” Attorney General Garland still has his FBI task force to investigate it, as he informed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Oct. 27.

Joe Biden still has his job too, though now we have a better idea than we did nine months ago what that job is. It’s to cover up left-wing lies by playing the role of doddering old Uncle Joe who doesn’t know what he’s saying half the time anyway. You could call it type-casting.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/political-lies-that-cant-be-refuted_4080255.html

The New Hampshire School Boards Association (NHSBA) announced Thursday that it has withdrawn from the national organization following the group’s efforts to target parents.

The National School Board Association (NSBA) recently sent a letter to the Biden administration’s Department of Justice that described the actions of parents protesting policies such as critical race theory or COVID-19 rules as the equivalence of “domestic terrorism.”

“This email is to inform you that NHSBA [the New Hampshire School Board Association] has decided to withdraw its membership from the National School Boards Association, effective immediately,” NHSBA Executive Director Barrett Christina wrote. “NSBA’s recent actions have made our continued membership untenable.

The NSBA wrote Sept. 29 (pdf), “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat.”

The letter added, “As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

Following the NSBA’s letter, Attorney General Merrick Garland sent a memorandum to the Federal Bureau of Investigations to direct investigators to address the “disturbing spike” in harassment involving school board members by parents.

The controversy led lawmakers in Washington to discuss the matter with Garland this week. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee blasted the attorney general after he failed to rescind the letter or apologize regarding the matter.

“Thank God you’re not on the Supreme Court,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) told Garland. “You should resign in disgrace.”

The NSBA has since apologized for its letter.

“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter. To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue,” the NSBA wrote last Friday.

“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance,” the letter added.

Despite the apology, the damage has already had negative consequences nationwide.

In addition to New Hampshire, state school board associations in Ohio, Missouri, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania have already withdrawn from the NSBA.

Three additional states, Alabama, Florida, and Kentucky, have also announced they are considering a departure from the national organization.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/new-hampshire-school-boards-association-leaves-national-organization-over-parent-controversy_4076004.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-10-30-2&mktids=197bd0f40b606ed83674b637f3e6b8c2&est=p712C%2Bt5HdNCPTGox7o3OwoBpXN0rGmvp9cxsrk91vmgG71oQ%2FAFRa6%2F2NbGnguREA%3D%3D

It was just another suburban school board meeting like the thousands of others that regularly take place around the country.

A typical meeting with the school superintendent and some staff, the board members probably facing the room, perhaps a microphone for comments from the public, and federal agents and a helicopter circling overhead.

Wait — what?

While a lot of attention has been focused on the Loudoun County, Virginia, school district and its cover-up of a girl’s rape, shady things have been going on in neighboring Fairfax County, another upscale suburb of Washington, D.C.

Parents arriving at a Fairfax school board meeting last week were greeted by unmarked federal government vehicles and a helicopter shining a searchlight down on them, according to Stacy Langton, a mother of six who attended the meeting.

Biden Tries to Explain Driving Cross-Country in an Electric Car, It Goes Horribly Wrong

Went to @fcpsnews #schoolboardmeeting last night. Heavy #Fed presence. Unmarked fed vehicles, @DHSgov vehicles, even helicopter circling overhead with spotlight on Moms & Dads. All on the night #DOJ Merrick Garland testifies. A little over the top, no?@SebGorka @AsraNomani pic.twitter.com/aUh2QuhaT3

— Stacy Langton (@StacyLangton) October 22, 2021

“This is something that is incredible in America and it’s, you know, ridiculously un-American,” Langton told Fox News.

“Honestly, I have paid a heavy price because of what I said at my school board meeting on Sept. 23 about the pornography and the pedophilia that I found in my son’s high school — at Fairfax High School.”

Langton said she has been harassed since participating in a “very peaceful, uneventful” protest last weekend at the Justice Department headquarters in Washington.

“Since the DOJ protest on Sunday … my family has been receiving daily threats,” she said. “So I have threats against my children by name, I have been followed in my car with my children in my car. … They know where I live, and I don’t know who’s putting somebody up to this, but it’s obviously meant to intimidate me.”

On Oct. 4, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo advising the FBI and U.S. attorneys to be aware of threats against school officials and school board members. He said the Justice Department is “steadfast in its commitment to protect all people in the United States from violence, threats of violence and other forms of  intimidation and harassment.”

Merrick’s memo followed the now infamous letter to President Joe Biden from the National School Boards Association likening parental protests to “domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” The NSBA later rescinded and apologized for the letter.

School Board Endangers Children of Parents Who Speak Out

After being grilled by Republican lawmakers during a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Garland reiterated his intention to mobilize federal agents against perceived threats to school boards.

Regarding the alleged threats against her, Langton could only speculate.

“It could be it’s the DOJ, it could be it’s [Terry McAuliffe’s] campaign people because I know this is suddenly all about the election here in the state of Virginia, it could be the school board, it could be the LGBTQ community. I know there are a lot of people who are very unhappy about what I said at the school board meeting.

“I don’t know why people have a problem with what I said because I don’t know who is in favor of pornography in their children’s school. This isn’t a political issue, and even the liberals shouldn’t be happy that there’s porn in the schools.

“So I’m not getting a lot of sleep right now. Nobody’s sleeping in my house because we can’t be sure that we’re safe.”

Langton speaks quite articulately, but one correction might be offered.

Among leftists, everything is political.

Everything.

Attorney General Merrick Garland was utterly humiliated on Wednesday by Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Garland was grilled over his Oct. 4 memorandum in which he called on the FBI to mobilize against parents who were concerned about what their children were being taught in public schools.

Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who was at the top of his game, told Garland: “Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.” He then called on Garland to “resign in disgrace.”

Next up was Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley who laced into the attorney general for weaponizing the FBI and the DOJ against parents for political purposes.

No Woke Agenda in Court: Rittenhouse Judge Says Rioters Can’t Be Called ‘Victims,’ Approves This List Instead

“It’s wrong, it is unprecedented to my knowledge in the history of this country, and I call on you to resign.”

Then, it was Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’ turn, and by the end of this exchange, I almost felt sorry for him.

Almost.

Do you believe that Merrick Garland’s son-in-law’s business poses a conflict of interest?

Most of Garland’s activism can be chalked up to being a team player, but he does actually have some skin in the game in the debate over critical race theory being forced into U.S. public school curriculum. His son-in-law, Xan Tanner (not to be confused with Dan Tanna), is the co-founder of Panorama Education, a company that markets critical race theory-based software platforms to school districts throughout the country.

Lest you think Tanner’s company is small potatoes, an article in the “Press” section of the company’s website informs readers that “25 percent of American students are enrolled in a district served by Panorama today.”

TechCrunch reports that the company raised $60 million in new funding to expand the company in September.

Note that one of the “existing backers” is the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Priscilla Chan is Mark Zuckerberg’s wife.

Cruz grilled the attorney general about this glaring conflict of interest. He asked Garland repeatedly whether he had “sought an ethics opinion” on the matter, a question he refused to answer. (A full transcript of the exchange can be viewed on Cruz’ website.)

Watch: Sen. Hawley Destroys AG Garland in 92 Seconds, Catches Him Red-Handed on Loudoun Rape Case

Holding up a copy of Garland’s memo to the FBI, Cruz declared, “This memo was not law. This memo was politics.”

“I’ll tell you what, the NSBA is so embarrassed of this letter, they’ve apologized for it and retracted it, but you don’t apparently have the same willingness to apologize and retract what you did,” Cruz said. “Let me ask you something else. A big part of this letter is that they’re upset about parents not wanting critical race theory taught. Your son-in-law makes a very substantial sum of money from a company involved in the teaching of critical race theory.

“Did you seek and receive a decision from an ethics adviser at the Department of Justice before you carried out an action that would have a predictable financial benefit to your son-in-law?”

In the exchange that ensued, the attorney general refused to answer the question 12 times … yes, 12.

“This memorandum is aimed at violence and threats of violence,” Garland replied.

“I just asked a question. Did you seek an ethics opinion?”

Garland danced around the question each of the 12 times it was asked, in a thoroughly infuriating but all too typical manner.

“[Attorney] General, are you refusing to answer if you sought an ethics opinion?” Cruz pressed.

“I’m telling you that there’s no possible con[flict] … “

“So, you’re saying no. Just answer it directly. You know how to answer a question directly. Did you seek an ethics opinion?”

Finally, Cruz’s time expired. He said, “Let the record reflect the attorney general refuses to answer whether he sought an ethics opinion. And apparently ethics are not a terribly high priority in the Biden Justice Department.”

In addition to establishing that Garland had not sought an ethics opinion regarding his son-in-law’s business interests, Cruz humiliated the attorney general by demonstrating that neither he nor anyone else at the DOJ had bothered to investigate any of the 20 incidents of “intimidation” of school board members by parents before hastily firing off his memo to the FBI.

“Let me ask you something, General Garland. In the letter, which you told the House of Representatives was the basis for this abusive memo targeting parents, how many incidents are cited in that memo?”

“I have to look back through the memo,” Garland replied.

Cruz pressed. “You don’t know. How many of them were violent?”

“Again, the general report … ”

The senator interrupted the attorney general and asked, “How many of them were violent, do you know?”

“I don’t know.”

More back and forth ensued, and Cruz finally summed it up: “Okay. Fifteen of the 20 on the face of it are not violent. They’re not threats of violence. They’re parents who are unhappy. Yet, miraculously, when you write a memo, the opening line of your memo, ‘In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence.’ You know what? You didn’t look, and nobody on your staff looked. Did you even look up the 20 instances?”

Garland replied, “As I testified, the decision to send a memo is for an assessment … ”

He was immediately cut off. Cruz asked, “Did you look up the 20 instances? Did anyone on your staff look them up?”

“I don’t know the answer. But it’s not all of the memo.”

Cruz took his kill shot. “But of course you don’t, and General, there’s a reason. Look, you started your career as a law clerk to Justice Brennan. You’ve had many law clerks during the year, during your time as a judge. I was a clerk to Chief Justice Rehnquist.”

“I’ll tell you what, if I drafted an opinion for the Chief Justice and walked in, and it said there’s a disturbing pattern of violence, ‘Well, Ted, how do you know that?’ ‘Well, I got an amicus brief here who claims it.’ You would fire a law clerk who did that. You’re the attorney general of the United States. This was not a tweet you sent. This is a memo to the Federal Bureau of Investigations saying, ‘Go investigate parents as domestic terrorists.’”

I guess we shouldn’t be surprised by any of this; Garland’s disregard for the Constitution is evident in every move he makes.

The DOJ is no longer committed to enforcing U.S. laws. Rather it exists to advance the Biden administration agenda, and it uses its vast powers to punish political adversaries.

The attorney general’s testimony demonstrated once again that his DOJ has picked up right where the Obama DOJ left off. The politicization of the DOJ is nearly complete.

And that is very frightening indeed.

“General Garland, you have weaponized the FBI and the Department of Justice. Your U.S. attorneys are now collecting and cataloging all the ways that they might prosecute parents … because they want to be involved in their children’s education.”

That’s how Sen. Josh Hawley challenged Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday as Garland testified before a Senate committee regarding the Justice Department’s interest in parents protesting against school boards.

“It’s wrong,” Hawley said. “It is unprecedented, to my knowledge, in the history of this country, and I call on you to resign.”

There may be headaches around the country today for the people who repeatedly facepalmed during Garland’s testimony.

Hawley zeroed in on Garland in front of a large photograph of police arresting Scott Smith, the angry father whose daughter was sexually assaulted in a school restroom in Loudoun County, Virginia.

Former CNN Cameraman Exposed as Alleged Congressional Hitman – ‘I’m Coming for Him’

The Republican senator grilled Garland on a letter from the U.S. attorney for Montana that he said called for the prosecution of parents speaking out against school boards.

The letter followed an Oct. 4 memo from Garland calling upon federal law enforcement officials to develop plans to respond to “threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.” That memo had come days after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to President Joe Biden comparing school board protesters to domestic terrorists.

“Now, you testified last week before the House that you didn’t know anything about [the Smith] case,” Hawley said.

“I find that extraordinary because the [NSBA] letter that you put so much weight on — the letter that’s now been retracted — it cites this case. … There’s a news article cited in the letter. It’s discussed in the letter, but you testified you just couldn’t remember it.”

