The FBI is unable to turn over ANY evidence related to its investigations into Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation as it admits it destroyed ALL the evidence after Biden took office. Millions of taxpayer funds have been thrown away.


Justice Dept. Investigated Clinton Foundation Until Trump’s Final Days
President Donald J. Trump and his allies tried to cast the Clinton Foundation as corrupt. But the yearslong investigation sputtered to its conclusion without charges.

The Justice Department kept open the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s family foundation for nearly all of President Donald J. Trump’s administration, with prosecutors closing the case without charges just days before he left office.

Newly released documents and interviews with former department officials show that the investigation stretched long past when F.B.I. agents and prosecutors knew it was a dead end. The conclusion of the case, which centered on the Clinton Foundation’s dealings with foreign donors when Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state under President Barack Obama, has not previously been reported.

Mr. Trump, who campaigned on a promise to “lock her up,” spent much of his four-year term pressuring the F.B.I. and the Justice Department to target political rivals. After being accused by the president’s allies of serving as part of a deep-state cabal working against him, F.B.I. officials insisted that the department acknowledge in writing that there was no case to bring.

The closing documents, which were obtained by The New York Times as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, spelled the end to an investigation that top prosecutors had expressed doubts about from the beginning. Still, it became a rallying cry for Republicans who believed the F.B.I. would ultimately turn up evidence of corruption and damage Mrs. Clinton’s political fortunes.

The foundation became attack fodder for Republicans in 2015 after the conservative author Peter Schweizer published the book “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” an investigation of donations that foreign entities made to the family organization. Mr. Schweizer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute, where Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former chief strategist, was a founder and the executive chairman.

A spokesman for the Clinton Foundation, Craig Minassian, said that the organization had been “subjected to politically motivated allegations with no basis in fact.”

Republicans seized on the accusations in Mr. Schweizer’s book, accusing Mrs. Clinton of supporting the interests of foundation donors as part of a quid pro quo.

Specifically, critics focused on the foundation’s receipt of large donations in exchange for supporting the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian company with ties to mining stakes in the United States, to a Russian nuclear agency. The deal was approved in 2010 by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States when Mrs. Clinton, as secretary of state, had a voting seat on the panel.

Mr. Schweizer’s research caught the eye of F.B.I. agents in Washington, who in 2016 opened an investigation into the allegations in his book.

The F.B.I. in New York and Little Rock, Ark., also opened investigations but apparently not based on the book, according to the final report by John H. Durham, the Trump-era special counsel who led an investigation into the bureau’s inquiry into possible ties between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia.

In his report, which was made public last week, Mr. Durham explored the handling of the Clinton Foundation investigation, comparing it to the F.B.I.’s treatment of the Russia investigation. As part of his inquiry, Mr. Durham questioned Mrs. Clinton last spring. “Secretary Clinton was voluntarily interviewed by Special Counsel Durham on May 11, 2022,” said David E. Kendall, her lawyer. “No topics were off limits. She answered every question.”

The Justice Department did not think much of the foundation investigations, frustrating F.B.I. agents. Raymond N. Hulser, a prosecutor in charge of the public integrity section at the time, told Mr. Durham that the Washington case that was based on the book lacked predication.

Indeed, some prosecutors at the time believed the book had been discredited.

The investigation became a source of friction at the F.B.I. as agents believed the Justice Department had stymied their work.

That tension spilled into public view and had far-reaching consequences.

Andrew G. McCabe, then the F.B.I.’s deputy director, was accused of leaking information about the case to a Wall Street Journal reporter and later lying about it to the Justice Department’s inspector general. The episode helped prompt his dismissal in 2018 and a failed effort by the department to prosecute him.

In August 2016, the three foundation cases were consolidated under the supervision of agents in New York. Agents were authorized to seek subpoenas from the U.S. attorneys’ offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn, but prosecutors declined to issue them. The investigation seemed to go dormant.

