Thursday, May 25, 2023

Mere Words Won’t Deter Corrupt Officials


The Durham report shores up the image of a government characterized by the rule of law and fidelity to high principle but conceals the reality of bipartisan addictions to graft and self-dealing.


Imagine if the police caught Ted Bundy and, instead of trying him for his crimes, released a bombshell report detailing his brutality with reams of evidence—but then let him walk free. 

While many are treating the Durham report as the final word on defamatory Russian collusion claims against President Donald Trump, punishment and prosecutions are absent. As illustrated by the Bundy example, exposing wrongdoing, but withholding punishment, is deeply unsatisfying. 

The Durham report explains in great detail what many of us already know: the FBI, the broader intelligence community, various Washington insiders, and the Hillary Clinton campaign conspired to influence the 2016 election with fake claims that Donald Trump had engaged in unlawful Russian collusion. They used these charges to influence his foreign policy, investigate him and his associates, and to encourage widespread disobedience among unelected bureaucrats working for the federal government. 

While this is all terrible and demonstrates lawless unaccountability by our most senior intelligence and law enforcement officials, everyone should have known most of this already. Justice Department’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz had earlier reached a similar conclusion. And various of the particular details had already become public through a combination of court rulings, news reports, and the mostly empty Mueller report. 

Public interest in this story is more than merely academic. The entire government is supposed to be our servant. Its workers—elected and unelected—only have the authority we give them. When they lie to us, break the rules, and try to control us in order to further their institutional interests, then they deserve much worse than a written reprimand. 

Some of the bad actors have lost their jobs, including James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Kevin Clinesmith. But none, so far as I know, have lost their pensions, been barred from future federal employment, or been sent to prison. 

Former FBI Director James Comey is running around the country making millions and lecturing about ethics. Former Assistant Director Andrew McCabe is a frequent commentator on cable news. 

Junior FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, who altered an email in order to secure a FISA warrant against Carter Page, served no jail time and was able to get his Washington, D.C., law license back (although he remains suspended in Michigan). 

Not a single one of these creeps has apologized. 

Perhaps this weak sauce should not be surprising. After all, being filled to the gills with lawyers, Washington, D.C., loves words, and its striver class is obsessed with prestige. Perhaps the people celebrating this report think the embarrassment of being called out in the report is punishment enough. But this is all cold comfort, since we do not hold these people in nearly the esteem in which they all hold themselves. 

The problem of reports leading nowhere is not limited to the recent Durham report. There were endless congressional hearings on Benghazi and Iran during the Obama years, none of which led to prosecutions or serious changes in policy. The Washington Post released the “Afghanistan Papers,” showing years of dishonesty, corruption, and incompetence in that military campaign, but none of the liars were cashiered. 

Dr. Anthony Fauci and others in the public health apparatus have been hauled repeatedly in front of congressional committees, but they have retired with fat pensions and book deals. And the current FBI director, Christopher Wray, has lied and dissembled before Congress repeatedly since his appointment, but even he still has his job. In other words, with and without detailed reports, none of these wrongdoers have faced serious consequences.

Rather than being the start of accountability, documents like the Durham report are a type of performance art. They are designed to shore up the image of a government characterized by the rule of law and fidelity to high principle, but they conceal the reality of bipartisan addictions to graft, low standards, and self-dealing. 

Any congressman, Democrat or Republican, has more in common with his counterparts in the other party, as well as everyone else in that town, than they do with their constituents. This is why so many congressmen retire only to live there

This is also why self-evidently immoral practices that are not technically illegal—like congressional insider trading, government officials getting royalties for the drugs they regulate, and generals selling their services to the highest bidder—are also normal and regularized. We are in a more “advanced” stage of national decline, one characterized by the luxury, weakness, and decadence for which democracies have long been criticized. 

No one receiving benefits wants to stop the gravy train, and that means there is a mutual non-aggression pact between all of the players. This pact allows demotion, reputational harm, and, in extreme cases, termination for actions that embarrass the political class, but otherwise leaves real prison time and penury off the table. 

