Mark Levin: We are staring tyranny in the face Fox News
Thursday, June 16, 2022
The Clintons and the demoRats just can't STOP LYING...!!
Charge: Clinton, DNC break pledge to stop lying about Trump ‘dossier’ Paul Bedard 4 h ago Washington Examiner
In a new bid to hide their attorney’s efforts in the disputed Trump-Russian ‘dossier,’ the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party have already violated a two-month-old promise to stop lying about their efforts, according to charges filed with the Federal Election Commission.
© Provided by Washington ExaminerCharge: Clinton, DNC break pledge to stop lying about Trump ‘dossier’
mm
The complaint shared with Secrets focuses on the move by the DNC and Hillary for America campaign to claim an attorney-client privilege in shielding work done by their law firm Perkins Coie and former partner Michael Sussman from Special Counsel John Durham.
That appeared to openly violate a pledge both made to the FEC to stop claiming attorney-client privilege over the over $1 million they paid the law firm for work done by Fusion GPS on the the so-called “Steele Dossier” and accept the election agency’s finding that the work was for opposition research not “legal advice and services.”
In giving that pledge to the FEC, the Clinton campaign and DNC paid a combined $113,000 fine to make the case go away.
But in renewing the claim that their relationship with Perkins Coie is protected by an attorney-client relationship, the campaign and party face having the FEC reopen their investigation and level even greater fines.
The new complaint filed with the FEC is the latest by the Coolidge Reagan Foundation to force the 2016 Clinton campaign and DNC to tell the truth about their roles in and spending on the dossier, a crude document meant to smear then-candidate Donald Trump as he was rising in the polls against the former first lady and secretary of State in advance of a presidential election he won.
In the FEC deal revealed by Secrets two months ago, the agency said it found probable cause that the Clinton campaign and the DNC misreported the expenses for the Fusion GPS services to Perkins Coie.
The campaign and party said they wouldn’t dispute -- or further fight -- the case, at least with the FEC. “Solely for the purpose of settling this matter expeditiously and to avoid further legal costs, respondent[s] does not concede, but will not further contest the commission's finding of probable cause to proceed” with the probe, they said in the FEC deal.
Dan Backer, with the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, said that in making the new claim in the case brought by Durham, the campaign and party were contesting the commission's findings -- exactly what they promised never to do.
“The FEC found probable cause to believe HFA and the DNC violated federal law by filing false campaign finance disclosure reports with the commission,” he said in sizing up the original case for the new complaint. He added, “Specifically, HFA and the DNC falsely claimed payments made to Perkins Coie in connection with Fusion GPS’s opposition research and investigations into Trump to prepare the salacious and fraudulent Steele Dossier were for the purpose of legal services. In reality, Fusion GPS’s investigation into Trump and preparation of the Steele Dossier were for political purposes and not for the purpose of enabling Perkins Coie to provide legal advice or in connection with litigation.”
But in making the case that the Perkins Coie spending was for legal services and should be protected from release to Durham, Backer wrote, “HFA’s and the DNC’s intervention, arguments, and supporting declarations in United States v. Sussmann violate their agreement to ‘not further contest the commission’s finding of probable cause to believe’ Fusion GPS’s opposition research into Trump and preparation of the Steele Dossier did not constitute legal services.”
In an earlier letter sent to Durham, Backer said, “The government should not permit HFA and the DNC to adopt conflicting positions in different proceedings, depending on the federal agency against which they are litigating.”
Backer just sent his new complaint to the FEC and it was unlikely that the agency, DNC or Clinton campaign would have immediate reaction.
Like the FEC, Durham has been eager to determine if the campaign or party were hiding documents under improper claims of attorney-client privilege.
That appeared to openly violate a pledge both made to the FEC to stop claiming attorney-client privilege over the over $1 million they paid the law firm for work done by Fusion GPS on the the so-called “Steele Dossier” and accept the election agency’s finding that the work was for opposition research not “legal advice and services.”
In giving that pledge to the FEC, the Clinton campaign and DNC paid a combined $113,000 fine to make the case go away.
But in renewing the claim that their relationship with Perkins Coie is protected by an attorney-client relationship, the campaign and party face having the FEC reopen their investigation and level even greater fines.
