• The Sietch will be brought offline for HPG systems maintenance tomorrow (Thursday, 2 May 2024). Please remain calm and do not start any interstellar wars while ComStar is busy. May the Peace of Blake be with you. Precentor Dune

United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread

DarthOne

☦️
Majority Of Americans Say Biden Has Gone Too Far Prosecuting Political Opponents: Poll



A majority of Americans believe the Biden administration has gone too far in its effort to prosecute political opponents, according to a new poll out Tuesday.

The survey, conducted by the Trafalgar Group for the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC), a conservative interest group for people aged 50 and older, found that more than 51 percent of 1,078 likely voters surveyed “believe the Biden administration has crossed an important ethical line in pursuing political opponents.” Just 41 percent rejected the statement.


“Among the respondents who answered ‘Yes’ and said the Biden administration had crossed an important ethical line were a staggering 74.2 percent of Latino voters,” AMAC reported, “many of whom have family roots in countries where political and religious persecution is the norm.”

The results of the survey conducted Sept. 21-26 mirror the findings of an earlier poll from the Trafalgar Group in August. A plurality of independents said the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI were “too political, corrupt, and not to be trusted.” More than half of Hispanics surveyed, or 55 percent, in the poll of 1,092 likely voters — a similar sample size to the group’s poll out Tuesday — said they believed the DOJ’s investigation of former President Donald Trump is politically motivated.

Both polls came in the aftermath of the FBI’s unprecedented raid of the former president’s Florida residence by roughly 30 agents in early August. A federal magistrate judge signed off on the search, ostensibly regarding potential violations of the Presidential Records Act, but it possesses all the hallmarks of the routine witch hunt operations used to go after Trump from within the agency for the past six years.

Days after the raid, Attorney General Merrick Garland professed in a press conference that he had personally signed off on it. The raid, Garland said at the time, was “narrowly scope[d],” though an examination of the warrant shows authorization to confiscate any and all documents Trump may have come into contact with as president.

In 2017, Trump revoked Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court after the new president was sworn into office. Justice Neil Gorsuch was appointed instead.

Last week, the FBI raided the home of a Tennessee pro-life activist and charged 10 more defendants over protests at an abortion facility. Nationwide firebombings at pro-life centers, on the other hand, have yet to result in similar prosecution.

“It took a month and a half and a pressure campaign from concerned congressional leaders and senators to get the FBI to even say it was ‘investigating’ these attacks,” reported The Federalist’s Elle Purnell.


The pair of surveys both contradict Democrats’ hysterical claims that Republicans are an existential threat to Democracy itself, while Democrats, meanwhile, explicitly weaponize the levers of law enforcement against their political opponents. President Joe Biden embraced the popular left-wing talking point as the theme of his opening message for the fall midterms while flanked by Marines in front of Independence Hall in what appeared as a hell-like landscape.


Oh well, it'll be nice to know that when the Feds start kicking down doors on trumped-up charges that my fellow Americans will think Biden's 'going too far' :p
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
I'm inclined to agree with @Proxy 404. A random conservative interest group's survey isn't reliable enough to draw real conclusions, it's too easy to manipulate survey data.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Judge dismisses case over FBI raid of 1,400 private safe-deposit boxes and seizure of millions in jewelry and cash


  • A judge has ruled the March 2021 FBI raid of US Private Vaults did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
  • Deposit-box holders whose property was seized in the raid and has not been returned sued the bureau.
  • A lawyer involved in the class action said the raid was the "largest armed robbery in US history."

A judge ruled on September 29 that federal agents who raided 1,400 safe-deposit boxes in March 2021 at a private vault company did not violate search and seizure laws, court documents shared with Insider show.

A lawsuit filed in August alleged the FBI and the US attorney's office in Los Angeles obtained warrants against US Private Vaults in Beverly Hills, California, by concealing critical details from the judge who approved them.

In his ruling, District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner found no impropriety in the way the government got or executed the warrants for the raid. He dismissed the class-action suit filed on behalf of the people whose boxes had been seized.

The vault company was shut down following the raid and pleaded guilty to conspiracy to launder drug money.

