Tag Archives: Representative Jim Jordan

About Those RICO Laws…

Posted on by

RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) Laws were originally put in place to deal with organized crime. I suspect that the people who put them in place never dreamed that organized crime would make its way to the White House.

On Tuesday, Just the News reported the following:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan on Tuesday wrote to White House chief of staff Jeff Zients and Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding that the pair account for reports that a staffer in special counsel Jack Smith’s office repeatedly met with Biden White House officials.

Isn’t that special?

I thought that the purpose of the special counsel was to have an investigation free of interference from within the government.

The article notes:

“According to recent reporting, Jay Bratt—a Department of Justice employee and top aide to Special Counsel Jack Smith—met with White House officials multiple times, just weeks before Mr. Smith indicted former President Donald Trump,” Jordan (House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan) wrote to Zients. “This new information raises serious concerns regarding the potential for a coordinated effort between the Department and the White House to investigate and prosecute President Biden’s political opponents.”

The letter then proceeds to document the various meetings between Bratt and White House officials between 2021 and 2023. It further highlighted allegations that Bratt, in particular, “improperly pressured” a lawyer representing a Trump employee to cooperate with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the former president.

The article concludes:

“These facts reinforce the serious concern that Mr. Smith is not running an impartial and unprejudiced investigation and prosecution,” Jordan insisted. “The Committee has a significant interest in examining how the Department runs its Special Counsel investigations to inform potential legislative reforms concerning the Department’s Special Counsel practices and operations.”

Jordan demanded that Zients and Garland provide the Judiciary Committee with documents related to Bratt’s myriad visits as well as any communications between the Department of Justice and the Biden White House related to Smith’s operations.

Does anyone believe that if President Biden were a Republican, he would still be in office?

Privacy?

Posted on by

On Saturday, Townhall posted an article about a subpoena issued by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Citibank.

The article reports:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) issued a subpoena to Citibank over allegations that the company provided private information of customers involved in the January 6 Capitol Hill protests to the weaponized Department of Justice.

The subpoena came after Jordan declared the bank was not cooperating with the Committee’s requests to turn over crucial documentation.

“The Committee and Select Subcommittee have obtained evidence showing that at least one major financial institution provided the FBI with private financial data without legal process,” Jordan wrote to Sunil Garg, CEO of Citibank North America. “Bank of America (BoA) provided the FBI — voluntarily and without any legal process — with a list of individuals who made transactions in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area with a BoA credit or debit card between January 5 and January 7, 2021.”

Jordan’s letter also stated that individuals who previously bought a firearm with a BoA product were moved to the top of that list— regardless of the time or place of the firearm purchase.

The Committee alleges that the bank shared individuals’ private information regarding their accounts with the FBI despite having no criminal past.

Keep in mind that the purchases were tracked because people used their credit cards. How much easier would it be to track the purchases of all Americans if we were using digital currency?

The article concludes:

“These documents suggest that the executive branch was brainstorming informal methods— outside of legal process—for obtaining private customer information from financial institutions,” Jordan’s letter continued.

Jordan has also sought information from JPMorgan, PNC, U.S. Bancorp, Wells Fargo, and Trust Financial Corporation.

“Given this concerning testimony, the Committee has written to other major financial institutions, including Citibank, to determine whether those entities were involved in similar conduct,” he said.

The Ohio congressman hinted at future legislation that would hold financial institutions responsible if they participate in such activity.

I know someone whose PayPal account was closed because she purchased a hamburger with her credit card in Washington on January 6th. She attended the rally, but went back to her hotel afterwards. Sharing credit card records of people who have not committed a crime should be illegal if it is not already. If it is illegal, those who broke the law need to be held accountable.

Exposing The Lies

Posted on by

On Monday, Trending Politics reported that the FBI agent who testified about the agency’s involvement with Hunter Biden’s laptop lied under oath to put distance between the Bureau and efforts to discredit the information gleaned from its discovery. Why is it that people who lie under oath to protect Democrats never seem to be held accountable?

The article reports:

Rep. Jordan’s announcement comes as part of the Facebook Files, an effort by House Republicans to disclose the multitude of ways in which federal authorities have pressured social media companies to silence critics and oppress the free flow of information. New documents obtained by the Judiciary Committee show that the FBI previously met with Big Tech companies in the wake of the laptop’s discovery and sought to suppress news about it on major social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter.