Sensing someone who might threaten business-as-usual, the D.C. political class rejected Trump and circled the wagons against him. The infamous Steele dossier acquired a prestigious provenance early on, when it was ferried to the FBI by the consummate insider (and Keating Five beneficiary), Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.). As the Russian collusion story developed, for every lunatic like Adam Schiff, there was a nominal Republican like Liz Cheney willing to impart the patina of neutrality to what was, in fact, extreme partisanship for the interests of the ruling class. 

While nothing in the Durham report surprises me, and its conclusions are incontrovertible, I am not nearly as excited as the professional commentariat. Unless people are being sent to prison—or worse—then the rot in our political system will continue unabated.



X22, On the Fringe, and more- May 25 (signal boost included)





If there's even 1, even 1 person  on here with a Twitter, or Facebook, or even an Instagram account, I urge you to please post the link to this petition on that handle. Petitions like this rely heavily on promotion from others for high signature numbers, and there's only so much promotion I can do on my own before I start to sound really annoying and a little bit like I'm begging. 

I need promotional help on platforms with higher audiences that I'm not a part of. If there's anyone on here who can help spread the word that this petition exists, it would be a big help. Otherwise I'll be stuck at a low signature count.

Please consider helping (and make sure to use hashtags like #ncisla , #cbs and #paramountplus so that others can see them)

The Left Has Pushed the Envelope ~ VDH

Why are our government, corporations, and popular culture colluding in mass suicide—to the delight of our enemies like Communist China?


The Left is waging a full-fledged cultural revolution against traditional America. And the Maoist results are often as absurd as they are terrifying.

Special-counsel John Durham just issued his final report on wrongdoing within the FBI, CIA, and the Department of Justice. 

The summary confirms that our premier investigatory and intelligence agencies interfered in the 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns. 

Directors and high-ranking FBI officials lied under oath. They misled Congress. They altered court documents and deceived federal judges. 

The FBI hired a foreign national to gather dirt on Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign—while he was being paid by the rival Hillary Clinton campaign.

The FBI contracted Twitter to suppress news stories. It kept the Hunter Biden laptop under wraps, even as former intelligence officials flat out lied it was likely “Russian disinformation.” That was a blatant effort to aid the 2020 Biden campaign.

The IRS just conceded whistleblowers were correct and the agency fired its entire multiyear audit team responsible for investigating Hunter Biden’s purported tax irregularities. 

The agency claimed it was ordered to do so by the Department of Justice, headed by Biden’s appointee Merrick Garland.

California is facing a crushing $32 billion deficit. Yet it flirts with an $800 billion-dollar “reparations” payout to the state’s black residents. 

No one has any idea where the money for that would come from. No one can define who would qualify. No one can explain why a state that never allowed slavery eight generations ago now owes selected Californians billions of dollars it does not have. 

One of the reparations board leaders asserts blacks might be willing to accept an “installment” plan of payments.

The NAACP just issued a “travel alert” advising blacks not to visit Florida. The announcement was timed to draw negative attention to conservative Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ announcement of a presidential bid. 

Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, and Indianapolis—all outside Florida—have the highest black murder rates in the nation. 

Florida in contrast, with a black population of 3.3 million, has the second largest number of black businesses in the nation. The chairman of the NAACP’s board of directors is himself a Florida resident! 

Black Lives Matter has just announced it lost millions of dollars in investments and ran up huge deficits. 

The culprit was its former corrupt leadership. 

Its extravagant spending, plush homes, and family hangers-on have nearly bankrupted the advocacy group. It cannot account for the millions of dollars in corporate guilt and protection money it leveraged following the George Floyd riots in 2020. 

In New York, a threatening subway career criminal with 42 prior arrests was subdued by a bystander and died during the confrontation. The criminal is now deified. The would-be Samaritan is charged with felony manslaughter. 

The deceased’s uncle is vocal about his late nephew’s confrontation. But he himself was just arrested with stolen property and armed with a knife. He was mysteriously still roaming the streets despite 70 prior arrests and current active arrest warrants.

