~ Featuring ~
Can the FBI Be Independent? 
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
Bob Goodlatte Discusses Upcoming Peter Strzok Deposition
by sundance
{ } ~ House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte discusses the latest issues surrounding the ongoing congressional review of DOJ and FBI corruption... Within the interview Chairman Goodlatte outlines the upcoming deposition of “former?” FBI Agent Peter Strzok which is scheduled to take place on Wednesday June 27th, 2018.
'Buckle up' for more Robert Mueller Russia revelations, 
key Senate dummycrats-Democrat says
by Naomi Lim
{ } ~ Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., told more than 100 people at a dummycrats- Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee event... that they should "buckle up" for more revelations in the Russia investigation in the coming months, boastfully joking that there was information only known to himself and and special counsel Robert Mueller. “If you get me one more glass of wine, I’ll tell you stuff only Bob Mueller and I know," Warner quipped to the crowd, according to Politico, referring to Mueller's probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether President Trump obstructed justice. "If you think you’ve seen wild stuff so far, buckle up. It’s going to be a wild couple of months," Warner added...
Commie mad-Maxine Waters Calls for dummycrats-Dem 
thugs to Use BLM scumbag-Soros Tactics on Trump Officials
{ } ~ California Rep. mad-Maxine Waters is officially a fascist — a liberal fascist, to be more precise... One who believes in using harassment and intimidation to manipulate people into acting as she desires. While speaking on MSNBC this Saturday about the recent harassment of Trump administration officials, this proud liberal fascist urged the network’s audience to continue harassing Trump administration officials until they step down from their posts. “I have no sympathy for these people that are in this  administration who know it’s wrong for what they’re doing on so many fronts. They tend to not want to confront this president or even leave, but they know what they’re doing is wrong,” she said.  mad-Waters disagrees with President Donald Trump’s otherwise popular policies, his top officials — including White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Homeland Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen — deserve to be harassed, or so her argument went...
Russia Supports OPEC's Plan to Increase Oil Production 
by Alice Greene
{ } ~ Major oil producers met in Vienna last week to discuss a proposal to increase production following a rise in prices... Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak confirmed Saturday his country’s support for Saudi Arabia’s plan to raise crude production by 1 million barrels per day starting in July. This figure is far lower than the 1.5 million barrel a day increase Russia had been gunning for, and sources close to the matter say the actual amount is more likely to be around 600,000 because not all nations are able to increase output...
Erdogan proclaimed winner in Turkey presidential election 
by Samuel Chamberlain
{ } ~ Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was returned to office with expanded powers... the country's electoral board said Sunday, brushing aside opposition claims that the results were incomplete. Sadi Guven, the head of the Supreme Election Council, said that 97.7 percent of votes in the presidential race had been counted and Erdogan had received an "absolute majority." Unofficial results from the state-run Anadolu Agency showed Erdogan with 52.5 percent of the vote and his main rival Muharrem Ince at 30.7 percent. Kurdish candidate Selahattin Demirtas, who ran his campaign from jail while awaiting trial on terrorism-related charges, was garnering 8.4 percent. Former Interior Minister Meral Aksener, who broke away from Turkey's main nationalist party over its support for Erdogan, received 7.3 percent of the vote...How can the people of Turkey be so stupid.
Can the FBI Be Independent? 
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
{ } ~ When President Donald Trump appointed Atlanta lawyer Christopher Wray to succeed James Comey as the director of the FBI, my initial reaction was not positive. Wray is a veteran of the Department of Justice and is part of that good-old-boy DOJ network that knows how to protect its own. Indeed, when then-New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a former U.S. attorney, needed a good criminal defense lawyer -- whose millions in fees were paid by New Jersey taxpayers -- he hired Wray.

Christie was never indicted in the Bridgegate scandal, but defense counsel for those who sought Christie's cellphone to demonstrate to jurors the governor's involvement in the plot to shut down lanes near the George Washington Bridge for political retaliation. Christie claimed that he gave his phone to federal prosecutors, but they told the court that they did not have the phone. Where was it? In a safe of the Atlanta law firm that employed Wray.

