Thursday, September 2, 2021
Wednesday, September 1, 2021
MAGA Rep. Boebert Calls For Biden And Harris Impeachment, Pelosi To Be Removed Over Afghanistan withdrawal THEPOLITICALINSIDER.COM BY SEPT 1, 2021
Boebert (R-CO), speaking on Tuesday with the House Freedom Caucus, called for the Commander-in-Chief’s impeachment.
But she also sought impeachment for Harris, who she believes has failed the American people by not invoking the 25th Amendment.
“The blame starts at the top with Biden and his hand-picked Vice President who bragged that she was right there making the same bad decisions,” declared Boebert.
“And if not for her own dereliction of duty, she should be impeached for not demanding we invoke the 25th amendment,” the fiery right-wing Republican added.
“It is time for action. Impeach Biden. Impeach Kamala Harris.”
In the weeks before Afghanistan’s collapse, President Joe Biden and now-exiled former Afghan President Ashraf Ghani cut a secret deal to deceive the world about the Taliban threat.
The transcript of the last phone call between the two heads of state shows that the U.S. president specifically asked the Afghan president to downplay the potential resurgence of the foreign enemy.
“President Joe Biden wanted the now-departed Afghan president to create the ‘perception’ that his government was capable of holding off the Taliban – an indication he knew it was only a matter of time before the US ally fell to the Islamic group even while reassuring Americans at home that it would not happen,” the Daily Mail reported on the transcript.
“In the last phone call between Biden and his Afghan then-counterpart Ashraf Ghani, the American president said they needed to change perceptions of the Taliban’s rapid advance ‘whether it is true or not,’ according to excerpts published on Tuesday,” the report continued.
“Four weeks before Kabul collapsed, Ghani pleaded for more air support and money for soldiers who had not had a pay rise in a decade,” the report added.
The transcript was originally obtained and released by Reuters.
“Hey look, I want to make it clear that I am not a military man any more than you are, but I have been meeting with our Pentagon folks, and our national security people, as you have with ours and yours, and as you know and I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things aren’t going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban,” President Biden said.
“And there’s a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture,” Biden added.
Ghani would later flee the country. According to the Russian embassy, he took off in a helicopter and four cars and a fortune in cash. An Afghan diplomat accused him of looting $169 million from the suffering, war-torn country. Over the denials of Ashraf Ghani about taking the money, the Taliban is demanding he return the alleged stolen funds.
“He made a mistake of abandoning the government… This is what resulted in the sudden vacuum, plundering and shooting,” the Taliban spokesperson said.
On Tuesday, Biden’s National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan hinted that economic aid, more specifically, Afghanistan government funds frozen by the U.S. government, could be on the table as leverage to ensure ‘hundreds’ of American citizens get home safely.
“When it comes to our economic and development assistance relationship with the Taliban, that will be about the Taliban’s actions,” Sullivan said. “It will be about whether they follow through on their commitments, their commitments to safe passage for Americans and Afghan allies, their commitment to not allow Afghanistan to be a base from which terrorists can attack the United States or any other country, their commitments with respect to upholding the entrance international obligations.”
“It’s going to be up to them,” he added. “And we will wait and see by their actions how we end up responding in terms of the economic and development assistance.”
In the background, however is Biden’s abandonment of an estimated $65 billion in military hardware that is now in the hands of the Taliban, as well as reported massive pallets of cash.
The first Trump impeachment trial, readers will remember, turned on the transcript of a phone call that then-President Donald Trump made to the Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy. The dispute was over whether Donald Trump offered a ‘quid pro quo’ in exchange for information on Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden, who had inexplicably obtained a lucrative deal with a Ukrainian gas company.
No such ‘quid pro quo’ was proven. The impeachment failed. The ‘whistleblower’ lied about his identity during the hearing.
The Biden phone call transcript is much more damning. It is a clear offer to deceive the American public and the international community about the Taliban threat. The false security of the country was the basis for the Biden military withdrawal after two decades of fighting, which ended in an indisputable disaster and the deaths of at least 13 Americans.
There is a chorus of Republicans now calling for President Biden to resign or be impeached. If the president somehow makes it past the 2022 midterms, that very well may be an option that is now on the table.
Syndicated with licensed permission from Becker News. Follow Becker News on Telegram.
ATOP THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT, ARE DISPLAYED TWO WORDS.....:Laus Deo....Just in case you may not have known…
You mean, NONE of his advisors saw this coming.....OR, did they "JUST LET IT HAPPEN"..?? (note....this video from Aug 6th)
Cracks appearing in ‘gushing’ media coverage of Joe Biden Sky News Australia Aug 6th 2021
Tuesday, August 31, 2021
WATCH: Ashli Babbitt’s Husband Appears on Tucker Carlson to Respond to MSNBC Interview With Her Killer By Cassandra Fairbanks Published August 26, 2021In an exclusive interview with @LesterHoltNBC, Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd describes why he’s choosing to identify himself. Byrd shares his account of the January 6 riot, as officers barricaded the door and he fired a single shot, killing Ashli Babbitt.