Ultimately, the F.B.I. moved the case to Little Rock. In 2017, after prosecutors there requested help, the deputy attorney general’s office said the Justice Department would support the case.

Eventually, prosecutors secured a subpoena for the charity in early 2018 and the F.B.I. detailed personnel to examine donor records. Investigators also interviewed the former chief financial officer for the foundation.

Career prosecutors in Little Rock then closed the case, notifying the F.B.I.’s office there in two letters in January 2021. But in a toxic atmosphere in which Mr. Trump had long accused the F.B.I. of bias, the top agent in Little Rock wanted it known that career prosecutors, not F.B.I. officials, were behind the decision.

In August 2021, the F.B.I. received what is known as a declination memo from prosecutors and as a result considered the matter closed.

“All of the evidence obtained during the course of this investigation has been returned or otherwise destroyed,” according to the F.B.I.

CCRKBA Asks Congress to Investigate Alleged ATF ‘Unlawful Practices’

Days after it was reported the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) had alerted Congress and President Joe Biden about allegations of waste, mismanagement and unlawful employment practices at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a leading gun rights organization is asking Congress to block agency funding in the 2024 budget until the charges can be fully investigated.

The allegations came from two whistleblowers in the human resources office of that agency.

Now, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is asking Congress “to fully investigate” the allegations.

In his letter to the President and Congress, Special Counsel Henry J. Kerner said the whistleblowers “indicated that ATF has not adequately corrected the wrongdoing, asserting that employees continue to hold positions for which they are unqualified and that it is legally unsupportable to waive the debts
incurred by employees who improperly received LEAP (Law Enforcement Availability Pay).” He further noted that ATF “substantiated the whistleblowers’ allegations.”

The Kerner letter may be read here.

“ATF has been a troubled agency for decades,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “and its recent flip flop on arm braces is just the tip of the iceberg. Has anyone been held accountable for this apparent mismanagement? Was anyone ever fired or otherwise penalized for the deadly Fast and Furious scandal? How about Operation Wide Receiver?”

Despite Kerner’s assurance in his letter that ATF has taken corrective actions, Gottlieb remains unconvinced.

“We’re not confident the ATF can fix its problems internally,” he said,” so that job must be up to Congress, specifically the House Oversight Committee. And while Congress is handling this, there should be no budget approval for the agency, especially one providing a 7.4 percent increase over the ATF budget during Fiscal Year 2023.”

According to the letter, ATF has “implemented a variety of new programs and processes in response to the required and recommended actions in the OPM evaluation; finalized the new Job Analysis and Quality Review Process Standard Operating Procedures; launched a new Human Resources Liaison Program; implemented a new Strategic Recruitment Form; staffed and implemented a quality review process; and reorganized the Human Resources Operations Division to include new Performance Management and Human Resources Policy and Quality Control Branches. DOJ’s Justice Management Division has also hired a classification expert, who will collaborate with OPM and ATF to develop and implement a strategy to reassess the duties and ensure proper classification of the unresolved positions.”

Kerner’s letter to the president also noted that the Office of Personnel Management had identified 91 misclassified positions, and ATF had found 17 more for a total of 108 positions. Gottlieb called that an alarming error. He was not impressed with reports the agency had reassigned 36 people involved in the problem, and 14 more had retired, or even that ATF’s authority to classify federal law enforcement positions had been suspended.

“This is a poor example of our tax dollars at work,” Gottlieb said. “It reinforces the perception of an agency out of control. Is it any wonder that America’s gun owners have mistrust for the agency? The only way to get ATF’s attention is to deny its funding while a thorough investigation is conducted.”

Well, everyone knows SloJoe has never really been in charge. This just confirms it.