Laura Eimiller, a spokesperson for the FBI, told Insider: "Today's District Court ruling makes it clear that agents investigating criminal activity at US Private Vaults did not mislead the court and affirms the FBI's position that the investigation was conducted without malice and in a manner consistent with the law, FBI policies and the US Constitution."

The lawsuit was filed after FBI agents raided the Beverly Hills branch of US Private Vaults, seizing more than $86 million in cash, as well as jewelry and gold from 1,400 safe-deposit boxes. It said owners' items still had not been returned and that agents misled a judge to get the warrant.

None of the people who owned the boxes has been charged after almost five years of investigating; various agencies concluded "the problem was the business itself," court documents said.

Regarding the unreturned items, Eimiller said that agents "outlined evidence of widespread criminal wrongdoing in court filings while establishing a simple procedure to return safeguarded contents to box holders who were not otherwise subject to asset forfeiture."

Robert Frommer, a lawyer representing at least 400 plaintiffs in the class-action suit, said in an earlier filing that the government "did not know what was in those boxes, who owned them, or what, if anything, those people had done."

"The scope of what the FBI did is unprecedented," Frommer said. "This was the largest armed robbery in United States history, and it was committed by the FBI."

In new emails with Insider, Frommer confirmed that they intended to appeal the ruling.

Rob Johnson, an attorney who works with Frommer, described the ruling as a "shocking decision" that "will set a dangerous precedent that will allow the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to bypass the Fourth Amendment.

"The decision will give a blueprint for the government to pry open safe-deposit boxes, storage lockers, and other private spaces," he said, "and to take the contents with civil forfeiture."

Johnson added: "There is no question that we will be filing an appeal."

"FBI stands by its ongoing investigation of US Private Vaults," Eimiller said, "a business that criminally facilitated drug trafficking and money laundering, and which allowed customers to store their criminal proceeds anonymously in safe-deposit boxes."

According to the court papers, US Private Vaults solicited criminal clientele on its website, saying the less it knew about its customers, the better. The company advertised its services to help customers "avoid 'government agencies (such as the IRS) or attorneys armed with court orders.'"

Documents also said US Private Vaults did not rent solely to criminal customers and many customers used its services for legitimate reasons.


Rule of law, especially the equal application of it, is over. The FBI can abuse power and steal with zero consequences.


UPDATE: Armed Feds raid Miller's Organic Farm


The government says that Amos must cease operations because he doesn’t adhere to USDA standards.

Last month Rebel News brought you the story of how Amos Miller’s Organic Farm was raided by armed federal agents and economically crippled with hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

Now, as the seasons change, Miller’s farm is going toe-to-toe with the federal government to protect himself and independent farmers all over the country.

Amos Miller is an independent organic farmer in Bird-in-Hand, a remote Amish village in central Pennsylvania.

The farm has everything. Pasture-raised, grass-fed cattle to grass-fed raw dairy like yogurts, cheeses, and butters. The farm raises chickens, pigs, and even water buffalo and camels.

People all over the country signed up to be a part of Miller’s private food club for his holistically grown organic meat and dairy. But unfortunately, this is also the reason that the federal government and all its might, is targeting him.

The government says that Amos must cease operations because he doesn’t adhere to USDA standards. Amos argues that US government food regulations exist chiefly to strip small organic producers of their independence. They’re also financially intensive, making it so only the large producers are able to afford to stay in business.

By cutting the government out of his operations he’s effectively cutting out the middle man. The government siphons money from these farms through expensive “user fees.”

Amos and his customers argue that the USDA mandates food be processed and produced in ways that actually make the food less nutritious.

“The government is demanding I go through their slaughter houses and use toxic preservatives like artificial citric acid on my meat…my customers don’t want that…they want the whole organic deal,” Amos explained to Rebel.

Amos believes if they can bring down his operation under dubious reasoning and harmful regulations, other farmers will be next, putting the entire food system at risk of being transformed in the vision of the industry-backed government and WEF-aligned elites.

“If they can take me down they’ll come after other independent farmers next,” Amos said.

Legally representing Amos, is veteran constitutional lawyer Robert Barnes.