Do you think Garland should resign?

Hawley had Garland backed into a corner. Either he hadn’t done his due diligence before signing off on the Oct. 4 memo, or he had lied to Congress about being unaware of the Loudoun County incident.

“Maybe this will refresh your memory,” Hawley continued. “Do you think people like Scott Smith — do you think parents who show up to complain about their children being assaulted ought to be treated like this man right here?” Hawley asked, pointing to the picture of Smith being pinned to the floor by police.

Garland countered by saying that parents who show up at school board meetings are protected by the First Amendment.

“Do you think that they ought to be prosecuted in the different ways that your U.S. attorneys are identifying?” Hawley shot back.

Garland answered, “If what they’re doing is complaining about what the school board is doing — policies, curriculum, anything else that they want to — as long as they’re not committing threats of violence, then they should not be prosecuted, and they can’t be.”

Sen. Hawley Calls for Resignation of Biden’s Secretary of State and Defense

But Hawley said some of his Democratic colleagues at the hearing had repeatedly compared parents protesting at school board meetings to “criminal rioters,” a charge Garland denied.

“Oh, really?” Hawley replied, picking up a piece of paper and apparently reading a quote from it. “‘These people are just like the folks who came here on Jan. 6 and [were involved in] the riot at the Capitol’?”

Garland, perhaps suddenly recalling comments by Democrats, replied, “I don’t think that they were referring to the picture that you’re showing there”

“Well, I certainly would hope not. They were referring to parents who go to school board meetings. Mr. Smith is a parent who went to a school board meeting.

“I’ll leave it at this. General Garland, you have weaponized the FBI and the Department of Justice. Your U.S. attorneys are now collecting and cataloging all the ways that they might prosecute parents like Mr. Smith because they want to be involved in their children’s education and they want to have a say in their elected officials.

“It’s wrong. It is unprecedented, to my knowledge, in the history of this country, and I call on you to resign.”

Despite challenges from Hawley and other Republicans, Garland said Wednesday that he will continue to mobilize federal officials against threats to school boards, according to U.S. News & World Report.

“True threats of violence are not protected by the First Amendment. Those are the things we are worried about here. Those are the only things we are worried about here,” Garland said.

“We are not investigating peaceful protests or parent involvement in school board meetings. There is no precedent for doing that and we would never do that. We are only concerned about violence and threats of violence against school administrators, teachers, staff.”

Of course, violence is increasingly becoming whatever leftists say it is (as in the “silence is violence” line from Black Lives Matter).

Hawley is right — Garland should resign.

And here’s a suggestion: Think about sending the video of Hawley grilling Garland to your representative or senator as a primer on what many of us expect of those representing us in Congress.

Thank you, Sen. Hawley.

Denouncing efforts by the National School Boards Association to demonize parents who demand a say in the education of their children, the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday announced they will investigate potential collusion between the Biden administration and the National School Boards Association.

A rising tide of parental anger has been building across America as schools boards have jammed mask mandates, critical race theory, transgender activism and assorted other far-left extremist indoctrination tactics down the throats of children.

In response to defiant parents refusing to be pushed around any longer, Attorney General Merrick Garland earlier this month issued a memo saying that the Justice Department will now intervene on the side of school boards against parents.

#BREAKING: Judiciary Republicans launch new investigation into the National School Boards Association. pic.twitter.com/O4xGUmrNFQ

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) October 27, 2021

No Woke Agenda in Court: Rittenhouse Judge Says Rioters Can’t Be Called ‘Victims,’ Approves This List Instead

Garland’s memo implied that parents who speak up against White House and teachers union-backed policies are a threat to society.

Garland’s policy came in response to a demand from the National School Boards Association that parents learn their place.

“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” the group wrote in a letter.

The school boards association has since issued an apology for the reference to domestic terrorism, but not the general tenor of its attack on parents.

Is the Biden White House anti-parent?

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a scathing letter to the National School Boards Association on Wednesday announcing the launch of their investigation into the organization’s war on parents in partnership with the White House.

“We are investigating the troubling attempts by the Department of Justice and the White House to use the heavy hand of federal law enforcement to target concerned parents at local school board meetings and chill their protected First Amendment activity,” the letter thundered.

Noting that the group’s letter denouncing parents produced the knee-jerk reaction of Garland’s memo, the letter added that Garland told the House panel that the letter’s wild claims were the basis of his anti-parent memo.

Merrick Garland tells @ChuckGrassley he will not dissolve school board task force even though the National School Boards Association apologized for the “domestic terrorism” letter that seemingly prompted Garland to create the task force

— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) October 27, 2021

‘WJ Live’: After Student Walk-Out, Loudoun County Parents Demand School Board Resignation

“The Biden Administration seemingly relied upon the NSBA letter — which it coordinated in advance with the NSBA — as justification to unleash the full weight of the federal law enforcement apparatus upon America’s parents,” the letter read.

“Parents have an undisputed right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, including expressing concerns about the inclusion of controversial curricula in their child’s education,” the House Republicans wrote, noting that the school boards association appears not to recognize that.

“Unsurprisingly, the NSBA’s September 29 letter to President Biden never once mentioned ‘parents’ or parents’ role in their children’s education — although its subsequent apology memorandum purported to value the ‘voices of parents.’ Concerned parents are absolutely not domestic terrorists and, to the extent actual threats exist, local law enforcement — and not the FBI — are the appropriate authorities to address those situations,” the letter read.

“Parents cannot tolerate this collusion between the NSBA and the Biden Administration to construct a justification for invoking federal law enforcement to intimidate and silence parents using their Constitutional rights to advocate for their child’s future.”

The letter called for a release of all the documents from the group and the Biden administration that were germane to its demand that parents be restrained from publicly advocating for their children.

The letter also asked whether, in light of its new-found claim that it values parents, “the NSBA will urge Attorney General Garland to withdraw or rescind his October 4 memorandum.”

The letter was signed by Republican Reps. Jim Jordan, of Ohio; Steve Chabot of Ohio; Louie Gohmert of Texas; Darrell Issa of California; Ken Buck of Colorado; Matt Gaetz of Florida; Mike Johnson of Louisiana; Andy Biggs of Arizona; Tom McClintock of California; Greg Steube of Florida; Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin; Thomas Massie of Kentucky; Chip Roy of Texas; Dan Bishop of North Carolina; Michelle Fischbach of Minnesota; Victoria Spartz of Indiana; Scott L. Fitzgerald of Wisconsin; Cliff Bentz of Oregon and Burgess Owens of Utah.

Parents group fires back, says DOJ memo designed to suppress dissenting parents

Attorney General Merrick Garland said on Oct. 27 that it was appropriate for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to send a memo to school boards despite a National School Boards Association (NSBA) decision to withdraw its letter comparing parent protesters to domestic terrorists.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Garland attempted to distance the DOJ’s memo from the NSBA letter.

“All it asks is for federal law enforcement to consult with, meet with local law enforcement to assess the circumstances, strategize about what may or may not be necessary to provide federal assistance, if it is necessary,” Garland said, in response to questioning from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).

The memo, he said, “alters some of the language in the letter that we did not rely on and is not contained in my own memorandum. The only thing the Justice Department is concerned about is violence and threats of violence.”

After the NSBA letter and DOJ’s memo were issued, Republicans in Congress said the Biden administration was trying to quash parental dissent against the teaching of controversial subjects, including the quasi-Marxist critical race theory.

Republicans have said the DOJ should withdraw the memo since the NSBA retracted and apologized for its letter last week. The original letter referred to protests against school board members and likened such actions to domestic terrorism, asking the DOJ to use the Patriot Act.

“I think all of us have seen these reports of violence and threats of violence—that is what the Justice Department is concerned about,” Garland said on Oct. 27. “That’s the reason that we responded as quickly as we did when we got a letter indicating that there was violence and threats of violence with respect to school officials and school staff.”

Real and concrete threats of violence against school officials “are not protected by the First Amendment,” he said. “We are not investigating peaceful protests or parent involvement in school board meetings.”

The follow-up apology letter issued by the NSBA “does not change” its concern about the threat of violence, Garland said, telling Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) that the DOJ directive merely addresses whether any federal laws were being broken.

Without providing any concrete examples or data, the attorney general’s memo issued earlier in October said there has been a “disturbing spike” in threats of violence, harassment, and intimidation against teachers, school board members, and other educators. In a separate statement, the DOJ also announced the creation of a task force that would deal with such threats, which includes the agency’s National Security Division.

In response to Garland’s testimony on Oct. 27, Parents Defending Education head Nicole Neily said in a statement that a “number of people across the country” were terrified by the DOJ memo. The memo also suppressed parents from attending meetings and voicing their concerns “because they feared a knock at the door by the FBI,” Neily said.

Garland confirmed during an Oct. 21 House Judiciary Hearing that the basis for the claim of a “disturbing spike” in threats was based on the NSBA letter—not on law enforcement intelligence or academic studies.

But the NBSA has since distanced itself from its initial letter.

“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter,” the group’s Oct. 22 letter said. “To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue.

“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/ag-garland-defends-memo-targeting-parents-after-nsba-letter-is-withdrawn_4071931.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

Republican Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy condemned Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Biden administration over Garland’s letter to the FBI targeting parents protesting at school board meetings.

Kennedy made the remarks in an interview on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” on Wednesday ahead of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

“Merrick Garland is the vessel here. The prophet is President Biden in the White House. Merrick Garland’s not going to back off until the White House tells him to back off, and all of this was instigated by the White House,” Kennedy said.

“Most parents don’t believe that babies can be white supremacists.” @SenJohnKennedy previews the questions Attorney General Merrick Garland will face during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on the DOJ’s probe into ‘threats’ against school boards @BillHemmer @DanaPerino pic.twitter.com/c7W4hA8sKV

— America’s Newsroom (@AmericaNewsroom) October 27, 2021

This 5-Year-Old Tweet from Hillary Clinton Just Resurfaced, And It Reminds Everyone Why She Wasn’t Elected

Kennedy said the issue is really about parents’ love for their children.

“You don’t have to be a Latin scholar to figure out what this is all really about. It’s about parental love. My late father used to tell me when I was a kid. He’d say, ‘Son, you’ll never know love until you have a child.’ And he was right,” the congressman said.

Kennedy also criticized critical race theory.

Should children be taught the tenets of critical race theory?

“Most parents want what’s best for their children. They don’t want their children to grow up to hate. They don’t want their children to grow up to be racists. And that’s what critical race theory teaches,” Kennedy said.

Kennedy argued that there is a clear distinction between teaching children American history and imposing a worldview that labels people racist from birth.

“Should our kids learn about slavery and Jim Crow in school? Yes. Should our kids be taught about the Tulsa Massacre? You bet,” Kennedy said.

“But should our kids be taught that white babies are born bad and black babies are born hopeless and can’t make it without the help of the government? That’s drivel,” he added.

“Most parents know that. They don’t want that because they don’t believe it. Most parents don’t believe that babies can be white supremacists. And that’s really what this is all about.”

Wednesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing comes after 19 Republicans on the committee sent a letter to Garland on Monday demanding that he rescind an Oct. 4 memorandum targeting parents protesting at school board meetings.

Senator Dubs Biden’s Afghanistan Debacle ‘The Mona Lisa of Incompetence’

Garland had previously testified before the committee regarding the controversial memo.

“Your testimony before the Judiciary Committee last week concerning your October 4, 2021, memorandum targeting concerned parents at school board meetings was troubling,” the Republicans’ letter read.

Garland’s memo was sent to the FBI after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to President Joe Biden characterizing vocal parents as domestic terrorists. The NSBA later apologized for the letter.

A group of 19 Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Biden administration Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday to demand that he rescind a communication targeting parents at school board meetings.

The letter came after Garland appeared before the House Judiciary Committee last week following his Oct. 4 message which called out concerned parents.

The controversial memorandum was sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigations after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to President Joe Biden criticizing vocal parents as “domestic terrorists.”

“Your testimony before the Judiciary Committee last week concerning your October 4, 2021, memorandum targeting concerned parents at school board meetings was troubling,” the letter read.

#BREAKING: Judiciary Republicans demand Attorney General Garland withdraw school board memo.

