Month: July 2023

Pelosi: McCarthy is ‘playing politics’ with support of expunging Trump’s impeachments

Posted on (Updated by Miranda Nazzaro

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Sunday she believes Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is "playing politics" with his support of expunging former President Trump's two impeachments.

"We had no choice, [Trump] must be impeached," Pelosi told CNN's Dana Bash on "State of the Union." "Kevin is, you know, playing politics. It's not even clear if he constitutionally can expunge."

McCarthy told reporters last month he supports erasing Trump's impeachments because one was "not based on true facts," and the other was "on the basis of no due process."

"Well, [Trump] was impeached because we had no choice," Pelosi said Sunday. "He had undermined our national security, jeopardized our well being of our country."

Pelosi also called the idea of expunging the impeachments "not responsible."

"This is about being afraid," Pelosi said. "As I've said before, Donald Trump is the puppeteer. And what does he do all the time to shine light on the strings? These people look pathetic."

During her time as Speaker, House Democrats impeached Trump twice — once in 2019 for his abuse of power when he threatened to withhold U.S. military aid to Ukraine unless Kyiv investigated his political rivals, and again in 2021 for his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Republicans in the Senate acquitted Trump in both instances.

Frustrated lawmakers demand answers on UFOs

Posted on (Updated by Alexander Bolton

Senior lawmakers are increasingly demanding that military and other government officials provide them with information about intelligence on unidentified flying objects (UFOs) or unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs).

The demands reflect frustrations on the part of some lawmakers that they are being kept in the dark about what’s known about UFOs and UAPs.

The lawmakers do not necessarily believe the government is hiding signs of extraterrestrial life from the public and congressional oversight. But they are frustrated they are not learning more about unknown objects flying in restricted U.S. air space.

“My primary interest in this topic is if there are … object[s] operating over restricted air space, it’s not ours and we don’t know whose it is, that’s a problem that we need to get to the bottom of,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“If there’s an explanation for it that’s being kept from Congress, then we need to force the issue. We’re not getting answers,” Rubio told The Hill.  

The Senate has adopted an amendment to an annual defense bill that would require the federal government to collect and disclose all records related to UFOs and UAPs unless a special review board determines they must be kept classified.  

The amendment was sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, and is backed by Rubio and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), the chairwoman of the Armed Services subcommittee on emerging threats, as well as Sens. Todd Young (R-Ind.), a former Marine intelligence officer, and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).  

Rubio, the top-ranking Republican on the intelligence committee, has more access to classified information than the vast majority of lawmakers on Capitol Hill. He said he suspects there are records related to unidentified aerial phenomena that are being kept secret from congressional oversight.  

“Right now, what I know is reliable people tell us that and we’ve seen objects operating over restricted military and national security airspace. They claim it’s not ours. They claim they don’t know whose it is. That’s like the definition of a national security threat,” he said.  

“Either there’s an answer that exists and is not being provided, or there is no answer. Beyond that, I don’t want to speculate anything,” he added. 

Rubio said he was familiar with the claims of David Grusch, a career intelligence officer who worked for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. He claims the federal government has retrieved “non-human origin technical vehicles” that have landed or crashed on Earth.  

“We have a number of people including that gentleman who have come forward both publicly and privately to make claims,” Rubio said.  

“One of two things are true. Either A, they’re telling the truth or some version of the truth or B, we have a bunch of people with high clearances and really important jobs in our government are nuts. Both are a problem. And I’m not accusing these people of being nuts. That said, that’s something we’ll look at and continue to look at seriously,” he said.  

Interest in the subject is also reflected by this week’s House Oversight Committee hearing Thursday on UAPs and UFOs.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who is chairing the hearing, says lawmakers will hear testimony from Grusch, as well as former Navy Cmdr. David Fravor and former Navy pilot Ryan Graves.  

Burchett claimed on a podcast this month that the federal government has known about UFOs for decades and “they can fly underwater and don’t show a heat trail,” appearing to defy the laws of physics.  

Congressional sources familiar with efforts to gain more information from the Defense Department and intelligence agencies say UAPs and UFOs are being detected more frequently because of improvements in military sensor technology.  

The Department of Defense released three Navy videos in 2020 that show objects flying in extraordinary ways and capturing confused and awe-struck comments of Naval aviators who witnessed the phenomena.  

Grusch, who describes himself as a whistleblower, says senior intelligence officers have told him they participated in a secret UAP task force, though he says he has not personally witnessed nonhuman intelligence. He says he was retaliated against when he tried to gain more information about the program.  