Barnes explained to the Lancaster Patriot, a local newspaper in Amos’s area that:

“This is about power – who has the power to choose what I eat, what I put into my own body,” Barnes said. “it’s an extension of the vaccine mandate dispute. It’s an extension of a range of controversies currently raging across the country about the Constitution and our laws and the role of the federal government in our lives.”

Next week, Rebel is going to sit down with Robert Barnes for an exclusive interview. And discuss what this case means for independent farmers, food sovereignty, bodily autonomy, and freedom in general.

Please go to LeaveThemAlone.com and sign our petition which I’ll be personally delivering to the federal court where Amos’s case resides.


Related as to why this rabbit hole goes deeper then you might think:




Why do they do this?
Paul Joseph Watson



Durham probe: FBI offered Christopher Steele $1 million to corroborate Trump allegations in dossier


The FBI offered ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele $1 million to corroborate salacious allegations made in his dossier against former President Donald Trump and members of his 2016 campaign, but he was unable to do so, an FBI official testified Tuesday.

FBI supervisory counterintelligence analyst Brian Auten was the first witness in the trial of Igor Danchenko, the Russian national who served as the primary sub-source for Steele's anti-Trump dossier and has been charged with five counts of making false statements to the bureau.

Auten testified that he and a group of FBI agents went overseas in early October 2021 to speak with Steele about the dossier. During questioning by Special Counsel John Durham on Tuesday, Auten said that during those meetings the FBI offered Steele $1 million if he could corroborate allegations in the dossier. Auten testified that Steele could not do so.

Auten also said that the FBI had no corroboration of allegations in the dossier but nevertheless took that information and inserted it into the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to surveil former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

"On October 21, 2016 [the date of the Carter Page FISA application], did you have any information to corroborate that information?" Durham asked.

"No," Auten said, confirming that the FBI began receiving Steele’s reports, later known as the dossier, on Sept. 19, 2016, and submitted its first FISA application on Page on Oct. 21, 2016.

Sept. 19, 2016, was also the day that then-Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann brought white papers to a meeting at FBI headquarters with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker that alleged the Trump Organization was using a secret back channel to communicate with Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank in the weeks leading up to the presidential election.

Sussmann was found not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI in June. Sussmann had allegedly brought the information to Baker on Sept. 19, 2016, and he allegedly claimed that he was not doing work on behalf of any client but rather bringing the data as a citizen concerned with national security.

Meanwhile, Auten also said the FBI reached out to other intelligence agencies to see if they could corroborate information relating to dossier, which was commissioned by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through law firm Perkins Coie.

Auten repeatedly admitted under questioning from Durham that the FBI never received corroboration of the information in the Steele dossier, but he stressed that it was used in the initial FISA application and in the three subsequent renewals.

The special master currently reviewing records seized by the FBI in its unprecedented raid of former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, Judge Raymond Dearie, who at the time sat on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, signed off on the final warrant to surveil Page.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, in 2019, said that the dossier served as the basis for the FISA warrants against Page. Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee first said that the dossier served as the basis for those warrants and surveillance.

The Justice Department admitted in 2020 that the FISA warrants to surveil Page, when stripped of the FBI's misinformation, did not meet the necessary legal threshold and never should have been issued.

Auten also testified Tuesday that the FBI considered submitting FISA applications against Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos but said the FBI ultimately did not do so.

In March 2016, as an aide to the Trump campaign focusing on foreign policy, Papadopoulos met with Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud in London who told him that the Russians had dirt in the form of emails that could damage Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Papadopoulos then told Australian diplomat Alexander Downer of the new information. Downer reported Papadopoulos’ comments to the FBI.

Papadopoulos was charged in former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation with making a false statement to the FBI. The charging document said the false statement was about the timing of his meeting with Mifsud and about his knowledge of Mifsud’s connections to Russia. The charging document also claimed that he "impeded" the investigation by making his false statement.

But Papadopoulos did not only meet with Mifsud and Downer while overseas. He met with Cambridge professor and longtime FBI informant Stefan Halper and his female associate, who went under the alias Azra Turk. Papadopoulos told Fox News that he saw Turk three times in London: once over drinks, once over dinner and once with Halper.