Elvis Chan, a Special Agent with the FBI, served as the “main conduit” between Big Tech and the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force in 2016, according to Jordan. Chan, in addition to Task Force Chief Laura Dehmlow, originally confirmed the authenticity of the laptop to Twitter before changing course and telling Facebook and other social media companies “no comment.” The answer led Facebook, and eventually Twitter, to suppress the sharing of news stories about Hunter’s laptop.

It has become very obvious in recent months that the American voters have been lied to and led to believe things that were simply not true. If we allow the people currently in control of the Department of Justice and the White House to continue in these roles after 2024, then we are responsible for the death of equal justice in America. Think carefully before you vote next year.

This Really Shouldn’t Surprise Anyone

Posted on by

On Monday, PJ Media posted an interesting article about the fifty-one national security officials who wrote a letter suggesting that the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop reported by The New York Post were Russian disinformation, and that there was no proof the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden. This turned out to be a rather ridiculous claim after Hunter Biden’s attorneys sued the computer repair shop owner for invasion of privacy after it released the information. Why would he do that if the information was bogus? But it gets even better.

The article reports:

For the past couple of years, we’ve been led to believe that the letter from 51 national security officials was some sort of spontaneous, grassroots effort by the intelligence community to warn us about the potential foreign influence behind Hunter Biden’s laptop.

The laptop has since been confirmed to be legitimate, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence confirmed that there was no foreign disinformation campaign involved. But new information from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and congressional investigators, with the help of two Obama-era CIA officials, has revealed a new twist in the story. The investigation has uncovered evidence linking the letter dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation during the 2020 election to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

…Jordan revealed to Just the News that a report on government weaponization is set to be released later this month, detailing the individuals involved in the letter and the evidence linking them to the Biden campaign. Jordan suggested that the letter may have been a significant interference in the presidential election and was motivated by political considerations. Jordan declined to provide more details as further witness interviews are being conducted this week.

“It was all done with politics, and it looks like there was some real connections with the Biden campaign,” Jordan said during an interview late last week on the John Solomon Reports podcast.

The article concludes:

I’m sure the question on everyone’s mind is: who in the Biden campaign was involved in this scheme? While Jordan has confirmed that evidence linking the letter dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop to the Biden campaign has been uncovered, he says specific ties to the Biden campaign will be disclosed in the interim report.

The corruption in our federal government never ceases to amaze me.

 

The Circus Continues

Posted on by

The arraignment of President Trump was questionable at best, but Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg had to fulfill his campaign promise to ‘get Trump.’ The next step in the drama was Representative Jim Jordan looking for information on what role the federal government paid in the investigation. Obviously, Alvin Bragg does not want any information on that topic investigated or revealed, so he a entered a restraining order against Rep. Jim Jordan to stop Jim Jordan’s investigation.

On Wednesday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s urgent request to enter a restraining order against Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) was rejected on April 11, the same day it was filed.

U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, a Trump appointee, turned down Bragg’s emergency request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Jordan.

“The Court declines to enter the proposed Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause,” Vyskocil said, noting that she had not yet received several documents that were referenced in Bragg’s filings.

…Jordan said on Fox News that Bragg is obstructing a legitimate congressional investigation.

“They’re obstructing our investigation,” Jordan said. “We have a constitutional duty to get to the facts, particularly when you have a district attorney interfering with the most important election we have, which is the election of the commander-in-chief; the president of the United States.”

Trump, who was president until early 2021, is running for a second term in 2024.

Bragg has asserted that Jordan and other members of Congress lack the authority to probe the Trump prosecution but Jordan disagreed, pointing to how federal funds were used to investigate Trump.

“First, they indict a president for no crime. Then, they sue to block congressional oversight when we ask questions about the federal funds they say they used to do it,” Jordan said in a statement.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is engaging in election interference. Whether or not he will pay a price for that behavior remains to be seen.

 

The Concept Of Having Skin In The Game

Posted on by

In early America, only men were allowed to vote. The theory behind that was that men were the head of their houses and a man’s vote represented the vote of his family. In many states only property owners could vote because they were considered to have a stake in the decisions made by their elected representatives. Obviously that changed. Obviously that needed to change. How far are we willing to let that change go? Recently the idea of letting 16-year olds vote has become popular among many Democrats. The claim is that it will encourage life-long voters. I am more inclined to think it will create more opportunities for mischief.

On Sunday, The Conservative Review posted an article about another voting discussion–letting non-citizens vote.

The article reports:

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) was hit with backlash after making a seemingly elementary and innocuous remark: “Only Americans should vote in American elections.”

