Pew Research: Democrats Value Free Speech Far Less than Republicans

posted by Dennis Prager at American Greatness 

In case you were in doubt – and if you were in doubt, that means you aren’t following what is happening in America to the most important freedom of all – Pew Research has confirmed that Democrats value free speech far less than Republicans do.

Read the following statistics and conclusions and weep for our country:

• “The share of U.S. adults who say the federal government should restrict false information has risen from 39% in 2018 to 55% in 2023.”
• “Just over half of Americans (55%) support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online, even if it limits people from freely publishing or accessing information.”
• “Support for government intervention has steadily risen since the first time we asked this question in 2018. In fact, the balance of opinion has tilted: Five years ago, Americans were more inclined to prioritize freedom of information over restricting false information (58% vs. 39%).”
• “The partisan gap in support for restricting false information has grown substantially since 2018.”
• “Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online (70% vs. 39%). There was virtually no difference between the parties in 2018, but the share of Democrats who support government intervention has grown from 40% in 2018 to 70% in 2023.”
• “A large majority of Democrats and Democratic leaners (81%) support technology companies taking such steps, while about half of Republicans (48%) say the same.”

Here are 10 conclusions:

No. 1: The most important human freedom is freedom of speech. Free speech is what makes the pursuit of truth possible. It is what makes the advancement of science possible. It constitutes the very definition of a free society. And free speech is what makes human dignity possible. People who cannot say what they believe are dehumanized. They ultimately become robotic beings exemplified by North Koreans.

No. 2: America has been the freest country in the world for all of its history. That is why the French gave America the Statue of Liberty. It is rapidly relinquishing that title.

No. 3: Free speech is seriously threatened for the first time in American history.

No. 4: The threat to free speech comes entirely from the Left.

No. 5: There is no example in history of the Left attaining power and allowing free speech. From the French Revolution to the Russian Revolution to the Maoist takeover of China to almost any university in America today, wherever the Left comes to power, it suppresses speech.

No. 6: The Left must suppress speech in order to retain power. If it were to allow dissent, it would lose its hold on power.

No. 7: That is why conservative speakers are rarely allowed to speak on college campuses. Left-wing professors, deans and administrators know – consciously or subconsciously – that an effective conservative speaker can undo years of left-wing indoctrination in just 90 minutes.

No. 8: Given that “Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online (70% vs. 39%),” the often-stated claim that “there is little difference between the two parties” is false.

No. 9: All tyrannies label dissent “misinformation.” That is what Vladimir Putin’s government labels all dissent in Russia today.

The communist regime in the Soviet Union named its official newspaper “Pravda” – the Russian word for “truth” – because, in a left-wing tyranny, the left-wing regime determines truth. Anything else is “misinformation” or “disinformation.”

That Western societies are moving toward Soviet-like suppression of speech is obvious in America and was made particularly clear in 2020, when the then-prime minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, told her country: “We will continue to be your single source of truth” and “If you do not hear it from the government, it is not true.” Fittingly, Ardern was awarded two teaching fellowships at Harvard University – one of them at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, based at Harvard Law School, where she “will study ways to improve content standards and platform accountability for extremist content online.”

No. 10: Liberals are abandoning liberal values – in particular, their storied commitment to free speech. There are far more liberals than leftists, but over the past few years the liberals’ unswerving commitment to the Democratic Party, unswerving commitment to The New York Times, The Washington Postor virtually any other mainstream news source, and their unswerving opposition to conservatives and the Republican Party has led them to embrace and unswervingly vote for left-wing values.

As for the future, this is what Pew reported regarding young Americans: “The shares of younger adults who say they support tech companies and the government restricting false information online have increased substantially since 2018 (by 14 and 19 percentage points, respectively).”

But there is a better reaction than to weep.

Fight.

X22, On the Fringe, and more- July 27

 

Whistleblowers and the Rule of Law

by Daniel Oliver for American Greatness

What should law-abiding, patriotic citizens do when it’s clear that the system has stopped working?

