Stories about
Doug Collins


Douglas Allen Collins (born August 16, 1966) is an American politician and a United States Representative from Georgia's 9th congressional district since 2013. Previously he was a state representative in the Georgia House of Representatives, representing the 27th district, which includes portions of Hall, Lumpkin and White counties. Collins also serves as a chaplain in the U.S. Air Force Reserve with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. He is a member of the Republican Party.

David Harris Jr

Published  1 month ago

Rep Doug Collins released the transcripts of Lisa Page’s testimony before Congress, and one item jumped to the forefront. Page told the House members that the FBI, including James Comey, had discussed bringing charges against Hillary for violating the espionage act, but that the DOJ ordered them to drop it. Who gave the order? And why?(Although I’m sure we can all guess why.) And as to who ordered the stand down order, my guess is that it was Loretta Lynch, who met Bill Clinton on the tarmac. A couple of days later the Hillary campaign said they were thinking of keeping her on in the Hillary administration.

Rep Collins said his patience with the DOJ had grown thin so he released the testimony.

Collins plans on releasing more testimony.

The Ohr testimony disclosed the Bruce Ohr gave his wife’s opposition research on Trump to the FBI in a flash drive.

On Tuesday Rep. Doug Collins released the Lisa Page testimony online.

The testimony released today revealed the FBI was considering charging HIllary Clinton under the Espionage Act until the Department of Justice told them “no.”

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence,” but the Justice Department shut them down.

Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton’s emails. This goes back to the FBI’s “Midyear Exam” investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.

Comey cleared Clinton of all charges in a press conference on July 5, 2016.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Republican Georgia Rep. Doug Collins released the private testimony of former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, but it’s former Attorney General Loretta Lynch who may feel the sting.

According to Page’s testimony, which was made public on Tuesday, the FBI considered charging former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with gross negligence under 18 U.S. Code § 793 for her alleged handling of classified information. (RELATED: Doug Collins Releases Ex-FBI Lawyer Lisa Page’s Interview Transcripts)

NEW: Lisa Page’s congressional testimony reveals that the FBI was considering charging Hillary Clinton under the Espionage Act for “gross negligence” — until the DOJ flat-out told them “No.”https://t.co/c6t7UyttzB

— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) March 12, 2019

“We had multiple conversations with the Justice Department about bringing a gross negligence charge,” Page told Republican Texas Rep. John Ratcliffe. “And that’s, as I said, the advice that we got from the Department was that they did not think — that it was constitutionally vague and not sustainable.”

Ratcliffe responded, “When you say advice you got from the Department, you’re making it sound like it was the Department that told you: ‘You’re not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors and we’re telling you we’re not going to.'”

“That’s correct,” Page answered.

But if Page were telling the truth, and the FBI did recommend possible charges against Clinton, then Lynch may not have been telling the truth when she said that she would “accept their recommendations.”

Lynch: “I fully expect to accept” the DOJ and FBI recommendations on the Clinton email probe https://t.co/8I58ZMGkGD https://t.co/A1DeQqJ6cB

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) July 1, 2016

“I fully expect to accept their recommendations,” Lynch said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado on July 1, 2016. “I will be accepting their recommendations and their plans for going forward.”

Lynch, who was responding to criticism of her tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton, made the reassurance that she would abide by the recommendations of the FBI when she declined to recuse herself from the case. “It’s important to make it clear that that meeting with President Clinton does not have a bearing on how this matter is going to be reviewed, resolved and accepted by me,” she said.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins unilaterally released a 268-page transcript Friday of a deposition that Justice Department official Bruce Ohr gave to Congress in August.

Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, took the unusual step by reading a statement on the House floor and providing a link to the Ohr transcript in the public record. The representative said his patience with the Justice Department “has grown thin.”

Ohr served in 2016 and 2017 as a back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the anti-Trump dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government. (RELATED: Bruce Ohr’s Testimony Contradicts Glenn Simpson’s)

Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.

Bruce Ohr was interviewed on Aug. 28, 2018 by a task force of members from the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.

Collins said Friday that he plans to release additional transcripts from interviews conducted by the task force. Lawmakers have also interviewed Nellie Ohr and FBI and Justice Department officials such as former FBI general counsel James Baker and former FBI attorney Lisa Page.

“Out of an abundance of caution, we gave DOJ an opportunity to review them for information that would endanger national security, but after many months and little progress, our patience has grown thin,” Collins said.

“The proposed redactions have nothing to do with national security and are anathema to our goal of government transparency,” he continued, adding that “I am, therefore, today making one of these transcripts public.”

“I intend to make other transcripts public soon,” he said. “I’m willing to consider any reasonable redactions DOJ makes in a timely manner, but won’t allow these transcripts to remain shrouded in secrecy.”

Parts of Bruce Ohr’s testimony have already been leaked to the press. In the hearing, Bruce Ohr undercut several claims made by Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, and California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Bruce Ohr testified that he met with Simpson on Aug. 22, 2016 to discuss information from the dossier. That contradicted Simpson’s testimony to House Intelligence on Nov. 14, 2017 that he did not meet with Bruce Ohr until after the election.

Bruce Ohr also told lawmakers that he told the FBI about his contacts with Steele in early August 2016, days after he and Nellie Ohr met the former British spy in Washington, D.C.

Schiff claimed in a memo released on Feb. 24, 2018 that Bruce Ohr did not tell the FBI about his contacts with Steele until after the election.

Ohr testified that he generally trusted Steele, who he first met in 2007, when Steele still worked for the British government. But Ohr had less confidence in Steele’s sources, since their information originated with Russians.

“I think — my impression is that Chris Steele believed his sources,” Ohr said in one exchange.

“What I should say in addition, though, is that whenever you are dealing with information from Russia, you have to be careful, because it is a very complicated place. And so even information from a good source has to be looked at carefully.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Former FBI legal counsel Lisa Page testified to Congress that the Justice Department ordered the FBI not to charge former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with “gross negligence” by mishandling classified information.

Transcripts of Page’s closed-door testimony in July 2018 were released Tuesday by Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) on Tuesday, which included the following exchange with Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX):

RATCLIFFE: So let me if I can, I know I’m testing your memory. But when you say advice you got from the Department, you’re making it sound like it was the Department that told you: You’re not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors and we’re telling you we’re not going to …

PAGE: That is correct.

RATFLIFFE: …bring a case based on that.

Ratcliffe highlighted the exchange on Twitter.

Lisa Page confirmed to me under oath that the FBI was ordered by the Obama DOJ not to consider charging Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information. pic.twitter.com/KPQKINBtrB

— John Ratcliffe (@RepRatcliffe) March 13, 2019

Page confirmed that the Department of Justice led by Attorney General Loretta Lynch had “multiple conversations” about charging Clinton with gross negligence but noted that it would be a rare decision.

“[T]hey did not feel they could sustain a charge,” she said, referring to the Department of Justice.

President Donald Trump reacted to the reports on Wednesday.

“The just revealed FBI Agent Lisa Page transcripts make the Obama Justice Department look exactly like it was, a broken and corrupt machine,” he wrote. “Hopefully, justice will finally be served. Much more to come!”

The just revealed FBI Agent Lisa Page transcripts make the Obama Justice Department look exactly like it was, a broken and corrupt machine. Hopefully, justice will finally be served. Much more to come!

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins released 370 pages of transcripts Tuesday of congressional testimony given in October 2018 by Lisa Page.

Page is the former FBI attorney who exchanged anti-Trump text messages with former FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok.

Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, published links to the transcripts on his congressional website. Collins published a transcript Friday of testimony from Bruce Ohr, the Justice Department official who served as a back channel between the FBI and former British spy Christopher Steele during the bureau’s Trump-Russia probe.

Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm hired by Democrats to investigate President Donald Trump.

Page left the FBI on May 4, 2018 amid a brewing scandal over her text messages with Strzok, the former deputy chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence division. Page and Strzok were part of a small group at the FBI that worked on “Crossfire Hurricane,” the code name for the bureau’s counterintelligence probe of the Trump campaign.

The investigation was started on July 31, 2016.

Many of the details of Page’s testimony have been publicized.

She told lawmakers that she was told in May 2017 by her boss, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein brought up the idea of wearing a wire in meetings with Trump.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

The more we learn the more we realize that collusion and obstruction of justice may have actually occurred… under the Obama administration. Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page admitted last year under oath that the FBI was ordered by the Loretta Lynch-run Justice Department not to charge Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information. That’s […]

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

Transcripts of former FBI lawyer Lisa Page’s private testimony to a joint congressional task force investigating potential bias in the Justice Department and the FBI were released Tuesday.

Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., the ranking member of the committee, released 370 pages of transcripts of testimony that took place over two days. Page answered questions for about 10 hours total on July 13 and July 16.

“The American people deserve to know what transpired in the highest echelons of the FBI during that tumultuous time for the bureau,” Collins said in a statement.

“Out of an abundance of caution, this transcript has a limited number of narrowly tailored redactions, relating only to confidential sources and methods, non-public information about ongoing investigations, and non-material personal information,” he said.

Last week, Collins began releasing the transcripts of private testimony given to a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees when he asked that the unredacted transcript for Justice Department official Bruce Ohr from August 2018 be put on the record. Ohr acted as an unofficial back channel between the FBI and the author of the so-called Trump dossier.

Page and another FBI employee, Peter Strzok, came under fire last year when it was revealed they had exchanged text messages that displayed a bias against President Trump.

The pair worked on the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server and briefly were part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

Strzok was fired in August, and Page resigned from her position in May.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

On Friday Republican Doug Collins (R-GA) released the Bruce Ohr testimony transcript online.

Rep Collins said his patience with the DOJ had grown thin so he released the testimony.

Collins plans on releasing more testimony.

The Ohr testimony disclosed the Bruce Ohr gave his wife’s opposition research on Trump to the FBI in a flash drive.

On Tuesday Rep. Doug Collins released the Lisa Page testimony online.

Today, the link https://t.co/lFcxpHhFSJ will be placed in the record so the American people can read the transcripts of Lisa Page's interviews before the Judiciary Committee. pic.twitter.com/3m1ECz4ymf

— Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) March 12, 2019

The testimony released today revealed the FBI was considering charging HIllary Clinton under the Espionage Act until the Department of Justice told them “no.”

NEW: Lisa Page's congressional testimony reveals that the FBI was considering charging Hillary Clinton under the Espionage Act for "gross negligence" — until the DOJ flat-out told them "No."https://t.co/c6t7UyttzB

— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) March 12, 2019

The Examiner reported:

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence,” but the Justice Department shut them down.

Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton’s emails. This goes back to the FBI’s “Midyear Exam” investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.