The FBI director-to-be, sitting in his office in Atlanta, failed to provide evidence he had that he knew a federal court in Newark was seeking. This sordid episode was not dwelled upon during Wray's confirmation hearings, at the end of which he was confirmed to a 10-year term running the FBI. So Trump's search for an outsider who would change the Comey-led culture of political justice and run the nation's premier law enforcement agency according to the rule of law turned up the ultimate insider.

Earlier this week, Wray testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the behavior of FBI agents -- including the former director and former deputy director -- during the criminal investigation of former Secretary of State liar-Hillary Clinton. Wray had to thread a small needle.

On the one hand, the FBI is an investigative entity only. It does not decide whom or what to charge; it merely reports its findings to federal prosecutors in conjunction with their presentation of evidence to grand juries. As such, the FBI is subject to the DOJ prosecutors for whom it works, and the DOJ, of course, works for the president.

On the other hand, because both the DOJ and the FBI are guided by the ethical rules that govern lawyers and by the values of the rule of law implicit in American culture and recognized by the courts, the DOJ enjoys some independence from the president, and the FBI enjoys some independence from the DOJ. Principles such as equal protection under the law and due process of law protect life, liberty and property and trump instructions of the president to the DOJ and instructions of the DOJ to the FBI. Stated differently, the FBI must go where the evidence of crime leads it, and the DOJ must prosecute when the evidence is lawfully sufficient, no matter the subject.

This obviously becomes complex and treacherous when the president is the subject of the FBI's investigation, because one of the rule-of-law principles is that no one can be the judge or prosecutor in his own case. And it was in that context that Director Wray testified earlier this week. His testimony was largely about the response of the present-day FBI to the political excesses of the Comey-led FBI as articulated in a 568-page report issued by the inspector general of the DOJ.

That report found that there was political bias at the FBI and the DOJ in favor of liar-Clinton while she was the subject of a criminal investigation and that there was political prejudice against Trump at the same time. But it also found that the bias and prejudice were not the deciding factors in the ill-advised decision by Comey to announce that liar-Clinton would not be charged and then to recount all the damning evidence the FBI had amassed against her or in his decision to reopen and then reclose the investigation.

In Wray's testimony, I detected not a political defense of the FBI but rather a careful assessment of the constitutional relationship between Congress and the FBI that demonstrated a grasp of nuance and a defense of the rule of law.

Wray has been battling the House Intelligence Committee over its demands to get a peek at a portion of special counsel Robert Mueller's files on the president. The committee has threatened Wray and his boss, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, with censure, contempt and even impeachment if Wray fails to deliver the files. Wray's message to the committee, uttered in his Senate testimony, was that the FBI will follow the law and not surrender privileged information.

A privilege is the ability of the entity that enjoys it to prevent the revelation of information that the privilege covers. The attorney-client and priest-penitent privileges, for example, permit the client or the penitent to prevent the lawyer or the priest from revealing their communications. Wray knows that law enforcement, too, enjoys privileges, such as the obligation to keep matters that have been presented to a grand jury, the thoughts and impressions and strategies of investigators and prosecutors, and information developed from confidential sources secret.

By signaling that he will honor those privileges in the investigation of President Trump, Wray is upholding the rule of law. Were he not to do this, he'd be spilling the contents of a criminal file to the political allies of the subject of the file -- a spill that the law would not condone because it would put the president above the law.

In defending these rule-of-law privileges, Director Wray is upholding the independence of the FBI against an unforgiving political onslaught orchestrated by the president's allies. I hope this is resolved in a court of law and not in the court of public opinion. Public opinion is a reed that moves with the wind. The rule of law is a rock that keeps us free.

Views: 33


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Rudy Tirre on June 25, 2018 at 1:07pm


but if the committee gets all of the documents we will all know and mueller be out the door and warner mouth will be tied down.

Comment by Bonnie Somer on June 25, 2018 at 1:02pm

yeah wonder what warner and bob mueller have cooked up.................................can't wait



Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service