RT if you think he should! pic.twitter.com/fo6q1MzGFP

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) October 25, 2021

‘Identifiable Harm’: Biden Kills JFK File Release, Issues Baffling Statement

“You acknowledged that you issued the unusual directive soon after reading about the thinly sourced letter sent by the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to President Biden and not because of any specific request from state or local law enforcement,” it added.

Despite Garland’s testimony, the letter concluded, the attorney general “sidestepped” the effect of his memorandum.

“During your testimony, you sidestepped the obvious effect of your ill-conceived memorandum and the chilling effect that invoking the full weight of the federal law enforcement apparatus would have on parents’ protected First Amendment speech,” the letter said.

Should Merrick Garland resign as attorney general?

The committee’s letter upheld the rights of parents to direct the education of their children, including involvement at school board meetings.

The response also clarified that local law enforcement is the appropriate group to respond to any threats or violence rather than the FBI.

“Parents have an undisputed right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, especially as school boards attempt to install controversial curricula. Local law enforcement — and not the FBI — are the appropriate authorities to address any local threats or violence,” the House members wrote.

GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio accused the Justice Department of creating a “snitch line” to tell on parents during the committee’s hearing with Garland last week.

“When the attorney general, the United States sets up a snitch line on parents, Americans aren’t going to tolerate it,” Jordan said.

‘Are You Kidding Me?’: Jordan Counters Nadler’s Claim DOJ Became Political Due To Trump

“I think they’re gonna stand up to this accelerated march to communism that we now see America is going to fight the good fight, they’re going to finish the course, they’re going to keep the faith, because Americans value freedom​,” he added.

The NSBA apologized on Friday regarding its September letter.

“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter. To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue,” the NSBA wrote Friday.

“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance,” the letter added.

Well, that took long enough.

In late September, conservative parents and voters discovered what the NSBA is. It wasn’t a pleasant introduction:

The National School Boards Association penned a letter to President Joe Biden in which the educators group asked “for federal law enforcement and other assistance to deal with the growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation.”

This sounds pretty dire until you realize the letter was talking, in large part, about parents revolting at school board meetings over radical curriculums that included elements of critical race theory and overreaches such as mask mandates.

Over 100 parents and children gathered outside Riverside Unified’s School Board Meeting on Oct. 21 in protest. #Riverside #vaccine #mandate #Californiahttps://t.co/GirCzcvuHB

— KVCR (@EmpireKVCR) October 23, 2021

Biden’s Delaware Summer House Gets $455K Upgrade Billed to the US Taxpayer

In the letter, the NSBA accused parents of “spreading misinformation” and asserted, without evidence, that “extremist hate organizations” were “inciting chaos” at contentious school board meetings.

And then the kicker: This activity “could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

In a matter of days, Attorney General Merrick Garland snapped to attention and sent out a memorandum promising the FBI would hold meetings with school officials nationwide to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.”Is public education getting too woke?Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This quickly soured on both ends — particularly the NSBA’s assertion that parent activists were involved in “domestic terrorism.” Things got worse on Thursday when the Washington Free Beacon reported that emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show the NSBA’s president and CEO collaborated with the White House before the letter was sent — and that it was released without the approval of the NSBA’s board.

On Friday, the NSBA finally issued a mea culpa for its woke behavior, according to the Washington Examiner.

“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter. To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue,” the letter stated.

“We apologize also for the strain and stress this situation has caused you and your organizations.”

Breaking: In the wake of yesterday’s @FreeBeacon report, National School Board Association announces “we regret and apologize for the letter” to Biden admin characterizing concerned parents as potentially domestic terrorists pic.twitter.com/3RBufvWqAN

— Noah Pollak (@NoahPollak) October 23, 2021

Content Warning: What They’re Showing Schoolchildren Is So Disgusting the Law Requires It to Be Blurred on Television

“As we’ve reiterated since the letter was sent, we deeply value not only the work of local school boards that make important contributions within our communities, but also the voices of parents, who should and must continue to be heard when it comes to decisions about their children’s education, health, and safety,” the letter continued.

And, of course, what belated apology would be complete without this line?: “We are going to do better going forward.”

“Doing better” is apparently defined as “a formal review of our processes and procedures,” as well as “specific improvements” regarding “coordination and consultation among our staff, and our members across the country.”

This will apparently stop the NSBA from implying parents who love their children are engaged in “domestic terrorism.” It’s also worth noting that the memorandum does not address the specific inflammatory language and positions of the group’s Sept. 29 letter to the White House, nor does it discuss the prior coordination with the White House.

Also unaddressed is the questions Garland faced over the letter — and the Department of Justice’s subsequent memorandum, issued just days after the NSBA’s missive — during his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last week.

“Three weeks ago, the National School Board Association writes President Biden asking him to involve the FBI in local school board matters. Five days later, the attorney general of the United States does just that, does exactly what a political organization asks to be done,” Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan said.

“Republicans on this committee have sent the attorney general 13 letters in the last six months,” he added. “Eight of the letters, we’ve got nothing — they just gave us the finger.” Other letters took weeks to merit a response, Jordan said. But it was merely days before Garland promised the NSBA “open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting.”

“A snitch line on parents started five days after a left-wing political organization asked for it,” Jordan said. “If that’s not political, I don’t know what is.

BREAKING: Ohio Rep. @Jim_Jordan let loose on Attorney General Merrick Garland at Thursday’s hearing: “Folks all around the country, they tell me, for the first time they are afraid of their government” pic.twitter.com/9aWjNCnohU

— Newsmax (@newsmax) October 21, 2021

None of this was mentioned in the NSBA’s apology. Just a sanitized “mistakes were made“-ish retraction of an inflammatory letter which, by all appearances, spurred the Department of Justice and the FBI to treat American parents as if they were domestic terrorist threats for caring about their children’s education.

It certainly took long enough. And after all that, the apology was neither public nor specific. Meanwhile, it appears the FBI still remains mobilized against the chimerical threat the NSBA railed against.

Some mea culpa.

Sometimes, keeping sane while following politics involves wildly unwarranted optimism.

You’ve got to be a bit like the condemned criminals at the end of “Monty Python’s Life of Brian,” singing “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life” as they’re being executed.

Take Attorney General Merrick Garland, a man far more concerned with attacking our Second Amendment rights, law enforcement officers and parents protesting woke school boards trying to implement critical race theory-based curricula than he is with America’s skyrocketing violent crime rate or crisis at the border.

Sure, he’s a disaster — and a dangerous one at that.

But at least he’s not on the Supreme Court.

Imagine if a man who treats parents as if they were a domestic terror threat had a lifetime appointment to the high court, as former President Barack Obama thought he should. Remember how he was supposed to be a “moderate” pick, a compromise so that the Republicans in control of the Senate would confirm him? Yeah, not so much.

That’s how I kept calm Thursday when Garland appeared before the House Judiciary Committee and the Democratic committee chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, in his opening statement, began by praising Garland and his Department of Justice — at least in comparison to what he inherited.

“You have assumed this enormous responsibility at a crossroads in our nation’s history,” Nadler said in his opening statement, according to a transcript.

“For four years, the democratic institutions you have sworn to protect — first, as a judge, and now, as attorney general — were deeply undermined by the former president and his political enablers.  During that time, the Trump administration leveraged the department to protect the president and his friends, and to punish his enemies, both real and imagined.”

Garland, to judge by Nadler’s opening remarks, was some kind of admixture of Cincinnatus, Louis Brandeis and Eliot Ness, a man given the unenviable task of cleaning house after Trump and his poker buddies conspired to blow American democracy sky high.

Now, to hear the chairman tell it, there’s a Proud Boy or an Oath Keeper lurking behind every corner thanks to the former president — maybe even at your local school board meeting! — and it’ll take this gentle apolitical giant named Merrick Garland to clean things up.

This preposterous framing of the current political moment was impressive even by the standards of Nadler, one of the District of Columbia’s great horse-manure artists. Unfortunately for him, the next speaker was GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, a man of considerable caffeination who wasn’t about to let a fiction like that go unchallenged.

“The chairman just said the Trump DOJ was political and went after their opponents. Are you kidding me?’ Jordan began. “Three weeks ago, the National School Board Association writes President Biden asking him to involve the FBI in local school board matters. Five days later, the attorney general of the United States does just that, does exactly what a political organization asks to be done.”

Jordan was referring to an Oct. 4 memo from the Department of Justice in which Garland asserted “there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s schools.”

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” the memorandum continued, adding the FBI would “open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.”

“Republicans on this committee have sent the attorney general 13 letters in the last six months,” Jordan said. “Eight of the letters, we’ve got nothing — they just gave us the finger.” Other letters took weeks for a response, he said.

And yet, the congressman noted, it took the NSBA “five days” to get exactly what they wanted — between the letter to Biden to Garland’s memorandum, which included a promise of “open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting.”

“A snitch line on parents started five days after a left-wing political organization asked for it,” Jordan said. “If that’s not political, I don’t know what is.

Is Merrick Garland weaponizing the FBI?

“Where’s the dedicated lines of communication with local leaders regarding our southern border — something that frankly is a federal matter? Where’s the dedicated lines of communication on violent crime in our cities?

“Nope, can’t do that, the Biden Justice Department is going to go after parents who object to some racist, hate-America curriculum.”

BREAKING: Ohio Rep. @Jim_Jordan let loose on Attorney General Merrick Garland at Thursday’s hearing: “Folks all around the country, they tell me, for the first time they are afraid of their government” pic.twitter.com/9aWjNCnohU

— Newsmax (@newsmax) October 21, 2021

According to the Daily Mail, Garland said he was focused merely on “violence or threats of violence,” not on treating activist parents as domestic terrorists.

“I want to be as clear as I can be: This is not about what happens inside school board meetings. This is only about threats of violence,” the attorney general said.

Threats of violence, however, are already matters under law enforcement purview. The FBI doesn’t need a memorandum from the attorney general to focus on them, nor does it need dedicated lines of communication.

When this attention happens to align felicitously with opposition to a top-line liberal agenda item — the radical remaking of American education, no matter what parents might think of it — it’s not difficult to deduce where the focus is coming from.

As for the effect the NSBA’s letter had, Garland said he first learned about it by watching the news, Fox News reported. However, he conceded that “was brought to our attention” and that the White House had discussed it with the DOJ.

If this were about threats of violence, that’s what police or, in certain cases, federal law enforcement officers are for.

Garland’s memo wasn’t about that, however.

It was a notice that the FBI was being mobilized against parents who continue to protest school boards that have lurched to the left and demand zero accountability. If the bureau didn’t do it at the behest of a left-wing educators organization, the timing sure seems fortuitous.

And, despite Jerrold Nadler’s best efforts to portray Garland as being as neutral as white paint in a living room, he’s a political operative who’s weaponized the DOJ at the behest of the Biden administration and the Democrats.

But at least Garland isn’t on the Supreme Court.

Sing along with me, folks: “When you’re chewing on life’s gristle / Don’t grumble, give a whistle / And this’ll help things turn out for the best / And always look on the bright side of life …”

GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio did not allow House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler’s claim to go unchallenged that the Justice Department became a lawless, political agency due to former President Donald Trump, asking, “Are you kidding me?”

“For four years, the democratic institutions that you have sworn to protect, first as a judge, now as attorney general, were deeply undermined by the former president and his political enablers,” Nadler told Attorney General Merrick Garland prior to the top federal law enforcement officer’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee on Thursday.

“During that time, the Trump administration leveraged the department to protect the president and his friends and to punish his enemies, both real and imagined,” the New York Democrat said.

Nadler accused Trump of summoning the nation’s law enforcement officers following November’s election and demanding “they use the full power of the federal government to install him for another term.”

The Democrat told Garland his task is “unenviable … because you must build back everything [the Department of Justice] lost under the last administration. Its self-confidence, its reputation in the eyes of the American people and an institutional respect for our Constitution and the rule of law.”

Former NYPD Chief Calls Big Brian Laundrie Development ‘Very Strange,’ Suggests ‘Something Is Amiss’

Jordan, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, responded to Nadler’s opening statement by saying, “The chairman just said the Trump DOJ was political and went after their opponents. Are you kidding me?”