Comey cleared Clinton of all charges in a press conference on July 5, 2016.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

On Friday Republican Doug Collins (R-GA) released the Bruce Ohr testimony transcript online.

Rep Collins said his patience with the DOJ had grown thin so he released the testimony.

Collins plans on releasing more testimony.

The Ohr testimony disclosed the Bruce Ohr gave his wife’s opposition research on Trump to the FBI in a flash drive.

On Tuesday Rep. Doug Collins released the Lisa Page testimony online.

Today, the link https://t.co/lFcxpHhFSJ will be placed in the record so the American people can read the transcripts of Lisa Page's interviews before the Judiciary Committee. pic.twitter.com/3m1ECz4ymf

— Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) March 12, 2019

The transcript is 205 pages long.

Interview of: Lisa Page https://t.co/HZrQvUSMEt pic.twitter.com/9UMfkGrXrW

— hypervocal (@hypervocal) March 12, 2019

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

The 268-page Bruce Ohr interview transcript provides some clarity, some comfort, but also more concerns over the handling of the Russia investigation.

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

Post by @theamgreatness.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Senior Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr told congressional investigators in August 2018 that his wife, Nellie Ohr, who worked for Fusion GPS and was tasked with obtaining opposition research against then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016, gave him a flash drive of her research on the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Ohr admitted to investigators, […]

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Chuck Ross, DCNF

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins unilaterally released a 268-page transcript Friday of a deposition that Justice Department official Bruce Ohr gave to Congress in August.

Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, took the unusual step by reading a statement on the House floor and providing a link to the Ohr transcript in the public record. The representative said his patience with the Justice Department “has grown thin.”

Ohr served in 2016 and 2017 as a back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the anti-Trump dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.

Bruce Ohr was interviewed on Aug. 28, 2018 by a task force of members from the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.

Collins said Friday that he plans to release additional transcripts from interviews conducted by the task force. Lawmakers have also interviewed Nellie Ohr and FBI and Justice Department officials such as former FBI general counsel James Baker and former FBI attorney Lisa Page.

“Out of an abundance of caution, we gave DOJ an opportunity to review them for information that would endanger national security, but after many months and little progress, our patience has grown thin,” Collins said.

“The proposed redactions have nothing to do with national security and are anathema to our goal of government transparency,” he continued, adding that “I am, therefore, today making one of these transcripts public.”

“I intend to make other transcripts public soon,” he said. “I’m willing to consider any reasonable redactions DOJ makes in a timely manner, but won’t allow these transcripts to remain shrouded in secrecy.”

Bruce Ohr testified to the House last August that Christopher Steele was being simultaneously paid by both the FBI and Fusion GPS. We know Steele was also working for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, who was using Steele to get the FBI to go after Manafort, an old enemy. pic.twitter.com/8eMXqyhAhu

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 8, 2019

Parts of Bruce Ohr’s testimony have already been leaked to the press. In the hearing, Bruce Ohr undercut several claims made by Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, and California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Bruce Ohr testified that he met with Simpson on Aug. 22, 2016 to discuss information from the dossier. That contradicted Simpson’s testimony to House Intelligence on Nov. 14, 2017 that he did not meet with Bruce Ohr until after the election.

Bruce Ohr also told lawmakers that he told the FBI about his contacts with Steele in early August 2016, days after he and Nellie Ohr met the former British spy in Washington, D.C.

Schiff claimed in a memo released on Feb. 24, 2018 that Bruce Ohr did not tell the FBI about his contacts with Steele until after the election.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins unilaterally released a 268-page transcript Friday of a deposition that Justice Department official Bruce Ohr gave to Congress in August.

Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, took the unusual step by reading a statement on the House floor and providing a link to the Ohr transcript in the public record. The representative said his patience with the Justice Department “has grown thin.”

Ohr served in 2016 and 2017 as a back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the anti-Trump dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.

Bruce Ohr was interviewed on Aug. 28, 2018 by a task force of members from the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.

Collins said Friday that he plans to release additional transcripts from interviews conducted by the task force. Lawmakers have also interviewed Nellie Ohr and FBI and Justice Department officials such as former FBI general counsel James Baker and former FBI attorney Lisa Page.

“Out of an abundance of caution, we gave DOJ an opportunity to review them for information that would endanger national security, but after many months and little progress, our patience has grown thin,” Collins said.

“The proposed redactions have nothing to do with national security and are anathema to our goal of government transparency,” he continued, adding that “I am, therefore, today making one of these transcripts public.”

“I intend to make other transcripts public soon,” he said. “I’m willing to consider any reasonable redactions DOJ makes in a timely manner, but won’t allow these transcripts to remain shrouded in secrecy.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

The House voted Thursday to condemn anti-Semitic comments by Rep. Ilhan Omar as part of a broader resolution decrying bigotry in all its forms, including Islamophobia and white nationalism.

Sara A. Carter

Published  1 month ago

Department of Justice senior official Bruce Ohr’s testimony contradicts testimony given by other senior government officials and key witnesses who testified before Congress regarding the FBI’s investigation into President Trump’s 2016 campaign and alleged collusion with the Russian government, according to the full transcripts released Friday.

Ohr’s 268-page testimony, released by Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, reveals inconsistency and contradiction in testimony given by Glenn Simpson, founder of embattled research firm Fusion GPS and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is set to leave his post sometime this month.

It also reveals that many questions are still left unanswered.

The Contradictions and The Revelations

Glenn Simpson suggests in his testimony to the Senate that he never spoke to anyone at the FBI about Christopher Steele, the former British spy he hired to investigate the Trump campaign during the election. However, Ohr suggest otherwise telling former Rep.Trey Gowdy under questioning “As I recall, and this is after checking with my notes, Mr. Simpson and I spoke in August of 2016. I met with him, and he provided some information on possible intermediaries between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.”

In another instance, Simpson’s testimony also contradicts notes taken by Ohr after a meeting they had in December, 2016. Unverified allegations were decimated among the media that the Trump campaign had a computer server that was linked to a Russian bank in Moscow: Alpha Bank. Simpson suggested to the Senate that he knew very little about the Trump -Alpha Bank server story and couldn’t provide information. But Bruce Ohr’s own handwritten notes state that when he met with Simpson in December 2016, Simpson was concerned over the Alpha Bank story in the New York Times. “The New York Times story on Oct. 31 downplaying the connection between Alfa servers and the Trump campaign was incorrect. There was communication and it wasn’t spam,” stated Ohr’s notes. This suggests that Simpson was well aware of the story, which was believed by congressional investigators to have started from his research firm.

Ohr testified to lawmakers that Simpson provided information to federal officials that was false regarding Cleta Mitchell, a well-known Republican campaign finance lawyer, and information regarding the National Rifle Association. Sean Davis, with the Federalist pointed this out in a tweet today. Read one of those stories here.

Bruce Ohr testified that Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS provided to federal officials information we know to be false regarding Cleta Mitchell, a Republican campaign finance attorney, and the NRA. Giving false statements to federal officials is a crime under 18 U.S.C. 1001. pic.twitter.com/vm0tc4ft5R

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 8, 2019

4. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would not answer questions to lawmakers during testimony about when he learned that Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was working for Fusion GPS. Just check this out from Rep. Matt Gaetz’s interview with Judge Jeanine on Fox News.

“Rod Rosenstein won’t tell us when he first learned that Nellie Ohr was working for Fusion GPS,” said Gaetz, in August, 2018. “So I want to know from Bruce Ohr, when did he tell his colleagues at the Department of Justice that in violation of law that required him to disclose his wife’s occupation his sources of income. He did not do that. So when did all of the other people at the Department of Justice find this out because Rod Rosenstein, I’ve asked him twice in open hearing and he will not give an answer. I think there’s a real smoking gun there.”

However, in Ohr’s testimony he says he told the FBI about his wife’s role at Fusion GPS but only divulged his role to one person at the DOJ: Rosenstein. At the time, Rosenstein was overseeing the Trump-Russia probe, and had taken the information from Ohr and gave it to the FBI. Just read The Hill’s John Solomon full story here for the full background on Ohr’s testimony. I highlighted an important date below: remember Rosenstein wouldn’t answer lawmakers questions as to when he knew about Nellie Ohr. It also appears he failed to tell lawmakers about the information he delivered to the FBI.

Ohr stated in his testimony: “What I had said, I think, to Mr. Rosenstein in October of 2017 was that my wife was working for Fusion GPS… The dossier, as I understand it, is the collection of reports that Chris Steele has prepared for Fusion GPS.”

Ohr added: “My wife had separately done research on certain Russian people and companies or whatever that she had provided to Fusion GPS…But I don’t believe her information is reflected in the Chris Steele reports. They were two different chunks of information heading into Fusion GPS.”

5. Ohr also told lawmakers in his testimony that the former British spy, Christopher Steele was being paid by the FBI at the same time he was getting paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC. However, there was another player paying Steele and it was a Russian oligarch named Oleg Deripaska. Deripaska, a tycoon connected to Russian President Vladimir Putin, had well known animus toward his former friend Paul Manafort.

Rep. Mark Meadows asked Ohr during testimony “Did Chris Steele get paid by the Department of Justice?

Ohr’s response: “My understanding is that for a time he was a source for the FBI, a paid source.

In the testimony Ohr also revealed that Steele had told him details about his work with Deripaska saying Deripaska’s attorney Paul Hauser “had information about Paul Manafort, that Paul Manafort had entered into some kind of business deal with” Deripaska. Ohr said Manafort “had stolen a large amount of money from” the Russian Oligarch and that Hauser was “trying to gather information that would show that.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Americans will soon find out if Attorney General Bill Barr has the mettle to pursue Obama’s corrupt FBI and DOJ officials who weaponized the intel agencies to target Donald Trump.

John Huber, the special prosecutor tapped by former AG Jeff Sessions to investigate FISA abuses by Obama’s DOJ/FBI, met with newly-confirmed Attorney General Bill Barr this week.

On Friday, Mr. Huber, a US Attorney from Utah, sent a message to Americans — he is committed to holding offenders accountable.

“US Attorneys thoroughly enjoyed our time with AG Barr this week. He is a solid, proven leader with a clear vision for the @DOJ. We will move forward with his priorities, hold offenders accountable, and advance the rule of law,” Huber said on Friday in a tweet.

US Attorneys thoroughly enjoyed our time with AG Barr this week. He is a solid, proven leader with a clear vision for the @DOJ. We will move forward with his priorities, hold offenders accountable, and advance the rule of law. pic.twitter.com/cl1ApkgD7o

— U.S. Attorney Huber (@USAttyHuber) March 8, 2019

Here’s what we know so far with the information that is publicly available:

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee say John Huber still has not interviewed key witnesses and they want answers.

Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Doug Collins (R-GA) sent a letter to special prosecutor John Huber on January 8th demanding answers by a January 21st deadline.

“Your investigation has been ongoing for over nine months. During the course of our extensive investigation we have interviewed more than a dozen current and former DOJ and FBI personnel, and were surprised to hear none of these potentially informative witnesses testified to speaking with you,” the GOP lawmakers wrote.

The Republican Congressmen then blasted Huber for being a no-show at the December hearing where Clinton Foundation whistleblowers Lawrence Doyle of DM Income Advisors and John Moynihan of JFM Associates testified.

“Further, last month, then-chairman Mark Meadows invited you to testify as a witness at the Subcommittee on Government Operations’ hearing ‘Oversight of Nonprofit Organizations: A Case Study on the Clinton Foundation.’ We were disappointed to learn from the department that you were not enthusiastic about testifying when declining the invitation.”

Huber has the authority to impanel a grand jury, however it appears he has done nothing since Jeff Sessions appointed him in the Fall of 2017 to investigate FISA abuses.

The Clinton Foundation whistleblowers, Mr. Moynihan and Mr. Doyle told the committee they had to send their evidence to the Huber investigation THREE TIMES because they kept losing it.

In October, Congressman Meadows and Jim Jordan said they wanted to haul John Huber in before Congress to testify because they had not received any updates on Huber’s investigation.

We will soon find out if Huber’s appointment was one big head fake by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

John Huber, the special prosecutor tapped by former AG Jeff Sessions to investigate FISA abuses by Obama’s DOJ/FBI, met with newly-confirmed Attorney General Bill Barr this week.

U.S. Attorney John Huber, who serves as vice chair of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee, met with new AG William Barr this week in Washington, D. C. ⁦@TheJusticeDept⁩ pic.twitter.com/3cZqagJCAv

— US Attorney Utah (@DUTnews) March 7, 2019

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee say John Huber still has not interviewed key witnesses and they want answers.

Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Doug Collins (R-GA) sent a letter to special prosecutor John Huber on January 8th demanding answers by a January 21st deadline.

“Your investigation has been ongoing for over nine months. During the course of our extensive investigation we have interviewed more than a dozen current and former DOJ and FBI personnel, and were surprised to hear none of these potentially informative witnesses testified to speaking with you,” the GOP lawmakers wrote.

The Republican Congressmen then blasted Huber for being a no-show at the December hearing where Clinton Foundation whistleblowers Lawrence Doyle of DM Income Advisors and John Moynihan of JFM Associates testified.

“Further, last month, then-chairman Mark Meadows invited you to testify as a witness at the Subcommittee on Government Operations’ hearing ‘Oversight of Nonprofit Organizations: A Case Study on the Clinton Foundation.’ We were disappointed to learn from the department that you were not enthusiastic about testifying when declining the invitation.”

The GOP Congressmen gave Huber a deadline of January 21st to respond to the following demands:

The total number of witnesses you have interviewed, including names of specific individuals where possible, and the number of witnesses remaining to be interviewed;

The total number of FISA applications reviewed;

The total number of documents reviewed, including their substance and format (e.g. emails, meeting notes, phone logs, etc); and

A description and account of your coordination with DOJ IG Michael Horowitz”

Huber has done nothing since Jeff Sessions appointed him in the Fall of 2017 to investigate FISA abuses.

The Clinton Foundation whistleblowers, Mr. Moynihan and Mr. Doyle told the committee they had to send their evidence to the Huber investigation THREE TIMES because they kept losing it.

In October, Congressman Meadows and Jim Jordan said they wanted to haul John Huber in before Congress to testify because they had not received any updates on Huber’s investigation.

Furthermore, according to Congressman Meadows, there is no evidence John Huber has done anything other than be appointed by Jeff Sessions.

The evidence is mounting that John Huber, a US Attorney from Utah, was appointed by Jeff Sessions as one big head fake.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

The transcript from a private interview with Bruce Ohr, the Justice Department official who acted as an unofficial back channel between the FBI and the author of the so-called Trump dossier, released in surprise fashion on Friday.

Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, took to the House floor and asked that the unredacted transcript from August 2018 be put on the record.

"Mr. Speaker, last Congress, the Judiciary Committee interviewed multiple DOJ and FBI officials about their actions regarding the 2016 elections," Collins said.

"People anticipate the Mueller report soon. Will he find any so-called 'collusion'? Or was the only 'collusion' among agency personnel who hated the president and started this investigation?" he added. "Our interview transcripts were pertinent to a congressional investigation, but the 115th Congress ended, the investigation was closed, and copies were shared with certain members of Congress."

Excerpts of Ohr's testimony before a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees have already been leaked to the media.

Ohr, who previously worked as the associate deputy attorney general and director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, told investigators about his communications with dossier author Christopher Steele, and passed along Steele's research to the FBI even after Steele was dropped as an FBI source for providing confidential information to the media.

Ohr was demoted when it was revealed he met with Steele and Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of the opposition research firm, Fusion GPS, which commissioned Steele's work. Ohr also told lawmakers his wife Nellie Ohr was employed by Fusion GPS and shared a thumb drive with him to hand over to the FBI.

The dossier, which contained unverified claims about President Trump's ties to Russia, has been a subject of concern for GOP lawmakers, particularly for how it was used by the FBI to in FISA warrant applications to gain the authority to spy on onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Collins noted Friday how he and his colleagues have lost patience with the Justice Department in how slowly the agency has handled document requests, including the process of reviewing them for information that would endanger national security, and said he intends to release more transcripts from interviews with Justice Department and FBI officials.

“I intend to make other transcripts public soon,” Collins said on the House floor. “I’m willing to consider any reasonable redactions DOJ makes in a timely manner, but won’t allow these transcripts to remain shrouded in secrecy.”

Read the testimony below:

RedState

Published  1 month ago

A bold and necessary action

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee released the investigative interview with Justice Department figure Bruce Ohr on Friday, defying the department, which had slow-walked the release.

Rep. Doug Collins, Georgia Republican, released it to the Congressional Record, giving him protections against retaliation for the move.

Mr. Collins said he made the decision because Democrats have made clear they are intent on probing President Trump, and he wanted to make clear “what actually happened” in 2016.

Mr. Ohr was a conduit for information between the ex-British spy who compiled the anti-Trump dossier in 2016, and the FBI that began the investigation that is still ongoing into the president.

“We found a very disturbing pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice,” Mr. Collins told reporters.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

An ex-adviser to President Trump has signaled he and as many as four others will not cooperate with the House Judiciary Committee's sweeping demand for documents.

Michael Caputo, a former aide with the campaign who will be interviewed on Fox News’ “The Daily Briefing with Dana Perino” on Wednesday afternoon, has already told the committee he does not have any relevant records and that he “does not plan to testify in front of the panel,” according to the Washington Post.

Caputo has also started off talks with four other people linked to the president who received a request from the committee to form a “joint strategy of resisting requests,” the Post reports.

HOUSE DEMS LAUNCH EXPANSIVE TRUMP PROBE WITH SLEW OF DOCUMENT REQUESTS

“All four are reluctant to appear because they believe it’s a perjury trap designed to move toward impeachment of the president,” he told the newspaper.

The request from the Judiciary Committee was for Caputo to give them any documents related to Russian government contact with Trump associates.

The committee on Monday sent the letter as part of a massive document request to 81 people and organizations, going after information from dozens of figures from the president's administration, family and business.

Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., described the effort as part of a new probe into "alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption, and other abuses of power by President Trump."

In addition to the White House, Nadler is also seeking information from Trump family members, like Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Jared Kushner; from former administration figures like former chief of staff Reince Priebus, former national security adviser Mike Flynn, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former spokeswoman Hope Hicks; and from Trump campaign figures like Brad Parscale and Corey Lewandowski.

"Over the last several years, President Trump has evaded accountability for his near-daily attacks on our basic legal, ethical, and constitutional rules and norms,” Nadler said in a statement. “Investigating these threats to the rule of law is an obligation of Congress and a core function of the House Judiciary Committee."

REP. DOUG COLLINS TELLS JERRY NADLER TO 'COME BACK TO REALITY' AFTER MASSIVE TRUMP DOCUMENT REQUEST

Caputo was interviewed in May 2018 by the Senate Intelligence Committee as part of the panel's investigation into Russian activities during the 2016 elections. Caputo's lawyer, Dennis Vacco, told Fox News at the time the interview lasted three hours and included opening and closing statements by his client.

In Caputo’s closing statement, he said the panel's investigation “forced” his family out of their home and “crushed” his children due to mounting legal costs associated with the inquiry and told the committee: “God damn you to hell.”

"Today, I can’t possibly pay the attendant legal costs and live near my aging father, raising my kids where I grew up,” Caputo said. “Your investigation and others into the allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia are costing my family a great deal of money — more than $125,000 — and making a visceral impact on my children."

Caputo accused members of the Senate Intelligence Committee of working together and contributing to the “swamp" — a term often used by Trump to describe the bureaucracy in Washington, D.C.

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

They worry zeroing in on Ivanka, Don Jr. and Eric would be politically perilous.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins told Jerry Nadler to “come back to reality” after announcing investigations into President Trump are being expanded.

"I would say to my chairman, come back to the reality." Collins, R-Ga., said on Fox News Radio’s “Brian Kilmeade Show.”

“We’ve shown you for two years where the real problem is. Let’s have some open investigations, let’s get [Rod] Rosenstein in there… let’s actually look at what the Department of Justice became and what the people can no longer trust.”

HOUSE DEMS LAUNCH EXPANSIVE TRUMP PROBE WITH SLEW OF DOCUMENT REQUESTS

House Democrats opened a huge new avenue Monday in their investigations into Trump, with the chairman of the Judiciary Committee firing off document requests to dozens of figures from the president's administration, family and business.

Chairman Nadler, D-N.Y., said Monday the committee served document requests to 81 agencies, entities and individuals, as part of a new probe into "alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption, and other abuses of power by President Trump."

In addition to the White House, Nadler is also seeking information from Trump family members, like Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Jared Kushner; from former administration figures like former chief of staff Reince Priebus, former national security adviser Mike Flynn, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former spokeswoman Hope Hicks; and from Trump campaign figures like Brad Parscale and Corey Lewandowski.

"Over the last several years, President Trump has evaded accountability for his near-daily attacks on our basic legal, ethical, and constitutional rules and norms,” Nadler said in a statement.

“Investigating these threats to the rule of law is an obligation of Congress and a core function of the House Judiciary Committee."

The White House confirmed Monday it had received a letter from Nadler.

Collins believes this is a “classic case” of Democrats jumping to conclusions.

