Right Wing Granny

News behind the news. This picture is me (white spot) standing on the bridge connecting European and North American tectonic plates. It is located in the Reykjanes area of Iceland. By-the-way, this is a color picture.

Right Wing Granny

What They Left Out

On Monday, Just the News posted an article about what was left out of special counsel Robert Hur’s report on President Joe Biden’s handling of classified materials.

The article reports:

Iowa GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley and Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson on Monday asked that Attorney General Merrick Garland account for special counsel Robert Hur’s report on President Joe Biden’s handling of classified materials making no mention of a batch of materials the National Archives recovered from the president’s attorney’s office in Boston.

Hur’s report became public last week and stated that “[o]ur investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen.” It further declined to bring charges against the president, in part, on the basis of his poor memory.

Writing to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and Hur, the GOP lawmakers asserted that “[t]here appears to be a significant factual omission in Special Counsel Hur’s report on his office’s investigation into President Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.”

In March of 2023, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) confirmed that it had retrieved nine boxes from the office of Biden attorney Patrick Moore that had been taken from the Penn Biden Center in Washington. Those materials were then transferred to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. At the time, NARA had not reviewed the materials.

There are a lot of questions about the funding of the Penn Biden Center. I will just leave that there.

The article concludes:

The Republicans set a deadline of Feb. 23 for the DOJ to answer whether Hur reviewed the nine boxes in question and to document their contents.

Please follow the link to read the article. The details in this are amazing. Those boxes have done some serious traveling. One wonders if anything was subtracted from those boxes during their travels.

Does America Have A Justice System?

On Thursday, The Epoch Times reported that Special Counsel Robert Hur has announced that President Biden will not be charged for mishandling classified documents. I suppose it would be petty to point out that as a Senator or a private citizen he was not entitled to have those documents in his personal possession, but I guess that really doesn’t matter.

The article reports:

Among the reasons stated for not pressing charges was that Biden would present to the jury ‘as sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.’

I would like to point out that this elderly man with a poor memory is President of the United States. I also question the ‘well-meaning’ part.

The article continues:

“Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen,” Mr. Hur wrote in a 388-page report to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The materials, stated the report, included “marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and notebooks containing Mr. Biden’s handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods.” The FBI collected these items during a search of President Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, residence last year.

This is  unbelievable. President Trump’s house gets searched, and he gets charged while President Biden (because he is essentially considered a senile old man) gets away scot free. They searched Baron Trump’s room. Shouldn’t someone have searched Hunter Biden’s room?

I don’t know how (or if) we recover from the banana republic we have become.

 

It Pays To Be The Son Of “The Big Guy”

On Saturday, Breitbart reported that a fourth IRS whistleblower has come forward claiming that prosecutors in Washington, DC, and California previously blocked now-special counsel David Weiss from charging Hunter Biden in those jurisdictions.

The article reports:

“Mr. Weiss went to the U.S. Attorney’s Office — I can’t recall the dates — and they did not agree to prosecute the case in D.C.,” Waldon (IRS agent Darrell Waldon) told the House Ways and Means Committee during a transcribed interview in September, the Washington Examiner reported.

“I’m aware that it was presented to the District of Columbia and, at some point, the Central District of California, I believe,” he added.

…As the investigation progressed, Weiss never charged Hunter Biden in the jurisdictions of Washington, DC, or California. Instead, he formed a sweetheart plea agreement with Hunter Biden that collapsed in July under judicial scrutiny. Shapley’s testimony in April reportedly triggered the plea deal, filed in Delaware. Weiss later brought three gun-related charges in Delaware against Hunter Biden.

This testimony is interesting because of the way it relates to the testimony of Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The article reports:

The recent testimony by Waldon, who was Shapley’s boss, is notable because Attorney General Merrick Garland testified Wednesday that nobody had the authority to block Weiss from charging Hunter Biden, though “they could refuse to partner with him.”

“You said [Weiss] had complete authority, but he’d already been turned down. He wanted to bring an action in D.C. and the US Attorney there said, ‘No, you can’t’ — and then you go tell the U.S. Senate, under oath, that he has complete authority?” House Oversight Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) asked.

“No one had the authority to turn him down; they could refuse to partner with him.” Garland replied.

“You can use whatever language — ‘refuse to partner’ is turning down,” Jordan replied.

“It is not the same under a well-known Justice Department practice,” Garland claimed.

Waldon previously confirmed Shapley’s notes presented to Congress regarding an October 7, 2022, meeting between Waldon, Shapley, and Weiss, among others. “Darrell asked me to shoot an update from today’s meeting. Darrell — feel free to comment if I miss anything,” the top line of the email read.
The level of corruption in our current Justice Department is breathtaking.

Do We Have Any Idea Who The Federal Government Is Working For?

In the Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln stated, “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.(source here). Currently it seems as if government of the people, by the people, for the people has been replaced by government of the ruling class, for the interests of the ruling class, and only for the ruling class. There is a lot of money floating around Washington, D.C., and I am sure there are a lot of skeletons in the closet in Washington, D.C., that many politicians don’t ever want to see the light of day. So when someone is actually held accountable or not held accountable, there are probably more reasons behind it than we will ever know. However, recently it seems as if a lot of chickens are coming home to roost.

On Thursday, The Washington Examiner reported the following:

A third IRS official confirmed that Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss faced roadblocks when attempting to bring charges against Hunter Biden, contradicting denials issued Wednesday by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

IRS Director of Field Operations Michael Batdorf told the House Ways and Means Committee in a closed-door interview on Sept. 12 that he felt “frustrated” by the refusal of the Justice Department to approve tax charges that IRS agents viewed as well-supported by evidence, according to a transcript of the interview obtained by the Washington Examiner.

He also said the IRS removed agent Gary Shapley, a whistleblower, from the Hunter Biden case at the direction of Weiss despite having done nothing wrong.

Batdorf’s testimony was the latest piece of evidence to suggest Weiss did not enjoy the unfettered authority to pursue Hunter Biden that Garland and others claimed he had.