First, the congressman argued that Garland is overseeing a politically driven DOJ, pointing to a memorandum the attorney general put out earlier this month regarding “threats” against school officials from parents who are concerned about what their children are being taught.

“Three weeks ago the National School Board Administration writes President Biden asking him to involve the FBI in local school board matters,” Jordan said. “Five days later, the attorney general of the United States does just that. Does exactly what a political organization asked to be done.”

Do you think the DOJ is political under Biden?

Jordan contrasted that rapid movement by the attorney general with the slow response to 13 letters he and his congressional colleagues have sent to the DOJ, for which they sometimes wait weeks or months.

“Eight of the letters, we’ve got nothing,” the congressman said. “They just gave us the finger and said, ‘We’re not going to get back to you.’”

But what Jordan called a “snitch line” to report unruly parents was set up “five days after a left-wing political organization asked for it.”

“Think about this, the same FBI that Mr. Garland is directing to open dedicated lines of communication for reporting on parents just a few years ago spied on four American citizens associated with President Trump’s campaign,” the representative said.

Americans have had enough. pic.twitter.com/SFlYQFiFOR

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) October 21, 2021

Top House Republicans Demand Nadler Take This Action on Biden Border Crisis ‘Immediately’

“The Clinton campaign hired Perkins Coie, who hired Fusion GPS, who hired Christophe Steele who put a bunch of garbage together, gave it to the FBI. They used that as the basis to open up an investigation into a presidential campaign,” Jordan continued.

He further noted that a federal grand jury last month indicted Michael A. Sussmann, an attorney who worked at Perkins Coie, for allegedly passing false information to then-FBI general counsel Jim Baker alleging covert communications between the Trump campaign and Russians.

Jordan also pointed out, “A few weeks ago, the [inspector general] at the Department of Justice released a report that found that the FBI made over 200 errors, omissions and lies in just 29 randomly selected FISA applications.”

Last month, USA Today reported that the IG “faulted the FBI for ‘widespread’ errors in its applications for surveillance authority, concluding that the bureau failed to provide supporting documentation for sensitive wiretap requests.”

“Building on a 2019 examination of the FBI’s surveillance of a former Trump aide [Carter Page], Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz found that the bureau did not include adequate support for 183 surveillance applications between 2015 and 2020 following a review of more than 7,000 such requests,” it said.

Multiple FBI and DOJ officials prominently discussed in text messages of those serving in the FBI’s Russia probe of the Trump campaign have been forced out or left the agencies, Politico reported.

Those include former FBI Director James Comey, whom Trump fired; former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe; Comey’s chief of staff, James Rybicki; Baker; FBI agent Peter Strzok; FBI lawyer Lisa Page; and Bruce Ohr, who was associate deputy attorney general.

Bringing his remarks back to the present, Jordan contended that citizens’ constitutional rights have been under assault by the government and that “Americans are afraid.”

“They tell me for the first time, they fear their government,” he said. “And frankly I think it’s obvious why. Every single liberty we enjoy under the First Amendment has been assaulted over the last year.”

However, Jordan argued Garland’s memo was a turning point.

“I don’t think the good people of this great country are going to cower and hide. I think your memo, Mr. Attorney General, was the last straw,” he said. “I think it was the catalyst for a great awakening that is just getting started.”

Jordan concluded, “Americans are pushing back because Americans value freedom.”

A House Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General Merrick Garland got testy when the top Republican and Democrat got into a heated exchange.

It happened on Thursday when Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan started when he objected to the Biden Administration’s plan to have the IRS monitor the bank accounts of Americans, and then he told committee chair, New York Rep. Jerry Nadler that he had a video to present.

But Democrat Pennsylvania Rep. Madeleine Dean objected to the video because Republicans did not follow the “48 hour rule” which would have them submit the video for approval 48 hours in advance of showing it.

When Rep. Jordan attempted to appeal the objection Nadler shut him down saying “That’s out of order. This is not debatable.”

“What’s out of order is there is no rule that requires a 48-hour notice, that’s what out of order,” Jordan hit back.

“There is such a rule,” the New York Democrat asserted.

The two argued back and forth when another member, likely a Republican, said “Mr. Chairman, what are you afraid of?”

“It’s a video about parents at school board meetings,” Jordan said, growing mor agitated. “Moms and dads speaking at school board meetings. And you guys aren’t going to let us play it?”

“Mr. Chairman, obviously you’re not going to let us play it and obviously you’re going to censor us, which is sort of the conduct of the left today it seems and Democrats today it seems,” Jordan responded.

WATCH: Fight breaks out between Rep. Jerry Nadler and Rep. Jim Jordan during a House Judiciary hearing when Nadler sustains an objection to a video Jordan wanted to be played to AG Merrick Garland. pic.twitter.com/j06MPlJduV

— The Hill (@thehill) October 21, 2021

But the video was shared on Twitter by the House Judiciary GOP.

This is the video of parents at school board meetings that @RepJerryNadler refused to let us play at today’s Judiciary Committee hearing.

Why does the Left feel so threatened by brave American parents? pic.twitter.com/GvJlkWoJa2

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) October 21, 2021

“Judiciary Democrats are censoring @Jim_Jordan from showing a video of American moms and dads. Classic Democrats. Afraid of the American people and truth,” Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert said on Twitter.

Judiciary Democrats are censoring @Jim_Jordan from showing a video of American moms and dads.

Classic Democrats. Afraid of the American people and truth.

— Rep. Lauren Boebert (@RepBoebert) October 21, 2021

The video was designed as a response to the attorney general’s Orwellian directive to the FBI and United States attorneys to investigate parents at school board meetings who object to their children wearing masks in schools and who oppose Critical Race Theory being taught as possible “domestic terrorists.”

“Citing an increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers in our nation’s public schools, today Attorney General Merrick B. Garland directed the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to meet in the next 30 days with federal, state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement leaders to discuss strategies for addressing this disturbing trend. These sessions will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment and response by law enforcement,” the press release said.

“Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values,” Garland said. “Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.”

“According to the Attorney General’s memorandum, the Justice Department will launch a series of additional efforts in the coming days designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel. Those efforts are expected to include the creation of a task force, consisting of representatives from the department’s Criminal Division, National Security Division, Civil Rights Division, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the FBI, the Community Relations Service and the Office of Justice Programs, to determine how federal enforcement tools can be used to prosecute these crimes, and ways to assist state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement where threats of violence may not constitute federal crimes,” the directive said.

“The Justice Department will also create specialized training and guidance for local school boards and school administrators. This training will help school board members and other potential victims understand the type of behavior that constitutes threats, how to report threatening conduct to the appropriate law enforcement agencies, and how to capture and preserve evidence of threatening conduct to aid in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes,” it said.

Attorney General Merrick Garland told the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday that he had not sought, and would not seek, ethics review from the Department of Justice over his son-in-law’s alleged ties to the promotion of Critical Race Theory (CRT)

The issue arose because of a report that Garland’s son-in-law, Alexander “Xan” Tanner, had promoted tenets of CRT through his educational data firm, while Garland was cracking down on parents objecting to CRT at recent school board meetings.

As Breitbart News noted earlier this month, citing Becker News:

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s son-in-law is a co-founder of an educational data mining company that promotes the tenets of Critical Race Theory (CRT), a report at Becker News observed Wednesday.

The report noting Garland’s family ties to CRT comes in the wake of the attorney general’s memorandum directing the FBI to mobilize against parents who oppose CRT and mask mandates in K-12 schools and speak out about their concerns.

Panorama produces data mining surveys for schools, including “equity and inclusion surveys” and conducts “professional development” training in the areas of equity and inclusion for teachers and administrators.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) questioned Garland about whether he had sought ethics review from counsel within the Department of Jusice. Garland indicated that he had not, and would not, because it was not required. Later, under questioning from Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Garland reiterated that he had acted within Department of Justice rules.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/10/21/watch-merrick-garland-did-not-will-not-seek-ethics-review-over-alleged-family-ties-to-critical-race-theory/

A group of parents from Michigan and Virginia has sued Attorney General Merrick Garland, alleging his recent order on investigating threats against educators misuses his office’s powers.

Garland, a Biden nominee, on Oct. 4 in a memorandum directed the FBI and U.S. attorneys to draw up plans to target parents who threaten violence or attempt to intimidate educators.

The order came after the National School Boards Association (NSBA) asked the Biden administration to respond due to what it described as acts of “domestic terrorism” against school boards, referring to protests during school board meetings over contentious teachings.

The new suit (pdf) says Garland is effectively wielding federal law enforcement resources “to silence parents and other private citizens who publicly object to and oppose the divisive, harmful, immoral, and racist policies of the ‘progressive’ left that are being implemented by school boards and school officials in public school districts throughout the United States.”

The parents are based in Saline, Michigan, and Loudoun County, Virginia, two areas that have seen heightened backlash in recent months. In Virginia, for instance, many parents opposed a rule that teachers must use a person’s preferred pronouns or face discipline.

“You’ve got the attorney general who’s weaponizing his power, his office to suppress the speech of concerned citizens—parents who are speaking out at public school boards about some of these inane policies like promotion of critical race theory ideology, which teaches the kids to be racist,” Robert Muise, an attorney with the American Freedom Law Center, which is representing the parents, told The Epoch Times.

The Department of Justice has not responded to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit or criticism of the order, which has led to over a dozen state school boards removing themselves or mulling withdrawal from the NSBA.

Lisa Monaco, the department’s second-in-command, defended the policy before Congress earlier this month, asserting it was aimed at making sure law enforcement from the local to federal level was aware of how to report threats and in communication on how to address threats and violence.

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views,” Garland wrote in his order.

The plaintiff parents, though, say the policy amounts to “a direct threat and warning to parents and private citizens across the United States, including Plaintiffs, that the Department of Justice and its FBI will be investigating you and monitoring what you say at these school board meetings so be careful about what you say and how you say it, thereby chilling such expression.”

That violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, they argue.

The suit also noted that there are accusations of a conflict of interest because Garland’s son-in-law, Alexander Tanner, is the co-founder and president of Panorama Education, which sells materials and conducts surveys for school districts across the country, including some that appear to have elements of critical race theory.

“He’s got a stake in this, a personal stake in this, through his family members,” Muise said.

Panorama Education declined to comment beyond pointing The Epoch Times to its website, where it disputes allegations it’s linked to critical race theory.

The suit was filed in federal court in Washington. It asks the court to permanently enjoin Garland’s order.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/michigan-and-virginia-parents-sue-ag-garland-over-order-to-investigate-violent-threats-against-teachers-school-boards_4059416.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

Attorney General Merrick Garland has now repeatedly and clearly demonstrated his intention to tow the party line, as it drifts inexorably from Constitutional principles and the Bill of Rights—in lieu of serving as an independent and objective enforcer of federal law.

He first exposed his partisan contempt for objective facts in a speech given back on June 15. There he stated that “In the FBI’s view, the top domestic violent extremist threat comes from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, specifically those who advocate for the superiority of the white race.” Not Antifa. Not BLM.

As FBI field agents are well aware, the domestic threat posed by white supremacists was successfully dissipated in the ‘80s and ‘90s, largely as a result of high-risk large-scale undercover operations targeting the Aryan Nations and other white militia organizations. Garland’s speech parroted statements made in congressional testimony by FBI Director Christopher Wray on Sept. 17, 2020, wherein much the same conclusory statements were made, unsupported by data, reflecting Democrat talking points rather than independent determinations based on articulated facts.

Garland’s and Wray’s statements have lent credibility to the newly expanded definition of white supremacy to include all those who disagree with progressive policies—the moral justification thus being created for repressive tactics directed at eliminating dissent. And—significantly—at ostracizing dissenters.

Garland has now taken another step in the politicization of the Department of Justice, by categorizing parents disturbed by progressive indoctrination of their children as domestic terrorists. And the FBI, whose resources are already overtaxed—approximately 10,000 special agents to protect a nation of 330,000,000 plus—has been directed to investigate this imminent threat to national security.

In his Oct. 4 memorandum to the FBI Director, Garland warns parents that “in the coming days, the Department [of Justice] will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”

Missing in the memo is any clue as to the federal jurisdiction that might justify the FBI’s involvement in what appears to be in essence the suppression of opposing views—suppression of the expression of opinions which are contrary to the views propagated by individuals and institutions currently wielding the reins of power. Garland’s misuse of the government’s overwhelming power—proscribed by the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights—is barred precisely because the Framers anticipated such abuse of power, and went to great lengths to prevent it.