“I think they're going to overreach in who they call. Whether it’s the president’s children or his associates,” Collins told Kilmeade.

The Georgia congressman also accused Nadler of being pushed by anti-Trump elements in his party and in his district.

“This shows this is nothing but a political theater,” Collins said. “[Nadler] is being pushed in his own district by folks in their party saying you’ve got to impeach.”

“If you have collusion or if you have evidence put it on the table,” Collins said.

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Monday that Democrats would be introducing a net neutrality bill to replace the set of open internet rules that were repealed in 2017.

IJR - Independent Journal Review

Published  1 month ago

"Why are we infringing on people's liberties?"

Conservative Review

Published  1 month ago

In 2014, Shayna Lopez Rivas was raped on her college campus. “I had pepper spray, but he had a knife,” she told reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday. “And I knew my fight was over the moment he pulled it out.”

“After that vicious attack, I promised myself I would never, ever be a victim again,” she continued. “Had I been armed that night that stole so much from me, I am confident things would have been different.”

In a one-on-one interview with Blaze Media after a press conference against a new House gun control bill, Lopez Rivas explained how she became a Second Amendment supporter after her horrific experience. After the attack, she said, a friend of hers invited her to the shooting range to learn about gun safety:

“I will never forget,” she told me, “I fired her Glock 17, and the moment I fired it, I knew if I had this on me the night that I was attacked, I would not have been raped.”

“Firearms are an equalizer,” she said. “They are the greatest equalizer between a five-foot-five woman like myself and the six-foot-tall man who raped me.”

At the press conference, Rivas was joined by several other Second Amendment proponents and Republican House members opposed to H.R. 8, the so-called “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019,” which the Democrat-controlled House is expected to pass later this week.

“Those who support this bill claim it’s about safety,” Lopez Rivas said of the bill. “However, this bill is not about safety at all. H.R. 8 will not stop criminals from stealing firearms, getting them on the black market, or buying them through straw purchases.”

“This bill will only make it more difficult and expensive for law-abiding citizens like myself to own firearms,” she said, adding that it “encourages prosecution of otherwise lawful gun owners who make an innocent mistake.”

As I explained earlier, H.R. 8 seeks to mandate so-called “universal” background checks for gun purchases. This means extending federal background checks to the only transactions that still do not require them: Those between private citizens of the same state in states that do not already require background checks for private sales.

Research from the Obama Justice Department found that “universal” background checks are largely unenforceable without federal gun registration, something House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Doug Collins, R-Ga., pointed out at a previous hearing on the bill.

Additionally, Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., told me after the press conference that the bill also “sets a pretext for registration by requiring citizens to essentially beg and plead and pay for the constitutional rights that our forefathers fought for and bled for.”

“It also would make it harder for me to lend a firearm to a friend who otherwise couldn’t afford one, but needs one for temporary self-defense or to practice at the range by themselves,” Lopez Rivas said at the presser.

“As a rape survivor, I understand wanting to make our communities and country safer,” her statement concluded. “I just also understand that passing more laws that are near-unenforceable and criminalizing normal behavior of lawful gun owners is not the way to do it.”

You can watch the full press conference here:

Want to keep up with what’s going on in Washington without the liberal media slant, establishment spin, and politician-ese?

Sign up to get Blaze Media’s Capitol Hill Brief in your inbox every morning! It’s free!

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

A group of House Republicans gathered Tuesday on Capitol Hill to express their anger over two bills proposed by their Democratic colleagues that, if passed, would drastically tighten federal gun laws.

The Republican lawmakers, who were joined by a group of Second Amendment supporters, lambasted the two bills – HR 8 and HR 1112 – as “ineffective” and far overreaching measures that would ultimately lead to guns being confiscated from lawful owners.

“This bill turns law abiding citizens into criminals and it’s one more step towards federalized gun registration and ultimately gun confiscation,” Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Ga., the House Minority Whip, said. “That’s been the intention of many of the people bringing this bill for a long time. They want true gun control and this is the first step and surely not the last.”

ILLINOIS DEMS INTRODUCE BILL REQUIRING GUN BUYERS TO REVEAL SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS BEFORE GETTING FIREARM LICENSE

Scalise became a victim of gun violence when he was severely wounded by a gunman who opened fire while lawmakers were practicing for the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity in June 2017.

HR 8, which was approved by the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month in a 23-15 vote along party lines, would expand the scope of federal background checks and require nearly all purchasers of firearms to undergo a background check – even if they were bought it at a gun show, online or in a private transaction. HR 1112, which passed the committee 21-14, would require gun dealers to wait 10 days to receive answers about a background check.

The bills were introduced a day before the one-year anniversary of the mass shooting that killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

“Although we know the issue of gun violence won’t be fixed overnight, there are steps Congress can and must take to address it,” Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “Closing loopholes in the current background check system are long-overdue legislative measures that will help address this national crisis.”

While a handful of House Republicans have signed up in support of HR 8 – including Rep. Peter King of New York – the vast majority of GOP lawmakers opposed the legislation.

“Frankly HR-8 is taking the fears and concerns of a nation over gun violence and perpetrating a fraud upon the,” Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., said on Tuesday. “They are preying upon the very victims they are supposedly trying to help by putting a bill out there that will not help them. By constantly bringing up the mass violence instances such as schools and theaters and others. They are saying this will help.The reality is nothing in this bill would have stopped Parkland and nothing in this bill would have stopped the violence we have seen.”

The bills are part of the Democrats' efforts since retaking control of the House to move quickly to combat gun violence and they appear set to pass through the lower house of Congress. The legislation, however, is likely to meet a quick end once it lands in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Fox News College Associated Benno Kass contributed reporting to this piece.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) said Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, is blocking him from testifying as a witness in a forthcoming hearing on “gun violence.”

Scalise spoke with Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow during Monday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily.

Scalise said, “They’re moving a gun control bill this week. The Democrats have, with their hard shift to the left, they’re already moving towards taking away the right to law-abiding citizens to have a gun. So we’re having a hearing on gun violence in the new Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee, and Doug Collins, the Republican on our side, wanted me to be one of the witnesses to testify.”

Scalise explained, “Historically, if a member of Congress — Republican or Democrat — wants to testify before a committee and they have something unique to say, we provide that venue from him to do it. We’ve done it in the past when were were in the majority, and Democrats in the previous majority did. For whatever reason, the Democrat in charge of the committee says he won’t let me testify in that same forum. [He is] trying to block my testimony on gun violence. How ridiculous is that?”

Scalise added, “The irony is, can you or anybody else name who was on that panel that day? Typically, these congressional hearings get no attention. But when he banned me and tried to stop me from testifying, I ended up getting a lot more national attention for my message.”

Scalise went on, “Look, it was people with guns who saved my life. Because the bad guys out there, they’re going to find a way — whether it’s knives or guns or bombs — they’re going to find a way to do what they do, with or without new rules that block people that are law-abiding citizens.”

Scalise concluded, “We’ve got a lot of laws on the books, already. If law enforcement and the FBI in the case of Parkland and other agencies just followed all the rules, in many cases you would be able to stop other violence from happening. These new bills that they’re bringing in many cases wouldn’t even have stopped the violence that’s happened, but it would make it harder for law-abiding citizens to get a gun.”

Breitbart News Daily broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

NRA-ILA

Published  2 months ago

The Nancy Pelosi Speaker Era 2.0 continued on Wednesday, Feb. 13, with a markup of H.R 8, the “universal” background checks bill, in the House Judiciary Committee. Following on the heels of last week’s Judiciary Committee hearing, the same committee held a markup on Wednesday, where amendments and corrections to H.R. 8 could be considered. Unfortunately, the markup was clearly designed to allow the anti-gun Democrats who control the Judiciary Committee to grandstand and promote attacks on law-abiding gun owners, rather than consider efforts to combat violent crime.

It was clear from the outset that the anti-gun Democrats had no interest in considering reasonable approaches to addressing violent crime. The committee’s Ranking Member, Doug Collins (R-Ga.), offered the first amendment to the bill, which sought other approaches to combating crime rather than “universal” background checks, which study after study have shown to be ineffective, or their effectiveness inconclusive. His amendment was simply dismissed as not germane, without any discussion of its merits.

Please Contact Your U.S. Representative and Ask Them to Vote Against H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112!

H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112 cause undue burden's to law-abiding gun owners!

Representative F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) offered the next amendment. It simply sought to add to the list of exemptions from the “universal” background check requirements anyone who possessed a valid permit to carry a firearm. Adoption of the amendment would have still left the bill as an anti-gun mess, but it was a reasonable proposal considering carry permit holders already undergo a background check in order to obtain their permits. The anti-gun majority made clear they were not interested in anything reasonable, and the amendment was defeated.

The Sensenbrenner amendment was attacked by anti-gunners on the committee with ridiculous arguments and inaccurate information. Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) objected because not all states that issue permits to carry firearms require any training, even though the “universal” background checks mandated by H.R. 8 have no training requirements.Representative David Cicilline (D-R.I.) objected because, according to him, some states have no issuing requirements for permits, which is patently false. Other anti-gun legislators tried to claim that some states that issue permits after an applicant has submitted to a background check actually don’t check an applicant’s criminal history.

This process repeated itself throughout the day, with other amendments seeking to make even minor improvements to a monumentally bad piece of legislation being rejected similarly, either voted down or ruled not germane, by the anti-gun majority and Chair. This includes simple amendments that merely sought to put a cap on the fees that could be charged for a “universal” background check.

The Chair even spoke out against an amendment that sought to exempt victims of domestic violence from “universal” background check provisions of H.R. 8 by raising the concern of “evidentiary standards” when determining if the victim is actually a victim, even though anti-gun politicians have consistently refused to acknowledge “evidentiary standards” when promoting legislation to strip gun owners of their firearms.

After several hours, H.R. 8 was passed after anti-gun Democrats rejected every amendment offered by Republicans. The Judiciary Committee then took up H.R. 1112, legislation that would change current law that allows an FFL the option to transfer a firearm after three days if a NICS check is delayed. That discussion was much shorter, being dealt with in under an hour.

Although the actual language for H.R. 1112 has still not been made available on Congress.gov, as anti-gun Democrats have been apparently trying to rush legislation to the floor before it is truly ready for consideration, Chairman Nadler explained that the bill would extend the “delay” period from three days to 10 business days. However, after 10 business days, the transfer is not allowed to go through. The prospective purchaser must first file a petition with the Attorney General. If a “proceed” message is still not received 10 business days after the filing of the petition, only then may the transfer go through. However, NICS checks are only valid for 30 calendar days, so this new proposed proceed provision appears to be practically worthless because in almost all scenarios it will take more than 30 calendar days to accomplish.