In 2019, Papadopoulos told Fox News that he always suspected he was being recorded. It is unclear which of these people, if any, may have recorded conversations with Papadopoulos.

But Papadopoulos' meetings overseas resurfaced in 2019 as part of Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, sources told Fox News at the time.

Meanwhile, Mueller's investigation yielded no evidence of criminal conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian officials during the 2016 presidential election.

Auten’s testimony came during the first day of the second trial out of Durham’s years-long investigation.

DESPITE ACQUITTAL, DURHAM TRIAL OF SUSSMANN ADDED TO EVIDENCE CLINTON CAMPAIGN PLOTTED TO TIE TRUMP TO RUSSIA

The charges against Danchenko stem from certain statements he made to the FBI relating to the sources he used in providing information to an investigative firm in the United Kingdom related to the dossier.

Danchenko pleaded not guilty last year to lying about the source of information that he provided to Steele for the dossier, which contained salacious and now-debunked allegations against Trump.



Bombshell revelation of $1M offer to Steele shows FBI misled Congress on Russia probe: Kash Patel


Updated: October 11, 2022

The House Intelligence Committee under Rep. Devin Nunes sent 17 congressional subpoenas to the FBI "for information specifically related to payments and confidential human sources, were denied this information, and we learn it four years after our investigation," said the lead investigator of the panel's probe into the FBI's Russia Collusion investigation.


F
ollowing the bombshell revelation from the trial of Igor Danchenko that the FBI offered Christopher Steele $1 million to corroborate his dossier, former House Intelligence Committee investigator Kash Patel said this proves the bureau knew it hadn't been able to verify the Trump-Russia collusion narrative and misled Congress.

Danchenko, the primary source for the Steele dossier, is charged with five counts of lying to the FBI.

As the prosecution opened its case against Danchenko Tuesday, Special Counsel John Durhamquestioned his first witness, FBI supervisory intelligence analyst Brian Auten.

Auten testified that in early October 2016, the FBI offered Steele "up to $1 million" to provide corroborating evidence for his dossier, but the former British spy didn't provide any such information to the bureau. As a result, Steele wasn't given the money because he was unable to "prove the allegations."

An application the FBI submitted to a FISA court on Oct. 21, 2016 for a warrant to initiate electronic surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page included uncorroborated information from the dossier. Auten testified that before the FBI received the dossier, it didn't have enough evidence to obtain a FISA warrant.

Auten also said the FBI contacted other intelligence agencies regarding the specific allegations in the dossier, but none were able to corroborate them.

Durham asked Auten, "On October 21, 2016 did you have any information to corroborate that information?"

"No," Auten replied.

Patel was asked about the purported reward offer on the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show Tuesday. The House Intelligence panel chaired by then-Rep. Devin Nunes sent 17 congressional subpoenas "for information specifically related to payments and confidential human sources," he said, "were denied this information, and we learn it four years after our investigation."

"That means somebody obstructed a congressional investigation with congressional subpoenas," said Patel, a former national security prosecutor.

This exposes "the depths that [the FBI] would go to to falsely corroborate the Steele dossier, which ... shows they didn't have it verified, which we've said the whole time," Patel added.

"And more importantly," he continued, "they were willing to spend a million taxpayer dollars on shoveling political hot garbage through the federal court system just to surveil a political target that would have been totally baseless — it was baseless then."

Referring to a group of senior FBI leaders during the James Comey era as "government gangsters," Patel said "this bombshell" shows that they "were so arrogant, that they said, 'Nobody is going to catch us. We are going to break a constitutional republic's 250-year tradition because we don't like the guy in the White House, and we're going to manufacture a crime on it.'"

Retired FBI supervisory special agent Bassem Youssef, one of the bureau's most famous whistleblowers, said Tuesday's revelation at the trial was unlike anything he ever saw in his three-decade FBI career.

"Never in my entire career have I heard of such an offer to pay a source to corroborate their own information," Youssef told Just the News. "The FBI queries other sources in order to validate the original source of information. It is unheard of that the FBI would offer to pay Steele $1 million to corroborate his own information.