Rubio said “we don’t know” if such a program exists and what evidence it might have collected. 

“Without speculating or adding to intrigue about this whole topic, there’s no doubt that in this field, generally, there’s more than what we know,” he said. “We’re trying to get to a process where at least some people in Congress do know.” 

Asked why he suspects there’s more for Congress to know about UAPs, Rubio said “there’s pieces of puzzles that don’t fit.” 

“Most certainly there are elements of things, whether historic or current, that potentially Congress has not been kept fully informed of — and that would be a problem,” he said. “There’s really no function of the executive that shouldn’t require congressional oversight at some level.” 

The language in the Senate defense bill would require the National Archives and Records Administration to create a collection of records related to UAPs across government agencies that would be declassified for public use. 

“UAPs generate a lot of curiosity for many Americans, and with that curiosity sometimes comes misinformation,” Schumer said Tuesday on the Senate floor.  

Most lawmakers are extremely reluctant to say they suspect aliens from other solar systems are visiting Earth because there isn’t any undisputable evidence of such visits in the public domain. 

Also, the nearest star to planet Earth is 40,000 billion kilometers away, making it seem impossible that any alien craft could travel the distance necessary to span solar systems. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is so far away that it would take the Voyager 1 spacecraft, which travels at 17.3 km per second, 73,000 years to reach it, according to NASA.  

It’s also hard to fathom that a foreign adversary such as China possesses such advanced technology that it can fly aerial vehicles in ways that appear to defy the laws of physics, as U.S. military personnel have observed of UFOs or UAPs.  

Rounds said he has seen “no evidence personally” that extraterrestrial craft are visiting the planet but said, “I know that there’s a lot of people that have questions about it.” 

“It’s just like with JFK and the [1963] assassination. We set up separate archive for that or central collection place for all that data, which I think gave the American people a sense of security that there was a location where it was being held. This is following that same approach,” he said.  

The White House announced late last month that the National Archives had concluded its review of documents related to the assassination of former President Kennedy and that 99 percent of the relevant records had been made publicly available.

Asked about whether he personally believes military personnel and sensors are encountering extraterrestrial visitors, Rounds said: “I don’t think you can discount the possibility just simply because of the size of the universe.” 

“I don’t think anybody should say that they know for certain either way,” he said. “If we simply refuse to acknowledge there’s even a remote possibility, then we’re probably not being honest.” 

“Some of the items we simply can’t explain,” he said of the Naval videos of UAPs.

The Speaker’s Lobby: Dominating the DC news cycle

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

There are weeks on Capitol Hill where one story dominates.

Last week it was the defense bill.

But when the former President of the United States appears headed toward another indictment, you know what prevails.

IN THE SENATE, TIME IS PARAMOUNT

This is just not former President Trump duking it out with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Nor is this Mr. Trump facing prosecution over his handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

This is a likely indictment connected to the riot at the Capitol and efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

And even though former President Trump hasn’t been in office in two-and-a-half-years, he still manages to command nearly every cubic centimeter of news oxygen and political conversations on Capitol Hill.

Word of additional legal action followed a familiar script on Capitol Hill. Many of Mr. Trump’s fiercest loyalists rushing to defend him. Then there were a few Republicans spinning or slightly distancing themselves from former President Trump. Democrats – per usual – went all in, excoriating the former President.

"It’s absolute bull----," proclaimed Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., one of Mr. Trump’s closest allies. "This is the only way the Democrats have to beat President Trump is to arrest him. Smear him. Charge him with ridic, useless charges. All they want is a coverup of Joe Biden’s crimes. Hunter Biden’s crimes."

Greene said that the American justice system was "worse than some of the most corrupt, third world countries." She then proclaimed that Mr. Trump "is proven innocent time and time and time again and he’ll be proven innocent again."

And now for a diametrically-opposed view from the Democrats.

"There will be criminal accountability for everybody who committed crimes against the government," said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee. "We’re talking about a violent insurrection, surrounding an insider, political coup. This is a matter of the utmost pressing urgency to the American people to make sure we never relive something like that."

"The President was a central figure in an effort to overturn an election. An effort to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power for the first time in our history," said Mr. Trump’s nemesis, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

Schiff served on the House’s panel investigating the 2021 riot at the Capitol. However, the California Democrat wondered why it may have taken so long to target the former President.