What do woke liberals do (and apologies for any implication that they are patriotic citizens) when they don’t like that the system is working? They riot and kill. That’s what the Black Lives Matter riots were all about. “They” didn’t like the system, so “they” destroyed about $2 billion worth of property and killed at least 19 people. The New York Times, the Washington Post, and all the proper pontificating people in Washington, D.C., and the other bastions of woke-liberal group-think, didn’t bat an eyelash at the carnage. And so they all became complicit in the venture.

Who funded all that rioting? Even now we don’t know, because the media didn’t tell us, either because they didn’t know and didn’t care to find out, or because they did know—and didn’t care to tell us.

But now there’s real evidence that the system isn’t working the way it is supposed to work. In the administration of justice by President Biden’s “Justice” Department, there have been numerous, concrete examples of political bias, not just penumbras formed by emanations of political bias.

For those who had time to listen to it, the testimony of the two Internal Revenue Service witnesses who investigated Hunter Biden’s conduct over the past years was proof positive that all is not well in Camelot.

Their testimony was riveting. And sickening. And almost entirely ignored by the New York Times and the Washington Post—and by the major television networks and their news shows. Why are we not surprised?

Back in the day, there would have been (was, in fact) Stop Press Special Commentary, printing every word of any comment derogatory to Richard Nixon. In 1950, when Nixon was running for the Senate from California, he had done-in a liberal hero (actually “heroine”) of the Left, Helen Gahagan Douglas (who had inspired the Evil Queen in Disney’s 1937 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs). During his senatorial campaign, Nixon referred to her as “pink right down to her underwear.” On election day, he beat the pants off her, for which the media never forgave him—and that, class,

is what Watergate was really all about.

But we digress—though maybe not: we have to realize that the media is as corrupt (and has been for years) as the Biden Justice Department. Or is it the other way around?

In June, Hunter Biden pled guilty to two misdemeanor charges regarding his filing of federal income taxes. The Justice Department agreed to recommend probation as part of his plea agreement. If convicted, he would have faced a maximum penalty of 12 months in prison for each tax charge, as well as an additional 10 years in prison for a separate firearm charge, one for which his lawyers have negotiated a separate pretrial diversion agreement. (A diversion agreement is a means of avoiding a judgment of criminal guilt). Prosecutors are not currently seeking any jail time for any charges.

For Biden’s sweetheart plea deal to go into effect, it must be approved by a federal judge, in this case, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika. The hearing for Biden’s plea deal is currently set for July 26.

The lead prosecutor bringing charges against Hunter Biden is David Weiss, the U.S. Attorney for Delaware and a Trump appointee. Weiss’s investigation of Hunter Biden began in 2018, with an initial focus on Biden’s foreign business dealings.

Weiss has faced criticism from IRS whistleblowers and congressional Republicans for his decision to accept Hunter Biden’s plea deal, which many Republicans have condemned as overly lenient.

The two whistleblowers, Joseph Ziegler and Gary Shapley, testified that they were prevented by the Department of Justice from gathering evidence that connected President Biden’s alleged involvement in Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Ziegler said that the four prosecutors assigned to the case agreed with recommending felony and misdemeanor tax charges for Hunter Biden.

Now what happens? The question is, will Judge Noreika accept the plea deal? She is not bound to, but there are some limits on what she can look at and consider beyond the evidence presented to her.

Judges are appointed for life precisely so they can be brave in making decisions and not worry about losing their jobs—and their paychecks, which (for many) feed their families and pay their mortgages.

What kind of a judge is Noreika? She is a Trump appointee, but federal records show she has made more than $15,000 in political donations to both Republicans and Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Tom Cotton, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee—which suggests she is not, to say the least, a MAGA Republican.

In theory, a judge can’t troll for information not presented in court, which means Noreika is not supposed to make decisions based on the testimony of whistleblowers before Congress but not before her. But what is a judge supposed to do if it becomes apparent, as it seems to be in this case, that relevant parts of the Hunter Biden story have been suppressed—and by politicians for political reasons—to protect the guilty?

Putting the question otherwise, What should a law-abiding, patriotic citizen do when it’s clear that the system has stopped working?

If Judge Noreika were to ignore the normal restrictions on her authority by considering the whistleblowers’ testimony before Congress, is that justifiable on the grounds that the system has stopped working? If not, why not?