In July, The Federalist reported:

Shapley said U.S. Delaware Attorney David Weiss waited out the statute of limitations related to 2014-2015 financial crimes allowing the president’s son to evade additional charges. In June, news broke of a plea deal struck between Weiss and Hunter Biden limited to two misdemeanor tax crimes and a single felony charge over illegal firearm possession. The latter is forgiven after 24 months of sobriety, an agreement placed in jeopardy if the mysterious White House cocaine was linked to the first family’s son, who wrote a book on his struggle with drug addiction.

“In November of 2022, the statute of limitations was set to expire for the 2014 and 2015 charges in D.C., which included the 2014 felonies for the attempt to evade or defeat tax and fraud or false statement regarding Burisma income earned by Hunter Biden,” Shapley said.

Hunter Biden served on the board of the Ukrainian energy company raking in excess compensation despite having no prior experience in the industry.

“The statute of limitations had been extended through a tolling agreement with Hunter Biden’s defense counsel, and they were willing to extend it past 2022. Weiss allowed those to expire,” said Shapley.

It would be nice if Hunter Biden and those who let the statute of limitations run out on Hunter Biden’s crimes were held accountable for their actions.

What Happened At The Hearing?

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller posted a summary of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. It’s amazing how many Democrats seem to have memory problems.

The article reports what it considers the biggest takeaways:

1. Biden-appointed prosecutors could refuse to cooperate with Weiss

Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan pressed Garland on his previous testimony to Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley that Weiss had complete authority. Jordan emphasized Graves’ decision not to “partner” with Weiss on bringing charges against Hunter Biden.

2. It is unlikely the DOJ investigates the IRS whistleblowers

Republican Louisiana Rep. Mike Johnson questioned Garland on whether his office requested an investigation into the whistleblower testimony.

3. It is unclear why Weiss’ letters to Congress contradict themselves

Weiss wrote multiple letters to Congress in June and July responding to the IRS whistleblower allegations that his charging authority was limited. Weiss wrote a letter to Jordan in June where he said his charging authority was geographically limited to his home district and it was DOJ procedure to collaborate with U.S. Attorneys in their jurisdictions.

4. Garland appeared to dispute testimony from two FBI agents

Johnson questioned Garland on testimony from FBI agent Thomas Sobocinski who said Weiss had a “cumbersome” bureaucratic process for filing charges.

“There was administrative charge — or administrative process, not within DOJ, but also within tax.

5. Garland won’t talk about the details of the Hunter Biden case

The attorney general deferred to Weiss throughout his testimony when lawmakers asked specific questions on the details of the Hunter Biden case.

6. Garland did not consider appointing a special counsel from outside the Justice Department

Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel in August to continue the Hunter Biden investigation, even though DOJ regulations instruct for special counsels to be appointed from outside the government.

The article concludes:

The House Ways and Means, Judiciary and Oversight Committees are investigating the IRS whistleblower allegations alongside House Oversight’s probe into Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. Speaker Kevin McCarthy said on Sept. 12 that the three committees would be leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

Hunter Biden was indicted on Sept. 14 on three counts related to his October 2018 purchase of a Colt Cobra revolver while he was allegedly addicted to crack cocaine. His attorney said in a court filing Tuesday that Biden would plead not guilty to the gun charges.

 

Thank God For Whistleblowers

On Sunday, Breitbart posted an article about the case against Hunter Biden.

The article reports:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) planned to let Hunter Biden off the hook without charges until two whistleblowers came forward to expose political interference in the investigation, despite the claims of Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The New York Times exposed the inside dealings of Hunter Biden’s attorneys with senior officials at DOJ, who had constrained U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss even as Garland was testifying to Congress that Weiss had full authority to act in the case.

The New York Times reported:

Earlier this year, The Times found, Mr. Weiss appeared willing to forgo any prosecution of Mr. Biden at all, and his office came close to agreeing to end the investigation without requiring a guilty plea on any charges. But the correspondence reveals that his position, relayed through his staff, changed in the spring, around the time a pair of I.R.S. officials on the case accused the Justice Department of hamstringing the investigation. Mr. Weiss suddenly demanded that Mr. Biden plead guilty to committing tax offenses.

…As the testimony from the I.R.S. agents took hold, Mr. Biden’s legal team felt the ground shift beneath them. The U.S. attorney’s office suddenly went quiet.

The article concludes:

The whistleblowers, IRS Criminal Supervisory Special Agent Gary A. Shapley Jr. and IRS Special Agent Joseph Ziegler, told the House of Representatives that prosecutors would not let them pursue Hunter Biden’s tax crimes, and had sometimes tipped off the president’s son about impending searches or interviews.

The result was a “sweetheart” plea deal that would have prevented Hunter Biden from being investigated further — until federal judge Maryellen Noreika, a Donald Trump appointee, balked.

Earlier this month, Garland named Weiss a Special Counsel in the case, raising suspicions that his real purpose was to continue the cover-up. Charges were withdrawn from Noreika — ostensibly to be pursued elsewhere, but possibly to avoid her jurisdiction.

Does anyone really believe that Hunter Biden is being treated the same way any American would be who committed the crimes he is accused of?

When The Shoe Is On The Other Foot

When Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House, she did a number of things that set precedents for the future. She removed Republicans from committees, something that in the past had only been done by the party involved. She refused to allow some Republicans on the January 6th committee, again setting a precedent. Well, some of the precedents set by the January 6th committee are about to come back to haunt the Democrats.

On Sunday Just the News reported:

The precedent set by the House Jan. 6th Select Committee in obtaining relevant documents as evidence against former President Donald Trump and issuing subpoenas for their investigation could be a boon for Republicans in the congressional probe into the Biden family’s overseas business dealings.

The Jan. 6 panel demonstrated that it could conduct oversight and gain access to evidence and witnesses even as the Justice Department conducted a sprawling criminal probe into the same figures and issues, and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told Just the News he plans to ride those precedents.

“They set a lot of precedent during that Jan. 6 committee that I think they’re gonna regret with respect to this Biden investigation,” he told the Just the News, No Noise television show.

Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan are currently investigating President Joe Biden’s possible involvement in Hunter’s foreign business deals. Biden has repeatedly said he had no knowledge or involvement with his son’s businesses, but documents and testimony given to the committee call those denials into question.

Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed David Weiss, U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, to special counsel on Friday. Weiss has been leading the investigation since 2019.

Just on the basis of what has come out in the press, how could anyone investigate Hunter Biden for four years and not come up with anything?

The article notes:

Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz told Just the News that making Weiss a special counsel will strengthen the congressional investigation into the extent of Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings.

“I think it should increase the power of Congress to look into this,” he said during an interview on Friday. “I think it shows that there is still room for more investigation, and that Congress can play an important role in getting to the bottom of that.”

He noted that Congress has a “constitutional power to check and balance the executive and so the fact that there’s an ongoing investigation should not be an absolute barrier for Congress to do its job.”

Dershowitz said that Congress can insist on “subpoenaing prosecutors and then if they refuse, they can be held in contempt and it could go to the courts and we’ll see how the courts decide it.”

Please follow the link to read the entire article. If the Democrats choose to change the rules, the Republicans should embrace the change!

A Summary Of The Story

On Friday, The National Review posted an article about some of the information that has been revealed about the Biden family during the Congressional hearings.

The article reports:

The compelling congressional testimony of two IRS whistleblower agents has established three things.

First, the investigation into Biden corruption — millions of dollars pouring into the family coffers from apparatchiks of corrupt and anti-American regimes seeking to buy Joe Biden’s political influence — is real and has been thwarted by the Biden Justice Department. Second, the president’s son Hunter Biden received preferential treatment, and, next week, a federal judge should reject the sweetheart plea deal he was given by the Justice Department. Third, Attorney General Merrick Garland owes the country an explanation for why the Biden investigation has been sabotaged from within, even as he maintains publicly that it was conducted with independence and integrity.

…Garland and congressional Democrats never tire of branding Weiss a Trump-appointee — it’s Garland’s rationalization for not appointing a special counsel. Conveniently omitted from this story is the fact that Weiss could not have been confirmed absent the support of Delaware’s two Democratic senators, Biden allies Tom Carper and Chris Coons. More to the point, Weiss reports to Garland and, because the Hunter Biden matter is a tax case, DOJ rules dictate that any tax charges must be approved by the Tax Division at Main Justice — run by Biden appointees. Most obviously, Weiss’s appointment by Trump does nothing to eradicate the conflict of interest inherent in the Biden Justice Department’s investigation of the president’s son over conduct in which the president himself is implicated.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. The information is out there for anyone who wants to hear it. I truly believe that if the Biden family is allowed to walk free after all of this evidence has been revealed, our republic is over. The first question that should have been asked years ago is how did Joe Biden maintain his lifestyle on his government salary. Senators and Vice-Presidents are not paid millions.

In 2021, The U.S. Sun reported:

In 2017, Jill and Joe purchased another property in Delaware for $2.7million.

The home is a short walk from the beach and has six bedrooms and outdoor amenities for entertaining guests. 

Why wasn’t that questioned at the time?

When The Department Of Justice Decides To Enforce Only Some Of The Laws

On Wednesday, Hot Air posted an article about the protests outside the homes of the Supreme Court justices after the leak of the Dobbs decision.

The article reports:

Freshman Senator Katie Britt (R-AL) exposed an inconvenient truth Tuesday during a budget hearing. Attorney General Merrick Garland was questioned during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing about the fact that U.S. Marshals guarding the homes of Supreme Court justices have been instructed not to arrest protesters even though Garland previously claimed that the marshals have a free hand when it comes to making arrests.

Senator Britt came with proof that the marshals are instructed in the training package that arrests of protesters outside of the homes of Supreme Court justices are not priorities. The protests are regularly held outside the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices in response to the Dobbs decision which overturned Roe v Wade. Ever since a draft was deliberately leaked last spring that indicated the Court would overturn Roe v Wade, protesters have violated a federal statute that outlaws protesting at a judge’s home with the intent to influence a ruling. That is exactly what the protesters are doing.

In today’s highly-charged political atmosphere, such protests have the potential to turn deadly. Last June, local police arrested an armed man who traveled from California to Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home in suburban Maryland with the intention to kill him. He told police he was angry about the Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion and guns. He was charged in federal court with seeking to assassinate the Supreme Court justice. That incident highlighted the potential danger the justices and their families are in while they are in their homes. Congress approves additional security for the justices.

There are a number of problems with the protesters at the justices’ homes. First of all, protesting at a judge’s home to influence a ruling is illegal. Secondly, Justice Roberts created a problem when he voted to uphold Roe v. Wade. Because his vote made the decision a 5-4 decision rather than a 6-3 decision, it sent a message to the abortion lobby that all they need is one justice to reverse the decision. That was a bad move on Justice Roberts’ part and may result in violence against one of the other justices. Meanwhile the protesters breaking the law don’t have to worry about the fact that they are committing a crime.

Forced To Face The Music

On Wednesday, The New York Post posted an article about the appearance of Attorney General Merrick Garland before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. A number of Republican Senators used the appearance to point out how unevenly Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is enforcing various laws.

The article reports:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) excoriated the attorney general’s extraordinary inaction over the past 10 months as pro-abortion protesters have harassed Supreme Court justices at their homes in the wake of the leaked Dobbs decision, despite a federal law that bans “picketing or parading” near a judge’s residence.

“When rioters descended on the homes of six Supreme Court justices, night after night after night, you did nothing,” raged Cruz.

“The department did nothing when extremist groups, like Ruth Sent Us and Jane’s Revenge, openly organized campaigns of harassment at the homes of justices …

“When the same groups posted online information about where the justices worship, or their home addresses, or where their kids went to school, you again sat on your hands and did nothing. 

Next Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) pointed out the following:

Next, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) grilled Garland about the disparate treatment of Christian pro-life activists arrested outside abortion clinics compared to pro-abortion activists who have gone unpunished after firebombing pregnancy centers.