In almost every American city and town, biological males, with enormous advantages in size and musculoskeletal mass, routinely win women’s sporting competitions. 

They are systematically destroying decades of progress that sought to ensure parity between men and women’s sports. 

Corporate America has joined this cultural revolution hysteria. Companies are apparently now hellbent on destroying their brands, profits, and net worth.

Under pressure from the LGBTQ activists, the Los Angeles Dodgers reinvited the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” to celebrate Pride night at Dodger Stadium. 

Catholics and Christians had objected to the invitation because the group’s notoriety hinges on its sexualized and often pornographic mockery of Catholic ritual, the Holy Trinity, and Christian faith. 

The supposedly courageous group would never dare extend its street-theater blasphemy to other religious groups such as Muslims or Hindus. 

The Dodgers apparently do not care that Greater Los Angeles may be home to 6 million Mexican American citizens and resident Hispanic immigrants. Most are Catholic and many were avid Dodger fans. 

Anheuser-Busch has nearly destroyed its best-selling Bud Light brand by hiring transgender performance-art activist Dylan Mulvaney to hawk the brand—and his own transitioning—to America’s working classes. 

The Disney corporation, for decades, has enjoyed multibillion-dollar concessions and a veritable 40-square mile private fiefdom gifted from the taxpayers of Florida.

No matter. Disney has rebranded it films, amusement parks, and television offerings to reflect radical transgendered, gay, and race advocacies. 

The results so far are billion-dollar losses in Disney stock, subscribers, and viewers. 

A woke CNN has all but destroyed its once-global audience. It now has fewer viewers than certain popular podcasts.

All these implosions are not just shocking but surreal. Why are our government, corporations, and popular culture colluding in mass suicide—to the delight of our enemies like Communist China?



Poll: Tucker Carlson Is Most Influential Public Figure In America



According to a recent Gallup/Knight Foundation poll aggregating approximately 2,800 responses, Tucker Carlson is the “public individual” from whom most Americans get their information.

Gallup offered a broad definition of “public individual” to participants, including anyone who had “public influence (for example, a celebrity, journalist, academic expert, show host, online influencer, or business leader).”

Despite the wide field of options, most participants still chose media personalities. Carlson ranked first out of 900 unique individuals, with 113 of 2,800 respondents mentioning his name as the “one public individual” they watched or followed most often.

In a result that marks the public’s growing mistrust of legacy media, leftist comedians Trevor Noah and Stephen Colbert also ranked in the top 10, higher than credentialed scientists, current and former presidents, journalists, and Joe Rogan.

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow came in at a close second. Maddow was the only figure besides Carlson to receive more than 100 mentions.

Other notable media personalities ranking lower than Carlson include his former coworker Sean Hannity, facts-over-feelings media personality Ben Shapiro, and corporate media personalities Lester Holt and David Muir.

Carlson took up 4 percent of total responses, with the top 20 individuals garnering 24 percent.

The poll also demonstrated that Americans are primarily motivated by likability and trustworthiness when choosing who to turn to for information. Entertainment value and perspectives coming from outside the legacy media bubble were also highly ranked priorities.

The poll was released during a time of uncertainty for Carlson. However, earlier this month, he announced he would resume his nightly show on the social media platform Twitter. A recent poll from Change Research also showed that Carlson is currently more popular among registered voters than his former network.



Biden's ATF Loses on Biden's Signature Pistol Brace Ban but a Bigger Loss Is on the Way

Biden's ATF Loses on Biden's Signature Pistol Brace Ban but a Bigger Loss Is on the Way

streiff reporting for RedState 

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a perhaps fatal blow to the attempt by Joe Biden’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to outlaw the widely used and previously legal and unregulated pistol stabilizing brace. The injunction is a preliminary that lasts until the Fifth Circuit hears the appeal of a district court decision and only covers the people named in the appeal.

How We Got Here

Back in March, I wrote on the upcoming fight over pistol stabilizing braces in Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Takes on the ATF Over Their Bizarre Pistol Brace Rule.