The comment was in regard to House Joint Resolution 24, or the “Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in Approving the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022,” which passed the House of Representatives on Thursday.

The resolution seeks to overturn a bill that passed the D.C. Council in October, which opened the local voting process to non-citizens.

The Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act was passed by the D.C. Council in late 2021. The bill gives non-citizens who live in the district the right to vote for the mayor, city council member, attorney general, school board member, and commissioner.

The law was to be reviewed by Congress and then go into effect in March.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) pointed out there were 162 Democrats who voted to allow non-citizens to vote in D.C. elections. All 218 Republicans in the House voted not to let non-citizens vote in D.C. elections. The House voted to overturn the bill by a vote of 260-162.

If you want to vote in an American election, please become an American citizen first.

Saying The Border Is Open Is Racist!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Townhall reported the following:

House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee mainly had only one response to Republicans highlighting the disaster the U.S.-Mexico border has become under President Joe Biden’s leadership: Saying the southern border is open is racist.

Pay no attention to the thousands of people walking into America illegally.

The article continues:

After Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) outlined the record-breaking numbers of illegal immigrants encountered, those who were able to avoid apprehension, and the amount of drugs seized, meaning much more was able to get into the U.S., Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said the first hearing about the crisis is a distraction and will only expose how racist Republicans are.

Nadler added the GOP’s focus on the border “almost makes me miss the usual obsession with conspiracy theories and the FBI.”

…El Paso County Judge Ricardo Samaniego (D), who was the Democrat’s witnessed, testified the border was not open in his county, despite recently having a massive influx of illegal immigrants in September and December.

“There is no invasion of migrants in our community. Nor are there hordes of undocumented immigrants committing crimes against citizens or causing havoc in our community,” he added.

My advice to the Democrats is simple–if you are going to lie, at least make it believable!

Is This Legal?

Posted on by

As the Republicans prepare to take the majority in the House of Representatives, Democrats are preparing for the change. However, some of the preparation seems a little odd.

On Sunday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

Outgoing House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said the Jan. 6 committee will have to “scrub” some evidence from its final report before Republicans take over the house in 2023.

During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, Schiff was asked by anchor Dana Bash about Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) becoming chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee and will “go through the evidence you left out … you’re saying that there won’t be evidence that will not be made public?”

“The evidence will all be made public,” Schiff told Bash in response. “Now, we will have to make sure that we scrub that evidence for personally identifiable information, that the evidence that we provide protects people’s security, it doesn’t put them at risk. So, there are things that we’re going to have to do along those lines.”

The article also notes:

Elsewhere in his interview, Schiff declined to say whether he would comply with a House Republican subpoena when the GOP takes control.

“We’ll have to consider the validity of the subpoena,” he said. “But I would certainly view my obligation, administration’s obligation to follow the law. And the fact that they have disrespected the law is not a precedent I would hope that would be broadly followed. But we’ll have to look at the legitimacy or lack of legitimacy of what they do.”

Schiff, meanwhile, did not say when the final Jan. 6 select committee’s report would be released to the public. The panel will end with the start of the next Congress in January 2023—like all other select committees created during the current session of Congress.

So there are only consequences for not complying with a subpoena when the Democrats issue the subpoena? I am honestly beginning to wonder if our unequal system of justice has reached the point on no return.

FBI Whistleblowers Have Come Forward

Posted on by

On Monday, The Epoch Times posted an article about fourteen whistleblowers who have come forward with information about the politicization of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

The article reports:

Two months ago, Jordan (Representative Jim Jordan) said that six FBI whistleblowers approached the committee. Two came forward about a memo related to alleged violence and intimidation at school board meetings and four in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach. In the Senate, meanwhile, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in July that whistleblowers had come to his office to provide information, including disclosures relating to investigations into Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings.

“It’s becoming a well-worn trail of agents who say this has got to stop, and thank goodness for them and that American people recognize it, and I believe they’re going to make a big change on Nov. 8,” Jordan said, referring to the midterm elections.

In June, Jordan sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray warning that several former FBI officials were coming forward, while alleging the agency is “purging” employees who have conservative views.

…Two months ago, Jordan said that six FBI whistleblowers approached the committee. Two came forward about a memo related to alleged violence and intimidation at school board meetings and four in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach. In the Senate, meanwhile, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in July that whistleblowers had come to his office to provide information, including disclosures relating to investigations into Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings.