The entire premise of H.R. 1112 is predicated on the notion that it would have prevented the horrific murders committed in Charleston, S.C., on June 17, 2015. Proponents have argued that the perpetrator of that crime would not have been able to commit his crime if the background check had taken longer. That, however, is simply not true, as the violent murderer was not prohibited from purchasing the firearm he used and his terrible crime took place more than two months after he first attempted to buy a firearm, so even the extended delay of H.R. 1112 would have had no effect in his case.

Ranking Member Collins may have best summarized this week’s markup and last week’s hearing in his opening remarks on Wednesday, when he stated, “I’m sad the bill before us represents another missed opportunity to prevent violence in our communities.” Neither H.R. 8 nor H.R. 1112 will do anything to address violent crime, but both will surely create problems for otherwise law-abiding gun owners and prospective gun owners.

Please thank Ranking Member Collins and the 13 other members of the House Judiciary Committee who voted against the misguided and ineffective legislation that is designed to score political points, not address crime, violence or mental health.

Please use this link to let your elected officials know that you won’t be blamed for the actions of violent criminals. Ask your Representative to oppose H.R.8 and H.R 1112. Additionally, you may call your U.S. Representative using the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democrats this week approved a bill to require background checks for all sales and transfers of firearms -- but rejected GOP-led efforts to amend the legislation to alert police when gun buyers, including illegal immigrants, fail those background checks.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee is demanding that former FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein testify before the panel, following McCabe's explosive claims in an interview this week that senior members of the Department of Justice considered removing President Trump using the 25th Amendment.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee is demanding to know why the panel's Democratic leadership made the "costly" decision this week to hire two prominent anti-Trump consultants to conduct a purportedly impartial investigation of the the White House.

AP News

Published  2 months ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler says he has hired two veteran lawyers and critics of President Donald Trump as his committee begins to investigate the president and his administration.

The hiring of the two prominent lawyers, Barry Berke and Norman Eisen, comes as lawmakers from both parties are pressuring Trump attorney general nominee William Barr to release a full accounting of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe when it’s complete. The new additions to Nadler’s staff could also provide expertise for impeachment proceedings, if Democrats decide at some point to pursue them.

Nadler said in a statement that the panel is determined to “ask critical questions, gather all the information, judiciously assess the evidence, and make sure that the facts are not hidden from the American people.”

He did not mention impeachment, but noted that Trump faces “numerous allegations” of corruption and obstruction.

“His conduct and crude statements threaten the basic legal, ethical and constitutional norms that maintain our democratic institutions,” Nadler said. “Congress has a constitutional duty to be a check and balance against abuses of power when necessary.”

Nadler said Berke and Eisen “have been retained on a consulting basis as special oversight staff” to the committee’s Democratic majority. He said they would consult on matters related to the Department of Justice and Mueller’s Russia probe.

Both men have been high-profile critics of Trump, and they co-authored a Brookings Institution report released last year that laid out a case for his impeachment. The report said “it has become apparent that the president’s pattern of potentially obstructive conduct is much more extensive than we knew.”

Eisen served as a White House counsel for President Barack Obama and has focused on government ethics and corruption as a co-founder of the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Berke is a top trial lawyer and white collar criminal defense lawyer who is based out of New York.

Democrats have been cautious in speaking about impeachment, with most arguing that they want to see the Mueller report before they would even consider such a step. Nadler has called impeachment a “trauma” that should be approached judiciously and with bipartisan support.

Still, he has said he believes Trump has engaged in a pattern of obstruction — one of the issues Mueller is investigating.

“This is a critical time in our nation’s history,” Nadler said in the statement.

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel, criticized the hires and the “sharply partisan op-eds” that Eisen and Berke have written together.

“Looks like Democrats are staffing up for impeachment before Mueller’s report is even out,” Collins said.

Associated Press writer Eric Tucker contributed to this report.

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

Rep. Devin Nunes warned Wednesday the FISC must take action against the people that abused the system or risk "repercussions."

MintPress News

Published  2 months ago

Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has been the subject of bipartisan bullying since she explicitly called out the number one Israeli lobby group, AIPAC.

Diamond & Silk

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker is no one’s puppet. He made this absolutely clear during a House Judiciary Committee when pressed by Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell.

Swalwell, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, questioned Whitaker on the Mueller investigation and whether he would relay a message to President Trump.

According to the Washington Examiner, the Democrat asked Whitaker if he thought Mueller was conflicted, or whether he was running an honest investigation.

Whitaker said he thought Mueller was truthful and not conflicted.

Swalwell then asked Whitaker if he would echo the following line to Trump: “Mr. President, Bob Mueller is honest and not conflicted.”

“Congressman, I am not a puppet to repeat what you’re saying,” Whitaker responded. “I have answered your question as to what I believe about the special counsel.”

Whitaker then gestured to the House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold “Jerry” Nadler who said Swalwell was out of time.

Swalwell retorted that Whitaker did not answer the question and that he still wanted to hear his answer.

Whitaker said he had thought he did answer the question and had nothing further to say.

Check it out:

Here’s more on Whitaker from the Washington Examiner:

Whitaker took over as acting attorney general in November after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced from the position. He previously served as Sessions’ chief of staff.

Since taking over the Justice Department in an acting capacity, Whitaker has come under scrutiny for his past comments about Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

His criticisms of the Russia probe led to calls for him to recuse himself from overseeing the investigation. However, the Justice Department said in December Whitaker would not step aside.

The House Judiciary Committee Hearing included a number of testy exchanges between Whitaker and Democrat lawmakers. The exchanges were called a “pony show” by Republican Congressman Doug Collins.

Check them out:

SARAH PALIN

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker is no one’s puppet. He made this absolutely clear during a House Judiciary Committee when pressed by Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell.

Swalwell, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, questioned Whitaker on the Mueller investigation and whether he would relay a message to President Trump.

According to the Washington Examiner, the Democrat asked Whitaker if he thought Mueller was conflicted, or whether he was running an honest investigation.

Whitaker said he thought Mueller was truthful and not conflicted.

Swalwell then asked Whitaker if he would echo the following line to Trump: “Mr. President, Bob Mueller is honest and not conflicted.”

“Congressman, I am not a puppet to repeat what you’re saying,” Whitaker responded. “I have answered your question as to what I believe about the special counsel.”

Whitaker then gestured to the House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold “Jerry” Nadler who said Swalwell was out of time.

Swalwell retorted that Whitaker did not answer the question and that he still wanted to hear his answer.

Whitaker said he had thought he did answer the question and had nothing further to say.

Check it out:

Here’s more on Whitaker from the Washington Examiner:

Whitaker took over as acting attorney general in November after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced from the position. He previously served as Sessions’ chief of staff.

Since taking over the Justice Department in an acting capacity, Whitaker has come under scrutiny for his past comments about Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

His criticisms of the Russia probe led to calls for him to recuse himself from overseeing the investigation. However, the Justice Department said in December Whitaker would not step aside.

The House Judiciary Committee Hearing included a number of testy exchanges between Whitaker and Democrat lawmakers. The exchanges were called a “pony show” by Republican Congressman Doug Collins.

Check them out:

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

House Dems and Whitaker faced off Friday during a contentious six-hearing hearing focused primarily on the special counsel investigation. 

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

Today’s ongoing House Judiciary Committee hearing for Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker was slammed as “pointless” and a form of “character assassination” by ranking GOP member Doug Collins (GA).

“This hearing is a character assassination on Acting Attorney General Whitaker, all pure political theater, to go after the president,” said Collins in his opening statement.

The congressman pointed out that Whitaker’s tenure was coming to a close. “By next Thursday, Bill Barr will be attorney general,” said Collins. “This gentleman is finishing up his term as acting attorney general.”

The congressman who then asked the committee to vote to abruptly end the hearing. The committee proceeded to vote, however the measure did not pass and the hearing went on as planned.

“The hearing follows an intense back and forth between the Justice Department and the Judiciary Committee a day earlier.

The Judiciary Committee voted Thursday to give [chairman Jerrold] Nadler the authority to issue a subpoena if necessary, despite Whitaker having already agreed to appear before the panel voluntarily.

Nadler made clear early Thursday that he did not want to have to subpoena Whitaker, but said a “series of troubling events” suggested it would be better for him to be prepared with that authority, just in case he decided not to show up for the hearing.

But Whitaker then warned he would not show up unless lawmakers dropped the threat.”

Whitaker wrote Nadler, “Consistent with longstanding practice, I remain willing to appear to testify tomorrow, provided that the Chairman assures me that the Committee will not issue a subpoena today or tomorrow and that the Committee will engage in good faith negotiations before taking such a step down the road.”

Nadler responded hours later, writing if Whitaker was “prepared to respond to questions from our members, then I assure you there will be no need for the committee to issue a subpoena on or before February 8.”

Watch Collins’ opening statement below:

For the full story, click HERE.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker silenced House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., on Friday during a heated exchange that led to several people in the room laughing and gasping. During his appearance before the House

The Federalist

Published  2 months ago

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee refused to allow Rep. Steve Scalise, a target and victim of gun violence, to give testimony in Wednesday’s hearing on gun control. Scalise nearly lost his life in the congressional baseball practice shooting less than two years ago.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said the “Hearing on Preventing Gun Violence in America” planned to “hear from a broad array of witnesses, representing diverse perspectives on the issue of gun violence.” But when the ranking Republican Rep. Doug Collins asked if Scalise could give his testimony in the hearing, Democrats said no.

Nadler said majority members denied Scalise’s testimony because they had too many members who wanted to testify.

“The uniqueness of Mr. Scalise’s testimony, being denied this voice is a tragic for all who attend…and just because he probably disagrees with the majority should not have been a reason to keep him out,” Collins responded.

In his opening statement, Nadler said other witnesses in the hearing would, “Educate us on the scope of the problem, and they will inform our consideration of various legislative options, so that we may—at last—take real action to address this crisis.”

Despite being nearly fatally wounded and undergoing the trauma of gun violence himself, Scalise is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment.

“It was people with guns who saved my life and so many others that morning in June 2017,” Scalise told Fox News. “[Democrats’] answer to gun violence is to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. Frankly, they ought to be focusing on punishing the criminals.”

In full testimony Scalise planned to give, which you can read here, he explains how the legislation Democrats are considering would not have prevented his shooting or any number of recent mass shootings.

“H.R. 8 would not deter a criminal from engaging in criminal activity, and it won’t decrease gun crime,” Scalise wrote. “Instead, it only succeeds in limiting the ways that law-abiding citizens could exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Madeline is a staff writer at the Federalist and the producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Follow her on Twitter.