The assault on the Bill of Rights appears to be coordinated and nearly overwhelming in nature.

From the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, denied to the Jan. 6 unarmed Capitol Hill trespassers, to the utilization of tech companies as proxies to circumvent First Amendment limitations on government action, the onslaught has many fronts.

Apple is now monitoring and reviewing the images maintained by millions of customers on the cell phones that it sells. Ostensibly a measure to identify pedophiles, this is realistically a first step to monitor the public at large—actions by a powerful corporation that would be clearly illegal if conducted by the government without a warrant.

The right to a fair trial by a jury of one’s peers—the Sixth Amendment—was effectively eviscerated by the Biden administration’s declaration that mounted Customs and Border Protection officers were guilty of whipping illegal Haitian immigrants prior to any formal charges being brought

The administration’s disregard for free speech rights of millions of federal employees is evidenced by the White House’s list of prohibited words and phrases—a list that altogether too many corporate entities are quick to incorporate into their own private sector cultures.

Thus the Government achieves its proscribed goal of controlling speech through indirect means. And as is, or should be, self-evident, controlling permissible language is the first step toward controlling permissible thought.

An assault on property rights—heretofore secured by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments’ due process clauses—has utilized the back door of COVID-19 to justify regulation of small businesses, circumventing the legislative process, and severely restricting the exercise of business decisions by small entrepreneurs.

Civil rights have been curtailed by the insidious substitution of equity for equality—and by the insertion of critical race theory in lieu of the content of character theory of Martin Luther King.

The constitutional right to “security of person,” guaranteed in Article Three, along with the pursuit of happiness , as articulated in the Declaration of Independence, are being subtly undermined by the defund the police movement. How can happiness be pursued in an insecure, crime-ridden environment?

Rather, the assault on law-enforcement authorities has been ramped up. In the military, police, and in the Department of Homeland Security, witch-hunts are underway, with the search for dissenting opinion—mislabeled as a search for white supremacist conspirators—being encouraged and pursued by the media and left-wing think tanks. And the failure to provide secure borders undermines security on a number of levels, from the entry of violent criminals to the propagation of the dreaded virus.

Diversity of opinion is being routed out, and replaced by unquestioning obedience and propagation of dogma. How can the First Amendment’s freedom of religion be pursued when church and synagogue doors are barred whenever lock-downs are declared, while the doors to taverns remain open?

Powerful political leaders on the left—House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton—continually question the relevance of the Constitution, while enthusiastically supporting movements, such as the 1619 rewriting of American history, questioning the Framers’ relevance in the modern age.

The Second Amendment’s right to bear arms has been under constant attack from the Democrat Party. The attempt to place David Chipman, one of its most fervent opponents as head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms proved beyond the pale, even for middle of the road supporters of firearm bans. However, individuals such as Mark and Patricia McCloskey of St. Louis, who have exercised their Second Amendment rights in the defense of their security and their property, have been ridiculed by the media and prosecuted by local authorities.

The elephant in the room regarding blatant disregard of our precious rights is of course COVID-19. The Biden administration, as well as state executive officers, have used the pandemic to justify the sweeping away the right to privacy that justice William Douglas interpreted into the Constitution, as emanating from the “penumbra of rights“ that the founding document enshrined as guarantees for future generations.

These privacy rights have for years been used to justify the legalization of abortion as part of a woman’s “right to choose.” Yet these privacy rights and the right to choose are disregarded entirely when it comes to the right to choose as to whether or not a medical product is to be injected into one’s body.

Although members of the military have historically been bound by certain limitations on their ability to communicate personal views, the imprisonment of Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Scheller subsequent to his statements dissenting from disastrous decisions made by general command officers with regard to Afghanistan, is chilling indeed.

The move, in addition to being clearly intended to send a message to others in the military who might be so inclined, is additionally another step in the administration program to suppress and eliminate dissenting voices in the military and federal agencies.

To further enforce the message, Marine officials are also investigating Lance Corporal Hunter Clark for having consented to appear at the podium with non-candidate Donald Trump at a rally on Saturday, Sept. 25. Clark received national attention after rescuing an infant in the course of the chaotic evaluation at Kabul airport in Afghanistan.

What we are witnessing is a purge.

The true purpose of using vaccination mandates to fire employees from schools, civil service positions, hospitals, airlines, law enforcement, has nothing to do with COVID-19 and everything to do with disenfranchisement and diminution of our previously inalienable rights. The purpose is to weed out dissent.

It is the next step, following and building upon the redefinition of white supremacy to include any who disagrees with the party line, anyone who dissents. Just as the labeling of angry parents as domestic terrorists is simply a subterfuge to weed out dissent. It is a campaign to disempower, to eliminate those with dissenting ideas, ideas that diverge from authorized, “correct” thought. Those who could pose a threat to the power elite.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-purge-is-starting-with-the-bill-of-rights_4048928.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

House Judiciary Committee Republicans sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding an ethics review and public report regarding the AG’s memo, which directs the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and U.S. Attorneys to use law enforcement to investigate parents who “intimidate” school board members.

“This letter is to express our serious concerns about your recent decision to involve federal law enforcement entities in local school board debates and to stifle First Amendment-protected political speech. Your actions are not just inappropriate, but also appear to have been improperly influenced by politics and by your family’s interest in the matter,” wrote the Republican Judiciary Committee members in their letter (pdf), including Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.).

The letter is referring to the memorandum that Garland sent to federal agency heads on Oct. 4 directing the FBI and U.S. Attorneys to mobilize their states’ law enforcement to investigate parents who “threaten violence” toward school board members or administration officials.

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views,” stated Garland’s memo.

Garland’s memo came only days after the National School Board Association (NSBA) sent a letter to President Joe Biden asking him to crack down on parents who are “threatening” school boards.

“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” stated the NSBA’s letter.

Parents across the United States and most prominently in Loudon County, Virginia, have been speaking out at crowded school board meetings to oppose some of the curriculum being used in their children’s public schools and divisive ideas such as America is systemically racist. Parents in many areas have also been questioning some of the sexual content in the books being used at their children’s schools.

Congressman Chip Roy (R-Texas) one of the Reps. who signed the letter to Garland, said he attended Loudon County public schools for most of his childhood but that now the curriculum being taught is an “embarrassment.”

“I also want to know where he thinks he has the power to send FBI into communities to go after parents who are simply going to the school board to express their discontent with what’s happening in school boards,” Roy told Newsmax on Thursday.

A Virginia mother, Asra Nomani, told The Epoch Times those parents are only advocating for what they think is best for their children.

She is the vice president of strategy and investigation with Parents Defending Education, an organization working to “reclaim our schools from activists promoting harmful agendas,” their webpage states.

Nomani said in an Oct. 8 interview that parents going to school board meetings are, “asking the school board serious questions about how money is spent, the ideology that’s being promoted in the classroom, and these school board members don’t like getting these hard questions.”

“What’s happening in Loudoun County, Virginia, is incomprehensible. … And parents obviously have a right to exercise free speech and demand accountability from public officials. … This should be the time for all parents to get engaged. Do it lawfully, exercise your free speech, but certainly, we have to have some accountability at these local school boards,” Rep. Johnson said during a recent interview with Fox News.

Nomani’s advice to parents is to not be intimidated by the DOJ’s directive but to continue to voice their opposition to the ideas they disagree with, at public school board meetings and videotape their interactions.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Republicans’ letter to the AG.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/gop-congress-members-demand-answers-from-doj-about-parents-free-speech-rights_4051237.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter Wednesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland to demand an explanation concerning his memorandum to the Federal Bureau of Investigation over “serious concerns” regarding parents at school board meetings.

The letter, first reported by the Daily Caller, was led by Lousiana Rep. Mike Johnson and joined by 18 additional GOP House members on the committee.

“This letter is to express our serious concerns about your recent decision to involve federal law enforcement entities in local school board debates and to stifle First Amendment-protected political speech. Your actions are not just inappropriate, but also appear to have been improperly influenced by politics and by your family’s interest in the matter,” the representatives wrote.

“As members of the House Committee on the Judiciary, we have a responsibility to conduct oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and we trust that you will fully cooperate with our inquiry,” they added.

Part of the letter’s request included a call for Garland to submit himself to an ethics investigation.

(DAILY CALLER OBTAINED) — … by Henry Rodgers

The House members concluded with the “request you promptly consult with the designated agency ethics official to determine if your actions in this matter have resulted in an ethics violation for a breach of impartiality.”

“Judiciary Republicans trust that Mr. Garland will submit to our requested ethics inquiry, publicly release its results, and take whatever actions are necessary to protect the integrity of the office of Attorney General, including either recusing himself from this issue and/or rescinding the October 4th memorandum,” Johnson told the Daily Caller.

Part of the controversy stems from allegations that Garland’s son-in-law profits from work to promote critical race theory.

“The Justice Department usually has very broad standards for the appearance of impropriety that would trigger at least the inquiry into whether there was a conflict of interest,” former U.S. Assistant Attorney Andy McCarthy said during a recent interview with Fox News.

Garland’s son-in-law reportedly co-founded and works with the company Panorama Education. An educational workshop released by the company includes materials that promote critical race theory and fixate on overcoming “white supremacy,” according to Fox.

“The idea is that Garland’s son-in-law is profiting lucratively from peddling this stuff to the schools. And Garland, even though the Justice Department doesn’t appear to have jurisdiction to do what it’s done, is siccing the FBI on parents who are dissenting against these kinds of materials,” McCarthy added.

Garland’s Family Ties to CRT Exposed After He Threatened to Curb Parents’ ‘Intimidation’ of School Boards

Garland sent the Oct. 4 memorandum to the FBI concerning “threats” against school personnel.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s schools,” the attorney general wrote.

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” Garland continued.

“In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel,” he went on. “Coordination and partnership with local law enforcement is critical to implementing these measures for the benefit of our nation’s nearly 14,000 public school districts.”

Former U.S. Assistant Attorney Andy McCarthy said U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s son-in-law profits from his work to promote critical race theory.

“The Justice Department usually has very broad standards for the appearance of impropriety that would trigger at least the inquiry into whether there was a conflict of interest,” McCarthy said.

Garland’s son-in-law reportedly co-founded and works with the company Panorama Education. An educational workshop released by the company includes materials which promote critical race theory and fixate on overcoming “white supremacy,” according to Fox News.

“The idea is Garland’s son-in-law is profiting lucratively from peddling this stuff to the schools. And Garland, even though the Justice Department doesn’t appear to have jurisdiction to do what it’s done, is sicking the FBI on parents who are dissenting against these kinds of materials,” McCarthy added.

Family of Suspected School Shooter Starts Fundraiser to Ease Teen’s ‘Traumatic’ Experience, Then Gets Hit with the Bad News

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul also addressed the controversy recently.

“The punk who assaulted the policeman defending my wife and I in DC went free but the Biden Admin. labels concerned parents as ‘domestic terrorists?’” Paul tweeted alongside a post from Asra Q. Nomani urging parents to contact the National Association of School Boards in response to a controversial letter the association sent to President Joe Biden on Sept. 29.

The punk who assaulted the policeman defending my wife and I in DC went free but the Biden Admin. labels concerned parents as “domestic terrorists?” https://t.co/dSsqm6TNQQ

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) October 6, 2021

Garland sent a memorandum to the FBI last week concerning “threats” against school personnel.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence among school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s schools,” the attorney general wrote.

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” Garland said.

“In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel,” he continued. “Coordination and partnership with local law enforcement is critical to implementing these measures for the benefit of our nation’s nearly 14,000 public school districts.”

BREAKING: Attorney General Merrick Garland has instructed the FBI to mobilize against parents who oppose critical race theory in public schools, citing “threats.”

The letter follows the National School Board Association’s request to classify protests as “domestic terrorism.” pic.twitter.com/NhPU03YOYq

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) October 4, 2021

‘We’re Not Domestic Terrorists’: Parents’ Group Leader Hits Back After Biden DOJ ‘Declared a War on Parents’

In its September letter to Biden, the National School Boards Association pleaded with him to treat parents who oppose mask mandates and the teaching of critical race theory as domestic terrorists.