US Announces Ukraine Will Get F-16 Fighters as Antony Blinken Takes Control of Policy

The United States will no longer stand in the way of NATO allies   transferring F-16 fighters to the Ukraine Air Force, and it will participate in training Ukrainian pilots in flight proficiency and tactical training but not in the US. On Friday, Joe Biden informed other G-7 leaders of the sudden volte-face in US policy at the G-7 summit in Japan. Other “senior administration officials,” by this I mean Antony, with no “h,” Blinken, confirmed the policy change just to let everyone know that the decision was real and it wasn’t a case of Joe slipping off into another of his bouts of delirium dementium. So the F-16s could be in action by late autumn.

F-16s or No F-16s?

Equipping the Ukraine Air Force has been the subject of intense debate within NATO (see Putin’s War, Week 52. US and China Face off, Prigozhin Goes for the Jugular, Mystery Weapon Strikes, and Happy Anniversary) and inside the Biden foreign and defense policy clown car. The Ukrainian Air Force uses the same Soviet-designed sleds as the Russian Air Force. Eastern Europe has been scoured for Soviet airframes of all sorts, flyable or unflyable. The operational aircraft are used to fill gaps in the Ukrainian Air Force. The non-operational ones are broken up for parts. That well has run dry. To show how far the decision to equip Ukraine with F-16 fighters is from where we started, shortly after the war began, several East European countries wanted to send surplus Soviet aircraft to Ukraine, and the US blocked that effort; see Transfer of NATO Aircraft to Ukraine Falls Through as Zelensky Resumes His Campaign for a No Fly ZoneDid Blinken Put Poland Outside NATO Protection if It Transfers New Fighter Aircraft to Ukraine?, and Biden Junta Duplicity Revealed After Poland Declares MiGs for Ukraine Are Ready to Go.

Continue reading “”

Hyde-Smith reintroduces GRIP Act to block state gun registries

U.S. Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), of Brookhaven, on Thursday reintroduced her legislation to prohibit states, localities or any other organization from using federal funding to maintain gun registries.

The Gun-owner Registration Information Protection (GRIP) Act would clarify existing law that prohibits the use of any federal funding by states or local entities to store or list sensitive, personal information related to the legal ownership or possession of firearms.

Hyde-Smith first introduced the GRIP Act in the 116th Congress (2019-2021). “The GRIP Act is needed now more than ever as more anti-gun and anti-violence proposals too often end up infringing on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Hyde-Smith said. “The GRIP Act would ensure that states and cities comply with federal statutes that specifically prohibit the use of federal funds to keep gun registries, which can then be used to target people who own or purchase firearms legally.”

While current law prevents the federal government from storing information acquired during the firearms background check process, the GRIP Act would ensure the federal government does not support, either intentionally or otherwise, state or local efforts to collect and store personally identifiable information related to legal firearm purchases and ownership.

The bill also clarifies that states and local entities cannot use federal grant funds from programs, such as the National Criminal Histories Improvement Program, NICS Amendment Records Improvement Program, or the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, to create or maintain full or partial gun registries.

It would not limit states’ recordkeeping for permitting, law enforcement-issued firearms, or lost or stolen firearms. Hyde-Smith’s original eight co-sponsors included Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). U.S. Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.) cosponsored companion legislation introduced in the House by U.S. Representative Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.).

Mock v. Garland – FPC Lawsuit Challenging the ATF’s Pistol Brace Rule

LEGAL UPDATE: We filed a motion for injunction pending appeal with the Fifth Circuit today in our lawsuit challenging the ATF’s pistol brace rule, where we ask for it to be granted by May 24th

Summary: Federal lawsuit challenging the ATF’s pistol brace rule.

Plaintiffs: William Mock, Christopher Lewis, Maxim Defense Industries, LLC, and Firearms Policy Coalition

Defendants: Attorney General Merrick Garland, United States Department of Justice, ATF Directer Stephen Dettelbach, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

Litigation Counsel: R. Brent Cooper and Cody Wisniewski

Docket: N.D. TX case no. 4:23-cv-00095, Fifth Circuit case no. 23-10319 | CourtListener Docket

Biden Wants to Ignore Science to Push Traditional Ammunition

The Biden administration, which pledged to “follow the science,” has had a change of heart. Science no longer matters when it comes to their plans to ban traditional lead ammunition and fishing tackle on federal lands.