Sponsored Links

Breathe Green Co.WAIT! - Did You Complete Your Breathe Green Order? - If not you can get an EXTRA 10% off today. Simply click here and the discount will be automatically applied!Breathe Green Co.

Ultimate Pet NutritionIf Your Dog Eats Grass (Do This Everyday)Ultimate Pet Nutrition

Blood Sugar Stabilizer | SupplementDiabetes Discovery That is Leaving Doctors Speechless (Try It Tonight)Blood Sugar Stabilizer | Supplement

Revitalizing Hair TherapyHair Doctor Reveals How To Fix Thinning HairRevitalizing Hair Therapy

Car Accident Attorney | Search AdsCheck Out The Most Successful Car Accident Attorneys in San FranciscoCar Accident Attorney | Search Ads

Vikings: Free Online GamePlay This for 1 Minute and See Why Everyone Is AddictedVikings: Free Online Game

WayneDupree.com

Published  2 months ago

Doug Collins, ranking member, bashed Democratic colleagues for trying to mislead others

The Washington Times

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matthew G. Whitaker testified before the House Judiciary Committee Friday — and pulled no punches in fending off Democratic queries.

After telling the committee he had not spoken with President Trump or senior White House officials about special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, Chairman Jerrold Nadler, New York Democrat, was incredulous.

After a lengthy, contentious exchange, Mr. Whitaker finally replied: “Mr. Chairman, your five minutes are up.”

SEE ALSO: AG Whitaker snipes at Dems, denies interfering with Mueller probe

The chamber erupted with laughter to Mr. Whitaker’s response.

Here is what led to that back-and-forth: Mr. Nadler asked Mr. Whitaker if he had been briefed on the Mueller probe after his decision not to recuse himself from overseeing the investigation. Mr. Whitaker repeatedly pressed the lawmaker to explain his basis for the question.

“You are asking me a question as to your understanding, are you going to tell me where —,” Whitaker said before being interrupted by Mr. Nadler.

“I’m not going to tell you,” Mr. Nadler shot back. “Just tell me if it is correct or not. It is a simple question.”

Mr. Whitaker responded, “If every member today asked questions based on their speculation —,” before being interrupted a second time by Mr. Nadler.

The acting attorney general remained evasive, saying he would not talk about his private conversations with the president and adding he had not spoken with Mr. Trump or any other senior White House official about the Mueller probe.

Mr. Whitaker had signaled to lawmakers ahead of the hearing that he would not talk about his conversations with Mr. Trump.

The committee’s top Republican, Rep. Doug Collins, Georgia, blasted Mr. Nadler for holding the hearing, calling it “nothing more than character assassination.”

Mr. Collins also called the hearing “pointless,” noting that by this time next week, Mr. Trump’s pick for attorney general, William Barr, will be leading the department, not Mr. Whitaker.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

A House hearing for Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker erupted in fireworks Friday morning, as the top Republican on the judiciary committee accused Democratic Chairman Jerrold Nadler of “character assassination” against the temporary head of the Justice Department and called the hearing a pointless “dog and pony show.”

“This hearing is a character assassination on Acting Attorney General Whitaker, all pure political theater, to go after the president,” Ranking Member Doug Collins, R-Ga, said in his opening statement while urging the committee to adjourn.

A vote was then taken on whether to abruptly end the hearing. The measure did not pass, and the hearing began as scheduled, with Whitaker addressing the issue Democrats are most interested in: his oversight of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.

In his opening statement, he said he never offered "promises or commitments" regarding the Mueller or any other investigation.

"There has been no change in the overall management of the special counsel investigation," he said.

Whitaker also said he's been briefed and the probe and, during a tense exchange with Nadler, said he has not discussed the status with President Trump or senior White House officials.

The hearing follows an intense back and forth between the Justice Department and the Judiciary Committee a day earlier.

The Judiciary Committee voted Thursday to give Nadler the authority to issue a subpoena if necessary, despite Whitaker having already agreed to appear before the panel voluntarily.

Nadler made clear early Thursday that he did not want to have to subpoena Whitaker, but said a “series of troubling events” suggested it would be better for him to be prepared with that authority, just in case he decided not to show up for the hearing.

But Whitaker then warned he would not show up unless lawmakers dropped the threat.

“Consistent with longstanding practice, I remain willing to appear to testify tomorrow, provided that the Chairman assures me that the Committee will not issue a subpoena today or tomorrow, and that the Committee will engage in good faith negotiations before taking such a step down the road,” Whitaker wrote to Nadler.

Hours later, Nadler responded that if Whitaker appeared before the panel “prepared to respond to questions from our members, then I assure you there will be no need for the committee to issue a subpoena on or before February 8.”

Whitaker accepted the assurances and testified Friday.

The hearing Friday comes as the Senate is close to confirming President Trump’s nominee for attorney general, William Barr. The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday voted, along party lines, to advance Barr’s nomination to the full Senate for confirmation.

The president fired his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, the day after the 2018 midterm elections. Prior to Whitaker’s appointment as acting attorney general, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein oversaw the Russia investigation.

Nadler and other Democrats have criticized Whitaker for not recusing himself from the Mueller probe, as Sessions did due to his involvement with the Trump campaign in 2016, as Whitaker had made public comments criticizing the investigation.

The hearing is the committee’s first major oversight hearing looking at the Justice Department of this Congress. Whitaker told reporters last week that Mueller’s probe was “close to being completed,” the first official sign that the investigation may be nearing an end. His comments, though, were a departure for the Justice Department, which rarely comments on the status of investigations. Whitaker, though, said he had been “fully briefed” on the probe.

Fox News' Jake Gibson and Gregg Re contributed to this report.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker delegated time to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler on Friday while he was testifying in front of the committee, and the exchange drew a reaction.

“Mr. Chairman, I see that your five minutes is up,” Whitaker told Nadler during a contentious round of questioning regarding his involvement with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling.

“I’m here voluntarily,” Whitaker continued. “We’ve agreed to five-minute rounds.”

After an uproar ensued among the crowd, Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, the Republican ranking member of the House Judiciary, recommended that the committee take a break from further questioning. (RELATED: Matthew Whitaker: ‘Deeply Concerning’ Than CNN Was At Roger Stone Raid)

“I will point out that we didn’t enforce the five-minute rule on acting attorney general Whitaker,” Nadler responded and demanded that he answer if he “asked to approve any requests or action” for the special counsel.

President Donald Trump appointed Whitaker to serve as the acting attorney general after former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced to resign. With the elevation, Whitaker assumed control of oversight of the Mueller’s probe.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

President Trump on Saturday blasted “vicious” Democrats for their conduct during a House Judiciary Committee hearing a day earlier that featured Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker -- and saw fiery exchanges between Whitaker and House Democrats.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Shooting survivor and U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) says the Democrats refused his request to testify against the gun control currently being pushed in the House.

Steve Scalise says Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) asked Democrats to let Scalise give testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and they told him no.

Fox News reports that Scalise decided to make public the testimony he would have given, testimony that explains why universal background checks will not reduce gun violence or make Americans safer.

Scalise referenced the June 14, 2017, Congressional baseball shooting in which he was nearly killed. He noted that the gunman acquired his guns via background checks, just as nearly every mass shooter of the 21st century has done. Because of this means of acquisition, Scalise notes that universal background checks would not have stopped the shooting from taking place.

The same can be said about the November 5, 2009, Fort Hood shooting; the July 20, 2012, Aurora movie theater shooting; the May 23, 2014, Santa Barbara shooting; the October 1, 2015, Umpqua Community College shooting; the June 12, 2016, Orlando Pulse shooting; the October 1, 2017, Las Vegas shooting; and the February 14, 2018, Parkland high school shooting, to name but a few. In each of these crimes, the guns used were acquired via background checks.

Would-be mass shooters can pass background checks because they have no criminal record. They have criminal intent, but background checks look backward not forward.

As for career criminals, they do not shop for guns in a retail store. Rather, they buy them on the black market or steal them. Scalise pointed out that “a DOJ study of federal inmates found that only seven percent who possessed a firearm while committing the crime they were serving time for purchased it legally from a firearms dealer under their own name.”

Again, universal background checks would do nothing to deter such criminals because they are avoiding the places where such checks would be conducted.

Scalise wrote, “I firmly believe we must never forget, nor minimize, the importance of the Second Amendment to our Constitution. H.R. 8, as well as other new gun control legislation currently being considered by the House Democrat majority, do not accomplish the goal of reducing gun violence.”

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

House Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., said Wednesday that Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee refused to let him testify at a hearing on gun violence about his experience as a victim of a congressional baseball practice shooting two years ago. The move infuriated his fellow Republicans.

Scalise told Fox News that he found out over the weekend that Democrats had chosen not to allow hiis testimony at the hearing --“Preventing Gun Violence: A Call to Action” --, something he said is a courtesy traditionally extended to any lawmaker who wishes to speak.

SCALISE: DEMOCRATS DON'T WANT YOU TO HEAR WHAT I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT GUNS AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT

“I thought it outrageous that they want to try to silence this message, because in the end I’m still going to get my message out. They can’t silence this issue,” he said.

Scalise was shot and injured in June 2017. But despite his experience and perspective, he said that committee Democrats said he would not able to testify -- although he could submit written testimony for the record, which he did.

“I was surprised, because it’s unprecedented,” he said. “In the past, when we were in charge on the Republican side, if the Democrats selected among one of their witnesses to be a sitting member of Congress, we always gave them the courtesy of testifying in a proper setting, and we were asking for that same courtesy -- and they denied it.”

A spokesman for the House Judiciary Democrats told Fox News that there were multiple members on both sides who wanted to be witnesses, and Republicans were given two of the eight slots on the panel -- and did not choose Scalise as one of their two designees. But Scalise’s office said there is a standard practice of having an extra member panel for those who are experts or who have experience of the topic, which was not allowed by Democrats in this case.

At the hearing itself on Wednesday, the decision led to a back-and-forth between Republican ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga., and Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., who said that due to the number of members who wanted to speak, it was decided that no members would be allowed to testify in order to save time.

“It’s a debatable decision,” Nadler said. “We decided that, rather than hear from a lot of our colleagues who have other opportunities to address this issue in Congress, we’d rather hear from the witnesses.”

Collins pushed back: “The uniqueness of Mr. Scalise’s testimony being denied this voice is tragic for all who attend and all who have been a part of that, especially from his perspective as a lawmaker who will be voting on and working with this issue, and just because he probably disagrees with the majority is no reason to keep him out.”

“He wasn’t denied because he disagrees,” Nadler later said. “Majority members, we decided we needed to have a hard and fast rule today or we’d be here all day with members.”