He cited the case of Mark Houck, the Catholic father of seven acquitted in January of federal assault charges over an altercation outside a Philadelphia abortion clinic.

Houck was arrested at gunpoint in front of his terrified family in an FBI raid.

“This is a case where a Catholic pro-life demonstrator, a father, was accused of disorderly conduct in front of an abortion center,” Hawley said.

“The Philadelphia DA, who is a Democrat, very progressive, declined to prosecute. There was a private suit that got dismissed. Then after all that, your Justice Department sent between 20 and 30 agents in the early-morning hours to the Houck residence to arrest this guy after he had offered to turn himself in voluntarily.”

Garland said the FBI “dis­agreed” with that description of the raid.

So Hawley got out an easel and displayed a blown-up photo of fearsome-looking FBI agents with long guns, ballistic shields and bulletproof vests.

There is no excuse for this sort of behavior by the Justice Department. If we do not elect people who will uphold the law and who will appoint people who will uphold the law, we will descend into tyranny.

When Cooler Heads Don’t Prevail

On Wednesday, Red State posted an article about the raid on Mar-a-Lago. The Red State article heavily quotes an article from The Washington Post.

The Washington Post reports:

Months of disputes between Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents over how best to try to recover classified documents from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club and residence led to a tense showdown near the end of July last year, according to four people familiar with the discussions.

Prosecutors argued that new evidence suggested Trump was knowingly concealing secret documents at his Palm Beach, Fla., home and urged the FBI to conduct a surprise raid at the property. But two senior FBI officials who would be in charge of leading the search resisted the plan as too combative and proposed instead to seek Trump’s permission to search his property, according to the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a sensitive investigation.

Prosecutors ultimately prevailed in that dispute, one of several previously unreported clashes in a tense tug of war between two arms of the Justice Department over how aggressively to pursue a criminal investigation of a former president. The FBI conducted an unprecedented raid on Aug. 8, recovering more than 100 classified items, among them a document describing a foreign government’s military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities.

First of all, I question the list The Washington Post is providing. Has that information ever been made public?

Red State notes:

The FBI was criticized by both sides during those debacles—Hillary almost had a coronary in 2016 over then-FBI Director James Comey’s handling of her illegal server which contained classified information. Yet, her home was never raided, and she never faced charges. It doesn’t take a partisan to point out that there seem to be two systems of justice at play here.

The article at Red State concludes:

As we all know, the FBI’s concerns fell on deaf ears, and the raid went ahead as planned. The fact that there was such internal division within the DOJ shows that the surprise offensive was always politicized and heavy-handed. Merrick Garland has repeatedly shown in his term that he values politics over justice, and he will continue to act that way till he’s called to account.

There are currently two systems of justice in America. I am not sure how much longer that will last before it becomes a major problem.

Another Special Prosecutor

On Thursday, Breitbart reported the following:

Special Counsel Robert Hur, appointed Thursday by Attorney General Merrick Garland to probe President Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified information, was among those at the Justice Department who had knowledge about the Russia hoax perpetrated on former President Donald Trump.

According to a Justice Department document, Hur is a former DOJ official “who handled, participated in, or have personal knowledge of the FBI’s relationship and communications with” Christopher Steele, who authored the infamous dossier that paved the way for the Russia hoax.

Hur began his career by clerking for the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist after graduating from Harvard and Stanford. Hur was then hired as the principal associate deputy attorney general, “serving as the top aide to Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general under President Donald Trump. Before that, he had also been special assistant to Christopher A. Wray, who was leading the Justice Department’s criminal division at the time and went on to become the FBI director,” according to the Washington Post.

Rosenstein announced Hur’s appointment in a press release, praising him as having “experience and judgment [that] will advance our efforts to deter crime, promote the rule of law, and ensure equal justice for everyone.”

I hope no one minds if I don’t hold my breath waiting for equal justice for everyone.

It is very possible that this is the beginning of the strategy either to remove President Biden from the White House or discourage him from running for a second term. At any rate, I can guarantee that there is a strategy behind this move and that strategy is be orchestrated by someone other than Merrick Garland.

Politicizing Justice

Last week (updated today) The Epoch Times posted an article about the appointment of a Special Prosecutor to investigate President Trump. I wonder if all the Americans who have decided that President Trump is the ultimate evil have actually looked at what is happening and what it means to the future of America. A sitting President has allowed a Special Prosecutor to be named to investigate a political opponent who may run for President. If you are happy with this, would you have been happy if this had happened after the Hillary Clinton email scandal where she erased much of what was probably evidence against her? This is the kind of thing that goes on in banana republics. I only hope America has not become one.

The article reports:

While the Republicans kicked off the 2024 presidential race with the announcement that former President Donald Trump was again running for president, in perhaps the ultimate sign of our ignominious times, the Democrats, in effect, kicked off their half of the contest three days later by appointing a special counsel to escalate their political prosecution of him.

This is where “our democracy” stands today: with its purported defenders engaging in the singularly anti-democratic act of siccing a hyper-politicized law enforcement apparatus on a candidate for the highest elected office, on dubious grounds, thereby subverting the political process by which we decide who represents us.

At a minimum, no doubt to an approving President Joe Biden, his law-enforcement arm is now engaged in what amounts to election interference against arguably the president’s top challenger—ironically probing in part Trump’s alleged interference with the transfer of power in 2020, when Trump could make the case that the deep state did the same to him from the inception of Russiagate in 2016 onward.

Worse, with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel, the prospect of the former president being charged and convicted of something, anything, is more real than at any time during the perpetual campaign to purge Trump from the body politic.

Our ruling class really does wish to “lock him up,” or at least hold that threat over the former president’s head for maximum political gain.

The article concludes:

The legal persecution of Trump—an insurance policy of sorts should the political persecution of him and his supporters fail—is beyond chilling.

Those who loathe Trump, his policy, and his people, have proven they are willing to eviscerate the U.S. system in the name of defending it from traitors, authoritarians, and insurrectionists.

Their projection is reaching its apex.