“It’s becoming a well-worn trail of agents who say this has got to stop, and thank goodness for them and that American people recognize it, and I believe they’re going to make a big change on Nov. 8,” Jordan said, referring to the midterm elections.

I have said this before–do not count on a Republican wave in November. The media is already censoring conservative speech in preparation for that election, and there is no guarantee that the November election will not have the same sort of shenanigans that the 2020 election had. A number of states that have taken the time to audit the 2020 vote in detail have found major problems with the vote. Hopefully those problems will be fixed by November, but there are no guarantees. Unless we have an honest election, we can expect the corruption in the FBI to continue. There are no guarantees that it will not continue even if the Republicans take Congress. In the past our current Republican Congressional leadership has not shown that they have the courage to clean up the FBI. There is no reason to think that they will do it if they have the majority.

The Seeds Were Planted For The Destruction Of The Republic In 2012

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article that explains a lot of the initial and ongoing attacks on the Trump administration and President Trump. It also offers a possible explanation as to why so few in the Washington swamp have been willing to fight the seemingly endless corruption.

The article reports:

There is very little that surprises me, but this is completely stunning.  An FBI whistleblower came forth to inform Rep Jim Jordan and Rep Matt Gaetz that the FBI maintains a workspace inside the law firm of Perkins Coie.  {Direct Rumble Link}

In response to a letter sent by Rep. Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan, Perkins Coie, the legal arm of the DNC and Hillary Clinton, admitted they have been operating an FBI workspace in their Washington D.C. office since 2012.  Pay attention to that date, it matters.

This is a huge development.  Essentially, what is being admitted in this claim is that a portal existed into FBI databases within the law firm that represents democrats.  This means access to FBI database searches exists inside the office of the DNC and Clinton legal group.  Think about the ramifications here.

CTH has long claimed there was some kind of direct portal link between the Clinton campaign team and the FBI databases.  There were too many trails of extracted non-minimized research evidence in the hands of the Clinton team that CTH could not trace to a transferring FBI official.  If Perkins Coie operated a portal in their office that allowed them to conduct search queries of American citizens, then everything would make sense.  That access portal is exactly what is being claimed and admitted in this report.

The start date of 2012 is important for several reasons, not the least of which is FISA presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer criticizing the scale and scope of unlawful FBI database access going back to exactly 2012.  Keep in mind a FISA-702 search, is simply an unlawful FBI warrantless electronic search of an American (“702” represents the American citizen) into the central database -maintained by the NSA- that contains all electronic data and communication.

I have been in the deep hole of the FISA-702 database search query violations for so long I don’t even need a flashlight.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It includes some of Rosemary Collyer’s prior report on FBI abuses of the database.

There were some people who warned us when the Patriot Act was passed after 9/11 that it would lead to government abuses and illegal spying on Americans. Evidently they were right.

An Ordinary Citizen Would Be Arrested For This

Posted on by

Falsifying evidence is a criminal offense. We are about to find out whether the laws actually do apply to the people in Congress.

On Wednesday, The Western Journal reported the following:

It’s amazing to me that California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff is not in jail. This lawmaker has played it fast and loose, first during the Trump/Russia collusion investigation, which put him on the map, and next in the House impeachment inquiry of former President Donald Trump. There is no line this unethical, truth-challenged, repellent snake won’t cross in the name of politics.

The Federalist’s Sean Davis reported on Wednesday that Schiff was up to his old tricks at Monday night’s hearing of the Jan. 6 Committee. According to Davis, Schiff “claimed to have proof” that Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, a Republican, texted then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows “to instruct former Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.”

Davis claims that Schiff misrepresented “the substance of the text message and its source.” Schiff “even doctored original text messages, which were obtained and reviewed by The Federalist in their entirety.”

The article explains the changes Representative Schiff made to the text messages:

Davis (The Federalist’s Sean Davis) explains that in addition to lying about “substance” and the “source” of the text, Schiff “even doctored the message and graphic that he displayed on screen during his statement. The full text message, which was forwarded to Meadows from Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on the evening of Monday, Jan. 5, was significantly longer than what Schiff read and put on screen, but Schiff erased significant portions of the text and added punctuation where there was none to give the impression that Jordan himself was tersely directing Meadows to give orders to Pence on how to handle the electoral vote certification.”