"Obviously, the FBI was unable to validate this information through any other source that they had to resort to 'bribing' Steele to lend credibility to his own information, which the FBI knew to be inaccurate and unreliable," he added. "What a sad state of affairs in my beloved FBI."
 

Typhonis

Well-known member
No, the judge should explain why he dismissed the case. What precedent and what constitutional amendment shaped is opinion. Or, when local law enforcement arrests FBI agents or raids their offices....unleash asset forfeiture on them. Turn about is fair play.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Unending ‘Emergency Powers’ Enable Authoritarian Behavior Such As Suspending Elections



The United States will be operating under a falsified state of emergency through yet another hotly contested election.

It’s been nearly a month since Joe Biden told “60 Minutes” “the pandemic is over,” but the federal government he ostensibly controls is still operating under emergency powers originally declared two and a half years ago. The administration told The Daily Caller it plans to renew the state of emergency again before its current expiration on Oct. 13.

The White House and news media have made it plain that the Biden administration is extending the state of emergency for political reasons, not due to a legitimate emergency. USA Today noted that ending the state of emergency would “complicate” government officials’ desire for Americans to take another round of Covid booster shots, as new disclosures show the government secretly paid TV entertainers and pressured social media to push its shot narrative and validate billions in government contracts to pharmaceutical companies. The alleged “state of emergency” is also “keeping millions of Americans on Medicaid” under expansions approved only for “emergency” purposes.



Democrats also want to keep using Covid as an excuse for other wasteful and inflationary “emergency” federal spending on agencies that have demonstrated deep corruption. “And Biden’s controversial decision to wipe out student loan debt for millions of Americans rests on the Education Department’s ability to ease hardship in a national emergency,” USA Today says.

Extending the declaration would also mean the United States will be operating under a state of emergency through yet another hotly contested election. The last time that happened, an estimated 14.8 million mail-in ballots went missing amid widespread vote chaos. Courts largely refused to provide any clarity or accountability amid unprecedented charges of mass illegal voting, election law violations, mismanagement, irregularities, and confusion that in several swing states extended past the entire margin of Biden’s claimed victory.

Permanent Changes During ‘Emergency’ Rule
Given a plausible enough excuse and enough government-generated fear among the populace, in 2020 the majority of local, state, and federal elected officials rolled over to leftists’ clearly tactical demands for degrading election integrity. The so-called “emergency” changes to America’s electoral process largely remain in place today, two years after they resulted in massive social strife and widespread distrust in American elections.

States turned election days into election seasons, increasing the ability of targeted get-out-the-vote tactics to affect election outcomes. Swing districts allowed Democrat activist machines to run their election systems and operate Democrat get-out-the-vote operations through public offices. States filled mailboxes with ballots, millions of which went missing (Wisconsin, where I haven’t lived for more than a decade, sent multiple mail-in ballots for me to my previous addresses, according to my family.)


Mail-in balloting increases ballot error rates to within the margin of many electoral victories, allowing election officials to affect election outcomes by rejecting or accepting votes. Even if every single election official follows every single procedure and every voter fills out his mail-in ballot as accurately as a machine can — which aren’t realistic assumptions — conducting elections this way is a recipe for unrest among those ultimately declared the losers in elections that hinge on razor-thin margins. This is why 70 percent of Democrat voters this year still agreed that Russian interference elected Donald Trump and a majority of Republicans polled around the same time say Joe Biden won in 2020 by cheating.

Covid has been a massively successful excuse for Democrats to seize political power while destroying U.S. infrastructure and our nation’s social fabric. Given how much Democrats have won in just two years making sure this crisis didn’t go to waste, why wouldn’t they keep Americans rolling from one crisis to another, largely of their own making? What incentives do power-mongers have to end not just our technical state of emergency, but to solve any problems whatsoever? Instead, they seem to prefer to keep amplifying crises, because this gives them constant pretexts for abnormal and totalitarian measures.

Never-Ending Supply of Manufactured Emergencies
Consider the other national emergencies Biden has exacerbated while in office. Should Biden lose Covid as an excuse for his administration’s lawless and barely restrained exercise of power, he has several other options. One of them would be turning our nation’s proxy war with Russia over Ukraine into a hot war between nuclear powers. Now, that may be a legitimate national emergency, but it wouldn’t be an accidental one.