Should it persist, we will be an unrecognizable country.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. I personally think President Trump needs to be re-elected to illustrate that the Washington elite and media mob do not control the voters. Unfortunately, I fear that they do.

It Won’t Stop There

Do you honestly think that the constant attack and investigation of President Trump is actually about President Trump? Do you think the people behind the constant attacks and investigations of President Trump will stop with him? Do you honestly believe that whoever is the Republican presidential candidate in 2024 will not be subject to the same attacks and misuse of government power that President Trump has been subjected to? Can you honestly say that a Special Prosecutor should be appointed to investigate President Trump but not Hunter or President Biden’s business dealings? If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you should probably not waste your time reading any more of this article.

On Friday, Breitbart reported the following:

Attorney General Merrick Garland reportedly plans to name a special counsel to investigate former President Donald Trump, though he has yet to name such counsel to investigate President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

Update: Garland named John L. Smith as special counsel Friday afternoon in a televised press statement. According to LinkedIn, Smith is the Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division at U.S. Department of Justice — one of the most highly politicized, left-wing departments within the agency.

Hunter Biden acknowledged in December 2020 that he had been under federal investigation for possible tax violations. Since then, the investigation reportedly broadened to include more of his global business dealings.

However, Attorney General Garland has declined to appoint a special counsel, despite criticism from legal scholars who say that greater political independence is needed in an inquiry involving the president’s family.

On Thursday, I posted the following from The Washington Post:

Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

The appointment of a Special Prosecutor is political. It is a preemptive strike to make sure the Republicans cannot win the White House in 2024. The politicization of justice that has occurred during the Biden administration is a serious threat to our Republic. If this stands, the criminalization of political views that are not in agreement with the party in power will become part of our daily life.

Looking For The Root Causes

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted the following headline:

Biden Admin Still Working On ‘Root Causes’ Of Immigration Crisis As Border Crossings Remain At Record High

Is O.J. Simpson still looking for his wife’s killer?

The article reports:

Top officials from the Biden administration and the Mexican government met Thursday to discuss their work on border security, as illegal border crossings and cross-border drug trafficking remain at historically high levels.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, Attorney General Merrick Garland, Mexican Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard and Mexican Security Secretary Rosa Rodriguez held a press conference after meeting in Washington on Thursday to tout their progress on reining in drug trafficking, human smuggling and illegal arms sales across the southern border.

The Biden administration has continued to stress that it is focused on addressing the “root causes” of the border crisis, but the fruit of that labor isn’t evident to Americans yet.

Has it occurred to the Biden administration that one of the root causes of the border crisis might be that fact that there is no border wall to make crossing the border more difficult?

The article concludes:

Further complicating matters, the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico isn’t entirely copasetic. One journalist asked Blinken and Ebrard about recent comments from Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador blaming President Joe Biden for a “lack of control” at the southern border and criticizing the West for shipping arms to Ukraine.

Mexico has also blamed the U.S. for cartel gun smuggling. Blinken said the comments and actions gave him no doubts about the strength of the U.S. relationship with Mexico and the two countries’ ability to continue working together. But as the administration continues to stress the long game, polls show that Americans’ immigration concerns aren’t fading.

The cartels are currently controlling America’s southern border. That is not good for either Mexico or America. If the Biden administration were to come up with a workable plan to control the border, I suspect that Mexico would be willing to cooperate with that plan.

Have We Reached Banana Republic Yet?

On Thursday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about recent legal activities that appear to be political.

The article reports:

A hallmark of banana republics is that those who lose power are apt to wind up in prison, or on the wrong end of a firing squad. Even more advanced countries, like Israel, sometimes have a regrettable tendency to prosecute former political leaders.

It is hard to think of anything more destructive to a democracy, and yet the Democrats are going down that path. It seems clear that they intend to bring criminal charges against President Trump over his keeping some White House documents at Mar-a-Lago–a trivial offense, as far as anyone knows.

And that’s not all. The Department of Justice has issued subpoenas to a large number of people who were associated in some way with the Trump campaign or administration. They generally seek information about efforts to challenge the reported election results in several states. A copy of one of the subpoenas, with the name of the person who was served redacted, is linked below. Take a look at the scope of the documents the subject of the subpoena is required to produce:

594129794-Redacted-Subpoena

In case you are wondering about John Hinderaker’s background in making the above statements, John Hinderaker practiced law for 41 years, enjoying a nationwide litigation practice. He retired from the practice of law at the end of 2015, and is now President of Center of the American Experiment, a think tank headquartered in Minnesota. He and two other lawyers founded Power Line Blog in 2002.

The article concludes:

So far, of course, no criminal investigations have been launched into Joe Biden’s shipping of illegal aliens to many points across the country, often in the dead of night, for the last year and a half.

More examples could be multiplied. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon likely will go to jail for contempt of Congress, the same offense that former Attorney General Eric Holder was held to have committed by a bipartisan 255–67 vote of the House of Representatives. But unlike Bannon, Holder was not prosecuted. He now makes millions as a partner in a prominent Washington, D.C. law firm.

Given the thorough corruption of the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland, there is a reasonable possibility that the Democrats will move to imprison both Donald Trump and other prominent Republicans. I suppose they think they are secure, because Republicans would never follow such a third-world precedent when they regain power. I don’t know about that. In any event, there is a more fundamental question: are the Democrats trying to trigger a civil war, as they did in 1861? Judging from their actions, I think the question must be taken seriously.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is frightening to see how corrupt the Justice Department has become.

How The Cover-Up Worked


On September 2, NewsMax posted an article about the FBI’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop case. It seems as though there were some serious conflicts of interest in the investigation.

The article reports:

A former FBI official accused of running interference in the investigation into Hunter Biden was ”running point” on the bureau’s handling of Tony Bobulinski, Hunter Biden’s former business associate who was tasked with setting up the family’s joint venture with the Chinese firm CEFC, the Washington Examiner reports.

Timothy Thibault, who has been accused of bias in handling the investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop, resigned from the bureau abruptly last weekend.  