The U.S. House of Representatives’ Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries held a hearing to discuss Rep. Rob Wittman’s (R-Va.) H.R. 615, Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act. The NSSF-supported legislation would require the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to provide site-specific peer-reviewed scientific data that demonstrates traditional lead ammunition or fishing tackle is causing detrimental wildlife population impacts before prohibiting their use by hunters and anglers. This matters because the fundamental principle undergirding the science of wildlife management is that you manage populations.

The legislation is in response to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) pulling its own bait-and-switch that put hunters and anglers in a bind last year. USFWS published its rule after a “sue-and-settle” scheme where the antihunting group Center For Biological Diversity sued USFWS to end the use of traditional ammunition on federal lands and USFWS immediately entered into a settlement agreement. USFWS opened or expanded hunting and fishing opportunities at 18 National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) but prohibited the use of traditional lead ammunition and fishing tackle in a phased-in approach.

The USFWS, according to their press release announcing the plan, indicated that this measure is based on the best scientific data available; however, no data indicates that traditional ammunition is causing population declines of any wildlife species at any of the refuges.

The Department of the Interior’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks testified before the committee and essentially said, “We don’t need scientific studies. Trust us.”

‘Trust me.’ No Thanks

“I think we ought to make sure that decisions are made based on sound science,” explained Rep. Wittman of his bill. “Where there is a relationship between the use of lead, whether it’s ammunition or for fishing sinkers or for that matter lures… to just carte-blanche say that we’re going to allow agencies to ban lead across the spectrum just doesn’t make good sense.

“This bill allows us to make sure that there are the necessary science-based guardrails on how these decisions are made,” Rep. Wittman added.

Lawmakers had reasons to doubt the Biden administration on the “trust us” approach to banning traditional lead ammunition. First and foremost is the administration’s myopic focus on gun control. Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Ala.) questioned the motives behind the administration’s insistence on banning traditional lead ammunition. Alternative ammunition is more expensive and less available. The increased costs would limit availability to gun owners that are hunters and non-hunters who might shoot recreationally on federal lands.

“Trust me. I’m from the government. You can trust me. That is such BS,” Rep. Carl said. “I’m smart enough to know if you’re going to control guns – you cannot control guns. You cannot mandate guns, but what you can mandate is the ammo. And that’s what this lead bill is after. I’m sorry. That’s my personal feeling… if you can control the lead that goes in those bullets, you get it overpriced where the average person can’t afford it, that will be the ultimate case right there.”

Deputy Assistant Secretary Stricker bristled at the requirement of Rep. Wittman’s bill that scientific data and cooperation with state fish and wildlife agencies should drive the decision at each site where the federal government wants to ban traditional ammunition and fishing tackle. Instead, he believes that USFWS should be applied to broadly existing studies across the entirety of the United States. In his estimation, what is happening in Alaska with wildlife is the same as what is happening in Southern California, or Florida for that matter.

“But at the end of the day there’s a national interest in these conservation lands even if they are located within a state or straddle a couple of states that we need to be cognizant of and that the Fish & Wildlife Service has a responsibility to steward those lands,” Deputy Assistant Secretary Stricker said. “Partnering with the states is one thing. Having to ask them for permission is quite another.

Show Me the Science

Continue reading “”

Secret Service’s shady protect-Biden dodges make ‘em ALL look guilty

Ouch: The Secret Service is now officially the Bureau of Biden Butt-Covering.

The agency just issued a fresh denial of FOIA requests from The Post and the House Oversight Committee for visitor records from Biden’s Delaware houses — in the process showing that prior denials were factually false.

At last, the Secret Service admits that some records exist — contra absurd claims in earlier denials that they simply didn’t.