A pistol brace, also known as a stabilizing brace, is an accessory that attaches to the rear of the gun and allows the firearm, one that is technically a pistol, to be fired one-handed. These have been legal since their invention in 2010. However, on January 31, 2023, an ATF rule went into effect that classifies a pistol with a pistol brace as a “short-barreled rifle (SBR),” that is, a rifle with a barrel that is shorter than my…sorry, I meant to say 16 inches. The rule is complicated, but you have a few options:

  • Permanently remove or alter the brace so that it can’t be reattached
  • Add a barrel longer than 16 inches
  • Use an e-Form 1 or paper Form 1 to register it as an SBR
  • Turn it in to your local ATF office
  • Destroy the firearm

Here are a couple of videos explaining what a pistol brace is and how to comply with it.





Since writing that, the ATF has ruled that detaching the stabilizing brace is not sufficient to achieve compliance; the brace must be made inoperable or destroyed. The ATF director contradicted that guidance in testimony to Congress, but I wouldn’t count on using his testimony as a criminal defense.

Prior Legal Action

The order had barely taken effect when Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) went to court to block it. The FPC sued on behalf of its membership, William Mock and Christopher Lewis sued as owners of pistol stabilizing braces, and Maxim Defense Industries LLC joined the suit as a manufacturer of braces.

Plaintiffs William T. Mock, Christopher Lewis, Maxim Defense Industries, LLC, and Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. (FPC) have sued Defendants Attorney General Merrick Garland, in his official capacity, the United States Department of Justice, Director of ATF Steven Dettelbach, in his official capacity, and ATF. Individual Plaintiffs Mock and Lewis are Texas residents who own at least one braced pistol and would purchase others in the immediate future but for the Final Rule’s additional regulatory requirements. Maxim Defense is a firearms and firearms accessories manufacturer and retailer that specializes in stabilizing braces and braced pistols. The majority of Maxim Defense’ revenues are attributable to sales of products now subject to the Final Rule. FPC is a nonprofit organization that exists to defend and promote its members’ constitutional rights, advance individual liberty and restore freedom through political and legal advocacy and public education. FPC’s membership includes individual gun owners, licensed manufacturers and retailers, gun ranges, firearms trainers and educators, and others. Individual Plaintiffs and Maxim Defense are members of FPC.

The District Court ruled against them, and they appealed.

As this case was progressing, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation, also filed a lawsuit. In addition to the Texas-led lawsuit, West Virginia and North Dakota are leading another major effort in a case called Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, Inc., vs. Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The other plaintiffs are SB Tactical, B&T USA, Wounded Warrior Richard Cicero, and a coalition of 25 states led by West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley.

The other states are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.

Impact

The injunction itself is small potatoes. It only applies to the individuals who sued and are within the Fifth Circuit’s boundaries (Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi). However, it signals bad news for the ATF. The standard for winning an injunction is that the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm if it is not granted and that they will probably succeed on the merits of the case.

The Paxton suit, filed in a very Second Amendment-friendly courthouse, will probably succeed at trial, and the ATF will lose its appeal.

This will effectively neuter the ATF rule in the Fifth Circuit and generate other cases in other federal districts. Ultimately, you can’t have a product legal in at least three states and illegal in several others, as the ATF is finding out with its bump stock ban. So the Supreme Court will have to get involved.

Ultimately, this case is a loser for the ATF. Just like the bump stock ban redefined “automatic weapon” to “semi-automatic weapon that we don’t like,” they’ve changed the definition of a rifle from “must be fired from the shoulder” to “we can call anything we don’t like a rifle and f*** you.”


Fifth Circuit Opinion in Mock vs. Garland

Mock vs. Garland by streiff at redstate


District Court Opinion in Mock vs. Garland


Gavin Newsom Considering Cowardly Move in Event Dianne Feinstein Retires Early

Hillary Clinton Blurts Out the Quiet Part About the Democrats' Elder Abuse of Dianne Feinstein


While the push has been on in woke Democratic circles to shove Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) out the door before her last term in office is over, there has also been a coordinated effort among Feinstein’s “allies” to make sure she doesn’t.