There’s also the administration’s full-on jettisoning of the U.S. border to control by international criminal cartels that profit from drug and human trafficking in the absence of U.S.-imposed law and order. These cartels, of course, partner with the real top U.S. adversary, Communist China, in destroying our people and national resources while U.S. officials appear to be distracted covering up the Biden family business operations in Ukraine, which is of no national importance to the United States. Neither is providing security for Europe that Europe should provide for itself.


The growth of inflation under Congress’s two-decade refusal to control its own spending while the United States government endangers the dollar and nears a sovereign debt crisis to rival any in world history would be another manufactured emergency available to use to argue for more control by the same people driving this country into the ground. We’ve so far had essentially zero accountability for the use of this technique during Covid. That’s why we should expect it to continue and expand.

Past Time for Some Serious Checks and Balances
Like Barack Obama before him and whose administration is essentially back in the White House right now, Biden has been a master of executive overreach, which means authoritarianism restrained only by the desire to keep an increasingly emasculated people from actually revolting. Remember Obama’s “pen and phone”? Biden’s are bigger.

His administration is perfecting, for example, the Covid-developed technique of ruling simply by press release. Multiple times now, this administration has issued some edict without issuing an accompanying regulation that civil rights groups can spend the next 15 years challenging while the regulation is assumed to be law as soon as it’s issued, with no input at all from Americans’ duly elected representatives called Congress. This further delays even that modicum of accountability.

Why wouldn’t someone willing to suspend some laws — such as those requiring individuals to pay their own way through college, as they promised — also be willing to suspend other laws? Why wouldn’t someone willing to break some norms, such as nominating a Supreme Court justice who knows jack squat about the Constitution, not be willing to break others, such as never suspending elections?

Why wouldn’t someone willing to lie about what constitutes a “national emergency” for political gain be willing to do the same thing in another way? There is no logical endpoint to this kind of behavior. It could include anything, even something that sounds crazy like suspending elections over a drummed-up “national emergency.”

If you think that’s ridiculous, think back three years to what you’d have said if someone told you that government — including “freedom-touting” Republican governors! — would ban kids from going to schools for months, even years, over a virus that was less risky to them than the seasonal flu. The wild political effectiveness of inflating the “Covid emergency” beyond all reason is why pushing society’s limits in previously unthinkable ways is going to continue until American leaders start actually standing up for the rule of law and imposing some serious limits on executive-branch authoritarianism.

Dear Legislatures: Rein in Rogue Officials Already
That means every single “emergency powers” statute in this country needs to be definitively time-limited, immediately. If presidents and governors can suspend Americans’ rights indefinitely, with no limiting principle, and courts won’t stop them, then we have no rights. Rights secured only at the whim of the executive and after years of delay are not rights at all.

Know what living under unrestrained executive orders is called? Tyranny. Tyrants do whatever they can get away with. So far, that’s been working out pretty blooming well for whoever’s really in charge of Joseph R. Biden. The question is, what else do they think they can get away with? And what prudent and credible steps are Republicans planning to stop them?

What I’m going to do is this: If at any point we don’t have elections, I’m not filing my taxes. Go ahead, raid me over it. The more Americans decide that the federal government is full of lawless thugs, the better. Maybe at some point more conservative officeholders will start doing something about federal raids on people peacefully protesting tyranny. Good luck raiding me when I’m one of 100,000 people doing the exact same thing in localities protected by increasingly uncooperative sheriffs, attorneys general, and state legislatures.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
We've been under dozens of states of emergency for decades. I'd love to end all of them, but it isn't something new.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Jan. 6 hearing live updates: Committee votes to subpoena Trump


The House Jan. 6 committee on Thursday, after a months-long hiatus, held its ninth public hearing since June, and possibly its last in its investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack.

The panel focused on the role of former President Donald Trump before, alleging he was front and center of a plot to overturn the 2020 election and in a historic development, voted unanimously to subpoena Trump to testify.

Thompson: Panel will not issue subpoena for Pence testimony
House Jan. 6 committee chair BennieThompson told reporters right after the hearing that the panel would not issue a subpoena for former Vice President Mike Pence.