The new complaint filed with the FEC is the latest by the Coolidge Reagan Foundation to force the 2016 Clinton campaign and DNC to tell the truth about their roles in and spending on the dossier, a crude document meant to smear then-candidate Donald Trump as he was rising in the polls against the former first lady and secretary of State in advance of a presidential election he won.
In the FEC deal revealed by Secrets two months ago, the agency said it found probable cause that the Clinton campaign and the DNC misreported the expenses for the Fusion GPS services to Perkins Coie.
The campaign and party said they wouldn’t dispute -- or further fight -- the case, at least with the FEC. “Solely for the purpose of settling this matter expeditiously and to avoid further legal costs, respondent[s] does not concede, but will not further contest the commission's finding of probable cause to proceed” with the probe, they said in the FEC deal.
Dan Backer, with the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, said that in making the new claim in the case brought by Durham, the campaign and party were contesting the commission's findings -- exactly what they promised never to do.
“The FEC found probable cause to believe HFA and the DNC violated federal law by filing false campaign finance disclosure reports with the commission,” he said in sizing up the original case for the new complaint. He added, “Specifically, HFA and the DNC falsely claimed payments made to Perkins Coie in connection with Fusion GPS’s opposition research and investigations into Trump to prepare the salacious and fraudulent Steele Dossier were for the purpose of legal services. In reality, Fusion GPS’s investigation into Trump and preparation of the Steele Dossier were for political purposes and not for the purpose of enabling Perkins Coie to provide legal advice or in connection with litigation.”
But in making the case that the Perkins Coie spending was for legal services and should be protected from release to Durham, Backer wrote, “HFA’s and the DNC’s intervention, arguments, and supporting declarations in United States v. Sussmann violate their agreement to ‘not further contest the commission’s finding of probable cause to believe’ Fusion GPS’s opposition research into Trump and preparation of the Steele Dossier did not constitute legal services.”
In an earlier letter sent to Durham, Backer said, “The government should not permit HFA and the DNC to adopt conflicting positions in different proceedings, depending on the federal agency against which they are litigating.”
Backer just sent his new complaint to the FEC and it was unlikely that the agency, DNC or Clinton campaign would have immediate reaction.
Like the FEC, Durham has been eager to determine if the campaign or party were hiding documents under improper claims of attorney-client privilege.
Good for me but not for thee....OR...Do as I say, not as I do...
Gaslighting: Obama installs propane tanks at mansion while pushing green policies Brayden Dean - 5h ago
Former President Barack Obama installed three propane tanks at his Martha's Vineyard property as he backs green initiatives amid rising gas prices in the United States.
© Provided by Washington ExaminerGaslighting: Obama installs propane tanks at mansion while pushing green policies
Obama turned to home storage to guard against soaring prices. National fuel prices set a record high of $5 per gallon as he backed environmentally friendly policies, warning of the dangers of climate change.
"When it comes to climate change, time really is running out. Earth Day is a reminder that if we pledge to do our part and then follow through on those commitments, we can help preserve and protect our planet for future generations," he tweeted on April 22.
Obama's underground propane tanks, totaling 2,500 gallons of propane gas, were installed at the property for "residential purposes," the office of the select board of Edgartown, Massachusetts, reported.
The cost of propane gas has been rising in the U.S., with estimates from last October indicating those who use propane to heat their homes would spend 54% more than in winter 2021.
The Biden administration has worked to shift the blame for the rising costs of gas to Russian President Vladimir Putin as well as oil companies. Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called for oil companies to do their "patriotic duty" and lower gas prices.
"We are calling on them to do the right thing, to be patriots here and not to use the war as an excuse or as a reason to not put out a production, to not do the capacity that is needed out there so that the prices can come down," she said on Wednesday.
The White House has suspended drilling leases in Alaska, and Democrats have proposed to increase taxes on oil companies' profits.
Tuesday, June 14, 2022
TIME TO CALL YOUR SENATORS..? TELL THEM TO VOTE NO..!!!
WELL...That's it, I guess we're done, no sense even trying to win the election. We will just have to hand it over to the demoRats
Squad Member Threatens 'Civil War' If GOP Takes House Spencer Brown Posted: Jun 14, 2022
Unsurprisingly, Democrats don't have much of a case to make ahead of the midterms. Their majorities in Congress and Biden in the White House have ushered in inflation at 40-year highs, gas prices doubling in less than 16 months to set records beyond $5 per gallon, an open border, a crime crisis, and international embarrassments. So, when two thirds of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, what case is left for Democrats to make? Vote for us or there will be civil war. Hoo-boy.