Bobulinski, who in 2020 accused Joe Biden of lying about his involvement in his family’s overseas dealings, was also a key witness in the Hunter Biden laptop saga. He has said Thibault suppressed the evidence he gave to the FBI about the Biden family.

The Hunter Biden laptop case was an important investigation that could have easily influenced the 2020 election. The fact that the case was squelched by the FBI does not say good things about the FBI.

The article concludes:

In a July letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said whistleblowers reported that Thibault had sought to close ”an avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting” and sought to prevent it from being reopened.

”Mr. Thibault’s statement fails to address the allegations brought forth by whistleblowers who provided specific and credible allegations of political bias and his failure to comply with Department and FBI guidelines and standards.”

”Political bias should have no place at the FBI. We need accountability, which is why Congress must continue investigating and the inspector general must fully investigate as I’ve requested,” Grassley continued.

I am not convinced this case is going to be widely reported or have consequences even with all of the evidence that has come out. Americans need to find news sources that are reliable and report things of this nature. Otherwise, we will continue to elect politicians that use their office to get rich and totally ignore the interests of the American people who sent them to Washington.

Fighting For Transparency

On August 31, The Conservative Treehouse posted an screenshot of a memo Merrick Garland sent to DOJ and FBI employees reminding them of the restrictions involved when they talk to Congress. Coincidentally, the memo was written after several members of Congress had reported that they had been contacted by whistleblowers within the Department of Justice.

On September 1, Just the News reported that Senator Chuck Grassley has responded to that memo.

The article reports:

The Attorney General insisted the memo was not intended to discourage whistleblowers from reporting issues to Congress, but it came amid a string of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI both before and after the bureau raided former President Donald Trump’s estate.

“I write this letter to make clear to you that whistleblowers are the most patriotic people I know and they play an integral part in ensuring that inappropriate influences, political influence, and improper conduct within the Department and its components, such as the FBI, are exposed,” Grassley wrote. “Under your leadership, the Department and FBI have failed to be responsive to congressional oversight requests. Accordingly, it is often only because of whistleblowers that Congress and the American people are apprised of the type of wrongdoing that your memo seeks to protect against.”

“Even with your whistleblower caveats, and due to the timing of your memo, I remain concerned about the chilling effect it may have on whistleblowers who wish to approach Congress with information relating to fraud, waste, abuse, and gross mismanagement,” he concluded.

Congress is charged with oversight of the Department of Justice. It is becoming obvious that the current Department of Justice does not welcome that oversight.

 

We Have Reached Peak Insanity

On Tuesday, The Daily Caller reported that U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart will hold a hearing regarding the unsealing of the search warrant affidavit. Is it appropriate for the Magistrate who issued the search warrant to determine whether or not anyone can see the affidavit related to it? Are we supposed to overlook the fact that this Magistrate is loosely connected to Jeffrey Epstein? Those are just two of the questions I have about this case.

The article reports:

Reinhart will hold the hearing on Aug. 18 in the West Palm Beach Division, according to Fox News. The judge will opine whether the Department of Justice (DOJ) must unseal the search warrant materials for the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, which likely include the search warrant affidavit. The DOJ is expected to argue to keep the document sealed, the New York Post reported.

…The DOJ adamantly opposes the release of the search warrant affidavit, which would include testimony from federal agents justifying the raid and information about witnesses. Assistant U.S. Attorney Juan Antonio Gonzalez argued making the affidavit public would risk “the integrity of an ongoing law enforcement investigation that implicates national security.”

Somehow I just don’t believe them.

The article concludes:

Attorney General Merrick Garland, who personally approved the raid, said at a press conference recently that FBI agents could be subject to increased threats as a result of the search.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has requested the DOJ provide updates detailing the process of the search, which documents the FBI found, and how their release would impact national security.

Reinhart signed off on the search warrant that allowed the FBI to raid Mar-a-Lago. Reinhart, however, has ties to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, the Miami Herald reported. Reinhart quit his job as a U.S. attorney in 2008 and went to work for Epstein, according to the report. Reinhart was in private practice for 10 years before becoming a federal magistrate in 2018.

I heard a comment on the radio today that said generally the people pushing for transparency are the good guys. I suspect that is true in this case.

How The Truth Was Kept From Voters

On Tuesday, The Patriot Daily Wire posted an article explaining how the FBI managed to keep the investigation of Hunter Biden’s laptop from proceeding. The article includes some of the details about the obstacles currently preventing a thorough investigation of the contents of that laptop.

The article reports:

Several FBI whistleblowers say that the agency’s probe into Hunter Biden was internally sabotaged during the 2020 election in order to derail the investigation, after agents wrongfully deemed verified evidence as “disinformation” to ignore.

According to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), agents investigating Hunter “opened an assessment which was used by an FBI headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” adding that his office received “a significant number of protected communications from highly credible whistleblowers” regarding the investigation.

Grassley added that “verified and verifiable derogatory information on Hunter Biden was falsely labeled as disinformation,” according to the Washington Examiner.

…The whistleblowers say investigators from FBI headquarters were “in communication with FBI agents responsible for the Hunter Biden information targeted by Mr. Auten’s assessment,” and that their findings on whether the claims were in fact disinformation were placed “in a restricted access sub-file” in September 2020, according to Grassley, who added that the disclosures “appear to indicate that there was a scheme in place among certain FBI officials to undermine derogatory information connected to Hunter Biden by falsely suggesting it was disinformation.

Grassley summarized the new allegations in a Monday letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

The Examiner notes that FBI agent Auten was involved in the Trump-Russia investigation, including interviewing Christopher Steele’s primary source, Igor Danchenko.

According to Grassley, the “volume and consistency” of the allegations regarding the handling of the Hunter Biden probe “substantiate their credibility.”

The article includes a copy of the letter mentioned above. Please follow the link to read the entire article. We still don’t (and probably never will) know the extent of the backroom deals that Hunter Biden has been (and possibly still is) involved in. Even if the case is allowed to proceed, it is doubtful that he will be seriously punished. We truly have a two-tiered justice system in America right now. If they continues, the country will not survive.