Is it more noble to smash, loot, burn, and kill than to consider evidence improperly denied to the court?

If Noreika does consider the whistleblowers’ testimony, what will the BLMers do? Take to the streets again, and then ask Vice President Harris to bail them out of jail as she did during the 2020 BLM riots?

Judges are appointed for life. But they can still be impeached. Would “law and order” congressional Republicans be likely to impeach Noreika (in the next Congress, if they hold both houses of Congress) if she fails to reject the Hunter Biden plea deal?

Should they?

If not, what should law-abiding, patriotic citizens do when it’s clear that the system has stopped working?

It’s Time To Disarm All FBI Agents And Return Authority To Local Law Enforcement

If the FBI won’t submit to the legislative branch’s oversight, Congress can take away its guns and its jurisdiction.

posted by Stephen Friend at The Federalist

Republicans hammered FBI Director Christopher Wray during his recent testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Their inquiries concerned illegal FISA searches, overly aggressive arrest tactics, investigations of parents attending school board meetings, labeling traditional Catholics as anti-government extremists, and potential misuses of undercover agents at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Throughout the hearing, Wray repeatedly denied knowing the information Republicans sought. He proclaimed FBI policy precluded him from discussing ongoing investigations.

Wray’s testimony offered ample evidence of an agency in dire need of reform. In the aftermath, Republicans face questions about funding a new FBI headquarters, countering political investigations of American conservatives, FISA renewal, and how to counter Wray’s unwillingness to submit to the legislative branch’s oversight authority over his agency. Most importantly, Republicans must contend with growing calls from the electorate to defund the FBI. Many Republican representatives lack the political appetite to withstand a “defund the police” label from corporate media.

I will proffer an alternative option that may appease both factions: Disarm the FBI and force it to partner with local law enforcement agencies for any investigative and enforcement activities.

The Unarmed Criminal Investigator

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) defines a series 1811 “criminal investigator” as one who supervises, leads, or performs work involving planning, conducting, or managing investigations related to alleged or suspected criminal violation of federal laws. OPM similarly defines a lesser-known 1810 general “investigator.” These employees supervise, lead, or perform work involving planning, conducting, or managing investigations. 1810 investigators are unarmed. Their work does not involve criminal violations of federal laws, and they can only make or invoke administrative judgments.

FBI reformation rests in the merger of the series 1810 and 1811 positions. Through budget appropriations, Republicans can defund all 1811 criminal investigators from the FBI. Eliminating special agents will disarm the agency and remove its ability to arrest alleged criminal violators.

Next, Republicans should direct OPM to create a new, 1812 “unarmed criminal investigator.” Any current FBI special agents can transition to unarmed criminal investigators. Like 1810 investigators, 1812 unarmed criminal investigators will not carry firearms. Like 1811 criminal investigators, the new position should be charged with all necessary duties to investigate alleged or suspected criminal violations of federal laws. In addition, 1812 unarmed criminal investigators will not earn availability pay enhancement offered to federal law enforcement personnel. This reduces total FBI investigator salary expenditures by 25 percent.

Empower Local Authorities

Of course, unarmed agents can be just as corrupt as those with firearms. So how will a new series 1812 unarmed criminal investigator position diminish the FBI’s ability to investigate and persecute innocent Americans?

When OPM creates a new series 1812 unarmed criminal investigator position, Republicans can use budget appropriations to prohibit the FBI from investigating any alleged criminal violators without the expressed approval of state, local, or tribal law enforcement agencies holding arrest authorities within the area the investigation transpires. Further, Republicans can require federally deputized “Task Force Officers” from the approving agencies to partner and participate in all FBI investigations. The FBI presently partners with local law enforcement agencies. These partners commonly nominate personnel for federal deputization as task force officers through the United States Marshal Service. Task force officers maintain their state and tribal arrest powers in conjunction with their new, federal authorities.

These appropriation measures empower local sheriffs and police as a final stopgap measure against an out-of-control, politicized FBI. Once forced to partner with state, local, and tribal police, the FBI must demonstrate the righteousness of investigations to leaders within these agencies and gain their approval. Since these agencies are more accountable to local constituents, they will logically serve as a bulwark against FBI overreach.