Joining MSNBC's The Cross Connection with Tiffany Cross over the weekend, Bowman — who is a member of The Squad(TM) — explained what Americans can expect if Republicans pick up seats and retake Congress this November:
The January 6 commission would cease to exist, the findings will be completely suppressed and will not be admitted into any further investigations while the GOP will be in power. They would impeach president Biden as quickly as possible and they will continue to find ways to impeach him going forward. It would also embolden Republicans and the far-right and white nationalists across the country to begin to believe that it is their time to not just take power in the House but the Senate the White House and state houses across the country.
And We've got to understand that this is a group that has been radicalized by the great replacement myth and many other things and have been pushing for violence and pushing for even civil war. So that is what's at stake right now in terms of this election.
So, according to Rep. Bowman, Civil war is coming if Republicans win in November. Subtle.
It Does Not Appear the January 6 Select Committee Has Its Affairs in Order Rebecca Downs Posted: Jun 14, 2022
Although Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who serves on the select committee, provided some information on Tuesday morning's episode of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," the select committee does not appear to have yet tweeted about the delay or posted about it on its website.
"There’s no big deal, but I’ll tell you the putting together the video and exhibits is an exhausting exercise for our very small video staff. So we’re trying to — we were going to have 1-2-3 in one week and it’s just it’s too much to put it all together. So we’re trying to give them a little room to do their technical work, is mainly it," Rep. Lofgren said.
Beitsch also wrote on Tuesday morning how "Jan. 6 panel’s chair sparks pushback with criminal referral remarks."
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), who chairs the select committee, acknowledged to reporters on Monday night that they don't have the authority to recommend former President Donald Trump for criminal referral.
TWEET
Man Raju @mkraju
·Jun 13, 2022
A split between the top two members of the committee after Thompson tells reporters that they don’t plan to make criminal referrals
Rep. Liz Cheney @RepLizCheney
The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time.
Manu Raju
Here’s how Thompson answered my question earlier today on whether he thinks DOJ should prosecute Trump.
ManuRaju@mkraju
Bennie Thompson on whether he believes Trump should be prosecuted based on the evidence Jan. 6 committee has uncovered. "Well, I prefer that we complete our work and share that work with the Department of Justice, and they will make that call after that."
Here’s how Thompson answered my question earlier today on whether he thinks DOJ should prosecute Trump.
ManuRaju@mkraju
Bennie Thompson on whether he believes Trump should be prosecuted based on the evidence Jan. 6 committee has uncovered. "Well, I prefer that we complete our work and share that work with the Department of Justice, and they will make that call after that."
CNN's Manu Raju shared footage of him asking Reps. Thompson and Lofgren what their personal opinion was about whether Trump committed a crime and if he would be investigated or indicted.
Monday, June 13, 2022
Trump releases 12-page response to Jan. 6 hearing
Brett Samuels - 2h ago The Hill
Former President Trump on Monday issued a 12-page rebuttal to testimony and evidence presented by a House committee investigating the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, accusing Democrats of seeking to distract from a series of domestic issues facing the country.
In the 12-page document, Trump repeats a handful of disproven claims to assert the 2020 election was stolen from him and rigged in favor of Democrats, including some that were brought up during testimony by former Trump campaign and administration officials.
Brett Samuels - 2h ago The Hill
“Seventeen months after the events of January 6th, Democrats are unable to offer solutions,” Trump said in a statement released through his Save America PAC. “They are desperate to change the narrative of a failing nation, without even making mention of the havoc and death caused by the Radical Left just months earlier. Make no mistake, they control the government. They own this disaster. They are hoping that these hearings will somehow alter their failing prospects.”
The 12-page document underscores how Trump has yet to move on from his false claims of fraud in the 2020 election and how the committee’s work may be central to a potential 2024 campaign.
The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has held two public hearings thus far as it builds a case to show Trump was repeatedly informed by aides that the election was not stolen or rigged but continued to claim publicly that it was for months, misleading his supporters.
