Report: Democrat Seeking to Use 14th Amendment to Bar Trump From Office

Representative David Cicilline is seeking to invoke an obscure section of the 14th Amendment to bar Donald Trump from ever holding office again.

Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat, is specifically citing the former President’s alleged involvement in “inciting an insurrection.”

He sent a letter to colleagues outlining a bill and requesting co-sponsors for the measure that “would prevent Donald Trump from holding public office again under the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Cicilline circulated his letter on the same night Trump announced his campaign for the presidency.

RELATED: Democrats Attempting To Use 14th Amendment To Bar Trump From Office

Using the 14th Amendment to Bar Trump

Is there an Amendment the Democrats haven’t used in trying to keep Donald Trump out of the White House? If it’s not the 25th Amendment, let’s try the 14th.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is a rarely cited Civil War-era provision that bars individuals from holding office if they “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or “given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

Cicilline believes the January 6 Committee has provided proof of said rebellion on the part of the former President.

He says his bill “details testimony and evidence demonstrating how Donald Trump engaged in insurrection against the United States,” and references evidence provided by the select committee hearings.

RELATED: Democrats Have A Back-Up Plan That Might Still Bar Trump From Running Again If Impeachment Fails

Flawed Logic

David Cicilline’s bid to bar Trump from office using the 14th Amendment has a couple of fatal flaws.

One, just because the media refers to a rally that got out of control as ‘insurrection’ does not make it so, especially when referencing a Civil War-era clause that was clearly referencing those who took up arms to try and fracture the United States.

Two, while Trump was impeached in January 2021 on the charge of “incitement of insurrection,” he was ultimately acquitted by the Senate.

Acquitted. End of discussion.

It’s such a sad attempt at keeping Trump out of office that one almost feels pity for Cicilline.

It’s not a unique stance, however.

The Political Insider reported back in February of 2021 that Congressional Democrats were considering utilizing the 14th Amendment to stop their primary political opponent.

The measure at the time had no support on either side of the political aisle, with Democrats preferring “to see the former president convicted in the impeachment trial.”

He wasn’t convicted, making use of the Amendment even more ludicrous.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley has argued that invoking the measure against Trump is a “dangerous” tactic for the nation.

Barring the former President from running again in the future based on a rarely cited provision of the 14th Amendment, after having been acquitted and without a supermajority vote, could open up the floodgates for parties in power to keep their political opponents out of office.

  • 15 Democrats objected to counting Florida’s electoral votes in 2000.
  • 31 Democrats voted in favor of rejecting electoral votes from Ohio in 2004.
  • 7 different Democrats objected 11 times to certifying the results of the 2016 presidential election.

All of those Democrat lawmakers tried to overturn a legal presidential election. In 2016, it led to violent riots in the streets of Washington, D.C. meant to intimidate officials. In other words, an ‘insurrection’ by the media’s phony standards.

Should those individuals also be barred from ever running for office again under the 14th Amendment?

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Report: Democrat Seeking to Use 14th Amendment to Bar Trump From Office appeared first on The Political Insider.

GOP Leader McCarthy Again Gets Squishy When Asked About Impeaching Biden

As Republican voters head to the polls with the intention of electing people they believe will hold Democrats accountable for the last two years, celebration might be a bit premature.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), likely the next Speaker of the House, is doing his best to let the air out of that balloon.

Recently, McCarthy sat down with CNN’s Melanie Zanona, who asked the GOP leader, “…Investigations a huge priority, I know you’ve said not going to predetermine outcome, but is impeachment on the table?” 

While understandably wanting to keep his cards close to the vest, McCarthy dodged the question like he was in The Matrix:

“You know what’s on the table? Accountability. Shouldn’t we know where the origins of COVID actually started? They didn’t have one hearing. Shouldn’t we know what happened in the last 60 days of Afghanistan, so we wouldn’t repeat that again, so we wouldn’t have 13 new Goldstar families, that should have never happened? Shouldn’t we know why the DOJ would take it upon themselves to go after parents that would go to school board meetings?”

RELATED: GOP Chairwoman: If Republicans Win Control Of Congress They’ll Work With Biden 

Follow Up And Squishy Response

McCarthy continued, saying, “Shouldn’t we know where the taxpayers’ money is being spent? I call that accountability. That’s a responsibility for congress regardless of whose ever party is in the White House.”

To Zanona’s credit, she didn’t let McCarthy off the hook just yet. She followed up with, “Some of your members already calling for impeachment. What do you say to those members?”