The Need For Transparency

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article about a request by some Republican House of Representatives members demanding that the Department of Justice release body and surveillance camera footage as well any other footage in connection with the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Why hasn’t that footage been released already, it’s been more than a year?

The article reports:

Wisconsin Rep. Glenn Grothman, Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert and South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman first requested the information from the DOJ in October 2021. Now, they are re-upping their inquiry, asking Attorney General Merrick Garland to release the information since their constituents have a “growing concern” with the DOJ’s “apparent failure” to do so.

...Most of the 14,000 hours of surveillance footage from Jan. 6 has not been made public, Buzzfeed News reported in August 2021. It is unclear how things have changed roughly one year later.

“From every camera on the Capitol grounds – including body and fixed surveillance cameras – every second of footage from January 6, 2021 ought to be in the public domain by now,” Norman told the DCNF. “It is baffling to me why the Attorney General has failed to make the entirety of footage available, especially while the Select Committee is cherry-picking clips to suit its narrative.”

The article concludes:

“It continues to be our hope that all Americans have faith in our systems of government, including our criminal justice and judicial system,” wrote the Republicans in their letter, setting an August 4 deadline. “For this reason, it is imperative that the Department adequately respond to our requests in timely manner.”

The article includes a copy of the letter sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland. Transparency is needed because of the attempts to politicize the events of January 6th. The attempt to politicize the events of that day were made obvious when Speaker Pelosi blocked the Republican choices for the investigative committee. There is no way the current committee investigating January 6th has any form of legitimacy. The only reason the committee has been allowed to exist is because most of the Republicans in Washington have no desire to uphold the U.S. Constitution. As I have stated before–if Ghislaine Maxwell’s client list ever becomes public, it may explain a lot of votes in Washington in the past few years.

Labels Matter

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about the double standard used in reporting protests.

The article notes:

The Left has a rather schizophrenic attitude toward protests and demonstrations. Some are wonderful, like the George Floyd riots, which were not, in fact, protests at all. Or like arson and other destruction committed at pro-life facilities. Others are detestable, like the Dutch farmers’ protests, or the French “yellow vests,” or the Canadian truckers. Some protests, too, can only be ignored, like when hundreds of thousands of pro-life citizens show up for their annual march in Washington.

Currently the Left is “demonstrating” against the Supreme Court justices who concurred in the Dobbs decision. A few nights ago, as Scott has noted, left-wingers harassed Justice Brett Kavanaugh and other diners at the Morton’s steak house in D.C. Liberals viewed this effort as a triumph–Kavanaugh reportedly had to exit out a back door–and a pro-Democratic Party organization is now offering cash bounties to anyone who sees a conservative justice out in public in time for a flash mob to assemble.

When asked about such tactics, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was nonplussed. These are peaceful demonstrations, she replied, the very essence of democracy!

Creating an intimidating environment for political opponents is a sign of a tyrannical government. Protesting political figures at private locations that have nothing to do with their jobs is a form of intimidation.

The article concludes:

And, of course, all of this discussion takes place in the context of at least one assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh, the same man who was falsely and relentlessly smeared by the Democratic Party during his confirmation hearings. I think the leaders of the Democratic Party are well aware that their over-the-top attacks on conservative justices, and the kinds of harassment we have seen in recent days, are likely to lead to more assassination attempts. I think leaders of the Democratic Party hope that one or more conservative justices will be assassinated while Joe Biden is still (at least nominally) president, so that he can appoint a left-wing successor. I think this is why Attorney General Merrick Garland refuses to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 1507, which bans demonstrations at the homes of judges that attempt to influence their decisions. And I think this is why the Biden administration cheers on the mobs who harass conservatives in public places.

If this assessment seems harsh, ask yourself: what other hypothesis is consistent with the Democrats’ actions?

So, are protests and demonstrations good or bad? I think they are good–that is to say, consistent with our Constitution’s framework of ordered liberty–when they are peaceful (not “mostly peaceful”), when they are conducted in public places with proper permitting, and when they do not explicitly or implicitly threaten anyone. Citizens have a right to assemble peaceably, not to form themselves into mobs. They do not have a right to commit mayhem, to destroy property, or to threaten, menace, or unreasonably inconvenience others. Unfortunately, the “protests” that the Left likes most usually fall in the latter category. Let’s just hope they don’t result in even more catastrophic violence than we have already witnessed.

So far, the violence we have witnessed seems to be mainly on the liberal side–January 6th was not a totally peaceful protest, but did not include lighting fires, burning business, throwing molotov cocktails into police cars, or killing those trying to protect their businesses. If the violence on the political left, including antifa, BLM, etc., is not reined in, I fear that there will be violent pushback from the political right. That is a recipe for the destruction of America.

The Deep State Crosses Party Lines

In June I posted an article based on a post in The Conservative Treehouse about the appointment of Merrick Garland to the post of Attorney General.

The article in The Conservative Treehouse included the following:

The Democratic-controlled Senate voted 53-44 to approve Jackson’s (Ketanji Brown Jackson) nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. All those in opposition were Republicans, with three voting with Democrats to approve the nomination.

Biden nominated Jackson, a Washington-based U.S. district judge, to the D.C. Circuit to replace Attorney General Merrick Garland on the bench. That appellate court has served as a springboard to the Supreme Court in the past, including for current Justices John Roberts, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh. (read more)

On Friday, President Biden nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to serve on the Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice Breyer.

On Friday, Just the News reported:

Jackson, 51, sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and if confirmed by the Senate would become the first black female justice appointed to the nine-member high court. During earlier parts of her career, Jackson served as a clerk for Justice Breyer as well as a public defender, which made her resume appealing to Biden, who has voiced a desire to put more public defenders on the federal bench.

According to CNN, Jackson, received and accepted the offer from President Biden on Thursday night.

A decision Friday by the president would mark exactly two years since then-presidential candidate Biden promised to appoint the first black female justice to the court.

Biden said he would share his choice by late February. On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said there would absolutely be a public announcement before March 1.

On Friday, The Washington Examiner reported:

The connection between Jackson and Ryan (former House Speaker Paul Ryan) is complex, as Jackson’s husband has a twin brother who is married to Ryan’s sister-in-law.