"They moved quickly when it came to those who broke into this building behind us and assaulted police officers. But it seemed like almost a year, if not more, before they started looking at those who did the organizing. Did the inciting. Those who conspired to defraud the American people."

Schiff then suggested that the 1/6 committee "unearthed evidence that the Justice Department could not ignore."

HOUSE REPUBLICANS NARROWLY PASS CONTROVERSIAL DEFENSE BILL

That said, there was consternation at one point by prosecutors that the 1/6 committee wasn’t helpful in providing information to the DoJ for potential criminal probes.

In fact, much of the week in Congress was about 2024 – even though it didn’t appear to be about 2024.

The House Oversight Committee heard from two senior IRS whistleblowers who claim that Hunter Biden should have faced felony charges over his tax returns rather than a misdemeanor as part of his plea deal.

"They were recommending for approval, felony and misdemeanor charges for the 2017, ‘18 and ‘19 tax years. That did not happen here. And I am not sure why," testified IRS agent Joseph Ziegler.

Democrats said the IRS whistleblowers weren’t responsible for deciding who is prosecuted and what charges they may face. Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss said he had the ultimate authority to bring charges. But the whistleblowers – and many Republicans – believe pressure from above handcuffed prosecutors.

"We’ve got the two best agents in the place on the case," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. "And then, ‘Shazam!’ Something changes."


At one point in the hearing, Greene warned everyone that "viewer discretion was advised." She then displayed lewd poster boards of Hunter Biden in compromising positions.

"It's very serious that Hunter Biden was paying this woman through his law firm and then writing it off as business tax exemptions," said Greene.

Republicans claim that Hunter Biden’s tax issues and overseas business dealings are connected to President Biden and demonstrate rampant corruption. But before the hearing, Raskin predicted that no matter what the GOP did, they wouldn’t demonstrate wrongdoing by the President.

This is why the hearing oozed with 2024 presidential politics. Democrats contend the GOP only held the hearing to target the President.

"I think (House Oversight Committee) Chairman (James) Comer, R-Ky., might have to fill out a FEC form as an in-kind contribution to the Trump campaign based on what's going on in this hearing," proclaimed Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla.

But amid the looming indictment for former President Trump, Republicans said the hearing only underscored two standards of justice in the U.S. One for the Bidens. Another for Mr. Trump.

"The DoJ, the FBI and the IRS have worked to not only protect the criminal actions of the Biden family, but to continue persecuting President Trump," said Rep. William Timmons, R-S.C.

The intensity of that rhetoric will only grow once the feds formally indict the President. The extent of the indicment and what it alleges about Mr. Trump’s actions related to the election and the riot will amplify the invective the GOP hurls at prosecutors and the Biden Administration. And what Democrats say about the former President and Republicans.

This is why some Republicans now want to expunge the two impeachments of former President Trump. However, it’s far from clear that the House would ever consider such a resolution - let alone have the votes to approve such an expungement.

That said, Republicans presented a big platform this week to Mr. Biden’s top 2024 challenger, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy testified at a hearing about censorship and the weaponization of government.

"This committee has come to embody weaponization itself," said Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., characterized RFK Jr. as "a living, breathing, false flag operation" for his views on the pandemic.

Kennedy drew criticism for declaring that COVID-19 was "engineered" in a way to grant immunity to persons of Chinese and European Jewish descent.

The week ended without an indictment for former President Trump. That gives lawmakers fodder to spar over next week.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

However, there’s a House Oversight Committee hearing scheduled next Wednesday on UFO’s. Perhaps that’s the only subject which could upstage the prospective indictment of the former President.

Coons warns of government shutdown: We will ‘scare the hell out of you’

Posted on (Updated by Julia Shapero

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) warned on Friday that a government shutdown appears likely, as Congress faces down a September deadline to pass its annual spending bills.

“We are going to scare the hell out of you,” Coons said at the Aspen Security Forum, alongside Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and James Risch (R-Idaho). “We're really good at that.”

“On the debt ceiling, on default, we came right up to the end,” he continued. “We're gonna have a government shutdown because we're gonna fight between the House and Senate about appropriations. Maybe, I sure hope not. We keep coming right up close.” 

Lawmakers have until the end of September to pass the 12 annual appropriations bills to fund the government, but with the August recess approaching, they are staring down a tight deadline.

However, Coons suggested that bipartisan efforts, like those between himself and his Republican colleagues on Friday’s panel, will ultimately get the job done.

“In the end, it is exactly these kind of gentlemen with whom I am able to work and where we are able to continue to deliver sustained, strong, forward-leaning initiatives around strengthening our country, our defense, our military, our manufacturing and our system,” he said. 