McCarthy dodged again:

“One thing I’ve known about the land of America, it’s the rule of law. And we will hold the rule of law and we won’t play politics with this. We’ll never use impeachment for political purposes. That doesn’t mean if something rises to the occasion it would not be used. At any other time, it wouldn’t matter if it’s Democrats or Republicans. But the idea of what Democrats have done, what Adam Schiff has done, is treacherous… We’re better than that. We need to get our nation back on track. That’s what the Commitment to America does.”

RELATED: Elon Musk Endorses A Red Wave, Urges Independents To Vote Republican

Is This An Early Sign Of A GOP Cave-In?

Kevin McCarthy was not the only Republican who appeared to be getting wobbly in the knees. Over the weekend, Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel was interviewed by CNN’s Dana Bash. 

McDaniel is under the mistaken idea that Joe Biden is equivalent to Bill Clinton in 1994, and that Biden will view the election outcome as a sign that they want him to work with the GOP.

She stated, “If we win back the House and the Senate, it’s the American people saying to Joe Biden, ‘We want you to work on behalf of us and we want you to work across the aisle and solve the problems that we are dealing with.'” 

McDaniel must not spend a lot of time talking with Republicans. They want their leaders to oppose Biden and his agenda. Not “work with him.”

While Kevin McCarthy may not want to appear as if he is embracing the idea of impeachment, there could be a lot of pressure on him to pull the impeachment trigger.

Joe Kent is an America First Republican running for Congress in Washington state. He essentially laid out the case for Biden impeachment that could be tempting for Republicans, and their constituents.

“I say if you’re the Commander-in-Chief and you invite an invasion on our southern border, if you’re the Commander-in-Chief and you leave Americans on the battlefield in Afghanistan to fall into the hands of the Taliban, what are we supposed to do with you?” 

It’s a fair point. 

Newsflash to Republicans. If the American people give you the keys to the House, it is not because they want you to be nice.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post GOP Leader McCarthy Again Gets Squishy When Asked About Impeaching Biden appeared first on The Political Insider.

Jim Jordan poised to serve as top Biden foe in potential GOP House

A Republican takeover of the House next year would instantly shift the lower chamber from a force allied with President Biden to perhaps his fiercest collective adversary — one with real power to disrupt the second half of the president’s first term. 

But nowhere is that shift expected to be more pronounced than the Judiciary Committee, where Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — a conservative firebrand and staunch supporter of former President Trump — is poised to take the gavel. 

Jordan, a founder and former head of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, has already made clear his intent to use the panel to launch what would certainly be some of the most high-profile — and politically significant — investigations next year into the operations of both the White House and the broader administration. 

On the short list are probes to scrutinize Biden's involvement in his son Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings; the Homeland Security Department’s handling of the southern border; the Justice Department’s oversight of local school boards; and the FBI’s seizure of documents Trump took with him to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House. 

“If that doesn't warrant a real investigation and real change coming, I don't know what does,” Jordan told the Fox Business Network last week, previewing an array of topics he’s vowing to examine if the House flips, as many election watchers expect. 

Perhaps most significantly, Jordan’s gavel would also lend him jurisdiction over potential impeachments — an idea that’s already gaining steam in the conservative corners of the GOP conference, where the calls to oust Biden and members of his Cabinet have grown only louder throughout this year.

Those dynamics may put Jordan in the driver’s seat of what could potentially be Congress’s most consequential undertaking ahead of the 2024 presidential election, when Trump may be on the ballot to avenge the 2020 defeat he still hasn’t acknowledged. 

Yet a strong conservative push for impeachment could also put Jordan in a squeeze, caught between Biden’s loudest critics, including Trump, and more wary Republican leaders — a group he’s tangled with in the past — who are already signaling concerns about the political risks of trying to oust the president. 

In that scenario, Jordan, the agitator-turned-chairman, would be forced to choose between the aggressive entreaties of a right wing he helped to groom and the cautious posture of leaders he once opposed — a delicate position for a figure more accustomed to throwing bombs than deflecting them.

Trump, from the sidelines, would almost certainly join the pro-impeachment crowd, putting only more pressure on Jordan to pursue it. 

Whatever might happen with impeachment, outside observers are already predicting that a Jordan-led Judiciary panel will be a force to watch if Republicans are empowered with a House majority. 

“There is a lot in Jim Jordan's record that makes the potential prospect of him having such a powerful post, having control over the House Judiciary Committee, troubling,” Noah Bookbinder, president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), told The Hill.

