Both former Trump advisors Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon have been convicted of contempt of Congress over their refusal to comply with subpoenas from the committee.
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich on Friday excoriated the now-defunct House Jan. 6 Committee, contending that its findings were based on a “false product” and urging Congress to repudiate its activities.
“This committee, the J6 committee, was so fraudulent, that the current House should repudiate it, define it as an illegal or unethical, runaway investigation of no standing,” Gingrich said on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “[A]nd [it] should send a letter to both the Department of Justice and to the appropriate judges, saying that any action based on the J6 committee should be considered null and void and that people like Steve Bannon should not be going to jail because they want to fight with a committee which was literally operating outside the law.”
The Jan. 6 panel was an investigative committee run by the then-Democratic House that investigated the events of and leading up to the disturbance of at the U.S. Capitol on that date. The committee included only two Republicans, former Wyoming GOP Rep. Liz Cheney and former Illinois GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, both of whom voted to impeach former President Donald Trump.
Both former Trump advisors Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon have been convicted of contempt of Congress over their refusal to comply with subpoenas from the committee. Navarro is currently in custody at a Miami federal prison while Bannon has been ordered to report to prison next month.
“I think this is such a tainted and corrupted process,” he also said. “And I think it has to be repealed by the House, and repudiated by the House. And I think that the court and the Justice Department have to take into account that anybody who had a conflict with this committee was dealing with an out of control, illegal operation.”
“Their findings are based on a totally false product,” he said of the panel. “And the people who were subpoenaed by them who refused to agree, we now know, we’re on the right, that in fact, what you have here is a runaway select committee. That was totally dishonest.”
Gingrich took particular aim at Cheney, contending that she was motivated by her desire to take down the former commander-in-chief to such a degree, that she was willing to ignore the law to achieve that end.
“I mean, we’ve we’re in a period here where the establishment is just sick. And we have a chance to correct the record historically,” he said. “And I think people will be astonished at how bad was Cheney was, how much she broke the rules, and how basically, she wanted to destroy Trump so badly, that she didn’t care that in the process, she was breaking the laws.”
“This committee destroyed all of its records. Now. That is, that is totally illegal, because we have others talk about Trump and Biden and their records. While I tell you what the J6 committee did, deliberately and methodically, was 1000 times worse than anything either Trump or Biden had done in terms of records,” he contended.
“They did it deliberately. And they did it because they didn’t want other people to figure out what they’ve been doing,” he concluded.
—
House Republicans Furious with Way Speaker Johnson Distributes Tenured Perks
June 14, 2024 | Sundance
On the day after the Mar-a-Lago raid in 2022, the FBI raided the home of Pennsylvania Representative Scott Perry. {DETAILS} Factually, there were a series of coordinated FBI raids and targeted inquisitions that were intentionally timed to trigger immediately after the August ’22 Trump raid.
What most people do not know was that President Trump’s former Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows essentially set up Scott Perry. After the DOJ framed the J6 events as a “national security threat,” Mark Meadows was essentially a walking FISA virus. Meadows sent Perry text messages via an encrypted Signal app, however, Signal was cooperating with the DOJ/FBI to give all communication to the targeting units of a weaponized surveillance state.
SIDEBAR: I believe Meadows knew his communication with Perry would be intercepted, because Meadows was an ¹operative for the Intelligence Community. I have pointed out the Meadows issues before. Additionally, Meadows was absolutely confirmed as John Solomon’s source from Congress and likely from the Oval Office. Meadows consistently leaked information to Hannity’s Tick Tock buddy, that the DOJ/FBI and IC wanted to see distributed.
¹Mark Meadows is a confirmed Deep State operative, and I would not bet against Solomon being a willing assistant and operative himself. [Chase his current storyline with that qualifier in mind, and you might have a different perspective. Seven years of “Breaking”, “Explosive”, “Game Changing”, “Exclusive”, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. All of it with ZERO “big boom” accountability outcomes – exactly as designed.]
SIDEBAR OVER – Back to Perry. Pennsylvania Representative Scott Perry became an FBI target in part because of his proximity to the epicenter of the AME church network voting fraud in Philadelphia [there’s a reason Biden goes there all the time], and in part because Perry was a supporter of President Trump and didn’t buy the illogical 2020 election outcome narrative. {NYT Link}
Well, last week House Speaker Mike Johnson appointed Scott Perry to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, or HPSCI as it is known. Despite the MAGA reps supporting this selection, my hunch is that President Trump was the voice who leveraged Johnson to make this happen. Now, the non-MAGA professional Republicans in the House are going bananas.
The backlash against the appointment of Perry to the HPSCI is a remarkable dose of sunlight upon all of the Republican deep state operatives in the House of Representatives. Texas Rep Dan Crenshaw is so filled with rage he can’t see straight.