Another question this plan raises is how an unarmed FBI can conduct adequate and righteous investigations and bring criminals into custody without the threat of force?

Task force officers are a vital lifeline and significant force multiplier for the FBI. The FBI employs approximately 14,000 special agents. This number is incapable of policing federal crimes for a nation rapidly approaching 400 million citizens. Task force officers enhance FBI staffing and import a wealth of investigative experience and knowledge. For its part, the FBI provides sophisticated, expensive tools and techniques to local law enforcement agencies hamstrung by budgetary constraints. Local police agencies propose task force officers due to their demonstrable abilities as detectives. These individuals are frequently the most skilled and experienced members of an FBI criminal or counterterrorism squad.

Once Republicans mandate local approval and participation in FBI investigations, task force officers are the logical choice to arrest criminal suspects. As state-certified law enforcement officers, the task force officers are qualified and approved to carry firearms in the furtherance of their duties. Republicans should leverage appropriations to mandate task force officers as solely responsible for effecting an armed arrest of an FBI subject. As was the case with opening investigations, the FBI must gain approval from local agencies before arresting a suspect.

License to Investigate Corruption

The FBI investigates local corruption within government and law enforcement. Will an enhanced partnership between federal and local agents hinder the bureau’s ability to address these matters?

FBI task force officers’ public corruption investigations are proof of concept for effective cooperation between the FBI and local agencies. Questions commonly arise regarding FBI investigator impartiality and prospects for liaison when the FBI investigates corruption within police departments. In these situations, local FBI personnel have a conflict of interest, and outside agents conduct the investigations. Similarly, if a particular agency or law enforcement officer comes under scrutiny by the FBI, federally deputized task force officers from a neutral, state-level bureau of investigations (ie: Georgia Bureau of Investigations, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Texas Department of Public Safety, etc.) will conduct an independent investigation.

Prior to the passage of the 17th Amendment, United States senators were selected by state assemblies. This arrangement empowered the states to staff the upper chamber of our federal legislature and ensured that senators were more responsive to the needs of their state governments. Similarly, we can empower state and local authorities to restore traditionally republican government by eliminating armed FBI special agents and forcing the bureau to partner with these agencies.

The answer to a weaponized FBI may not exist in defunding the bureau, merely disarming it. The political pendulum naturally swings between right and left. Both sides should agree they wish to avoid federal government persecution when they inevitably find themselves out of the majority. If Republicans disarm the FBI, they will ensure it can never inflict a mortal wound upon citizens regardless of who holds federal power.

If Republicans Want To Keep Their House Majority, They Must Impeach Joe Biden

Shawn Fleetwood reporting for The Federalist

As more damning evidence emerges implicating Joe Biden in an alleged $10 million international bribery scheme, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has started floating the idea of impeaching the sitting president.

During his Monday appearance on Fox News, the California Republican said Biden has “used the weaponization of government to benefit his family and deny Congress the ability to have the oversight” and added that an impeachment inquiry would provide “Congress the strongest power to get the rest of the knowledge and information needed.” McCarthy reiterated similar sentiments on Tuesday, telling reporters an impeachment inquiry is “the only way” Congress can “get to the bottom of the truth.”

The predicate for impeaching Biden is certainly warranted. Not only does the FD-1023 form containing claims from a “highly credible” confidential human source (CHS) show how the then-vice president was instrumental in the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating the energy company (Burisma Holdings) his son was a board member of; it also shows how the Bidens were purportedly paid $10 million for Joe’s role in the firing of said prosecutor.

Coupled with corroboration from IRS and FBI whistleblowers, former Biden family business partners, and even Joe and Hunter Biden, the scheme represents perhaps the biggest scandal involving a U.S. president in American history.

While McCarthy’s remarks have generated excitement among many prominent conservative figures, talking about impeachment and actually impeaching Biden are two very different things. Republicans deserve credit for using their House majority to shine a light on the Biden family’s shady, foreign business dealings. But the exposure of such corruption means absolutely nothing if Republicans don’t act on it.