“Nothing in Jim's Jordan career so far has screamed out ‘balance,’” Bookbinder said, a trait he thinks is important in a committee with oversight of justice and law enforcement issues and which serves a role demanding transparency and upholding democratic norms.

“The Judiciary committees are always an important place for those issues. They're a place where there can be real positive action, but also a place where there can be deeply politicized hearings that can make things worse,” he added.

Jordan and his allies have rejected such criticisms, saying he’s simply aiming to bring some accountability to the administration after two years of neglect under the current chairman, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.). 

“Ultimately holding people accountable, that's for the Justice Department to take up,” Jordan told Fox Business. “But our job is to get the truth and the facts out there.

“We're going to do that.” 

Jordan and the Judiciary Committee will not be alone, of course, in battling with Biden if the House changes hands next year. 

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who's in line to lead the powerful Oversight and Reform Committee, is also promising deep dives into the president and his administration, vowing a focus on Hunter Biden, the border and the COVID-19 response. And Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), as expected chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would likely use that perch to examine last year's deadly withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. 

But Jordan is perhaps the most prominent national figure poised to take on the mantle of Biden antagonist if the House flips. 

In public comments, Jordan has already forecast where his priorities would be if he takes the gavel. And a source close to him elucidated that focus this week, saying immigration issues — including the border, crime, taking on Big Tech and oversight of the Justice Department and the FBI — would be among his top concerns, an emphasis already reflected by Jordan’s work this Congress as the Judiciary Committee’s senior Republican. 

During his time as ranking member, Jordan has also focused squarely on various domestic terrorism angles, a topic where he sees the Biden administration focusing too many resources on those with conservative viewpoints — and parents of public school children.

Jordan has sent a bevy of letters on a memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland signed in October of last year, noting a “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff” amid broader discussions over COVID-19 policies and how issues such as race and gender are addressed at school.

The memo largely encouraged coordination, asking the FBI to convene meetings with local law enforcement in the following 30 days to discuss how to respond to threats of violence. It ultimately resulted in little payoff, particularly given the swift GOP backlash.

The outcry from Republican lawmakers led the National School Boards Association, which wrote to Biden requesting assistance on the rising threats, to issue a statement saying its members “regret and apologize” for its outreach letter.

But it’s remained a consistent talking point for Jordan, who by his own count has sent more than 100 letters on the subject. 

The latest asked the Justice Department to preserve all its documents related to the Garland memo, saying the “anti-parent directive remains in effect, and as a result, the threat of federal law enforcement continues to chill the First Amendment rights of American parents.”

And Jordan scored a win last week when Jill Sanborn, a former FBI official tasked with overseeing the counter-terrorism division of the bureau, agreed to voluntarily sit with the panel’s investigators.

The FBI as well as the Department of Homeland Security have warned of the risks from domestic violent extremism (DVE), a category that includes those motivated by a wide variety of subjects. Leaders of each have cautioned that those motivated by race and ethnicity, particularly white supremacy, are among the most dangerous. 

Jordan, citing a whistleblower to the committee, contends some FBI cases have been inappropriately labeled as DVE “in order to appease the Biden Administration’s woke left-wing agenda.”

He also sent a new duo of letters Friday, this time to Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, saying lawmakers “are investigating the Biden Administration’s callous disregard for the safety and security of our southern border.” 

The letters ask for preservation of documents — a common tactic from the minority when they lack subpoena power and a reflection of their future priorities. 

“Committee Republicans will continue to pursue these matters, including into the 118th Congress if necessary,” Jordan wrote.

‘RussiaGate’ Figure Fiona Hill Accuses Elon Musk of Speaking On Behalf of Putin

Elon Musk continued pressing for peaceful negotiations to end the Ukraine-Russia conflict and avert global nuclear war, while RussiaGate figure and star witness in the first impeachment trial of Donald Trump, Fiona Hill, accused him of transmitting messages for Vladimir Putin. 

The Tesla CEO took to Twitter Monday to share a Newsweek op-ed that argued “neocons and the woke left” are leading us into “Woke War III.”

The column, written by David Sacks, pointed out that Musk had found himself in hot water for daring to propose a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine that included concessions on both sides – in an effort to avoid nuclear war and hundreds of millions, if not billions, of humans perishing as a result.

For his troubles, Musk was immediately branded a Putin sympathizer, as has become common in recent years.

RELATED: Experts Split on Threat of Russian Nuclear Escalation as Biden Vacillates

Transmitting Messages For Putin?