“It’s really only because of the personal relationship that are at the core of the Senate that we’re still able to work,” he added.

House Homeland GOP hits Biden admin for ‘celebrating’ June border data, as fiscal year nears record high

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee are criticizing the Biden administration for "celebrating" June's border numbers – amid a battle over the narrative of what shifting migrant numbers means for the ongoing crisis at the southern border.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data released this week showed there were 144,571 migrant encounters in June, compared to 207,834 in June last year and 189,034 in June 2021. In June 2020, there were just 33,049 at the border.

The numbers are high, compared to pre-2021 numbers. (June’s numbers are still higher than any month of the 2019 border crisis.) However, they mark the lowest at the border since February 2021 and a sharp drop from the 206,702 seen in May and 211,999 in April. A decrease is particularly unusual during the summer months. 

MIGRANT NUMBERS DROP SHARPLY IN JUNE AS BIDEN ADMIN'S POST-TITLE 42 STRATEGY TAKES SHAPE

Administration officials have tied the drop in encounters to measures introduced by the Biden administration as Title 42 ended in May. Those include dramatically expanded legal pathways -- including allowing 1,450 migrants in a day through ports of entry via the CBP One App -- and a rule to limit asylum for those who enter illegally. 

The agency noted that the number of people crossing illegally had dropped to 99,545, a 42% decrease from May. Acting CBP Commissioner Troy Miller hailed "sustained efforts" to enforce consequences and expand access to pathways for having "driven the number of migrant encounters along the Southwest border to their lowest levels in more than two years."

In an interview published Friday in Politico, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas pointed to both the "lawful pathways" and the asylum rule as reasons for the numbers.

"So it’s: lawful pathways, and a consequence regime for not using them — and we’ve seen a dramatic drop," he said.

HOUSE HOMELAND GOP REPORT ACCUSES MAYORKAS OF ‘INTENTIONAL’ DERELICTION OF DUTY OVER BORDER CRISIS 

But Republicans have said that the numbers are nothing to celebrate, and they have criticized the new broad use of parole by the administration , arguing that it is beyond the "case by case" basis intended by Congress. 

Chairman Mark Green said that the administration "is attempting to deceive the American people by celebrating June’s monthly encounter numbers—even as the Office of Field Operations reported a nearly 200% increase in encounters compared to June 2022."

The Office of Field Operations is the CBP agency that encounters migrants at a port of entry. Those encountered entering illegally between ports are typically encountered by Border Patrol. Both OFO and Border Patrol encounters are included in the total number of encounters, but Republicans have accused DHS of simply waving in otherwise-illegal immigrants through ports of entry via the use of parole and the CBP One App. 

In June, over 38,000 migrants were scheduled for an appointment on the app. That is also separate from up to 30,000 Haitians, Cubans, Venezuelans and Nicaraguans per month who are eligible to be flown in via a separate parole program announced in January.

"This drastic increase is even more evidence of how Secretary Mayorkas is abusing the CBP One app to shift otherwise inadmissible alien entries to ports of entry and release hundreds of thousands of these individuals into the United States," Green, R-Tenn., said.

Meanwhile, the committee released a fact sheet noting that currently, the number of migrants encountered at the border for FY 2023 is at nearly 1.8 million, which already exceeds the then-historic numbers seen in FY 2021 (1.7 million) and is on pace to approach or exceed the record-breaking 2.4 million encountered last year.

"If this rate of encounters continues, Fiscal Year 2023 is shaping up to be the highest year of Southwest border encounters on record," the fact sheet says.

The factsheet also noted that there have been a 579% increase in encounters of Chinese nationals this fiscal year, and 140 people whose names matched on the FBI terror watch list. 

MAYORKAS TO TESTIFY BEFORE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AMID GOP SCRUTINY OVER BORDER CRISIS 

The clash comes as Republicans and Democrats continue to struggle to find common ground on the question of migration and illegal immigration — with Republicans pushing for border security, asylum reform and greater deportations, and Democrats calling for broader legal pathways, expanded refugee resettlement and amnesty for those already in the U.S.

Republicans have hammered the Biden administration, including Mayorkas, for its handling of the border crisis, arguing that policies it put into place have exacerbated the crisis. They point to reduced enforcement, greater catch-and-release and the abolition of Trump-era policies such as border wall construction and the Remain-in-Mexico policy. Some have even called for Mayorkas to be impeached over his conduct.