Davis continues: “The original text was written by Washington attorney and former Department of Defense Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and included an attachment of a four-page draft Word document drafted by Schmitz that detailed Schmitz’s legal reasoning for suggesting that Pence had the constitutional authority to object to the certification of electoral votes submitted by a handful of states. The piece that Schmitz had sent to Jordan was published at the website everylegal.vote the next day and even included the same ‘DISCUSSION DRAFT’ heading and timestamp on the document that Schmitz sent to Jordan.”

He explains that Schmitz sent this text to Jordan “on the evening of Jan. 5, including the Word document as an attachment. Schmitz then texted to Jordan a three-paragraph summary of his Word document, which Schiff sliced and diced and then attributed to Jordan.”

Would anyone like to wager on how much of the above chicanery will be reported by the mainstream media?

Lying To Congress Is Only A Problem If You Are A Republican

Posted on by

Yesterday The Post Millennial posted an article yesterday that indicates Attorney General Merrick Garland lied to Congress when asked about using the Department of Justice Counterterrorism Division to investigate parents who were unhappy with the curriculum in their local schools.

The article reports:

In a letter addressed to US Attorney General Merrick Garland on Tuesday, Rep. Jim Jordan wrote that a whistleblower has revealed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is using its Counterterrorism Division to investigate parents.

“Last month, during your testimony before the Judiciary Committee, you testified that the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation were not using federal counterterrorism tools to target concerned parents at local school board meetings,” Jordan’s letter began.

…”We are now in receipt of a protected disclosure from a Department whistleblower showing that the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division is compiling and categorizing threat assessments related to parents, including a document directing FBI personnel to use a specific ‘threat tag’ to track potential investigations,” the letter continues, calling into question the “accuracy and completeness of your sworn testimony.”

Jordan’s letter goes on to outline that during Garland’s Oct. 21 testimony, he stated that the Department and its components were not using counterterrorism statues and resources to target concerned parents, specifically stating that he could not “imagine any circumstance in which the Patriot Act would be used in the circumstances of parents complaining about their children.”

The letter states that they have received an FBI email from the whistleblower dated Oct. 20, the day before Garland’s testimony, sent “on behalf of” the FBI’s Assistant Director for the Counterterrorism.

…That document, which references Garland’s Oct. 4 directive to the FBI, reveals that the FBI created the threat tag “EDUOFFICIALS” with the purpose of tracking “instances of related threats.”

“We ask that your offices apply the threat tag to investigations and assessments of threats specifically directed against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff,” the document reads. “The purpose of the threat tag is to help scope this threat on a national level and provide opportunity for comprehensive analysis of the threat picture for effective management with law enforcement parters at all levels.”

“This disclosure provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents,” Jordan wrote.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It includes screenshots of the Whistleblower’s information.

Is Leaking A Problem?

Posted on by

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article yesterday about a very interesting television interview of Jim Jordan by Margaret Brennan.

The article reports:

Representative Jim Jordan appears on CBS Face The Nation to discuss the ongoing impeachment fiasco. Ms. Brennan struggles to define a new journalistic concept for “first-hand” information as she claims David Holmes, who claims to have overheard half of a phone conversation that two other people were having, is a “first-hand” witness.

Jordan points out that Ms. Brennan is quoting from a seal(ed) transcript given to her by Adam Schiff that has not been released.

Whoops!

The video and the transcript are posted in the article. You can follow the link above to see them both.

It’s also interesting to see exactly how the interview ended:

REP. JORDAN: Well, I don’t think that’s what took place here, because there was never an investigation undertaken. There was never an announcement from President Zelensky–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the request for one that was overheard and testified to.

REP. JORDAN: But it didn’t happen. There’s- there’s all kinds of talk about things, but they- it didn’t happen. And well, remember when this all broke? What the Democrats tell us?

MARGARET BRENNAN: And the attempt itself doesn’t bother you?

REP. JORDAN: What the Democrats tell us? There was a quid pro quo. The scary thing is the Democrats have been out to get this president. I was struck by listening to Speaker Pelosi’s comments, her answer to your second question. She used the word impostor. I’m talking about the president of the United States, who 63 million people voted for, who won an Electoral College–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: –landslide. And yet these Democrats have been trying to get him- the start of this Congress, Congresswoman Tlaib said–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

REP. JORDAN: –she wants to impeach him before any evidence. Five members, think about this–

MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand.

REP. JORDAN: –five members of the Dem- of the Democrat- five Democrat members on the Intelligence Committee have voted to move forward with impeachment even before the whistleblower complaint was filed.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’ve got to go to a commercial break. Thank you very much, Congressman.