The 12-page document underscores how Trump has yet to move on from his false claims of fraud in the 2020 election and how the committee’s work may be central to a potential 2024 campaign.
The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has held two public hearings thus far as it builds a case to show Trump was repeatedly informed by aides that the election was not stolen or rigged but continued to claim publicly that it was for months, misleading his supporters.
In the 12-page document, Trump repeats a handful of disproven claims to assert the 2020 election was stolen from him and rigged in favor of Democrats, including some that were brought up during testimony by former Trump campaign and administration officials.
READ ON
Jim Jordan blasts Jan. 6 committee: Investigators 'altered evidence and lied' Daniel Chaitin - Yesterday Washington Examiner
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) raised trust issues with the House committee investigating the Capitol riot after it held its first prime-time hearing last week.
During an interview on Sunday, the congressman insisted the Thursday hearing showed nothing new and cast the Jan. 6 committee itself as a "one-sided" endeavor that has demonstrated it cannot be outright trusted. He reminded viewers that last year, the panel admitted to altering a text message between Jordan and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.
"This committee has altered evidence and lied to the American people about it, so much so that they had to issue a statement which says, 'We regret the error,' which is government speak for, 'We got caught lying,'" Jordan told Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures.
It was revealed in December that Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a member of the Jan. 6 committee, presented a graphic showing an altered text message between Jordan and Meadows. Jordan's office acknowledged the congressman from Ohio did send the message to Meadows but stressed that it was a snippet of a message he "forwarded" from an attorney, Joseph Schmitz, who was expressing a legal theory about overturning the results of the 2020 election.
The Jan. 6 panel apologized for the "error," which was truncating the message with a period, and Schiff presenting it to the public without full context.
“The Select Committee on Monday created and provided Representative Schiff a graphic to use during the business meeting quoting from a text message from ‘a lawmaker’ to Mr. Meadows. The graphic read, 'On January 6, 2021, Vice President Mike Pence, as President of the Senate, should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all.' In the graphic, the period at the end of that sentence was added inadvertently. The Select Committee is responsible for and regrets the error,” a spokesman for the select committee said in a statement to the Washington Examiner.
Members of the Jan. 6 panel have sought to draw a line connecting former President Donald Trump's efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 election to the Capitol riot. The violence briefly disrupted the process of lawmakers certifying President-elect Joe Biden's victory. The hearing on Thursday featured some never-before-seen video footage of the riot, as well as testimony from witnesses, including Trump's former spokesman Jason Miller, who claimed the display lacked important context.
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), the chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, told CNN's Jake Tapper after the hearing that the panel would be willing to release the full transcript of the deposition, but he declined to say when that might happen. Trump, for his part, chastised the panel, asserting, in part, that it "refuses to play any of the many positive witnesses and statements, refuses to talk of the Election Fraud and Irregularities that took place on a massive scale, and decided to use a documentary maker from Fake News ABC to spin only negative footage."
Jordan, along with Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN), was blocked from participating on the Jan. 6 committee by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and the congressmen are now conducting their own counter-investigation. Jordan was also subpoenaed by the panel but has refused to cooperate.
Although the Jan. 6 committee has two Republican members, Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who are Trump critics, Jordan argued that the country "sees it for what it is — a partisan political activity." He also expressed support for the committee disclosing all the depositions and documents from its investigation to go beyond such displays as were presented during the "choreographed" hearing that took place on Thursday.
"This committee has altered evidence and lied to the American people about it, so much so that they had to issue a statement which says, 'We regret the error,' which is government speak for, 'We got caught lying,'" Jordan told Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures.
It was revealed in December that Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a member of the Jan. 6 committee, presented a graphic showing an altered text message between Jordan and Meadows. Jordan's office acknowledged the congressman from Ohio did send the message to Meadows but stressed that it was a snippet of a message he "forwarded" from an attorney, Joseph Schmitz, who was expressing a legal theory about overturning the results of the 2020 election.
The Jan. 6 panel apologized for the "error," which was truncating the message with a period, and Schiff presenting it to the public without full context.
“The Select Committee on Monday created and provided Representative Schiff a graphic to use during the business meeting quoting from a text message from ‘a lawmaker’ to Mr. Meadows. The graphic read, 'On January 6, 2021, Vice President Mike Pence, as President of the Senate, should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all.' In the graphic, the period at the end of that sentence was added inadvertently. The Select Committee is responsible for and regrets the error,” a spokesman for the select committee said in a statement to the Washington Examiner.