WASHINGTON DC – […] Crenshaw, a member of the Intelligence panel, added: “The speaker needs to remember that there isn’t only one group that can threaten them. … Just do not teach the lesson that the only way for us to be effective here is threatening, because I’ll take the lesson and I’ll do it.”
[…] Beyond Crenshaw, a person familiar with the sitdowns said two separate groups of Republicans met with Johnson this week to share their frustrations about Perry’s appointment. That includes members of the Intelligence Committee who plan to meet with him on Thursday.
One Republican, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, said no previous committee assignment has sparked as much internal anger as Johnson’s decision about Perry.
Another GOP member added that Perry’s appointment “was the talk for a day or two” among Republicans during their recent trip to France because of how “angry” lawmakers are.
“There’s a lot of pissed people. A lot of angry people. (read more)
Pour in the sunlight…. This is good stuff. We need to find out exactly which Republicans are angered by the appointment of Perry to the HPSCI. The problem is much bigger than the insufferable Dan Crenshaw.
Beyond the details of this story, stand back and look at the larger picture of how the HPSCI seats were historically assigned, against the background of how stunningly bad the HPSCI has been at holding the HPSCI Democrats like Adam Schiff to account. Let yourself think about this.
Everyone gets frustrated by the insufferable ineptitude of the House Republicans who appear on committees, and as a consequence appear on television asking the wrong questions. Well, overlay the silo problem with the reality that Republican House accountability processes (committee assignments) are determined by seniority and who plays nicely in DC.
…”a lot of people who have worked hard to be good team players feel like they are getting passed over,” (link)
PICTURED: ~ The Average DC Republican ~
Things make sense now?
The Big Ugly needs to get BIGGER and UGLIER before the boil can be lanced and the puss drained.
The Truth Has No Agenda. However, this sunlight is progress.
.
{ Support CTH Here }
Logan Paul Interviews President Donald J Trump
June 14, 2024 | Sundance
Say what you want about Trump’s political instincts, but his new-age media savvy is excellent. President Trump continues giving long-format podcast interviews to some of the most watched independent channels on the internet.
In this relaxed and informal interview, President Trump again connects to an audience in a way that is direct, conversational and relatable. The topics with Logan Paul include debating Joe Biden in the 2024 election, raising $140M as a convicted felon, the Paul Brothers fighting each other, friendship with Vladimir Putin & Kim Jong Un, Logan Paul Vs Bradley Martyn, brutally honest thoughts on Dana White & Elon Musk, Trump deepfakes, if he believes in aliens & more. WATCH:
Timestamps: 0:00 Welcome Donald Trump! 0:55 Jake Paul Vs Mike Tyson! 1:50 Trump Gives Logan a Gift.. 2:35 Felony Conviction & Raising $140M 7:47 Joe Biden Debate! 11:01 Jake Paul Vs Logan Paul? 12:27 Logan Paul Vs Bradley Martyn (Who won?) 16:13 Dana White & Khabib Relationship! 19:05 Vladimir Putin Friendship & Russia Vs Ukraine War 27:21 Gaza Conflict 31:03 Trump’s Advice for People 33:39 Drug Crisis & Trump Plugs Mike’s Book 39:15 Logan Invites Biden on the Podcast in Front of Trump! 41:11 Does Trump Believe in Aliens? 44:40 Elon Musk & Trump’s Relationship.. 45:41 Trump Getting Deepfaked 50:24 “You’re Fired!” 51:53 Trump’s Viral TikTok!
Left’s Latest ‘Sting’ Against Supreme Court Justice Alito Backfires, Proves How Right He Is
By Joe Saunders, The Western Journal Jun. 13, 2024
When it comes to smearing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, the liberals have already lost.
With major court decisions due to drop any day now — from former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims to abortion and gun rights cases to other huge issues — liberal attacks are piling on with the publication of undercover recordings of Alito speaking in what were supposed to be private conversations.
But as “sting” videos making the news this week show, the leftists are only proving how right Alito is.
As National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin pointed out in a column published Tuesday, the recordings, made by a liberal documentary maker posing as a conservative to try to lure Alito into some click-bait stupidity, ended up doing the opposite: Alito comes across as a man of acumen and honesty — and humility.
His questioner, on the other hand, is clearly a lying grifter.
How to Get the Prescription McCullough Protocol Before the Government Bans It
The “sting” videos are below. The conversation is well worth hearing:
The documentary maker in question — identified by a cheerleading Rolling Stone piece as Lauren Windsor — approached Alito at a fundraising event for the Supreme Court Historical Society.
Her language was appallingly dishonest — she pretended sympathy for the public pressures Alito has been undergoing, especially concerning the groundbreaking Dobbs decision last year that overturned the legal and moral monstrosity of Roe v. Wade.
It was clearly designed to elicit some emotional response from the justice, one that could be twisted to prove the court is only one good abortion case from pushing the country into the “Handmaid’s Tale” nightmare of the left’s most fetishistic fantasies.