Now the agency is tendentiously citing a Trump-era 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that has no binding effect whatsoever on Delaware (which is in the 3rd Circuit) to insist it just can’t release the records.

Again: In response to earlier FOIAs, the Secret Service claimed for months it was diligently “reviewing thousands of records in an effort to locate any documents responsive to your request,” then said it had none.

Now it’s admitting they exist (as it should have known from the start: presidential protection is by far its highest-profile duty), but claiming it can’t share them.

It’s a multi-tiered Biden defense system, in other words:

  • Drag feet endlessly on producing information that belongs to the American people.
  • Tell flimsy lies, like saying that there are zero records relating to the people who visit the world’s most powerful man at his private homes.
  • Admit you told lies but still refuse point blank to hand over the goods.

And while the moves might fall within the letter of Freedom of Information law, they’re utterly against its spirit.

We get it: the Oversight Committee is drawing a net ever more tightly around the Bidens, producing hard evidence that seemingly ties “Big Guy” Joe to his family’s influence peddling.

The Delaware visitor logs, which track who comes to see Joe in private — and likely Hunter, who listed his father’s Wilmington home as his own address — will cast further light on that sordid situation.

They’ll also provide a list of people who might have had access to the classified info Joe improperly stored in the Wilmington house’s garage, which is unquestionably a matter of national security.

All the more so given Hunter’s shady international ties.

So the fear from the feds of revelations on this makes ugly sense.

Conceivably, this stonewall is just bureaucratic obstinacy-for-its-own-sake.

But the repeated prior deceptions from Hunter, Joe and the rest of the Biden clan around their mafia activities, plus the previous blatant falsehoods from the Secret Service, suggest there’s something to hide here.

Otherwise, why not just release the records?

Unless and until the Bidens and their security apparatchiks come clean, the American people should assume the worst.

The real collusion to rig the 2016 election was between the Clinton campaign, the Obama White House, and the FBI.
If you don’t think they didn’t try it again in 2020, well…………..

Biden was briefed on Clinton involvement in Trump-Russia hoax.

Special Counsel John Durham on Monday published a 300+ page report on the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, representing the end of a years-long investigation.

Included in the report are the details of a White House briefing on Aug. 3, 2016, during which then-CIA Director John Brennan met with President Barack Obama, then-Vice President Biden, FBI Director James Comey, and other senior administration officials to discuss Russian efforts to interfere in the election.

The report further highlights that Brennan specifically informed the group of then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan to paint Trump as being in league with Moscow.

“According to Brennan’s handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed on relevant intelligence known to date on Russian election interference, including the Clinton Plan intelligence,” Durham wrote. “Specifically, Director Brennan’s declassified handwritten notes reflect that he briefed the meeting’s participants regarding the ‘alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.

 

The Russia Collusion Hoax Is Just the Beginning

There was no collusion and Crossfire Hurricane should never have happened.

That’s the gist of Special Counsel John Durham’s bombshell-filled report on his probe of the FBI’s decision to open an investigation into allegations that former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign colluded with Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton.

But you, even if Peter Strzok is reading this, already knew that.

You probably also knew that, as Durham’s report made clear again, “the FBI’s handling of important aspects of the Crossfire Hurricane matter were seriously deficient” because the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI “failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law.”

Instead, a hoax was perpetuated at the highest levels of America’s federal government despite the fact that “neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”

Durham called his probe’s findings and conclusions “sobering,” but that’s barely the half of it.

On the one hand, the Durham report is a vindication of those castigated as conspiracy theorists for daring to call out the politicization of federal law enforcement. In clear terms, with extensive sourcing from interviews of those with the power in the FBI and at the DOJ, Durham shows how unchecked partisan power turned what is supposed to blind enforcement of the law into a reality in which Lady Justice uses her scales as a step stool to aid Democrats and a weapon to knock down Republicans.