The reasons are obvious but nevertheless intriguing even to those not predisposed to obsessing over the finer points of behind-the-scenes political machinations.

The most vocal proponent on the “Feinstein must retire” side has been Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who is rumored to be considering a future run for president but who for now seems content with being the co-chair for Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-Calif.) 2024 Senate run.

Khanna has on the surface tried to make this about Feinstein and her allies needing to “put country over party,” but in reality, an early Feinstein retirement has the potential to benefit Khanna by making Lee’s path to the Democratic Senate nomination easier.

Why? Because Gov. Gavin Newsom has in the past stated that he would pick a “woman of color” to replace Feinstein in the short term. Appointing Lee obviously would give her a running head start over her competitors.

That last point is something that seriously concerns former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), whose daughter, Nancy Corinne Prowda, has been acting in a caregiving role for Feinstein in recent weeks and has been seen close by her side during some of her recent appearances on Capitol Hill.

Ostensibly, this has been to ensure Feinstein’s well-being, but the rumor mill has it that Pelosi is having her daughter keep close tabs on Feinstein to make sure she doesn’t retire early, which would hurt Pelosi’s choice for the seat – Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is also a declared candidate.

But back to Newsom, as the unseemly debate continues over whether Feinstein should stay in the Senate or retire to her California home, he is reportedly considering his options to replace her in the event she decides to go ahead and head for the exits.

One person who is said to be on the list of people he has in mind to fill her seat? Longtime talk show host and big-money Democrat backer Oprah Winfrey:

In filling a Senate vacancy, Newsom has the authority to name a successor. He could even pick himself, though that is unlikely. State rules dictate when an election would have to be held.

Newsom’s choices all run risks.

He could get entangled in the ongoing Senate campaign and choose one of the declared candidates to fill a Feinstein vacancy.

Another option would be to select a caretaker, and then leave it to voters to decide in next year’s election — someone who would hold the seat but is not a Senate candidate. That’s where names like Winfrey come up — a celebrity who is Black and happens to meet Newsom’s appointment pledge. However, Newsom also might find it challenging to land on someone willing to take a short-term appointment.

If he picked one of the declared Senate candidates, Newsom would unsettle the growing field and elevate that person to frontrunner status. U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee, who is Black, is already running against fellow Democratic Reps. Katie Porter and Adam Schiff, who both are white.

According to the California politics experts at SFGate, there’s a “solid chance” this rumor is “something more” than just one being mindlessly “floated in California circles”:

The Associated Press does state that “a range of names, from obscure to famous” have been “floated in California circles,” so this could simply be a case of the publication deciding Winfrey, with her celebrity status, was the only one worth mentioning. But there’s a pretty solid chance it’s something more.

If so, this would absolutely be the coward’s way out for Newsom, who would avoid any cries of “favoritism” from his party in the event he chose Winfrey, who doesn’t have an ounce of political experience, over the others being floated to fill the seat.

But in a way, this would be par for the course for the “New Newsom,” should it come to pass. After all, he’s the guy bizarrely running around the country portraying wokesters in his party including himself as the “sane” alternatives to “extremist MAGA Republicans” who he says would take this country back decades if they get any more powerful – all while leaving out the fact that the Democrat policies he supports, like transgender women in women’s sports, are actually doing just that.

It would be just like him at this point to play the “middle of the road” placator type in the Senate race, trying not to ruffle the feathers of any of the major political power players he would need to make a formidable presidential run in the future a reality.

Then again, this isn’t really the “New Newsom” here at all, come to think about it. In fact, it sounds like the same Newsom we’ve always known, willing to put his personal and political ambitions ahead of doing what’s right for the residents of his state.

In other words, same crap, different day, same feckless “leader.” Despite continually picking the wrong people for the job, Californians really do deserve better than this.

Related: Ted Cruz Spills the Tea on Backroom Campaign to Replace Dianne Feinstein


Hillary Clinton Blurts Out the Quiet Part About 
the Democrats' Elder Abuse of Dianne Feinstein

We have been reliably informed going back decades about how Democrats are allegedly the party of “compassion.” But on the issue of Dianne Feinstein’s future in the U.S. Senate, we’ve seen a whole lot of masks slipping, which in the process has revealed a level of ugliness rarely put on such obvious display by Democrat “leaders.”