The committee had been debating how to manifest a meeting with the former vice president, but Thompson's comments indicate members will not force him to make an appearance.

When asked if he thinks Trump will honor the subpoena for his testimony, Thompson responded "ask Donald Trump." Thompson did not answer when asked if the committee would vote to hold Trump in contempt of Congress if he chooses not to comply.
 

mrttao

Well-known member
you don't like Bill Barr that doesn't make him wrong on this
Facepalm.
Bill barr does not support YOUR position.

Bill Barr (incorrectly) stated that the reason the trump lawsuit was dismissed was due to a technicality.

I disagreed with him, but also stated that
even if bill barr was right your logic is still utterly insane.

> Bill Barr says trump lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality (incorrect filing)
> YOU say if it was dismissed on a technicality it means trump lost the court case
> YOU say if trump lost the court case it means no fraud occured. As courts are the source of fact, truth, and morality. (except when they are not. like in the case of slavery)
> YOU say if no fraud occurred all video proof provided to you is just optical illusions.
> YOU say bill barr refuted those optical illusions. He is unaware of you or your logic chain
> YOU say that linking a video containing bill barr is you making a point by point rebuttal
 
Last edited:

mrttao

Well-known member
the above regarding Barr's testimony is barely a more then he said word did you see his testimony where he details how he and the whitehouse staff told trump the claims he was pushing were bullshit, did you pay attention to the bit where he explains several claims of fraud as just people not knowing what ballot boxes look like in the counting room?
>You should have watched the entire 2 hour 24 minute video. it comes up somewhere in there
>I will not quote it
>I will not provide time stamps
>I will just say that somewhere in the video it comes up. go find it yourself

where he details how he and the whitehouse staff told trump the claims he was pushing were bullshit
ok? and what does that have to do with your insane troll logic which you espoused here?
 

Cherico

Well-known member
you literally quoted me saying "assuming you did not change the timestamp from the last time you posted it". as well as "youtube embedding does not work for me on this site. you need to post it inside code brackets".

1. Bill Barr is a liar.
When democrats tried to use mail in ballot voter fraud to attempt to steal the re-election from lincoln (yes, the one who freed the slaves). he just rounded up the conspirators and hung them. that is the remedy for high treason. and an established precedence on how to deal with it.

2. "if we get caught cheating, it does not invalidate the cheating votes. instead you must go through insane implausible red tape. suing separately for each individual false vote" is the most bullshit politispeak I have heard in a long while.

3. source: bill barr's ass. It is barr's imagination that you are only allowed to sue for each false vote individually. This is called case consolidation. And you don't even need to consolidate each ballot. You would look to consolidate the case of different USPS workers who were each individually backdating votes. while a single one of them backdating 10k votes would not need consolidation for each of the 10k votes to be part of one case. similarly to how if you rob someone of 10,000 dollars you do not need to trial each dollar individually.

4. Even if we take barr's claim as true, and there really is a law on the books somewhere that says that in case of blatant voter fraud the only recourse is to challenge each individual fraudulent vote one by one... it still fails to answer any of the points I or other's raised.

You are way too invested in this talking point that you completely ignore whether or not is actually a rebuttal to something or not.

You claimed there was no fraud.
I gave you several examples of proof that fraud occured.

your grand rebuttal is...
> here is a politician
> he says they filed the case incorrectly.
> therefore the case was dismissed (even though actual dismissal reasons given by the judges were different)
> if it was dismissed on a technicality it means trump lost the court case
> if trump lost the court case it means no fraud occured.
> if no fraud occurred all video proof you show is just optical illusions.

This chain of logic is frankly insane. and calling it a rebuttal of evidence of fraud occurring is just clown logic.
Gandalf the based has spoken
 

DarthOne

☦️
Q8x2zdmx8Tpt.jpeg
 
Last edited:

LordsFire

Internet Wizard

mrttao

Well-known member
What exactly is stopping china from just... ignoring the intellectual property rights and simply operating those fabs with non american employees? (chinese, german, swedes, japanese, indian, and so on and so on. lots of countries have tech engineers)

are we going to get chinese bootleg !AMD/!intel chips soon?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top