Fiona Hill, who featured heavily in RussiaGate and the first impeachment of Trump, accused Musk of “transmitting a message” on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In particular, she noted the mention of water supplies.

“It’s unlikely Elon Musk knows about this himself,” she said in an interview with Politico. “The reference to water is so specific that this clearly is a message from Putin.”

Or, you know, he simply googled Crimea and read various reports on the key role the water supply has in the Russia-Ukraine conflict dating back to 2021. It’s not as if the water crisis in the area was super-secret.

But of course, facts don’t matter when it comes to accusing people of being secret Russian agents.

Hill continued to expand on her theory that Putin was speaking through Musk.

“Putin does this frequently,” she said. “He uses prominent people as intermediaries to feel out the general political environment, to basically test how people are going to react to ideas.”

And she simply wouldn’t let up.

“It’s ironic that Elon Musk, the man who has been talking about getting us to Mars should be Putin’s messenger for the war in Ukraine, when we’re having a really hard time getting our act together on this planet,” she alleged.

Related: Tucker Carlson SHREDS Ukraine’s Zelensky For ‘Shaking Down’ Congress For More Money

Elon Musk Continues to Lobby Against Nuclear War

Elon Musk continued to warn of the threat of nuclear war Monday, once again referencing Russia’s insistence that Ukraine acknowledges Crimea as Russian territory.

“If Russia is faced with the choice of losing Crimea or using battlefield nukes, they will choose the latter,” he wrote in response to his prediction of a possible nuclear war. “We’ve already sanctioned/cutoff Russia in every possible way, so what more do they have left to lose?”

“If we nuke Russia back, they will nuke us and then we have WW3,” he cautioned.

Critics noted that Musk’s messages were focused mostly on Russia’s needs and Ukraine’s concessions.

“If Russia faces destruction of their army and utter defeat by NATO, they will use nukes, then NATO will respond with nukes and civilization is over,” the billionaire fired back.

“But, hey, look on the bright side! At least Russia doesn’t get Crimea in that scenario, so you can be comforted by that thought, while watching the mushroom clouds rise.”

And unlike Hill, Musk has actually put his money where his mouth is – with his company Starlink supplying and even paying for satellite internet that the Ukraine military depends on. Essentially, and whether deliberate or not, that makes Musk the enemy in the eyes of Russia.

Former President Donald Trump has also argued, like Elon Musk, that nuclear war must be averted.

“Be strategic, be smart (brilliant!), get a negotiated deal done NOW,” Trump said. “Both sides need and want it. The entire World is at stake.”

Musk and Trump’s calls for peace actually led Pavel Podvig, a so-called expert on Russia’s nuclear doctrine and capabilities at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research, to accuse the men of being “dangerous.”

Let me repeat – calling to avoid nuclear war, not actual nuclear war, is dangerous.

“If you yield to this nuclear threat once, then what would prevent Russia in the future — or others — to do the same thing again?” Podvig said.

“Just giving in at this point would actually be dangerous,” he added.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post ‘RussiaGate’ Figure Fiona Hill Accuses Elon Musk of Speaking On Behalf of Putin appeared first on The Political Insider.

Sen. Hawley Introduces Bill To Allow States To Deport Illegal Immigrants

Already this fiscal year, the U.S. has seen record-breaking numbers of illegal immigrants crossing the border. So far, over 2.1 million encounters with one month to go.

We’ve seen border states attempt to shame the Biden administration into doing something about it by sending illegal immigrants to northern, liberal areas.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has another idea. He’s introducing a bill that would allow individual states to enforce federal immigration laws, and deport illegal immigrants.

RELATED: Top Dem Nadler Knew Trump Impeachment Process Was ‘Unconstitutional’ But Schiff And Pelosi Dismissed Him

Granting More Power To States

Hawley’s bill, the “Empowering States to Deport Illegal Immigrants Act,” would:

  • Let state prosecutors bring charges for immigration violations
  • Allow states to deport illegal immigrants
  • Allow border states more leeway in actually closing their borders with Mexico

Conservatives have been pushing for such changes for some time.

During a recent appearance on the Fox News Channel with host Laura Ingraham, Hawley talked about the legislation and said:

“If Joe Biden isn’t going to enforce immigration laws why don’t we let the states enforce immigration laws? The State of Texas would love to, the states of Florida, Arizona, they’d love to enforce immigration laws. Let them do it, let’s let them secure the border, let’s let them deport illegal immigrants according to our laws. Let’s take the gloves off here, let’s enforce the law, let’s restore order to the border.”