Issuing statements and running to Fox News to discuss how corrupt the Bidens are is not going to cut it with Republican voters, and nor should it. Whether it was the Trump-Russia collusion hoax or the government-sponsored ransacking of civil liberties during the Covid lockdowns, the GOP has talked for years about “holding corrupt officials accountable,” only to then sit on their hands once given power.

[There Is More Evidence To Impeach Biden Over Ukraine Than There Ever Was For Trump]

For example, in the seven months House Republicans have been in charge, who exactly has been “held accountable?”

Has Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas faced consequences for leaving the U.S. southern border wide open? Has Attorney General Merrick Garland answered for weaponizing the Justice Department to target conservatives and protect Democrats like the Bidens? How about FBI Director Christopher Wray for his agency’s interference in the 2020 election and surveilling of Catholic parishes?

Nope. Not a single one.

Some Republicans may argue that impeachment is a political failure waiting to happen, given that a conviction by the Democrat-controlled Senate is highly unlikely. But that rationale didn’t stop House Democrats from impeaching former President Trump twice. And it wouldn’t stop them from going after any future Republican president, either.

Furthermore, impeaching Biden is more than just a trial. It’s about exposing the American people to the Biden family corruption that legacy media have worked so hard to hide and — equally as important — showing Democrats that Republicans are just as willing to fight political fire with political fire.

Republican politicians who earnestly believe the existing status quo — wherein agencies like the DOJ can target and crush everyday Americans with no recourse — can continue in its current form are kidding themselves. Without an effective and equally consequential response to their nefarious behavior, Democrats will not hesitate to further weaponize government processes and institutions against their political opponents unabated. Failure to mount any sort of political resistance to such egregiousness is both an act of cowardice and a death blow to what’s left of the American experiment.

Until Biden is actually impeached, McCarthy and House Republicans’ “We’re going to hold Biden accountable!” rhetoric is meaningless. The time for Republican statements of concern and outrage is over. If GOP House leadership has any interest in keeping their majority come 2024, they must impeach Joe Biden.

Hageman -vs- Mayorkas

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

When the people of Wyoming removed Liz Cheney and replaced her with Harriet Hageman, it was perhaps one of the best reflections of a damaged, yet standing, constitutional republic.  To say Harriet Hageman represents an upgrade to our congressional representation would be a profound understatement.

This is a lady I would campaign for, volunteer for and fight like hell to keep in office.

During her remarks yesterday Representative Harriet Hageman dropped all pretenses and eloquently called DHS Secretary Mayorkas what he is, “a tyrant.”  Representative Hageman’s perspective on the value, importance and critical protections for the constitutional freedom of speech was eloquently argued, directly to the face of the DHS organization that seeks to define, restrict, censor and control speech.  This is really good.  WATCH:

…“There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.” ~ Sundance

Democrats Are Trying to Make Climate Change the New COVID

Brandon Morse reporting for RedState 

There are a lot of religions on this planet, but none so demanding of one’s faith as the Church of Climate Change. It’s a cult whose message is so pervasive in our culture that many take it at its word that mankind is indeed changing the climate of the Earth, but once you start looking at the data you can see pretty quickly that a lot of its claims are based on half-truths or full-on lies.

(READ: A Non-Believer’s View of the Church of Climate Change)

The dirty secret about the Church of Climate Change is that all things considered, it’s a suicide cult. It wants humanity to die off and stop having so many children. All this to, ironically, save you from yourselves.

Moreover, its goal is to get you to give up on human advancements and regress back to a time when humanity worked with lesser technologies and fewer rights. It wants you to hand power to them, not only in the government but personal freedoms such as your ability to travel freely and eat what you want. It wants to regulate businesses into obeying rules that would cripple and restrict them.

As Jeffrey Tucker points out in the Epoch Times, the media is currently using the fear-inducing models they created for COVID-19 to push the climate change scam. There are orange and red “tracking maps” on major networks following big heat increases in the same way they would highlight COVID-19 outbreaks.