When last we left you with Feinstein, the Democrat/media conundrum over her situation was taking an unseemly turn, with the additional, previously unknown “medical complications” she faced during her prolonged shingles bout taking center stage in a way the press has in the past been very reluctant to do with Democrats.

As I noted at the time, though concerning information about an elected official’s health is something voters deserve to know about, my issue with the piece was in the timing, because it came at an awfully convenient time for the contingent of Democrats and media types – including the Times – who want Feinstein to resign now so someone more “woke” can be installed in her place.

In my opinion, the way Feinstein has been treated by foes and supposed “allies” alike as powerful Democrats exploit her condition in a delicate 2024 Senate chess game suggests some pretty rampant elder abuse is taking place, which is something twice-failed Democratic candidate for president Hillary Clinton accidentally blurted out in so many words in a Monday interview at the Chicago Humanities Festival.

When asked about Feinstein and the retirement question, Clinton first pointed to her friendship and working relationship with Feinstein as a way to burnish her supposed creds as an expert of sorts on the subject:

“Let me say a word about my friend and longtime colleague Dianne Feinstein,” she continued. “First of all, she has suffered greatly from the bout of shingles and encephalitis that she endured. Here is the dilemma for her: she got reelected, the people of California voted for her again, not very long ago. That was the voters’ decision to vote for her, and she has been a remarkable and very effective leader.”

She then openly admitted that Feinstein, who pictures have made abundantly clear should be home resting instead of being wheeled into the Senate and various committee rooms as a rubber stamp for the Biden agenda, should not retire because Democrats need judges confirmed. Who did she blame for her callous opinion? Republicans:

“Here’s the dilemma: the Republicans will not agree to add someone else to the Judiciary Committee if she retires,” she continued, referencing Feinstein’s powerful committee membership. (When Feinstein was absent from the Senate for nearly three months this year recovering from health issues, it created a logjam on the narrowly divided Judiciary Committee, since Democrats were unable to confirm President Joe Biden’s judicial nominees without Republican support.) “I want you to think about how crummy that is. I don’t know in her heart about whether she really would or wouldn’t, but right now, she can’t. Because if we’re going to get judges confirmed, which is one of the most important continuing obligations that we have, then we cannot afford to have her seat vacant.”

“If Republicans were to say and do the decent thing and say, well this woman was gravely ill, she had just lost her husband to cancer… of course we will let you fill this position if she retires. But they won’t say that,” she continued. “So what are we supposed to do? All these people pushing her to retire: fine, we get no more judges? I don’t think that’s a good tradeoff.”

Got that? Hillary admits that Feinstein, 89, was “gravely ill” over the last couple of months (something you don’t get over so easily) and on top of that has been suffering for over a year now over the loss of her husband to cancer. Let’s also not forget Feinstein’s rumored cognitive issues, which have continued upon her return to the Senate. But in Clinton’s view, Feinstein should be dragged if necessary into the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) because without her Biden’s more radical judicial nominees don’t make it to the Senate floor for a full vote.

Just how cold-blooded can one human being actually be? Hillary Clinton does a pretty damned good job of lowering the bar on that every time she opens her mouth to speak. I mean she is literally saying that Dianne Feinstein’s health and well-being are second to woke Democrat nominees getting shoved through the SJC.

Keep in mind here that in addition to Clinton’s infamous heartless nature being on full display, she’s also lying on a number of fronts.

For starters, if Feinstein resigned, California Gov. Gavin Newsom would get to appoint her interim replacement, which presumably would happen in a relatively short amount of time since he’s likely already considered who to put in that slot. So even if Feinstein did retire, it wouldn’t take long before Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) would be able to get through the few nominees that Republicans on the committee agree should not go forth.