The NSBA letter said, “As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

America First Legal formally requests an ‘investigation regarding potential improprieties’ of Merrick’s memo

The National School Boards Association (NSBA) recently characterized the effort of parents who engage in passionate opposition to forced masking and the indoctrination of their children through critical race theory (CRT) as a form of “domestic terrorism.” In response, a Florida mom equates the weaponization of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against parents trying to protect their children to “using dogs and water hoses on black Americans fighting for civil rights.”

How it Began

On Oct. 4, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo instructing the director of the FBI addressing what he described as “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools.”

The memo was in response to a Sept. 29 letter (pdf) from the NSBA to the Biden administration comparing what it describes as “attacks against school board members and educators for approving policies for masks to protect the health and safety of students and school employees” and “physical threats because of propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula” as “equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

For this, the NSBA’s letter “specifically solicits the expertise and resources of the U.S. Department of Justice, FBI, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service, and its National Threat Assessment Center regarding the level of risk to public school children, educators, board members, and facilities/campuses.”

The NSBA also requested “assistance of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to intervene against threatening letters and cyberbullying attacks that have been transmitted to students, school board members, district administrators, and other educators.”

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views” Garland stated in his memo to the FBI. “Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.”

Parents Speak Out

According to Quisha King, the government knows that the growing number of parents who are going to school board meetings to voice their opinions against CRT are gaining a lot of attention, and “they want to do everything possible to shut that down.”

King—the Florida mom whose comments before the Duval County School Board went viral on social media in June—said the school board members who are determined to push their agenda are now so desperate to stop the momentum of the parents who oppose them “they will use the government against its own people” to silence them.

“We probably never thought that would happen in America,” King told The Epoch Times. “It’s outrageous.”

Asked if the threat to use the FBI to treat parents who oppose CRT at school board meetings as domestic terrorists would dissuade her from speaking out in the future, King said “absolutely not.”

“In fact, I think this is going to backfire,” King asserted. “You’re going to see even more parents. Of all sides of the political spectrum, come out and say ‘wait a minute, the FBI is coming after parents who just want to give their children the best life possible.’ This isn’t going to dissuade us. It’s only going to rally more of us.”

While King concedes there may have been instances of parents expressing anger at meetings or sending inappropriate emails, she is unaware of anyone erupting into violence or harming any school board members. King also said the threat to use the power of the FBI to shut down parents who are turning out in increasing numbers to stand up for their children at school board meetings is only going to open the eyes of parents who have “been teetering” on the idea of pulling their children from public schools altogether and finally “tip them over the edge.”

During her speech at Thursday’s Family Research Council’s annual Pray Vote Stand Summit, King received an extended standing ovation when she suggested parents stage a “mass exodus” from the public system. Asked to expand on that statement, King said she has already begun working on the idea by speaking to parents who may be hesitant and working with them to find solutions before setting a specific date to stage the “mass exodus” on a national level.

“Anyone who is involved in wanting to have freedom and liberty in this country and believes in what this country stands for is being attacked,” Duval County, Florida, resident April Carney told The Epoch Times, saying part of the reason why she chose to run for a position on the school board is because the choices of parents are systematically being taken away.

“Those of us who are parents and are thoroughly involved in our child’s education, we want to be included in the decision making  process regarding the curriculum and the rules and regulations that are being put in place in schools,” Carney said. “That has completely stopped. There’s been too much activism brought into the classroom and not enough emphasis on reading, writing and arithmetic, science and our students are failing because of that.”

“Our first problem as Americans is we aren’t naming the enemy,” Karen Schoen, a former educator and dean in the New York school system told The Epoch Times, suggesting that the real enemy are the “globalist communists” seated in positions of power on both sides of the political aisle.

“Communism cannot have opposition or dissent,” Schoen insisted. “They will not tolerate anybody who calls them out, and now that Americans are fighting back they are weaponizing government agencies to shut down any dissent.”

“We don’t want to co-parent with the government,” Jessico Bowman told The Epoch Times. “We want to be involved in our children’s education and upbringing because that’s our responsibility.”

“If the DOJ wants to classify that as domestic terrorism that’s really the DOJ’s problem,” Charles Bowman added, saying that when it comes down to it, the community will rally together. “We are going to voice our opinion and we are going to support the people who want to voice their opinions.”

“Who gets to decide what’s a threat versus just an angry parent speaking out?” Jessico asked. “Do we trust them [the government] to make that determination for us at the federal level?”

“If you as parents are not going to advocate for the best interests of your children then who will,” Charles interjected. “Like Jessico said, we’re not interested in co-parenting with the government at all. But it is our responsibility as parents to make sure our children are safe. If we don’t, we can be labeled as cowards.”

As The Epoch Times reported in August, the Bowmans were recently embroiled in a struggle with the Flagler County school system regarding a surprise, random, haphazard COVID-19 protocol that had children being sent to isolation rooms, quarantined at home with requirements to undergo a series of COVID-19 tests and leaving confused parents scrambling to make sense of it all.

“They don’t want people speaking their mind,” Charles said. “They don’t want people having a voice in this process. This has always been part of the left’s playground in the public education system, so here you are, they’ve rattled the right to the point where conservatives are getting involved. Now they’re trying to figure out how to get the conservatives quiet again. They’ve overstepped, and now they’re trying to figure out how to regain control over the sandbox.

Conservative Organizations Join Parents

“What the NSBA did, requesting that the FBI weaponize the federal government against parents and grandparents is not only a strict violation of the First Amendment, it is the most egregious abuse of power I have seen recently,” Keith Flaugh, founder of the Florida Citizens Alliance told The Epoch Times.

“We are big supporters of the Tenth Amendment,” Flaugh added, “and I think this is going to force the issue of governors like Ron DeSantis to use the Tenth Amendment.”

The Tenth Amendment—passed by Congress on Sept. 25, 1789 and ratified Dec. 15, 1791—states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Flaugh further stated that this effort to use the power of the government against its own citizens is “also a beacon call to every constitutional sheriff in the country.”

“A constitutional sheriff has the legal authority and duty to interpose against the federal government when they are overreaching their constitutional authority,” Flaugh explained. “We’ve got a federal government that’s completely out of control and we’ve seen it manifest itself on a number of fronts. This is just the latest and most egregious. It is literally weaponizing the federal government against its citizens. And even though it will probably make me one of their targets I will be urging people to stand up and say I will not comply.”

“We’re urging people to do it peacefully,” Flaugh clarified, “but at the end of the day, I will not comply, period. Full stop.”

In an Oct. 7 letter (pdf) addressed to The Hon. Michael E. Horowitz, Inspector General for the Department of Justice, Reed D. Rubinstein, Senior Counselor and Director of Oversight and Investigations for the America First Legal (AFL) Foundation formally requested an “Investigation Regarding Potential Improprieties Related to the October 4, 2021, Attorney General’s Memorandum.”

“The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized American parents’ fundamental liberty interest in and Constitutional right to control and direct the education of their own children,” Rubinstein states in the letter. However, Rubenstein asserts that the DOJ appears to be “committing the full weight of its federal law enforcement resources to prevent parents from exercising constitutionally-protected rights and privileges, for inappropriate partisan purposes.”

In addition, under the Freedom of Information Act, the AFL Foundation has also filed a request (pdf) for the following documents:

1. All records of, concerning, or regarding (1) the Garland Memorandum and/or (2) the NSBA Letter.
2. All records sufficient to show each person within the Department who reviewed (1) the Garland Memorandum and/or (2) the NSBA Letter.
3. All records created by the Department showing the “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” referenced in the Garland Memorandum.
4. All records the Department relied upon to support the Garland Memorandum statement “there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools.”
5. All records created by the Department showing “the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel” referenced in the Garland Memorandum.
6. All records the Department relied upon to support the Garland Memorandum statement there has been “a rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”
7. All records sufficient to show the Department’s understanding and interpretation of the term “intimidation and harassment” used in the Garland Memorandum.
8. All communications from, with, or regarding any person employed by the National Education Association and/or the American Federation of Teachers.
9. All communications with any person having an email address including eop.gov regarding (1) the Garland Memorandum, (2) the NSBA, (3) the NSBA Letter, the National Education Association and/or the American Federation of Teachers and/or (5) any person employed by the National Education Association and/or the American Federation of Teachers.

Asked about the optics of FBI agents descending upon school board meetings to drag parents away from podiums, King was forthright in her prediction.

“It will be reminiscent of using dogs and water hoses on black Americans who were fighting for civil rights,” she said bluntly.

The Epoch Times reached out to the NSBA and FBI for comment.

Some will remember that comedy classic from 1961, “Divorce, Italian Style,”  starring Marcello Mastroianni. Unfortunately, sixty years later, we seem to be moving toward, even living through, a far less funny, real life “Communism, American Style.”

What is “Communism, American Style”?  As yet one would think it bears little resemblance to the Soviet kind with its Gulags and so forth.

Or does it?

On Oct. 6, the Los Angeles City Council proclaimed, nearly unanimously (11-2), COVID-19 mandates that require proof of vaccination to enter indoor restaurants, movie theaters, salons, shopping centers, and just about every other public indoor space you could think of in the entertainment capitol.

Others, with the encouragement of our federal government, will soon be following suit in varying degrees or already have.

Maybe Gulags aren’t needed when the entire society is living in one.

This occurred only a couple of days after Merrick Garland, the attorney general of our country—in what Mark Levin described as Stasi-like behavior—announced his jihad, apparently in cahoots with several other governmental education entities, against parents who deigned to criticize school boards for propagandizing their children with Critical Race Theory (son of Critical Theory, son of Marxism).

Garland called these concerned parents, who are springing up seemingly everywhere, “domestic terrorists.”

It turned out the AG’s own children were, via the “education” company Panorama, profiting mightily off purveying this same inducing of race hatred while pretending to be an anti-racist, totalitarian so-called theory.

Communism, despite its high-toned, ever-changing, moralistic rhetoric— more precisely thanks to it, when you think about it— is the most evolved system yet for preserving as much money as possible in the hands of elites (translation: communist leadership and their friends).

It’s no accident Fidel Castro died a billionaire while his people live on in squalor.  Or that General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping’ inhabits the opulent imperial redoubt, partly a UNESCO World Heritage Site, Jade Spring Hill (Take a look. Mar-a-Lago may not have seemed all that impressive to him.).

Power to (some of) the People, indeed.

Nevertheless. China, Russia and, no doubt, Cuba, had he known much about it, were considered too impoverished by Marx to be fecund opportunities for communism, especially then. Pol Pot’s Cambodia would probably have baffled old Karl.

Marx assumed his system would first come to that more modern industrialized state that was prepared for the transition, Germany.

He was wrong about that (at least until East Germany came along, but that was only due to the intervention of the Soviets.  Yes, Nazism had elements of Marxism too.).

Or was he?  Perhaps he was just ahead of his time.

What modern industrialized state could be more fecund for communism than the United States of America, the country with the most-est of all?

And it wouldn’t even require a revolution. It could just walk in the door, especially since so many of its leaders seem ready for it.

Of course, they do not name what is happening communism, or even socialism.  That would just create dissension.  Often, conveniently, they do not even admit what they are doing, or calling it, to themselves.

But they are doing it.  And that is what is important.

Basic to this development is a one-party system, something more like China, which is communist in rhetoric and social control, but capitalist, in greater or lesser extents, economically.  Socialism, most intelligent people know, ultimately does not work as an economic system.

There’s nothing new about that.  Lenin understood it when he instituted limited capitalism, the New Economic Policy (NEP), only a few years after assuming power.

But the one-party system is still attractive.  It obviously can be successful when paired with capitalism of various degrees.  The so-called Chinese miracle is an outgrowth of that when millions, largely in the more capitalistic era of Deng Tsiao-peng, were lifted out of poverty.

Virtually all the Democratic Party and an unfortunate portion of the Republican—the uni-party, as it is known—believe the Chinese are the way of the future and, as I have aid before, have consciously or unconsciously joined up with them in deeds, if not in words.

The premature, surprise lifting of the debt ceiling on Oct. 7 with notable Republican participation was but one example of this growing tendency toward one-party rule.  Democracy, especially multi-party democracy, is just too unruly, too Eighteenth Century, too Enlightenment, for the modern high-tech era.