In his submitted written testimony, Scalise says he applauds the intent to pursue a reduction in gun violence, but that he does not support new gun control restrictions being considered in the hearing, and that the focus should be on stopping criminals instead. He argued that the measures proposed in legislation to ramp up background checks (known as H.R. 8) would not have prevented any recent mass shootings, nor would it have halted the gunman who shot him.

“Instead, whether intentionally or not, the gun control proposals in H.R. 8 could turn law-abiding citizens into criminals while also failing to achieve the stated purpose of reducing gun violence,” he said.

Gun control has long been a sensitive issue where Republicans and Democrats have struggled to find common ground. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, said on Tuesday after President Trump’s State of the Union address that she was “saddened” that Trump did not mention gun violence.

“The president talked about security in so many ways and he totally ignored the gun violence epidemic in our country,” she said.

Scalise told Fox News that Democrats' decision to deny him a platform was a bad start for House Democrats going forward on hot-button issues.

“It’s not a good way for the Democrats to start their new majority by trying to suppress opposing viewpoints and there are going to be a lot of controversial issues that go before the Judiciary Committee in the next two years,” he said. “If they start to run it like a kangaroo court, it's going to really hurt their credibility and ultimately show that they’re not about getting facts out, they're just trying to promote a leftist agenda, and that would be a mistake on their part.”

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing Wednesday on new gun control legislation Democrats plan to push on the American people. Democrats would not allow me to speak. Here's the testimony I planned to give.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

After a tense back-and-forth between congressional Democrats and the Justice Department, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler announced Thursday evening that Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, likely in his final days as the country's chief law enforcement officer, will appear Friday as scheduled before the panel.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Congressional Democrats are using their guest lists for the State of the Union address on Tuesday to score political points against President Trump on immigration, the government shutdown and more. 

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Congressional Democrats are using their guest lists for the State of the Union address on Tuesday to score political points against President Trump on immigration, the government shutdown and more. 

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham has a few questions for the FBI about the arrest of Roger Stone. For example, wasn't it curious that CNN was on the scene of the arrest? Here's the bulk of

mcclatchydc

Published  2 months ago

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell voiced concerns Tuesday about Democratic-led efforts to bolster the nation’s voting rights laws

americanthinker

Published  3 months ago

More information is supporting the theory that the current big Justice Department "investigations" are actually functioning as big cover-up operations. Robert Mueller's team is effectively hiding key evidence related to serious crimes committed by government officials. Mueller has nearly complete control over what the public or any investigator can see. He has control over what witnesses can talk about.

This means that the Huber and Horowitz investigations exist to make you think something is being investigated when it is not. That is why Representatives Doug Collins, Mark Meadows, and Jim Jordan sent a letter to Huber, the U.S. attorney, this week that essentially exposes the fraud.

The letter begins, "We write to request an update on the progress of your review of irregularities involved with the Department of Justice's (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) actions during 2016 and 2017[.]" The letter then points to facts that indicate that there has been no real investigation. None of the many key witnesses has been interviewed. Huber refused to testify at a recent congressional hearing about the Clinton Foundation. The letter then asks for information in four areas where Huber cannot reply without further demonstrating that this is a fake investigation.

There is also mounting evidence that hiding facts is common in deep state political crusades. A recent column by Marty Watters and Lee Cary exposes Mueller's long history of improperly hiding evidence. The column begins, "During his twelve-year reign as FBI Director, Robert Mueller not only protected his criminal friends by silencing those who could expose their bad acts, he projected his friends' crimes onto others."

One example cited is the case of William Campbell, who infiltrated Russia's State Nuclear Energy Corporation, Rosatom, for the FBI. Over a period of eight years, he documented the bribery and money-laundering involved in Russia's effort to get access to U.S. uranium assets. Massive donations were made to the Clinton Foundation, and absurdly high speaking fees were given to Bill Clinton by those who planned to profit from the deal.

The reason you have not heard Campbell's story is that FBI director Mueller forbade him to go public. Attorney General Loretta Lynch threatened Campbell with jail if he told the truth. The truth was hidden, and the deal went through.

You will remember the case of Valerie Plame, where a special counsel was empowered to find out who "outed" supposed covert agent Plame. It was known early in this politically motivated investigation that the chosen target, Dick Cheney's top aide, Scooter Libby, was not the person who had leaked Plames name. There were two earlier leakers whom Mueller's FBI knew about. But the special counsel did not want to let a good investigation go to waste, so he prolonged it for maximum political effect. Sound familiar?

We know that the person who leaked Plame's name to Robert Novak was Richard Armitage. The Watters-Cary column added a new twist to the story by introducing an earlier leaker, who was hidden by Mueller. An FBI employee, Sibel Edmonds, did not like the extensive illegal surveillance she was witnessing. She wanted to expose the criminal actions of the FBI. Director Mueller intervened on two occasions to silence her. Some of the information from the surveillance related to Plame. Watters and Cary write:

One of the "secrets" that Mueller did not want Edmonds to expose was that the FBI has a 2001 recording of Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman outing Plame's identity as a CIA employee to a Turkish diplomat. This was long before Richard Armitage claimed he "accidently" [sic] outed Plame to Robert Novak.

Silencing Edmonds enabled Mueller to position his protégé, Deputy Attorney General James Comey, to eventually appoint their mutual, close friend, U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, as the Special Counsel tasked to discover who leaked Plame's identity as a CIA employee. Everyone with a need to know already knew the original leaker was Grossman. But the public didn't need to know, and so the spin-up to the lengthy Plamegate puppet show began.

Scott Johnson of Powerline has three posts about "Mueller's Cone of Silence" that relate to Mueller attempting to hide evidence in his Russian troll case. In February of last year, Mueller indicted Russian social media actors (some of whom do not even exist) for some trivial actions not aimed at any particular candidate. The apparent purpose of the indictment was to feed the Trump-Russia collusion fable by creating news stories containing the word "Russia." Mueller surely had no expectation that the Russians would answer the charges, but Concord Management did just that.

Concord's attorney has asked to see the evidence against its people. Mueller has essentially told the judge that the evidence is "sensitive," and he doesn't want to show it. Openly telling the defendant he can't see the evidence is one step more brazen than simply hiding the evidence. The Concord attorney responded this way in his motion to Judge Dabney Friedrich:

In this first-of-its-kind prosecution of a make-believe crime, the Office of Special Counsel maintains that it can unilaterally – and for secret reasons disclosed only to the Court – categorize millions of pages of non-classified documents as "sensitive," and prohibit defense counsel from sharing this information with Defendant[.]

It is interesting that Judge Friedrich is married to Matthew Friedrich, who is tied directly to Mueller in some well documented cases of hiding evidence from defendants. Sidney Powell's great book, Licensed to Lie, describes the extreme corruption of Mueller's prosecutors in the cases of Ted Stevens, Merrill Lynch, and Enron. Evidence was hidden in these cases on a grand scale. Later, after the damage was done, higher courts overturned verdicts and strongly rebuked the dishonest prosecutors.

In 2014, Sidney Powell wrote a column about what Eric Holder had done to four of the corrupt and discredited prosecutors described in Powell's book. Holder did the same thing that our current "dirty cops" expected from President Hillary Clinton. Holder "honored, promoted and protected" them.

Matthew Friedrich was one of the four, and Andrew Weissmann was another. Matthew Friedrich "personally told the jury facts that were directly refuted by [evidence he withheld][.] ... Mr. Friedrich rushed the indictment of Senator Stevens and micromanaged that corrupted prosecution, which cost the citizens of Alaska their senior Senator, changed the balance of power in the Senate, and facilitated the enactment of Obamacare. "

Judge Friedrich is a Trump appointee. Her rulings so far indicate that she may be just as effective for Trump as Jeff Sessions was.

Look at the big picture. Those in power regularly hide evidence of their crimes and get away with it. From Lois Lerner to Hillary Clinton to Strzok and Page, the dreaded "glitch" eats the most important evidence. From "Fast and Furious" to Benghazi to Comey's fake investigation of Hillary to Rosenstein's stonewalling to Mueller's "insurance policy" cover-up, hiding the facts is the primary goal.

Joseph Stalin is quoted as saying, "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." It is also true that the actual evidence decides nothing. The people who control the evidence decide everything.

Image: James Ledbetter via Flickr.

Dan Bongino

Published  3 months ago

Republicans from the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees are demanding an update from the U.S. attorney appointed to investigate allegations of wrongdoing and surveillance abuse in the FBI and DOJ. The congressmen claim the attorney has yet to interview a number of key witnesses.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) and Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) sent a letter to U.S. attorney for Utah John Huber and told him they were “surprised” many witnesses have yet to hear from the attorney, despite the ongoing investigation lasting over nine months.

“Your investigation has been ongoing for over nine months,” the Congressmen write. “During the course of our extensive investigation we have interviewed more than a dozen current and former DOJ and FBI personnel, and were surprised to hear none of these potentially informative witnesses testified to speaking with you.”

They continue, “Further, last month, then-chairman Mark Meadows invited you to testify as a witness at the Subcommittee on Government Operations’ hearing ‘Oversight of Nonprofit Organizations: A Case Study on the Clinton Foundation.’ We were disappointed to learn from the department that you were not enthusiastic about testifying when declining the invitation.”

The Congressmen gave Huber a deadline of January 21 to provide a response to the following inquiries:

“1) The total number of witnesses you have interviewed, including names of specific individuals where possible, and the number of witnesses remaining to be interviewed;

2)The total number of FISA applications reviewed;

3)The total number of documents reviewed, including their substance and format (e.g. emails, meeting notes, phone logs, etc); and

4)A description and account of your coordination with DOJ IG Michael Horowitz”

In March 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Huber to investigate whether or not the FBI abused its powers when obtaining a FISA warrant on former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page.

The lack of communication and updates from Huber has been frustrating Republican members for months.

In October 2018, both Meadows and Jordan spoke to the Washington Times where they expressed their disappointment in the U.S. attorney.

“I would just like to know what he’s doing. I’ll take anything. All I know is that we haven’t heard a single thing about what he’s doing,” said Jordan.

Meadows said, “I have not seen a lot of evidence that Mr. Huber has done anything other than be appointed by Jeff Sessions. It’s been portrayed that he’s making great progress, but I’m not sure there is a whole lot to show for it other than rhetoric right now. I’m not aware of any substantial work that he’s doing.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  4 months ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft Bruce Ohr, the corrupt US attorney at the top of the Department of Justice, was caught lying in his testimony to Congress.  He consistently denied that he knew what his wife Nellie was up to related to the Russia witchhunt.  This was a lie! In December 2017 the head of […]

TheHill

Published  4 months ago

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) abruptly stepped aside on Thursday to allow his House Freedom Caucus ally, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), to run uncontested for the ranking member role on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee -- a position that he won.