REP. JORDAN: Thank you

I suspect that Ms. Brennan was very glad to see that interview end. Life is hard when you have to deal with smart people who tend to be at least one step ahead of you.

When The Accusations Crumble

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article about Mark Coleman, a former MMA fighter who wrestled at Ohio State when Representative Jim Jordan coached there. It seems that Mr. Coleman has changed his mind about whether or not Representative Jordan know about the sexual abuse allegations against a university physician.

The article reports:

“At no time did I ever say or have any direct knowledge that Jim Jordan knew of Dr. Richard Strauss’s inappropriate behavior,” Mark Coleman, a former MMA fighter who wrestled at Ohio State when Jordan coached there, said in a statement.

“I have nothing but respect for Jim Jordan as I have known him for more than 30 years and know him to be of impeccable character.”

Coleman is the first former OSU wrestler to recant his claims that Jordan knew about sexual abuse at the hands of Dr. Richard Strauss, an OSU physician accused of molesting dozens of student-athletes.

I previously wrote about this scandal here. The two noteworthy things about the scandal are the fact that it happened twenty years ago and did not surface until there was talk of Jim Jordan as Speaker of the House and the fact that Perkins, Coie is involved. Perkins, Coie was the law firm that was used to channel funds to Christopher Steele for the dirty dossier.

I wonder how much of the mainstream media will report the fact that this man has changed his story. I also wonder if now that the damage to Jim Jordan’s reputation is done, will the story go away.

The Government Envisioned by Carroll Quigley Has Come To Pass

Posted on by

We are here:

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy” (Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966.)

The dream of Carroll Quigley has come true. We have reached the point where it does no good to simply ‘throw the rascals out.’ We tried that in 2016, and nothing has changed. On Sunday night, Republicans and Democrats in Congress put together a spending bill that would fund the government through September. It is truly a bad bill that does not respect the wishes of the voters in the 2016 election.

Fox News reported today:

The proposed legislation has no funding for Trump’s oft-promised wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, but does set aside $1.5 billion for border security measures such as additional detention beds. It does give Trump a $12.5 billion down payment on his request to strengthen the military, a figure which could rise to $15 billion should Trump present Congress with a plan for fighting the Islamic State terror group. The proposed $15 billion amounts to half of Trump’s original $30 billion request.

…The House and Senate have until 11:59 p.m. Friday to approve the bill, which would avert a government shutdown. If passed, the catchall spending bill would be the first major piece of bipartisan legislation to advance during Trump’s short tenure in the White House. The measure is assured of winning bipartisan support in votes this week, but it’s unclear how much support the measure will receive from GOP conservatives and how warmly it will be received by the White House.

Democratic votes will be needed to pass the measure even though Republicans control both the White House and Congress. The minority party has been actively involved in the talks, which appear headed to produce a lowest common denominator measure that won’t look too much different than the deal that could have been struck on Obama’s watch last year.

Breitbart posted an article today quoting Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the vice chairman of the House Freedom Caucus:

Jordan argued the entire point of doing a short-term spending bill last year was to get the government through until the next administration took office. Then, he explained Republicans in a GOP-controlled federal government would have the opportunity to fight for their priorities.

“Why did we last fall do a short-term spending bill if we weren’t going to actually fight for the things we told the voters we were going to fight for?” he said. “So we’d have been, I mean if this is the deal we’re going to get it seems to me we should have just did the bill for the whole year. But we specifically held the vote for; we did a short-term spending bill for this time so that when Republicans controlled the government, we could actually do the things we campaigned on. This bill doesn’t seem to do that. Plus it maintains Chris this idea that for every new dollar you spend in defense money you’ve got to give the Democrats more money in non-defense. That’s again not what we campaigned on. So I’m disappointed. We’ll see how it plays out this week. But I think you’re going to see conservatives have some real concerns with this legislation.

We might want to remember that the first rule of Saul Alinsky‘s Rules for Radicals is:

“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.

Part of the problem here is that the Democrats have convinced the Republicans that if the Democrats shut down the government, the Republicans will somehow be blamed for the shutdown. Because of the mainstream media’s support of the Democrats, that is the way it will be spun, but many Americans are looking past the spin.

This budget bill is a major mistake for Congressional Republicans. They need to look at the votes lost by the Democratic Party in elections over the past decade and understand that if the Republican Party continues in the direction they seem to be currently going, they will also lose voters. If the Republicans ignore the results of the 2016 election and the popularity of Donald Trump because he stood for change, there will be a successful third party within a decade.