Helping in this transition to crypto-communism, or whatever you would call it, are many in the populace who would rather be led than to think or, more importantly, act for themselves. It’s the part of human nature that makes for good communists.  In fact communism owes its existence to them.

They are the part of America that will allow, indeed are allowing, communism to walk in the door.  Among them are some of our richest and most successful citizens, but that does not stop them from being fools.

They are not, moreover, the people that built this country.  Those who built the country are from the folks de Tocqueville saw when he wrote “Democracy in America,” the independent, self-starting citizens that formed so many non-governmental, patriotic organizations for the betterment of all.

Those people, thankfully, and here’s the good part, have not gone away.  The ideological war is not over. The Fat Lady hasn’t even begun to sing. She hasn’t opened her sheet music.

Merrick Garland and his allies made a big mistake in their frontal assault on the parents of America, many of whom were already outraged. Just think how many they are, parents fed up with an already atrocious public school system that served no one and was now being used for indoctrination.

They are forming a literal army across the country. Running for school board is turning into the number one vocation or avocation, depending on the situation, for patriotic, committed Americans.

But something even bigger is happening.  And it doesn’t take Outkick’s Clay Travis to see it—although he clearly has and is talking about it daily on his radio show with Buck Sexton.

Football season is here and the country is fed up to an unprecedented degree with their pro-communist leaders for a variety reasons from the totalitarian COVID mandates to the equally unprecedented national embarrassment of Afghanistan to a mainstream media that has done nothing but lie to them.

And more and more people are showing their displeasure for this state of affairs in football and NASCAR stadiums, in concert halls, and in the streets.

It’s a movement never seen before and it’s growing at an amazing clip.  Crowds of Americans are banding together and shouting:

LET’S GO BRANDON!

Well, this is a family newspaper, but you know what I mean.  “Let’s go Brandon!” is how a NBC reporter translated for her audience the expletive laced rejection of Joe Biden being shouted by a NASCAR audience. It’s another way of saying “Bye-bye, communism, good-bye.  We love our freedom here.”

As I mentioned in this space last July, the politicization of the United States’ armed forces, already underway under President Barack Obama, has been kicked into a higher gear by the Biden administration and its tame general, Mark Milley, by using the Capitol incursion of last Jan. 6 as pretext.

By repeatedly and consistently mischaracterizing it as an “insurrection,” the media have turned a protest that got out of hand into the bombardment of Fort Sumter, which launched the American Civil War in 1861.

That the Biden administration was complicit with the media in transforming a rag-tag bunch of protesters into a supposed proto-army of rebellion became apparent in President Biden’s address to Congress last April 28.

There, clearly with the Jan. 6 protesters in mind, he spoke of “what our intelligence agency has determined to be the most lethal terrorist threat to the homeland today: white supremacy’s terrorism.”

The logic of “our” intelligence agency which is said to have produced such a bizarre and improbable point of view seems to have been as follows: Donald Trump is a white supremacist; his Jan. 6 supporters were terrorists; therefore, all 74 million Trump voters in 2020 (there are probably more by now) are at least potential white supremacist terrorists.

That’s quite a threat all right. Or it would be if any of it had an iota of truth in it.

Such paranoia obviously had a political motivation and must have been adopted for cynical reasons, as a stick with which to beat any opposition to the radical Biden agenda from the right.

But now, not quite six months later, it appears to have become a habit with this administration to confuse any opposition to any part of its agenda with “terrorism.”

In response to a letter from the National School Boards Association to President Biden complaining of an “imminent threat” from parents who are allegedly sending “threatening letters and cyberbullying” said to amount to “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” Attorney General Merrick Garland has sent a memo to the FBI—the extent of whose corruption is even now being revealed by John Durham—expressing his concern over an alleged “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools.”

He provides not a single example of such harassment, intimidation or threats of violence, nor any constitutional warrant for such Federal interference in state and local education matters and public order-keeping, even if there were any of either.

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution,” he writes, “that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.”

Andrew McCarthy at National Review, who calls this “dangerous nonsense,” reminds us that “the First Amendment protects speech unless it unambiguously calls for the use of force that the speaker clearly intends, under circumstances in which the likelihood of violence is real and imminent. Even actual ‘threats of violence’ are not actionable unless they meet this high threshold.”

And this is not to mention the fact that, as more than one commentator has pointed out, we have in the last year and a half seen numerous left-wing examples of “threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views,” which have been perfectly OK with the Justice department and the FBI.

What, in fact, is Garland himself doing with such a memo as this if not warning of the FBI’s coming “efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views”?

This looks a lot like a recurrence to President Nixon’s famous formulation: “When the President does it, it’s not illegal.” As in so many other ways throughout the Obama-Biden years, there is one rule for the ruling class, another for everybody else.

This politicization of the Justice Department continues a process which seems to have begun under President Obama and then continued on unabated, though surreptitiously, under President Trump, whose administration it sought, as we now know, continuously to undermine.

Interestingly, another case of an effort to intimidate an individual based on her views had taken place only days earlier, when protestors pursued Senator Kyrsten Sinema into a ladies’ room at Arizona State University, objecting to her view that the government headed by Biden and her fellow Democrats’ shouldn’t be spending $3.5 trillion that it doesn’t have.

In that case, however, neither the president nor Attorney General Garland nor anyone else in the administration seemed to mind, and “the big guy” himself dismissed the incident as nothing but a “part of the process.”

I thought of this remark when I read the opinion of “a lawyer friend” of the excellent Paul Mirengoff at PowerLine blog that the Garland letter was just “huffing and puffing done to scratch a political itch” with no real legal force behind it. Mirengoff himself opines that “anyone prosecuted by the DOJ for non- violent conduct as a result of this memo will very likely find pro bono legal representation and beat the rap.”

This is true—at least until the entire judiciary has been Bidenized. But in the meantime, such a person may only “beat the rap” the way General Michael Flynn did: after years of expensive litigation that all but ruined him and his family financially.

As he knows only too well, under the politicized Obama-Biden Justice Department, the punishment reserved for dissenters is, precisely, “the process.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland has a conflict of interest in his order to federal officials to target parents who are suspected of intimidating, harassing, or being violent toward school staffers, activists say.

Garland in an Oct. 4 memorandum directed FBI agents and U.S. attorneys to address what he described as “a disturbing spike” in such behavior in recent months. He said a series of measures will be announced soon “to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”

Parents have increasingly protested against the rise of critical race theory teachings in schools, but few incidents have turned violent.

Some activists say Garland’s order constitutes a conflict of interest, pointing to contracts that his son-in-law’s company, Panorama Education, has signed with school districts across the country.

In one case, Asra Nomani of Parents Defending Education said, the company signed a $1.8 million contract with Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia that will see Panorama collect information on students with surveys including questions about whether they feel “gender fluid.” There are also portions allocated for “equity” professional development, a word often used by critical race theorists.

“Panorama Education staff gets status as ‘school officials’ so they have the right to private student data under federal law, according to an email just sent by a Fairfax County school district official. This is federal law that Garland would have to enforce and Big Tech is now circumventing,” Nomani wrote in a blog post.

“The Attorney General is instructing the FBI to investigate parents who might pose a financial threat to the business of his daughter’s husband,” she wrote in another blog, under the moniker Sundance.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) said he’s been reviewing notes on Garland’s connections.

“The allegations that Attorney General Garland’s family is potentially profiting off his recent decision to use federal law enforcement to shut down debate at school board meetings is deeply troubling. If this turns out to be true, Congress must hold oversight hearings now to investigate potential corruption,” he told The Epoch Times via email.

Panorama and the Department of Justice (DOJ) didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment by The Epoch Times.

A Panorama spokesperson told news outlets that the company “only uses student data for the purpose of helping schools and districts better serve their students.”

The company isn’t linked with “any particular academic philosophy, including critical race theory,” the spokesperson said. “The only relationship between Panorama Education and Attorney General Merrick Garland is that Panorama’s co-founder Xan Tanner is AG Garland’s son-in-law.”

Lisa Monaco, a top DOJ official, defended the order before Congress this week, arguing that “spirited debate” was welcome at school board meetings but that “violence is not appropriate.”

Most of the incidents were merely parents growing “rowdy or disruptive,” writer Zaid Jilani said.

The National School Boards Association urged the Biden administration to deal with “angry mobs” of parents just days before the order was issued, listing a number of incidents it deemed over the line. “The classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” the association wrote.

The association welcomed the new order, saying it sent “a strong message to individuals with violent intent who are focused on causing chaos, disrupting our public schools, and driving wedges between school boards and the parents, students, and communities they serve.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/ag-merrick-garland-has-conflict-of-interest-in-order-of-probes-into-parents-activists_4037470.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

Parents opposed to critical race theory (CRT) in California classrooms are outraged over accusations from school boards that criticism of ethnic studies curriculums based on CRT and other neo-Marxist ideologies is linked to domestic terrorism.

The National School Boards Association (NSBA), which denies CRT is being taught in K-12 schools, in a Sept. 29 letter (pdf) said parents at local school board meetings opposed to CRT and mask mandates are contributing to a “growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation” and asked President Joe Biden’s administration to address the issue.

The NSBA letter states: “As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

Celeste Fiehler, a member of ParentsUnion.org, told The Epoch Times the NSBA comparison of parents to “domestic terrorism” is ludicrous and wrong.

“It’s ridiculous. It’s an intimidation tactic,” she said. “I’m not afraid of the FBI knocking on my door because I stood up for my kid as a parent.”

She opposes CRT, which she calls “hate-based” education that divides students into oppressed and oppressors based on race and privilege.

“When you take power away from parents, or their ability to raise their children, you’re going to get angry parents—parents who love their children,” said Fiehler, whose children attend the Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) in Riverside County.

“We’re not knocking down podiums. We’re not burning down school buildings. We’re asking for fair education for our children, and what we oppose is the curriculum,” Fiehler said.

AG and DOJ Respond

Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland responded with a memorandum and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a press release announcing a concerted effort to target threats of violence, intimidation, and harassment by parents directed toward school board members, teachers, and other personnel.

“Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values,” wrote Attorney General Garland. “Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.”

Garland has directed his office and the FBI “to meet in the next 30 days with federal, state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement leaders to discuss strategies for addressing this disturbing trend. These sessions will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment and response by law enforcement,” according to the press release.

The DOJ will create a task force consisting of representatives from the department’s Criminal Division, National Security Division, Civil Rights Division, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the FBI, the Community Relations Service and the Office of Justice Programs “to determine how federal enforcement tools can be used to prosecute these crimes, and ways to assist state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement where threats of violence may not constitute federal crimes.”

The DOJ will also create specialized training and guidance for local school boards and administrators to “help school board members and other potential victims understand the type of behavior that constitutes threats, how to report threatening conduct to the appropriate law enforcement agencies, and how to capture and preserve evidence of threatening conduct to aid in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes.”

Riverside County

Fiehler blasted the “domestic terrorist” label at a DSUSD meeting on Tuesday.

“If you think for one second, that parents who love their children and are here to protect them … are domestic terrorists, then consider every single one of us just that,” Fiehler said.

“Being a domestic terrorist, you’ll see me in the pickup line and the drop-off lines of three different schools, rushing three kids to sports, and at the high school football games because I love my children,” she told the board.

“What you won’t see is this tired terrorist mom doing is burning down buildings, destroying property, physically assaulting people throwing Molotov cocktails out my car window, or murdering anyone,” she said, referring to incidents during the 2020 summer riots. “I’m a law-abiding citizen who wants a fair and healthy education for my children.”

“So, don’t mess with parents protecting their children because you will lose,” she concluded.

Fiehler said Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris downplayed the violence that occurred during protests following the death of George Floyd last year.

“Thousands of people were injured, hundreds of lives were changed forever, and a lot of people died because of them,” she said.

Rather than policing parents, she said “the activists should be investigated.”

Fiehler said some school boards have taken steps to disrupt the conversation on CRT and other important topics, including censoring videos of public meetings on YouTube to remove parents’ comments and removing chairs to limit the seating capacity at meetings.