Members of the Jan. 6 panel have sought to draw a line connecting former President Donald Trump's efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 election to the Capitol riot. The violence briefly disrupted the process of lawmakers certifying President-elect Joe Biden's victory. The hearing on Thursday featured some never-before-seen video footage of the riot, as well as testimony from witnesses, including Trump's former spokesman Jason Miller, who claimed the display lacked important context.
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), the chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, told CNN's Jake Tapper after the hearing that the panel would be willing to release the full transcript of the deposition, but he declined to say when that might happen. Trump, for his part, chastised the panel, asserting, in part, that it "refuses to play any of the many positive witnesses and statements, refuses to talk of the Election Fraud and Irregularities that took place on a massive scale, and decided to use a documentary maker from Fake News ABC to spin only negative footage."
Jordan, along with Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN), was blocked from participating on the Jan. 6 committee by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and the congressmen are now conducting their own counter-investigation. Jordan was also subpoenaed by the panel but has refused to cooperate.
Although the Jan. 6 committee has two Republican members, Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who are Trump critics, Jordan argued that the country "sees it for what it is — a partisan political activity." He also expressed support for the committee disclosing all the depositions and documents from its investigation to go beyond such displays as were presented during the "choreographed" hearing that took place on Thursday.
Sunday, June 12, 2022
Here's What Senators Came Up With for a Deal on New Gun Laws Spencer Brown Posted: Jun 12, 2022
The bipartisan group of Senators — led by Chris Murphy (D-CT) and John Cornyn (R-TX) — announced their proposal for legislation they seem to think has a chance of making it through their evenly-divided chamber.
In a joint statement, the senators said their plan will "protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country" while citing a duty they feel to "come together and get something done." Never mind, apparently, that all the restrictive gun laws in Chicago and elsewhere haven't protected residents.
The statement continued saying the agreement "increases needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students, and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can’t purchase weapons," again, as if previous laws to keep guns out of criminals' hands had worked. "We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law," the statement concludes. We'll see.
The proposal includes providing "resources" — likely grant incentives — to states if they implement so-called "red flag laws." It also includes investing taxpayer dollars in mental health services for families and in schools along with school safety resources to "to help institute safety measures in and around primary and secondary schools, support school violence prevention efforts and provide training to school personnel and students." The proposal announcement also says legislators will seek to include an "enhanced review period" for firearm purchasers under 21 years old.
Perhaps notably — and showing Democrats did not get all the things they've called for in the wake of the tragedy in Uvalde, Texas — is a lack of their buzzword assault weapons ban, high capacity magazine restrictions, a federal red flag system, or an increase in the minimum age to purchase certain rifles.
To be clear, the lack of those items in the framework proposal does not mean Democrats won't try to sneak in some version of them as an eventual piece of legislation is developed.
As WaPo previewed before the official announcement of the proposal, the inclusion of billions of federal dollars for school security programs and mental health care is probably the only thing the proposal has going for it with most Republicans.
Townhall reported last week that an armed school resource officer and secured doors kept an aggressive man from entering an elementary school filled with children. The SRO took the individual down with assistance from local law enforcement while most children inside the building were unaware that anything had happened outside. The training and protocol that worked there should be used for a framework, not gun-grabbing Democrats' CNN talking points.
Throughout the negotiations, Republicans involved had tried to assuage concerns from firearm owners and gun safety advocates. Sen. Cornyn said that the forthcoming deal was "not about creating new restrictions on law-abiding citizens" but "about ensuring that the system we already have in place works as intended." Yet several of the pieces of the framework seem to include new restrictions, albeit lesser than a blanket ban on "assault weapons" or magazines.
And while the group may have reached a tentative agreement, they're only a small group of the U.S. Senate — and several Republicans in the crew such as Susan Collins (ME) and Mitt Romney (UT) are not exactly known as standard bearers for the GOP. At least 60 senators in all would be needed to support any resulting legislation in order to overcome a potential legislative filibuster.