On the other hand, however, it’s a damning indictment of our federal government and its vast administrative state made up of unelected bureaucrats who, at key points in their careers and in the history of our country, become some sort of in-kind employees of the Democrat Party. Even worse, there’s little to no reason for Americans of any political stripe to think things have changed.

Consider the IRS whistleblower who recently came forward to claim the investigation of Hunter Biden’s taxes has been corrupted by the same bias that was at play in investigations of alleged foreign interference targeting the Trump and Clinton campaigns in 2016. Despite being protected, the Justice Department ordered the IRS to axe the entire team investigating Hunter’s alleged tax fraud, according to the whistleblower’s lawyers.

How about federal agents’ response to classified documents at Mar-a-Lago — which the feds always knew about and had verified were locked up — versus their reaction to learning of classified documents Biden had scattered around the eastern seaboard in locations accessed by Hunter Biden, foreign nationals, and maybe even Corn Pop for all we know.

What about the DOJ’s displayed unwillingness to enforce federal laws protecting Supreme Court justices from intimidation and harassment while actively working to issue opinions on cases? The lack of interest in pursuing cases against those responsible for firebombing pro-life organizations? The general failure to prosecute Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters who destroyed businesses, homes, and law enforcement outposts?

What’s going to happen when, almost inevitably, there are fresh allegations lodged against 2024 presidential candidates? Or wrongdoing by a prominent cabinet official? Can the American people really be expected to trust what is told to them from behind the seals of the Department of Justice or Federal Bureau of Investigation? Even CNN couldn’t sugarcoat the devastating truths presented in the Durham Report.

Continue reading “”

And a great disturbance was felt as though millions of Vegans cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

United Nations’ Group Confirms Meat, Eggs, and Dairy are “Vital Sources of ‘Much-Needed Nutrients’”.

Perhaps the globalists are beginning to realize the rules they make for the normals today are those that may eventually be imposed on them.

Perhaps elite policymakers are beginning to worry they will eventually be forced to consume lab-grown meat and insects.

But whatever the reason, one United Nations agency has decided to admit the truth: Meat, eggs, and dairy are a vital source of high-quality protein humans need to survive and thrive.

A new report from the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has determined that meat, eggs and milk are vital sources of much-needed nutrients, such as proteins, fats and carbohydrates, that aren’t easily found in plant-based foods.

The comprehensive study, which is based on data from more than 500 scientific papers and 240 policy documents, also stated that these nutrients are critical during key life stages, such as pregnancy and lactation, childhood, adolescence and older age.

“Nutrient needs of humans vary substantially over their life course. While there are a variety of dietary patterns that can meet those needs, foods that are rich in nutrients are a critical part of a healthy diet,” FAO Deputy Director-General Maria Helena Semedo and Chief Economist Máximo Torero Cullen wrote in a foreword to the report. “Terrestrial animal source foods provide energy and many essential nutrients, such as protein, fatty acids and several vitamins and minerals that are less common in other food types.”

The full report is here for those who want to review the findings.

The report also supports a position I have held for a long time: A protein-rich diet helps prevent weight problems.

When consumed as part of an appropriate diet, foods of animal origin can help meet nutrient goals endorsed by the World Health Assembly and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for reducing stunting, wasting among children under five, low birth weight, anemia in women of reproductive age, and obesity and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in adults.

However, the report also expresses the usual environmental platitudes about livestock…while tossing in an “equity” reference.

If consumed as part of an appropriate diet, animal source foods can help with meeting the nutrition targets endorsed by the World Health Assembly and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to reducing stunting, wasting among children under five years of age, low birthweight, anemia in women of reproductive age, and obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in adults.

But at the same time, the livestock sector “must contribute to addressing a range of challenges,” write FAO Deputy Director-General Maria Helena Semedo and Chief Economist Máximo Torero Cullen in a foreword to the report.