As my colleague Bog Hoge wrote, the Democrats are utilizing this scare to get people to agree that action is needed, but the first step is to stop voting for Republicans, of course. Hillary Clinton was on X literally blaming the heat wave (a common occurrence on planet Earth) on “MAGA Republicans.” As Hoge noted, this means you. Somehow, you’re to blame for global warming, not the billions of other people across the globe just living their lives or the climate cult Democrats traveling to and fro in carbon-spewing airliners and yachts.

(READ: The Climate Scam)

If you take a step back and see the Democrat message for what it is, it becomes pretty ridiculous. They’re effectively telling you that they can control the weather, all you have to do is give up your freedom to them.

Kind of reminds you of the COVID-19 days, huh? Same goal, different crisis.

Is climate change real? Sure. Climate changes all the time and sometimes in drastic ways, but the impact of mankind’s existence on the planet isn’t really nailed down, and compared to the absolute power of nature, the location and output of the sun, the status of the oceans and position of the clouds, and many other factors, that impact is looking negligible.

The idea that humanity is somehow destroying the globe hasn’t born out any concrete evidence and moreover, the fact that the same people who say we are killing the planet are the same people looking to turn you from a citizen to a subject. It makes all of this seem less scientific and more like a conquering force trying to get you to lay down your arms and accept their rule without any bloodshed.

Moreover, when real scientists begin looking at the data, they shrug. Astro-physicist and noble laureate Dr. John Clauser recently gave a speech where he concluded that the climate cult’s science isn’t even actual science. It’s nonsensical doomsday claims based on cherry-picked data. He recently told the CO2 Coalition Board of Directors in South Korea that he doesn’t even believe there is a climate crisis.

“Beware,” said Clauser. “If you’re doing good science, it may lead you into politically incorrect areas.”

A good portion of the country was in politically incorrect areas when it was combating the false Democrat narratives surrounding the COVID-19 virus. Now, we need that same energy from Republican leaders when it comes to climate change.

New Mexico Referring Women to Satanic Temple’s TST Health for Abortions

Hannah Bleau for Breitbart

New Mexico Referring Women
To Satanic Temple’s TST Health For Abortions

Hannah Bleau | 26 Jul 2023

The New Mexico government is reportedly referring women seeking to terminate their pregnancies to the Satanic Temple’s TST Health, which offers an “abortion ritual,” according to the New Mexico Alliance for Life.

In a press release on Tuesday, the New Mexico Alliance for Life announced that it has discovered that the state is actively referring women to the Satanic Temple Health (TST Health) via the state’s hotline, which is funded by taxpayers. The pro-life organization discovered this through what it described as a public records inspection.

The Satanic Temple’s TST Health, described as a “collaborative of reproductive rights advocates and abortion care providers contracted and directed by The Satanic Temple to advance its Reproductive Religious Rights Campaign,” openly boasts of its goal to expand access for mothers to end the lives of their unborn children. Earlier this year, the Satanic Temple touted the creation of the “world’s first religious abortion clinic,” which includes offerings of “abortion rituals.”

CONTINUE READING AT BREITBART...

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

Sean Hannity Earns His CIA Pin During RFK Jr Townhall

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

Tick-Tock Sean Hannity has been a member of the right-side media control group for a long time.  We all know this here, and almost no one can tolerate watching the pontificating nonsense – nor do they.  However, it is only with the assist from the 2024 Murdoch agenda to promote RFK Jr. as an alternative for MAGA Democrats, that Hannity’s mask simply drops.  So, this is a good thing.

These types of revelations are always good, and perhaps now the Trump family will quit entertaining Hannity as something other than the control officer for the financial group behind the corporate media intents. However, I won’t hold my breath on that outlook – at least not any longer than it will take the Trump orbit to realize Jason Miller is the Bill Barr of the Trump 2024 campaign. Whoops, was that my outside voice?  I digress. WATCH:

State Dept. Grilled About New Biden Scandal: Rob Malley, Iran, Classified Docs, Even 'Treason' Question Raised

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

While a lot of the media world is understandably looking at the evolving news around the Hunter Biden plea deal, there’s another Biden administration scandal that is pretty huge but isn’t getting the same amount of attention: What the heck is going on with Rob Malley?