As we've learned before, a statement of agreement between a small group of senators is anything but a done deal. We've also learned that what might seem to be a workable legislative framework can turn into a Frankenstein's monster of horrible policies as Democrats scheme to use the bipartisan cover of squishy Republicans to ultimately get their way.
The best thing for any Senate Republican to do at this point is walk away from the table and declare opposition over anything even remotely concerning in the tentative agreement — the incentive for red flag laws or the enhanced review for under-21 purchasers, for example — or legislation as it ends up being written.
There's less than five months until the midterms, Democrats need at least ten Republicans to even move a bill to a vote, and there's no reason for Republicans to cave on an issue as critical as Americans' Second Amendment freedoms just to look like they're playing nice. Democrats would never do the same if they were in the minority, and there are better, more effective, less freedom-depriving options available to respond to tragedies like the one in Uvalde. Harden schools, fund resource officers, train willing staff, and work to remedy the myriad failures of government that are discovered in the wake of such tragedies.
How Many Died as a Result of Capitol Riot? By Robert Farley
November 1, 2021
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol resulted in “almost 10 dead.” Four people died that day, and five others — all law enforcement officers — died days, weeks and even months later. Here we lay out what is publicly known about the circumstances surrounding those deaths.
THE ONLY SHOOTING DEATH
A shooting death: Ashli Babbitt, 35, of San Diego and an Air Force veteran, died on the day of the riot after being shot in the shoulder by a Capitol Police officer as she attempted to force her way into the House chamber where members of Congress were sheltering in place, according to a Jan. 7 statement from then-U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.
In April, the Department of Justice announced that it would not pursue any charges against the Capitol Police officer who shot Babbitt.
According to the Justice Department release, “As members of the mob continued to strike the glass doors” outside an entrance that leads to the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Ms. Babbitt attempted to climb through one of the doors where glass was broken out. An officer inside the Speaker’s Lobby fired one round from his service pistol, striking Ms. Babbitt in the left shoulder, causing her to fall back from the doorway and onto the floor.”
The press release said the Justice Department’s 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.”
I guess so...When Cheney's opening remarks sounded like the opening statement from a prosecuting attorney. And she left out the last lines of what Trump said in his speech on Jan 6th.
Jan. 6 panelists: Enough evidence uncovered to indict Trump By HOPE YEN, Associated Press - 2h ago
\WaASHINGTON (AP) — Members of the House committee investigating the Capitol riot said Sunday they have uncovered enough evidence for the Justice Department to consider an unprecedented criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump for seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
© Provided by Associated PressRep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., listens as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol holds its first public hearing to reveal the findings of a year-long investigation, on Capitol Hill, Thursday, June 9, 2022, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)The committee announced that Trump's campaign manager, Bill Stepien, is among the witnesses scheduled to testify at a hearing Monday that focuses on Trump's effort to spread his lies about a stolen election.
“I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a committee member who also leads the House Intelligence Committee. “There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election that I don’t see evidence the Justice Department is investigating.”
© Provided by Associated PressRep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., talks with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, June 9, 2022, following the first public hearing of the House select commiThe committee announced that Trump's campaign manager, Bill Stepien, is among the witnesses scheduled to testify at a hearing Monday that focuses on Trump's effort to spread his lies about a stolen election.“I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a committee member who also leads the House Intelligence Committee. “There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election that I don’t see evidence the Justice Department is investigating.”ttee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh
The committee held its first public hearing last week, with members laying out their case against Trump to show how the defeated president relentlessly pushed his false claims of a rigged election despite multiple advisers telling him otherwise and how he intensified an extraordinary scheme to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
© Provided by Associated PressAn image of a mock gallows on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, is shown as committee members from left to right, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., Vice Chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., look on, as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol holds its first public hearing to reveal the findings of a year-long investigation, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, June 9, 2022. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
READ MORE
People are so quick to judge....They want to interpret into their own words, what Trump said in his Jan 6th speech and always leave out the ending of his speech, WHICH SAYS NEAR THE END...
Transcript....
We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side.
But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order.
We don't want anybody hurt. It is a very tough period of time.
There has never been a time like this where such a thing happened, where they could take it away from all of us, from me, from you, from our country.
This was a fraudulent election, but we can't play into the hands of these people.
We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You are very special. You've seen what happens. You see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel. But go home and go home...."
(video cuts off early)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