Ryan has also supported Jackson through previous nomination processes. When former President Barack Obama nominated her to a spot on the U.S. District Court for the D.C. Circuit in 2012, Ryan testified on her behalf at the confirmation hearing and spoke highly of her qualifications, urging his fellow GOP colleagues to confirm her.

Jackson, 51, was known to be on a short list of contenders the White House considered for the role and exhibits a unique background, having been a federal trial court judge for eight years without experience as a prosecutor or major corporate lawyer. She also sat on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals bench, where notably Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh served as judges before their promotions.

It will be interesting to see exactly what her impact on the Supreme Court will be if she is confirmed.

The Incestuous Swamp

On December 10th, The Washington Free Beacon posted an article which may explain why we are not hearing an awful lot from the Durham investigation.

The article reports:

A top adviser to Attorney General Merrick Garland is facing calls to recuse herself from the Justice Department’s investigation of the Trump-Russia probe, which has looked into the actions of her husband, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan.

Margaret Goodlander serves as counsel to Garland, who oversees Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation. Garland has oversight of Durham’s budget, the scope of the investigation, and the release of a report Durham is believed to be writing. Sullivan, who married Goodlander in 2015, has been referenced in Durham’s indictment of a cybersecurity lawyer who worked for the Clinton campaign. While there is no indication that Durham is targeting Sullivan, the national security adviser could be a witness for the investigation given that he was a foreign policy adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. Durham’s report could also reveal embarrassing details about Sullivan’s work on the campaign to dig up dirt on Donald Trump’s possible links to Russia.

A spokesman for the Justice Department said Goodlander “has no role in Mr. Durham’s investigation,” but it is unclear whether she has formally recused herself from the matter or whether the Durham probe is outside her Justice Department portfolio. Fox News reported that Goodlander advises Garland on antitrust and international issues.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) and the watchdog group Empower Oversight say Goodlander should be formally recused from the Durham investigation to maintain public trust in the probe.

Maybe I’m missing something, but if your husband is under investigation by the Justice Department, you shouldn’t be working for the Justice Department.

The article concludes:

According to the indictment, Sussmann’s (indicted cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann) former Perkins Coie partner, Marc Elias, in September 2016 briefed Sullivan and others on the Clinton team about his firm’s efforts to investigate the Alfa Bank data. Sullivan days before the election issued a statement that cited the Alfa-Trump allegations as evidence of collusion. It was unknown at the time that the Clinton campaign was investigating the Alfa Bank issue. The FBI later determined that there was no nefarious link between the bank and Trump.

Elias was the attorney who hired Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned the Steele dossier. Durham indicted the primary source for the dossier, Igor Danchenko, on charges that Danchenko lied to the FBI about the identity of his sources. Dancheko allegedly lied by saying that a longtime Democratic operative, Charles Dolan, was not one of his sources.

Grassley and Empower Oversight have pressed the Justice Department over the recusal of another official, Susan Hennessey, who has pushed the false claim that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Hennessey, who serves in the national security division, last year criticized Durham’s investigation, calling it “partisan silliness.”

Grassley said Garland has stonewalled his requests for information about Hennessey and other Justice Department officials’ conflicts of interest.

“I’ve raised concerns about potential conflicts of several Biden Justice Department officials and can’t get a straight answer from the attorney general,” he told the Free Beacon.

The Free Beacon was once a client of Fusion GPS. All of the work Fusion GPS performed for the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product appeared in the Steele dossier. For more information, see here.

The swamp is deeper and has more entangled vines than most of us ever imagined.

 

Ruining A City Already In Peril

On Tuesday, The New York Post reported that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has created the first legal ‘shooting gallery’ for drug addicts in the city.

The article reports:

With just four weeks left in office, Mayor Bill de Blasio launched the country’s first legal shooting galleries Tuesday morning, calling them safe havens for addicts — shortly before five people overdosed at just one of the clinics on opening day.

“Overdose Prevention Centers are a safe and effective way to address the opioid crisis. I’m proud to show cities in this country that after decades of failure, a smarter approach is possible,” de Blasio said in a statement.

The nonprofit-run centers, New York Harm Reduction Educators on E. 126th Street in Harlem and Washington Heights’ CORNER Project on W. 180th Street, opened Tuesday.

There were five overdoses at the East Harlem site that saw 85 users inject drugs laced with fentanyl including heroin on Tuesday. 

This is not the way to deal with the drug problem. Also, this is a big change to make four weeks before leaving office.

The article concludes:

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), whose district includes Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn, called on the Department of Justice to block the sites, noting that under former President Trump the DOJ said such sites would violate the federal Controlled Substances Act.

Malliotakis wrote US Attorney General Merrick Garland Tuesday urging him to “take swift action to enforce federal law.”

The congresswoman cited a Jan. 2021 Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that determined it was a federal crime for a supervised injection site run by a Philadelphia nonprofit to allow consumption of illegal drug use at its location.

“Instead of focusing on the root cause of the drug epidemic, Mayor de Blasio is enabling drug cartels that continue to break our laws, smuggle illegal drugs over our border, and prey on our children,” Malliotakis said.

“Crime and fentanyl use are at record highs because of open borders, botched bail reform, and anti-police policies that keep releasing criminal drug dealers back onto our streets. Opening taxpayer-funded heroin shooting galleries is not a proper solution. These centers not only encourage drug use but they will further deteriorate our quality of life,” she said.

De Blasio has largely turned a blind eye to daytime drug sprees in major city hubs like the Garment District and the Triangle Plaza Hub in the Bronx.

It might be a good idea to acknowledge that a good deal of our drug problem in America is related to two things–an open southern border and the Chinese manufacturing and selling of fentanyl. Until we are willing to address those two issues, we will continue to have an addiction problem in America. Setting up ‘safe’ places to take illegal drugs does nothing to combat either problem. There is no law regulating illegal drugs or controlling what is in them. There is no guarantee that an illegally purchased drug will not contain a fatal does of fentanyl.