“These include issues related to the environment (e.g., deforestation, land-use changes, greenhouse-gas emissions, unsustainable water and land use, pollution, food–feed competition), herd management (e.g., low productivity, overgrazing, poor animal welfare), animal health related issues (e.g., diseases, antimicrobial resistance), human-livestock related issues (e.g., zoonotic and food-borne diseases) and social issues (e.g., equity).”

Then again, reviewing this hot take from the United Nations, perhaps the Dutch farmers’ recent election victory is giving the globalists pause in pursuing the war against cows.

IRS removes investigative team from Hunter Biden probe in move whistleblower claims is ‘clearly retaliatory’

WASHINGTON — The IRS on Monday removed the “entire investigative team” from its long-running tax fraud probe of first son Hunter Biden in alleged retaliation against the whistleblower who recently contacted Congress to allege a coverup in the case, The Post has learned.

The purge allegedly was done on the orders of the Justice Department, the whistleblower’s attorneys informed congressional leaders in a letter.

“Today the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Supervisory Special Agent we represent was informed that he and his entire investigative team are being removed from the ongoing and sensitive investigation of the high-profile, controversial subject about which our client sought to make whistleblower disclosures to Congress. He was informed the change was at the request of the Department of Justice,” Mark Lytle and Tristan Leavitt wrote.

The whistleblower, who supervised the Hunter Biden probe since early 2020, hasn’t publicly identified the first son as the subject of the case he says is being brushed under the rug, but congressional sources confirmed it.

“On April 27, 2023, IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel appeared before the House Committee on Ways and Means. He testified: ‘I can say without any hesitation there will be no retaliation for anyone making an allegation or a call to a whistleblower hotline.’ However, this move is clearly retaliatory and may also constitute obstruction of a congressional inquiry,” the lawyers went on.

Continue reading “”

It’s not about popularity or even the usefulness of a thing. It’s about bureaucraps exercising arbitrary power at the whim of whoever happens to be in charge. We are either a nation of laws, or we’re nothing more than another dictatorship under the rule of man, instead of the rule of law.


Analysis: Despite Trump Claim, Bump Stock Ban is Important

Former President Donald Trump (R.) hand waved his decision to unilaterally ban bump stocks in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting as “very unimportant.” But the ban was enormously consequential both legally and politically.

On Wednesday, Trump was asked about his ban by a Republican primary voter at CNN’s town hall.

“As you know, the bump stocks are actually a very unimportant thing,” Trump replied. “NRA I went with them, and they said, ‘it doesn’t mean anything, or actually all they do is teach you how to shoot very inaccurately.’ So, we did that.”

It is true that the National Rifle Association (NRA) supported instituting the ban via executive order after balking at a legislative ban they argued went too far. Trump listened to NRA and issued an order to have the ATF craft a rule banning the devices as unregistered machineguns–possession of which could lead to upwards of ten years in prison under the National Firearms Act (NFA). However, he turned a deaf ear when the NRA complained the rule went too far by refusing to exempt those who’d legally bought the stocks before Trump ordered the rule.

The result was a total confiscation order for bump stocks from the Trump Administration. Despite previously ruling bump stocks were legal to buy without special regulations under the Obama Administration, the ATF declared under Trump the stocks are actually machineguns and aren’t legal to buy and never were. Only destroying the stock you owned or turning it over to the ATF without compensation were offered as remedies to avoiding potential federal felony charges.

The ATF had made its fair share of contradictory or incoherent rules and determinations before the bump stock ban–it had once claimed pressing a pistol-brace-equipped gun to your shoulder constitutes redesigning it on the fly.

However, the bump stock ban was one step further than many of the agency’s previous proclamations. It was based on a lie. One that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has since called out.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Biden’s administration continues pushing radical and impractical proposals that are imposing regressive energy taxes on low- and middle-income consumers, hurting our energy security, and increasing the risk of a catastrophic failure of our electric grid.

It’s time for sober thinking about our energy and power networks. We need an affordable, reliable, and resilient electric grid. Unfortunately, sober thinking about energy is in desperately short supply in Washington, DC.