The State Department faced a grilling on Wednesday behind closed doors in a classified briefing about Rob Malley.

Rob Malley was one of the architects behind the 2015 Iran nuclear deal during the Obama/Biden administration. Joe Biden made him the Special Envoy to Iran in 2021, and he revived talk on the deal that former President Donald Trump had pulled out of in 2018.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee had been trying to get testimony from him for months. Still, the State Department kept putting them off for a variety of reasons, even though he was making press appearances.

Then it turned out that Malley had been stripped of his security clearance and placed on full unpaid leave pending a State Department security investigation for possible mishandling of classified documents. That investigation involved the FBI and the Diplomatic Security Service (the law enforcement branch of the State Department). He had been placed on partial leave in the spring.

That’s incredibly concerning, given his position and what he might have done. The fact that virtually no one in the Biden team suffers consequences suggests that what he did was problematic if even the Biden administration took some action. But then, typically, they’re not being straight with Congress and not telling people what happened here.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-TX) said earlier this month:

“At no point did the Department indicate that Special Envoy Malley’s security clearance was suspended or under review, or that he was being investigated for potential misconduct,” wrote the congressman.

He added, “The Department’s failure to inform Congress of this matter demonstrates at best a lack of candor, and at worst represents deliberate and potentially unlawful misinformation.”

McCaul threatened to hold the State Department in contempt if they didn’t get a classified briefing. He also used the word “treason” because the way the Biden team is acting makes it look awful. McCaul has previously said that they didn’t know what was going on but that if he had leaked classified information to our adversaries, like Iran or Russia, that could constitute an “act of treason.”

Now, I’m not saying that he has committed that, but we need to know what is going on. We need to be briefed in the Congress. This is the very same man who negotiated the Iran deal, This is a man that the nation has put their most – their biggest confidence in, with some of the biggest secrets related to Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and if there’s anything that has compromised that, Congress needs to know.

The grilling on Wednesday came after an agreement with McCaul to brief Congress on the matter.

Iranian press is reporting that Malley was holding secret talks with the Iranians at the United Nations, perhaps without authorization. That would be a huge problem, to say the least.

Malley, in fact, has a history of holding unsanctioned meetings with America’s enemies, including in 2008, when he was fired from the Obama campaign for conducting talks with the Iranian-backed terror group Hamas. In addition to mishandling classified information, officials can have their security clearances revoked if they fail to disclose contacts with foreigners.

The Tehran Times, a pro-regime mouthpiece, claimed earlier this month that Malley engaged in “suspicious interactions with unofficial advisors of Iranian descent,” and that his security clearance was initially pulled in late April. The disclosure of these details in the Iranian press indicates that sources in Tehran may know more about the situation than those in the American media.

Leaking Classified Information to Pro-Tehran Advocates

Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon indicated that Malley may have leaked classified information to a network of pro-Tehran advocates who supported the Obama administration’s Iran deal. Malley and others involved in the original Iran deal routinely briefed this group to ensure they reiterated the Obama administration’s talking points about the deal. The collection of Iran deal supporters and those sympathetic to the hardline regime came to be known as the “echo chamber.”

Sources say Malley may have resumed briefing the echo chamber as President Joe Biden pushes to resurrect the Iran deal, and that during one such briefing he may have leaked information he was not authorized to disclose.

I’ve reported before that during Trump’s term, Malley (and other Obama/Biden people) met with the Iranians, trying to preserve the Iran deal, going around what the Trump administration was doing at the time. Talk about a possible Logan Act problem. Yet neither he nor any of the Obama/Biden team that were involved with meeting with the Iranians were held to account for those meetings. It’s also more than a little concerning that Obama and Biden would hire him for such a pivotal position after his contact with Hamas.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) demanded answers, “The State Department needs to explain why Robert Malley continued working on negotiations with Iran to resurrect the failed nuclear deal after losing his security clearance.”

We’ll keep you updated if more comes out of the hearing, but obviously, there’s a big problem here, and once again, the Biden team has played cover-up rather than revealing what’s been going on. That likely means there’s a lot there to be concerned about.