“As a Catholic and as someone who, like, really cherishes my faith, I just don’t, I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that, like, needs to happen for the polarization to end,” she said. “I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”
Alito, like, agreed. But not, like, in a way that any, like, mature person could, like, disagree with.
“I think you’re probably right.” he said. “On one side or the other — one side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working — a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”
Is there any honest American who could disagree with that?
One side or the other is going to win — because when two irreconcilable forces are in active conflict, one or the other will eventually win. Alito didn’t predict which side it would be. He didn’t even, strictly speaking, state a preference (though his authorship of the Dobbs decision — and its tone — make that pretty clear).
He merely stated a fact.
It’s also important to point out that there is a way of “living together peacefully” — more or less in the state of the country as it is — but in the long term, something is going to give.
And then, playing her role to the hilt, Windsor went as far as to invoke “godliness” (the judgmentally minded might call it a kind of blasphemy, considering she was lying through her leftist teeth).
“I think that the solution really is, like, winning the moral argument,” she said. “Like, people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”
“I agree with you,” Alito said.
“Bingo!” cried the editors at Rolling Stone, slapping a summary headline on the piece: “Supreme Court justice says he ‘agrees’ that the U.S. should return to a place of godliness.”
If wishing a county to be in a state of “godliness” isn’t damning, what is?
But Alito also knows it isn’t the court’s job to determine whether the United States is a place of godliness — that’s up to Americans and the representatives they elect.
In a video from 2023 Windsor intercut, she recorded Alito describing his view of the Supreme Court. Again, it was exactly what a normal American would want to hear:
In that portion of the video, in where Windsor again cited the “polarization” of the country and what can be done about it, Alito lamented the role of “the media” in eroding the public trust in the court (like Eve lamenting the serpent, under the circumstances), but also made it clear the court has limits that are inherent in its creation.
“We [the justices] have a very defined role, and we need to do what we’re supposed to do,” he said.
“But this is a bigger problem. This is way above us. So I wish I knew the answer. I do.”
The humility of the words “way above us” is not in any liberal politicians’ makeup — whether they’re on or off the court.
What Alito was describing was the will of the American people and — probably — the will of God.
The Democratic Party and the American left in general have spent decades proving they have scant respect for either. But it’s exactly the kind of humility the country needs from the men and women on the highest court in the land.
In another video, a Windsor colleague identified as Ally Sammarco — “who identifies as a former Republican turned Democratic strategist,” according to The Washington Times — expresses crocodile tears of sympathy to Alito for the “attacks” he’s facing in the media. Then she asks him what he thinks is behind it.
Again, Alito’s response defied the desires of Democrats for clickbait quotes.
“I think it’s for a simple reason. They don’t like our decisions,” he said. “And they don’t like how they anticipate we’ll decide some cases that are coming up. That’s the beginning and the end of it.”
Again, is there an honest American who can disagree? The fact that these recordings even exist proves his point.
Alito is a target of the attacks, especially the ongoing faux fight over flags outside his homes.
Justice Clarence Thomas, a man whose public rectitude is irreproachable, is another constant target — as a black conservative with a towering intellect, even his existence is an insult to the fringe left.
And now the leftist assault on the Supreme Court is reaching its peak for the session, as the justices ready the release of opinions on Trump immunity, charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion, the abortion drug mifepristone, the Second Amendment and curbing the power of the administrative state.
It’s going to be a massive final sprint for the conservative-majority court, and liberals are already launching preemptive attacks, with Alito in the crosshairs.
Every Supreme Court justice makes history with every day on the job, of course. But Alito is different. His authorship of the Dobbs decision puts him in the rarefied company of Supreme Court justices whose landmark decision have etched a place in the chronicles of the country. (For good or ill: Chief Justice Earl Warren, author of the Brown v. Board of Education decision is in that group, along with Roger Taney of Dred Scott and Harry Blackmun or Roe v. Wade.)
He knows what place he has; he knows the power that he has, but he also knows that that power is sharply limited by the very Constitution that created it.
That’s a lesson every American politician should learn and live by. It’s a lesson most sorely needed by big-government, Democratic politicians from President Joe Biden on down to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her squad.
Liberals trying to smear Sam Alito might think they’re hurting him and the court, but all they’re really doing is showing how much he belongs there.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
MASSIVE SCOTUS DECISION JUST DESTROYED THE ATF…
Brat: Globalists Want To Tear Down The Judeo-Christian West With No Alternative
Related
There must be provisions for elections and election results to be challenged. Even if they are never or rarely used, their presence, and the mere possibility that they can be used, if deemed necessary, provides a sense of legitimacy to the elections they safeguard. And without that security, there is a break between the government and the consent of the governed, a chasm so great that it calls into question the very legitimacy of the government itself.
NarrowPathMinistries 