EPA v. The Grid
A week after FERC commissioners warned about a looming “catastrophic reliability failure,” the EPA issued rules that could devastate the Mother Network.

On May 4, members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission delivered stark warnings to the members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The agency’s acting chairman, Willie Phillips, told the senators, “We face unprecedented challenges to the reliability of our nation’s electric system.”

FERC Commissioner Mark Christie echoed Phillips’ warning, saying the U.S. electric grid is “heading for a very catastrophic situation in terms of reliability.” His colleague, Commissioner James Danly, averred that there is a “looming reliability crisis in our electricity markets.”

The commissioners pointed to several factors for the reliability crisis, including numerous coal plants that are being retired prematurely, insufficient pipeline capacity to assure natural gas can be delivered to power plants, insufficient high-voltage transmission capacity, and distortions in the electricity market caused by massive federal subsidies for weather-dependent renewables.

On the last point, Danly told the senators, “FERC has allowed the markets to fall prey to the price distorting and warping effects of subsidies and public policies that have driven the advancement of large quantities of intermittent renewable resources onto the electric system.” In his written testimony, Danly went further, saying “Most of these market-distorting forces originate with subsidies — both state and federal — and from public policies that are otherwise designed to promote the deployment of non-dispatchable wind and solar assets or to drive fossil-fuel generators out of business as quickly as possible.”

Continue reading “”

And this is another reason why they want to delegitimize and/or pack the court, so when this type of bureaucrap-for-brains reaches the courts, they believe they’ll have some way to bully the justices to rule things their way.

Anti-gun activist: forget banning ‘assault weapons,’ expand the NFA instead

As Democrats ramp up their demands for a ban on modern sporting rifles, progressive columnist and talk show host Thom Hartmann thinks he’s found a more practical way to make semi-automatic firearms off-limits to the average American; expanding the National Firearms Act to include all semi-autos and require owners to pay a $200 tax in order to possess a Glock pistol or an AR-15.

To make his case, Hartmann turns to history… or at least his version of it.

We still remember their names:

  • Bonnie and Clyde gunned down civilians and cops as they cut a bloody swath across the Midwest with their full-auto .30-06 fire from M1918 Browning Automatic Rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, and .45 ACP rounds from full-auto M1911 handguns.
  • Machine Gun Kelly preferred  the Thompson machine gun to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible.
  • So did John Dillinger, who’s famous “Tommy Gun” has been recreated and is sold online today.
  • Baby Face Nelson liked to kill FBI agents with his fully automatic .45 pistol.
  • Pretty Boy Floyd’s famous weapon was an automatic Colt pistol.
  • Ma Barker, who as a child was devastated when her hero Jesse James was killed in 1882, could not hold a rifle being only only 5’ 4” tall so also used an automatic handgun.
  • Al Capone preferred to carry a .38 Smith & Wesson handgun, letting his gang do the really bloody work with their automatic rifles and shotguns.

Collectively, through the late 1920s and early 1930s, these and hundreds of other less-well-remembered killers used weapons developed for the battlefield around the time of the Civil War and World War I to spill blood all across America. Weapons the Founders of America and Framers of the Constitution couldn’t have dreamed of.

And then America said, “Enough!”

In 1934, Congress passed and President Roosevelt signed the National Firearms Act (NFA), which didn’t outlaw even one single gun. Instead, it put a tax on automatic weapons, sawed-off shotguns, and a variety of other weapons of war. That’s all it took to stop the slaughter.

Wow, all it took to stop organized crime from continuing their gangland slayings was a gun control law? Pretty impressive, or at least it would be if it wasn’t totally false. Among the factors that Hartmann fails to acknowledge are the repeal of Prohibition in 1933, which removed a huge source of revenue (and conflict) among the mob bosses and gangs that had been growing fat off the fruits of their illicit labor for most of the past decade.

Continue reading “”