Monterey County

Kelly Schenkoske, a Monterey County parent who homeschools her children, has opposed the ethnic studies curriculum and CRT at Salinas Union High School District (SUHSD) meetings.

The NSBA’s comparison of parents protesting CRT to domestic terrorism, suggesting there is some kind of moral equivalency, is simply false, she said.

“They want to shut down any dissenting voices. They want conformity,” Schenkoske said. “While they’re attempting to silence the civic engagement of parents and taxpayers, they’re ramping up efforts to push civic engagement on youth.”

Many teachers in public schools are actively recruiting unsuspecting “young foot soldiers” to promote their own political ideologies, she said.

The book, “Rethinking Ethnic Studies,” by R. Tolteka Cuauhtin, encourages student activism and talks about the youth voice as imperative, Schenkoske said.

“It showcases their agenda for all,” she said.

SUHSD has recently used a new tactic, allowing students to comment first at school board meetings, Schenkoske said. Though there hasn’t been a change in official board policy, she said it’s another strategy the board has used to silence dissenting opinions and block criticism.

At the last board meeting, parents who requested their three minutes to speak were denied the opportunity because of the new policy.

“None of them were ever allowed to speak. Students were given the entire allotted time,” she said.

SUHSD teacher Peter Williams has mentioned several times at recent school board meetings that parents opposed to CRT should not be allowed to speak.

Orange County

Irvine parent David Whitley told The Epoch Times many parents in Orange County are fed up with what public schools are teaching, and many parents have chosen CRT as “a hill to die on.”

“We’re either going to get this nonsense tampered down, or people like me are going to leave the state. There’s no reason to stay in a place that is completely anti-American and growing to be anti-white under the guise of anti-racism. It just defies logic and reason,” he said.

Comparing irate parents to domestic terrorists is “completely absurd,” he said. “If there’s one thing parents should be doing, it’s being extremely angry at what the public schools are teaching their kids … so I am ecstatic that more and more parents are going to the school board meetings and speaking up.”

Though “it’s a little bit late in the day” to try to fix public schools in the state, Whitley said parents can no longer sit back and watch what’s happening.

Whitley said it’s not surprising that the recent backlash from parents has left local school boards and other government officials feeling threatened.

“They should,” he said, “because the country is run by families and by parents. The public schools are there to educate their kids so that they’re informed and good citizens, and what they’re doing in the public schools is literally dividing the nation and destroying the country.”

Whitley urged more parents to stand up against the school boards.

Children are being taught to have “different moral views, different views on sexuality, different views on American history, different views on the nuclear family and their place in life itself,” he said. “It’s just absurd.”

While he’s glad to see so many mothers at school board meetings, Whitley said more fathers are now showing up.

“That may be why they’re intimidated, because it’s not just a bunch of soccer moms that are talking at the school board meetings now,” he said.

“And, they want to intimidate us with the power of the FBI? Well, I know people in law enforcement, and they don’t like what’s going on either,” Whitley said. “So, it’s going to come to a head at some point because what I know is the parents that are upset by this aren’t going away until they’re either in handcuffs or they stop indoctrinating their children.”

Californians for Equal Rights

Meanwhile, the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation (CFER) on Oct. 1, joined forces with 20 organizations in response (pdf) to NSBA’s “fear-mongering” letter,” the organization stated in a media release.

“Going forward, CFER will stand with our parent and community supporters in the unifying and broad-based movement against toxic racial divisions and political indoctrination in our public education system,” according to the media release.

“CFER is particularly alarmed by DOJ’s categorical allegation of grassroots activities at the school district level as ‘criminal conduct,’ and how this call for federal investigations can gravely discourage civic participation,” the media release stated.

“In response to community demands for more transparency and parental access to controversial educational activities, CFER has engaged in local organizing and awareness building on issues such as ethnic studies, critical race theory and racial preferences,” said Frank Xu, CFER president.

“Contrary to the victim narrative promoted by DOJ to coddle school board personnel, lack of responsiveness and accountability on the part of many public-school authorities has prompted a growing number of parents speaking at open meetings and seeking legitimate channels to express their concerns,” the release stated.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/california-parents-blast-school-boards-for-linking-criticism-of-crt-with-domestic-terrorism_4036482.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

As President Joe Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland keeps proving how right Republicans were to keep him off the Supreme Court.

Since his confirmation in March, Garland has repeatedly shown how willing he is to use the Justice Department for politically driven causes — from his handling of the fallout from the death of George Floyd, to his opposition to voter integrity laws, to his memo Monday to the FBI to crack down on parents protesting the decisions of their local school board.

If knee-jerk partisanship in the hands of a term-limited political appointee is dangerous, imagine the same man in a lifetime job on the nation’s highest court.

Most Americans should remember that Garland was the federal judge chosen in 2016 by then-President Barack Obama to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the untimely death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.

That nomination was stonewalled by the Republican Senate under then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (even McConnell’s most vicious critics on the right have to acknowledge that act of political heroism for the future of the Republic).

Skin Problems, Neuropathy, Paralysis All Part of Over 500,000 Adverse Events Reported After COVID Vaccine

In an interview Tuesday morning on “Fox & Friends,” Colorado Republican Rep. Ken Buck brought up Garland’s past as a federal judge to explain why the order to the FBI on Monday was so troubling.

“Attorney General Garland was a judge, and he should know better than to try to use the FBI for political speech. So many of the courtrooms that we go into, we see this Greek goddess of Themis who had a scale on her left hand and the sword in her right hand, and she’s blindfolded,” Buck said.

“And she’s blindfolded because justice is blind. Justice is impartial — doesn’t care whether you’re white or black, man or woman, tall or short. Justice should not be used to attack a group of people expressing their opinions at school board meetings, whether they’re in favor of critical race theory or whether they’re opposed to critical race theory. Whether they’re in favor of masks or vaccines or opposed.

“That’s political speech that needs to be protected.”

Check it out here. Buck’s comments about Garland come about the 3-minute mark.

That’s all true, of course. The question is whether Garland believes it.

As conservative commentator Dennis Prager pointed out during the fight over Garland’s nomination, mainstream media outlets and liberal commentators went to huge lengths to paint Garland as the “moderate” kind of judge Americans needed on the high court, when the reality was he was a predictable liberal, likely to side predictably with the left on major issues from abortion to immigration to Second Amendment rights.

Even in an era dominated by lies from the administration — “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” of Obamacare — and lies promulgated by the mainstream media — the “hands up, don’t shoot” that helped launch Black Lives Matter as a movement — Garland’s alleged “centrism” was a major assault against verifiable truth.Is the Biden Justice Department a threat to American freedom?Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

As if to prove it, the attorney general, the very same man whom luminaries at liberal outlets from coast to coast — like The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times — assured the country would be a “centrist,” has taken militantly leftists positions at every opportunity.

Instead of a moderate, Garland is revealing himself to be an attorney general firmly on the side of the progressive left, using the Justice Department to file a lawsuit against Texas over its pro-life law, for instance, or overseeing the treatment of defendants in cases stemming from the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion. (Even a liberal publication like The Daily Beast acknowledged the government’s bias, albeit from a twisted perspective.)

But with his latest move, Garland is showing himself to be the kind of AG only a progressive protofascist could dream of.

He’s openly ordering the Federal Bureau of Investigation — the FBI, for goodness’ sake — to keep tabs on the efforts of American parents who don’t want their kids subjected to critical race theory brainwashing, or requirements to keep their faces and noses covered throughout the school day on scientifically questionable grounds. (This isn’t just a view from the conservative side. If New York Media’s The Intelligencer doesn’t buy the mask argument, it’s got holes.)

With his memo on Monday, Garland proved he’s all too willing to wield the powers of the federal government to put the efforts of parents worried about their children’s education and future on a par with domestic terrorism.

At the same time, he’s part of the administration of a president whose political party took the side of actual domestic terrorism last year when mobs tore apart American cities and Democrats cheered them on (or bailed them out).

Republican Lawmakers Raise the Alarm as ATF Tries to Alter Basic Definition of ‘Firearm’

Of course, a Garland defender could make the argument that Garland the attorney general is a different creature from Garland as Supreme Court justice — that he’s only fulfilling a role and he would have fulfilled duties on the high court differently. But it’s a hollow point.

Garland clearly thinks he has a legal right to take the actions he has, which means that as a Supreme Court justice, he’d likely approve of similar high-handed tactics on the part of the government (certainly as long as it was a Democratic administration implementing them).

Every day since his inauguration in January, Joe Biden has shown he’s not at all the “centrist” that was sold to the American public by a hideously biased mainstream media during the 2020 election.

Every day since he was confirmed, Merrick Garland has shown the same about himself.

Rep. Buck was right. Garland was a judge and should know better than to give the FBI an order like the one he gave on Monday.

He clearly doesn’t, or he doesn’t care.

And he almost had a lifetime seat on the United States Supreme Court.

Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Monday that the FBI would take the lead on the law enforcement response to what Garland called “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”

“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views,” Garland wrote in a memo to federal prosecutors as well as FBI Director Christopher Wray. “Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values.

“Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety,” the AG added.

Garland fired off his memo days after the National School Boards Association (NSBA) claimed in a letter to President Biden that “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat,” as parents grow frustrated with mask mandates being imposed on their children and critical race theory being injected into their curricula.

The Sept. 29 letter cited that opposition — naming the imposition of mask mandates in schools as well as “propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula” as the causes of dozens of incidents at school board meetings this year.

“This propaganda continues despite the fact that critical race theory is not taught in public schools and remains a complex law school and graduate school subject well beyond the scope of a K-12 class,” the letter went on, despite incidents across the country where teachers have been exposed to be racializing their curricula.

The NSBA then suggested that “[a]s these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes” and asked that the administration review the question.

The letter went on to cite more than 20 reported incidents in California, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio and other states. In one incident from September, an Illinois man was arrested on charges of aggravated battery and disorderly conduct for allegedly striking a school official at a meeting.

“We are coming after you,” a letter mailed to an Ohio school board member said, according to the group. “You are forcing them to wear mask — for no reason in this world other than control. And for that you will pay dearly.”

In his memo, Garland ordered the FBI and US attorneys to arrange meetings with federal, state, local, tribal and territorial leaders within 30 days to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats” and “open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.”

NSBA interim Executive Director and CEO Chip Slaven said in a statement that Garland’s action sent a “strong message to individuals with violent intent who are focused on causing chaos, disrupting our public schools, and driving wedges between school boards and the parents, students, and communities they serve.”

“Over the last few weeks, school board members and other education leaders have received death threats and have been subjected to threats and harassment, both online and in person,” Slaven said. “The individuals who are intent on causing chaos and disrupting our schools—many of whom are not even connected to local schools—are drowning out the voices of parents who must be heard when it comes to decisions about their children’s education, health, and safety. These acts of intimidation are also affecting educational services and school board governance. Some have even led to school lockdowns.”

“We need to get back to the work of meeting all students’ needs and making sure that each student is prepared for a successful future,” Slaven concluded. “That’s what school board members and parents care about.”

With Post wires

https://nypost.com/2021/10/05/merrick-garland-calls-in-fbi-to-counter-threats-against-school-staffers/

The radical left want’s to label concerned parents as ‘Domestic Terrorists’… January 6 narrative 2.0

President Joe Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland is officially mobilizing the FBI and U.S. attorneys to “investigate and prosecute” protests by parents against things like mask mandates and critical race theory at public school board meetings and schools across the country.

“Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values,” Garland wrote in a memo that he sent to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Justice Department prosecutors on Monday. “Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.

TIRED OF THE ADS? BECOME A PREMIUM USER TODAY!!

MORE NEWS: REPORT: Pfizer’s Vaccine Effectiveness Against COVID Plummets After Six Months, Study Finds

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” he added. “In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”

This came after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to Biden claiming that “education leaders are under an immediate threat.” The NSBA went on to ask for federal law enforcement and other assistance in combatting what it claims to be a growing threat of violence in response to mask and vaccine mandates, as well as curriculum teaching critical race theory.

“Coupled with attacks against school board members and educators for approving policies for masks to protect the health and safety of students and school employees, many public school officials are also facing physical threats because of propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula,” the NSBA said.

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/10/biden-regime-mobilizing-fbi-to-identify-and-prosecute-parents-who-are-protecting-their-kids-from-school-boards/