This week, the committee released a report accusing Mayorkas of an intentional dereliction of duty in his handling of the crisis.

"On top of these failures to uphold the law and fulfill his oath of office, Mayorkas has willfully undermined the sacred foundation of our constitutional republic—the separation of powers. He has rejected his responsibility to enforce the laws passed by Congress, and he has refused to respect rulings by the federal judiciary," it found.

DHS soon pushed back against the report. 

"Secretary Mayorkas is proud to advance the noble mission of the Department, support its extraordinary workforce, and serve the American people," a DHS spokesperson said on Wednesday. "The Department will continue to enforce our laws and secure our border, protect the United States from terrorism, and improve our cybersecurity, all while building a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system.

"Instead of pointing fingers and pursuing a baseless impeachment, Congress should work with the Department and pass comprehensive legislation to fix our broken immigration system, which has not been updated in decades," the spokesperson said.

Sen. Chuck Grassley put American lives at risk to spread a document he knew was a lie

Posted on (Updated by Mark Sumner

 Sen. Chuck Grassley released an FBI FD-1023 form related to the Hunter Biden investigation. These forms are not intended to be public documents and it is highly unusual to release them publicly. These are the forms that the FBI uses to “record raw, unverified reporting from confidential human sources.” They do not represent the results of investigations, and “recording this information does not validate it or establish its credibility.”  

These forms are not classified, but they are kept in confidence for a number of reasons that are mostly connected with protecting sources. The FBI has made it clear to Grassley repeatedly that releasing the form would have a negative impact not just on this case, but on every case that depends on confidential human sources.

Grassley released it anyway because he has placed what he sees as a momentary opportunity to hurt President Joe Biden over the needs of the FBI and the good of the nation. More than that, Grassley is doing this to forward a story that he knows is a lie.

The form, which is dated June 2020, claims to be sourced from a businessman who was introduced to leadership at Burisma energy in Ukraine in “late 2015 or early 2016” to help the company find a U.S. company to purchase. During a meeting with Burisma leadership, the source claims that he was told Hunter Biden was put on the company board to "protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” Asked why it isn’t Hunter doing the job of locating a U.S. form to purchase, he’s told that “Hunter is not that smart.” Finally the source is told by Burisma executive Mykola Zlochevsky that the company has to pay $5 million to Joe Biden and another $5 million to Hunter Biden because they are being investigated by Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, and Burisma needed Biden to “deal with Shokin.”

The story then jumps to a phone call in 2016. Or maybe it was 2017. As with the original meeting, the source can’t recall the year, though he recalls the dialogue word for word. This time Zlochevsky complains that Burisma was forced to pay Biden, using a term that the source describes as “Russian-criminal-slang,” and now that Trump has been elected their investment is worthless. However, Shokin has been fired, so there was no investigation and no one would ever know about the money they paid the Bidens.

Jump forward to 2019 when CHS again meets with Burisma executives and Zlochevsky brags to the source about how clever they were in hiding the payments to Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, and how no one will ever find those payments. According to the source, this is the kind of thing Ukrainian businessmen like to brag about in casual conversation.

Finally, it comes down to this bit where one of the Burisma executives tells the source:

"... he has many text messages and 'recordings' that show he was coerced to make such payments … he had a total of "17 recordings" involving the Bidens; two of the recordings included Joe Biden, and the remaining 15 recordings only Included Hunter Biden. … These recordings evidence Zlochevskiy was somehow coerced into paying the Bidens to ensure Ukraine Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin was fired.”

If any of this sounds slightly familiar, it’s because it’s the exact story that Rudy Giuliani told to The New York Times in May 2019. In that story, Hunter Biden was placed on the board of Burisma in 2014 not because he was clearly a well-placed American with years of experience in lobbying, investment banking, and corporate governance who might be essential to an energy company looking to expand internationally, but because his father could get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired.

And Shokin was fired in 2016. The Ukrainian parliament voted him out after Joe Biden made it clear that the United States was very concerned about Shokin and might withhold or delay assistance to Ukraine unless he was removed. That’s a real thing. Biden even bragged about it later, telling a group of foreign policy advisers that he confronted the Ukrainian president and demanded Shokin’s firing.

Except the reason that Shokin was fired was because he was not investigating cases of corruption and was instead either turning a blind eye or an outstretched hand when dealing with Ukrainian oligarchs who were making off with billions. Both the U.S. and the U.K. governments had been pressuring Ukraine about Shokin for over a year before Joe Biden’s visit. In fact, the thing that upset the U.K. government most was that Shokin was refusing to investigate one firm in particular: Burisma.