Tucker Carlson, Aaron Babbitt (Ashli Babbitt's Husband), And Terrell Roberts (Babbitt Family Attorney) React To The Interview With The Capitol Hill Police Officer Who Shot & Killed Ashli Babbitt
Lt. Michael Byrd broke his silence and confirmed his identity with an on-camera interview with MSNBC earlier in the evening. The Capitol Police previously refused to confirm the shooter’s name, even though it was reported all over the right-wing media, including by the Gateway Pundit.
During his MSNBC appearance, Byrd said that he saved “countless lives” by killing Babbitt, who was unarmed. He also complained that he has been getting death threats since killing the Air Force veteran. The officer said that it was “disheartening” and that he was simply “doing my job.”
Babbitt’s husband did not hold back in his response, saying that the officer needs to “suck it up.”
“I don’t even want to hear him talk about how he’s getting death threats and he’s scared,” Aaron Babbitt said. “I’ve been getting death threats since Jan. 7 — two, three, five, 10 a day — and all I did on Jan. 6 was become a widower. So, you’re going to have to suck it up, bud, and take it.”
Tucker Carlson also noted that Byrd is the same officer who previously left his loaded weapon in a bathroom at the Capitol building in 2019.
Byrd claimed that Babbitt was a threat, which Carlson was quick to call out.
“She was 5’2, she was unarmed, there were armed police in tactical gear standing right next to her on the other side of the door,” Carlson noted. “She was not warned, the tape shows that — she was just executed. But she was a threat, that’s what he’s telling you.”
Carlson mocked Byrd for pretending that he’s the “real victim” in the situation.
Babbitt’s husband said that he was “pissed off” and his “agitation level” was through the roof hearing the officer say that he did not care if she was armed or not. He also said that Representatives Paul Gosar, Louie Gohmert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene are the only lawmakers that have been in contact with the family.
Investigations by the Capitol Police and the Justice Department cleared the officer of any wrongdoing.
“The investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber,” federal prosecutors said in a statement.
Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that Babbitt was murdered.
Time: 10:00 am ET
Location: Courtroom 19
U.S. District Court District of Columbia
333 Constitution Ave NW
The hearing will address Judicial Watch’s argument against the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) attempt to close the case and withhold a full, unredacted version of the EC. In May 2020, Judicial Watch obtained a redacted version of the EC, which was written entirely by former FBI official Peter Strzok.
Judicial Watch filed the September 2019 FOIA lawsuit after the DOJ and FBI both failed to respond to identical July 11, 2019, FOIA requests, which asked for access to a single record: “The Electronic Communication that initiated the counterintelligence investigation of President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-02743))
In its effort to close the case, the Biden DOJ argues that there is not significant public interest in the full contents of the EC that initiated the counterintelligence investigation of former President Trump’s campaign and Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
Judicial Watch filed a motion countering that, “Disclosure of the full EC advances the public’s right to know what the government did, who was involved, and why the investigation into Trump and Russian interference was necessary.”
Judicial Watch cites two declarations from Kevin Brock, former assistant director of the Directorate of Intelligence and former principal deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) for the FBI. Brock testified that it is not standard procedure to have an EC drafted, approved, and sent to and from the exact same agent and that this is a violation of FBI oversight protocols:
In the EC document here, the “From” line indicates the EC – and authorization to begin an investigation as required under FBI policy – is from a part of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. The contact listed is Peter Strzok. The EC was drafted by Peter Strzok. The EC was approved by Peter Strzok. On the face of the document produced, it appears the EC that initiated a criminal FARA investigation of unidentified members of the Trump presidential campaign was created by Peter Strzok, approved by Peter Strzok, and sent from Peter Strzok to Peter Strzok. This is not usual procedure.
FBI policy prohibits an agent from initiating and approving his or her own case. Such action violates FBI oversight protocols put in place to protect the American people from an FBI agent acting unilaterally.
In fact, the EC does not identify any individual by name as a target of the investigation. It does not articulate any factors that address the elements of FARA as required by routine FBI policy and procedure and the Attorney General Guidelines and, therefore, does not contain sufficient justification for initiating an investigation into USPERs [U.S. persons].
Based upon my experience, no reasonable and experienced FBI counterintelligence squad supervisor in the field would have approved the EC at issue here – as released – which opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
The unredacted information released in the EC document here offers no legitimate predication justifying the investigation of USPERs involved in a presidential campaign or subsequent FISA intercept of a U.S. citizen.