Jordan, who won the race with no other competitors to challenge him, is expected to be a fierce defender of President Trump when Democrats take control of the panel next Congress. They are expected to become involved in a series of investigations into the Trump administration.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and two GOP lawmakers on the steering committee confirmed that Jordan won.

"The steering committee unanimously selected Jim Jordan to be our next ranking member. And I think he's going to do a great job and thought that it was a good move by the committee," Scalise told The Hill. "You never know what good things will happen along the way in these interviews."

The move is a stunning turn of events amid buzz that Meadows was vying uncontested for the role in the lead up to the steering committee vote.

Meadows arrived to the steering committee carrying a binder, which likely contained a layout of his vision for the panel. And part way into the meeting, Jordan entered the closed door meeting.

Jordan then confirmed to reporters that Meadows had pulled out of the race and that he had declared his interest.

"I just talked to them about the OGR ranking member position. The committee is discussing what they are going to do," Jordan told reporters. "I just went in and told them I am interested in the position."

When asked if Meadows was running, Jordan replied: "No, he is not."

Meadows at the time, however, declined to say that he was not running.

Jordan, the senior-most member on the Oversight committee, dropped out of the race for the House Judiciary Committee amid concerns he would not make it through the steering committee.

But by running in this particular race for Oversight, Jordan didn’t face the stiff competition he would’ve had if he chose to run for Judiciary, in which Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) -- who won there -- already appeared to be the clear favorite among GOP leadership and the steering committee.

Leading up to the steering committee vote on Oversight, it appeared Meadows was a shoo-in.

Members of the House Freedom Caucus — who have earned a reputation for being a thorn in leadership’s side — have faced an uphill battle in securing chairmanships. The group of hardline conservatives has long been pushing for better committee assignments and top positions on panels.

Fox News

Published  5 months ago

President Trump’s announcement Wednesday that he will support a bipartisan prison reform bill shows he wants to make deals with Democrats after they take control of the U.S. House in January so he can continue his record of achievement on behalf of the American people.

Fox News

Published  5 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker stunned onlookers and lawmakers during an already-contentious House hearing Friday, when he tried to call time on the Democratic chairman after yet another line of questioning regarding Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe. 

dailycaller

Published  9 months ago

Anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok told Congress on Thursday that he still has a top secret security clearance, in contradiction with a claim made in June by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

“You currently have what classification?” Strzok was asked by Georgia Republican Rep. Doug Collins during a joint hearing of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.

“I have a top secret clearance with some SCI compartments,” replied Strzok, the former deputy director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division. “SCI” is an acronym for highly classified materials known as Sensitive Compartmented Information. (RELATED: Sessions Claims That Peter Strzok Lost Security Clearance)

Strzok’s statement is a surprise of sorts given comments that Sessions made during a June 21 interview with conservative radio host Howie Carr.

“Mr. Strzok, as I understand, has lost his security clearance,” Sessions said.

Strzok was escorted out of FBI headquarters on June 15, a day after the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General referred him to the FBI for a disciplinary review over his Trump text messages.

Strzok was the FBI’s top investigator on the probe into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government. During that time, he spoke critically of Trump, calling the Republican an “idiot” and mocking his supporters.

He was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team in July 2017 after the discovery of his text exchanges. He currently works in the FBI’s human resources division.

The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment on the discrepancy between Strzok and Sessions’s statements.

100PercentFedUp.com

Published  1 year ago

dailycaller

Published  1 year ago

House Democrats just passed some of the most sweeping and sneaky anti-Second Amendment legislation in decades.

H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, and H.R. 1112, the Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019, are two Trojan horse bills that seek to impose onerous restrictions on gun sales under the pretense of preventing dangerous criminals from obtaining firearms.

National gun registries, endless background screenings, and prohibitive wait times are what these bills are all about. They represent a concerted effort to discourage Americans from buying, selling, or owning a firearm.

While neither of these bills would do anything to stop gun violence, they would make it almost impossible for law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment liberties freely by entangling them in a web of bureaucracy.

H.R. 8, which was the first bill passed by the House, would impose so-called “universal” background checks on gun sales and transfers, but that’s only a facade. What the legislation really aims to do is impose complex and burdensome restrictions on what law-abiding gun owners can do with their property.

While there are many dangerous ramifications to this bill, at its core, it would criminalize private sales and transfers that occur without direct government oversight and regulation. Virtually any sale of a firearm from one American to another would become illegal without first completing a background check, and even transfers of firearms between family members and friends would be subject to complex rules that could cause even diligent gun owners to inadvertently run afoul of the law.

Currently, private gun owners are not required to identify themselves to the federal government — an important protection against a national gun registry that H.R. 8 would severely weaken.

H.R. 8 is only step one of the Democrats elaborate plan, though. H.R. 1112 is even sneakier than its sister bill, making it possible for the government to prevent law-abiding citizens from purchasing a gun even if they pass a background check.

Current law allows the FBI three days to complete a background check on someone purchasing a firearm from a registered dealer, a provision designed to protect your Second Amendment right from bureaucratic slow-walking.

The new legislation would give the FBI up to 10 business days to conduct a background check, but would require the would-be purchaser to file a petition if the timeline is not met, at which point the FBI would have an additional 10 business days to act upon the petition. As Georgia Rep. Doug Collins pointed out on the House floor, however, this timeline can stretch beyond the window of 30 calendar days during which the original background check is valid, forcing the purchaser to start the whole process over again.

H.R. 1112 removes the incentive for FBI agents to complete background checks in a timely manner, threatening to put American gun buyers into a perpetual loop of wait lines that never end.

Given that 7,043,975 background checks were performed in 2018 — or nearly 20,000 per day — one can just imagine the backlog that would ensue if authorities had so much leeway to restrict sales.

We’ve already seen how bureaucrats can abuse such discretion for political purposes, such as when IRS employees targeted conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status with unnecessary delays.

Keep in mind, neither H.R. 8 nor H.R. 1112 would have any effect on criminals looking to do wrong, because criminals don’t go to the FBI seeking permission before buying a gun. As the Obama administration noted in a 2013 memo, the overwhelming majority of criminals who acquire firearms do so either through straw purchasers or by stealing — both of which are already illegal.

Moreover, background checks aren’t even a reliable way of preventing deranged individuals from obtaining firearms, since they can’t predict a person’s future actions. Parkland, Florida shooter Nikolas Cruz, for instance, passed a background check that allowed him to buy the gun he used to massacre 17 people.

Fortunately, Senate Republicans are certain to reject both bills, and President Trump has already vowed to veto them if they somehow reach his desk.

Still, the Democrats’ sneaky effort to undermine the Second Amendment offers a chilling preview of the agenda they would advance if they ever get control of two branches of the federal government again.

Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) is executive vice president at The Trump Organization.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.

Breitbart

Published  1 year ago

President Donald Trump invited members of Congress for lunch on Tuesday, but House Democrats turned down the invitation.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders criticized Democrats for refusing to work on a deal to end the partial government shutdown and fund border security.

“The President looks forward to having a working lunch with House Republicans to solve the border crisis and reopen the government,” Sanders wrote in a statement to reporters. “It’s time for the Democrats to come to the table and make a deal.”

The White House had hoped that more moderate Democrats would be willing to at least talk to the president about a bi-partisan solution.

Sanders confirmed that Trump had proposed a deal that would fund additional technology to screen ports of entry, allow minors to seek asylum in their home country, and fund a physical barrier of steel on the southern border instead of concrete.

“As Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi refuse to negotiate, President Donald J. Trump and his team are working hard to find solutions to solve the humanitarian and national security crisis at the border and reopen the government,” she wrote.

Reps. Susan Brooks (R-IN), Rodney Davis (R-IL), Doug Collins (R-GA), John Katko (R-NY), Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-TX), Van Taylor (R-TX), Anthony Gonzalez (R-OH) and Clay Higgins (R-LA) were on the White House guest list.

The White House did not reveal the lunch menu. On Monday, President Trump personally paid caterers to bring fast food to the White House for the Clemson football team to celebrate their national college championship victory.

Fox News

Published  2 years ago

President Donald Trump and his son-in-law scored a legislative victory Tuesday after the House overwhelmingly approved a prison reform bill that aims to help ex-convicts rebuild their lives after their release from prison.

The so-called First Step Act was authored by Reps. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Doug Collins, R-Ga., who also worked closely with the White House -- particularly Jared Kushner, Trump’s senior adviser, who advocated for the reform after witnessing how his father, Charles Kushner, was treated in prison.

The act would provide $250 million over five years to expand and support programs that reduce reoffending rates and encourage good behavior, the New York Post reported.

It would also require prisoners to be housed within 500 miles from their relatives and prohibit prisons from shackling pregnant women. Some prisoners would also be allowed to spend more of their sentences in a halfway house or home confinement.

“President Trump promised to fight for the forgotten men and women of this country — and that includes those in prison.”

- Jared Kushner, White House senior adviser

“President Trump promised to fight for the forgotten men and women of this country — and that includes those in prison,” Kushner wrote in the Wall Street Journal last month.

“America is a nation that believes in the power of redemption,” Trump said Friday at a prison reform summit at the White House. “America is a nation that believes in second chances, and third chances, in some cases. And, I don’t know, I guess even fourth chances.”

The reform effort earned support from multiple diverse groups, including Dream Corps’ #cut50 initiative – a movement led by CNN analyst Van Jones, a longtime critic of Trump, Mother Jones magazine reported.

But Jones’ support for the bill heralded by Kushner came under fire from progressive Democrats who oppose working with the Trump administration. ShareBlue media’s Oliver Willis accused Jones of aiding racism, tweeting: “Van provides window dressing so racist administration can point to their black friend without really doing anything.”

Aiding Donald Trump is aiding racism. And Van Jones is aiding Trump (even worse he did a dog n pony show for Ivanka, Jared, and Rick Perry). It was gross and disgusting. https://t.co/RloxxfFEEv

— Oliver Willis (@owillis) May 23, 2018

“Aiding Donald Trump is aiding racism. And Van Jones is aiding Trump (even worse he did a dog n pony show for Ivanka, Jared, and Rick Perry). It was gross and disgusting,” Willis added in another tweet, prompting mockery for opposing a reform that helps inmates.

Jeffries said his bill would give additional funding to programs that allow inmates to attend vocational and college courses and get help with mental health and substance abuse issues.

“These are individuals who are in the system right now without hope, without opportunity, without a meaningful chance at transforming themselves,” Jeffries said on the House floor. “And the First Step Act will provide that. … Why would we possibly refuse that?”

The bill now moves to the Senate where it will face a tough battle as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he wants any prison reform linked to sentencing reforms as well.

->