As the head of a Ukrainian anti-corruption organization told Radio Free Europe, Shokin had dumped the investigation of Burisma when he took office.

"Ironically, Joe Biden asked Shokin to leave because the prosecutor failed [to pursue] the Burisma investigation, not because Shokin was tough and active with this case," Kaleniuk said.

When The New York Times ran Giuliani’s version of the story in 2019, it took Bloomberg News just one week to rip it apart.

… at the time Biden made his ultimatum, the probe into the company—Burisma Holdings, owned by Mykola Zlochevsky—had been long dormant, according to the former official, Vitaliy Kasko.

“There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky,” Kasko said in an interview last week. “It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015.”

From the beginning of this whole affair, and in fact from the moment Giuliani set foot in Ukraine, it’s been obvious that in getting Shokin fired Joe Biden wasn’t protecting Burisma, he was taking action that put the company under renewed scrutiny. And in fact prosecutors did reopen their investigation of Burisma, reviewing multiple instances in which Zlochevsky was suspected of crimes.

All of this—all of it—was thoroughly covered just two years ago, including just how Giuliani generated his claims against Joe Biden and Hunter Biden in the first place.

Giuliani made a personal visit to an outgoing prosecutor, tried to convince him to play ball, and even called Trump directly while in the prosecutor’s office so that Trump could explain how excited he was about the “investigation” into Biden. The prosecutor even went so far as to add some new false claims, asserting that Joe Biden personally took a payment to act as an agent of a Ukrainian company.

That moment when Giuliani was making calls directly to the White House from the office of an outgoing official is the genesis of the idea that Joe Biden took some kind of payment from Burisma. Until that moment, it had come up nowhere. From no one.

Over the following months, Giuliani assembled a group of known criminals and former members of the pro-Russian government who had been ousted with the election of Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He found several willing to play along with his growing story, but they had a price: They wanted Trump to get rid of U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was too effective in fighting corruption. Trump gave them exactly what they wanted to get his false evidence against Biden, but even in 2019 the holes in the story were so big that the whole scheme was obviously a … scheme.

Now it’s back again and nothing has changed. The document that the FBI held was clearly authored by someone who was part of Giuliani’s plot, and it was clearly Giuliani himself who pointed out this document to Grassley and others. The document contains exactly the same false, easily disproved claims as the story the Times printed up for Giuliani and was obviously written with the sole purpose of providing some faux documentary evidence for the story Giuliani and Trump were pushing at the time. It’s all part of what Trump was trying to get Zelenskyy to say when he made his impeachment-worthy phone call to the Ukrainian leader.

The content of the FD-1023 form is a lie. What’s more, Grassley knows it is a lie. He knows this has all been investigated and found to be baseless accusations. And he knows that releasing this document causes real, genuine harm.

Protecting this type of information from wider disclosure is crucial to our ability to recruit sources and ensure the safety of the source or others mentioned in the reporting. CHSs are critical to cases across all FBI programs—whether it’s violent crime, drug cartels, or terrorism. It would be difficult to effectively recruit these sources if we can’t assure them of their confidentiality. And without these sources, we would not be able to build the cases that are so important to keeping Americans safe.

Grassley was sent a letter reminding him of exactly this issue and asking him expressly to remind everyone involved to keep in mind the importance of keeping these documents secure. Instead, Grassley did the opposite: He published the FD-1023 in blatant defiance of the FBI’s request.

Why did he do it? He did it for the same reason that Republicans had been seeking release of the document all along, and that was because they knew it would generate headlines like this:

Bidens allegedly 'coerced' Burisma CEO to pay them millions to help get Ukraine prosecutor fired: FBI form

Bidens allegedly 'coerced' Burisma CEO to pay them millions to help get Ukraine prosecutor fired: FBI form

Grassley purposely released a document that he knew was a lie for the purpose of attacking Joe Biden even though he knew it would put Americans in danger and damage the FBI’s ability to investigate actual crimes of all sorts.

To gain a moment of political attention, Grassley is creating an immeasurable risk. How can witnesses come to the FBI to make a confidential statement knowing that their identities and claims can be revealed for political expediency by someone who has no real interest in the truth?

There is a genuine broad streak of corruption in this case, and it runs right through Iowa.

Sign the petition: No more spending taxpayer money on frivolous GOP hearings.