And that brings me to my next point: As Sens. John Kennedy (R-L.a.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and others have pointed out, Feinstein’s absence from the Senate did not bring the SJC to a screeching halt. They continued to push nominees through for floor votes. It was just a handful (I think it was four?) who Republicans believed were too radical/unqualified to fill the positions for which Biden had nominated them.

When Feinstein returned, it didn’t take long before those “stalled” nominees made it through the committee. But something else that has also “made it through” all of this, as I’ve said before, is the sobering reminder that Democrats should not be trusted with anything, not your wallet, not your Senate seat, and especially not your grandma.



IRS Opened Investigation Into Matt Taibbi The Same Day He Blew The Whistle On Twitter And The Feds’ Censorship Scheme



The IRS opened an investigation into independent reporter Matt Taibbi the same day he published a “Twitter Files” report documenting efforts between the social media platform and federal intelligence agencies to censor dissenting voices online.

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel demanding all documents and communications related to the agency’s decision to launch an investigation into Taibbi. According to the letter, the IRS’s inquiry was initiated on Dec. 24, 2022 — the same day Taibbi released a bombshell report detailing collusion between Twitter and the federal government to silence online voices disapproved of by the regime.

“The IRS’s production shows that the IRS opened its examination of Mr. Taibbi’s 2018 tax return on December 24, 2022,” wrote Committee Chair and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. “Not only was this date Christmas Eve and a Saturday, but it also happened to be three weeks after he published the first Twitter Files detailing government abuses and the same day that Mr. Taibbi published the ninth segment of the Twitter Files, detailing how federal government agencies ‘from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA’ coordinated to censor and coerce speech on various social media platforms.”

In his Dec. 24 reportbased on “documents passed to Twitter by the FBI-led Foreign Influence Task Force,” Taibbi revealed Twitter “was receiving content recommendations in bulk from an array of federal agencies through the FBI, about a range of topics — from domestic extremist groups in the U.S. to … Joe Biden, and the energy company Burisma.” The report also showed that Twitter — along with Facebook and dozens of other tech-related firms — regularly attended FITF-led gatherings, where “companies often received an ‘OGA briefing,’ usually about foreign policy matters.”

According to Taibbi, OGA is often used as a euphemism for “intelligence services in general, or the CIA in particular.”

During his March 9 testimony before the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, Taibbi revealed the IRS had visited his home that same day, prompting Jordan to send a letter to the agency requesting information about its home visit. While the IRS produced some documents, those provided to the committee “raise more questions than they
answer,” according to Jordan.

“The IRS asserted to the Committee that it sent a letter to Mr. Taibbi on October 24, 2019—nine days after Mr. Taibbi filed his 2018 tax return—asking Mr. Taibbi to verify his return because it met identity theft criteria and could not be processed until he confirmed,” Jordan wrote. “The IRS alleged that it sent a second letter to Mr. Taibbi on March 23, 2020. However, according to Mr. Taibbi, neither he nor his accountant received either of these letters or any other notification that there was an issue with his 2018 tax return—that is, until the IRS conducted a field visit at Mr. Taibbi’s home three years later.”

Equally alarming, however, is the tactics with which the IRS used to dig up any dirt it could find on Taibbi. Jordan revealed that a month after opening its inquiry, the agent assigned to Taibbi’s case was instructed to perform an “extensive investigation,” which included “using publicly available search engines and commercial investigative software such as Anywho, Consumer Affairs, LexisNexis Accruint, and Google.” The documents provided to the committee also purportedly show the agency kept a “dossier” on Taibbi that included information such as his phone numbers, voter registration records, whether he had a concealed weapons permit, and whether he possessed a hunting or fishing license.

Taibbi’s Wikipedia page was also examined during the investigation.

Notably, the IRS documents acquired by Jordan reveal that Taibbi “did not owe the IRS anything,” but rather, “the IRS owed Mr. Taibbi a substantial refund.” The aforementioned documents do not, however, provide any information regarding “the IRS’s decision-making process to open a case against Mr. Taibbi, or to conduct a field visit at his home.”

Jordan is demanding the IRS forfeit any and all records related to the agency’s investigation into Taibbi no later than May 31.