RELATED: Thousands Of VA Students Protest Policy Requiring Boys To Use Boy’s Bathroom

Taking Matters Into Their Own Hands

While the Biden administration continues to insist that the southern border is “closed,” governors like Greg Abbott in Texas and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey have begun taking matters into their own hands.

Back in July, both Abbott and Ducey began transporting busloads of illegal immigrants to self-declared “sanctuary cities” like New York City and Washington D.C. It didn’t take long for the whining from sanctuary city mayors to begin.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams begged the federal government for help as the city’s homeless shelters were being overrun. Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser asked the federal government to deploy National Guard troops to her city, and claimed that immigrants were somehow being “tricked” into getting on busses headed for New York and Washington D.C. 

While calling for National Guard troops, Bowser also added that “local taxpayers are not picking up the tab.”

But perhaps the best illustration of how sanctuary cities don’t really mean sanctuary, is of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sending two planeloads of illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard.

Left-wing pundits accused DeSantis of “human trafficking,” and it sent the residents of the tony liberal enclave into a tizzy, declaring they had no way to house and feed just 50 migrants. In less than 48 hours, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker had activated 125 National Guard troops and the migrants were deported off the island to nearby Joint Base Cape Cod.

RELATED: Trump Has Seen Enough: Offers To Negotiate Peace Deal Between Russia, Ukraine

No End In Sight

As Americans listen to Biden administration officials repeatedly tell them that the border is closed and secure, The Political Insider’s own Kat Anderson recently looked at the numbers. The results are pretty alarming.

In August, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) reported 203,598 “encounters” with migrants at the border. That we know of, because there is no way to track how many “gotaways” avoided Border Patrol Agents and entered the country.

With one month left in Fiscal Year 2022, the total number of encounters is a staggering 2,150,370. The total for Fiscal Year 2021 was 1.7 million, marking an increase of 450,000 this year. Getting a bit anxious yet?

More people have crossed illegally into the United States than the populations of both Chicago and Houston. It is more than the population of 15 states combined. And what should really send a collective chill down the collective American spine, it is more than the total number of active military personnel in Russia, China, and the U.S.

If Josh Hawley’s bill becomes law, border states will truly be the front line against what some in those states are rightly calling an invasion.

POLL: Should states be allowed to deport illegal immigrants?

By voting, you agree to receive email communication from The Political Insider. Click HERE for more information.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Sen. Hawley Introduces Bill To Allow States To Deport Illegal Immigrants appeared first on The Political Insider.

Riggleman at center of new Jan. 6 controversy

Former Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-Va.), who previously worked as an adviser to the Jan. 6 select committee, is at the center of a new controversy engulfing the panel after he dropped a bombshell revelation while promoting his forthcoming book. 

In an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” teasing his book, Riggleman said someone at the White House placed a late-afternoon call to a Capitol rioter while the attack was still underway.

"You get a real 'aha!' moment when you see that the White House switchboard had connected to a rioter's phone while it's happening," he told Bill Whitaker of “60 Minutes.”

Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-Va.) speaks during House debates regarding articles of impeachment against former President Trump following Trump's actions leading up to and during the Capitol riot.

The revelation about the committee's largely-private investigation drew swift pushback from committee members, who are downplaying Riggleman’s knowledge of the panel's operation and brushing away the significance of the call.

It was an unwelcome distraction just days ahead of what may be the committee’s final public hearing on Wednesday, when panel members will seek to wrap up their case against former President Trump and his allies weeks before the midterm elections.

“I don't know what Mr. Riggleman is doing, really,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the Jan. 6 committee, told CNN during an interview Sunday when asked if he is a credible source when it comes to Jan. 6, 2021.

“I only saw him a few times when he was on the staff, and he did leave. He said he was going off to help Afghanistan refugees. So, you know, he does not know what happened after April, and a lot has happened in our investigation,” she said.

The California Democrat noted that all matters Riggleman brought up before his departure were looked into but “in some cases didn’t really [pan] out.”

“I will say this, that everything that he was able to relay prior to his departure has been followed up on and in some cases didn't really [pan] out, or there might have been a decision that suggested that there was a connection between one number or one email and a person that turned out not to pan out,” Lofgren said. “So, we follow up on everything.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who also sits on the Jan. 6 panel, tried to trivialize Riggleman’s claims about the call during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. 

“Well, that's one of thousands of details that obviously the committee is aware of,” Raskin said of the reported White House rioter call.

“I can't say anything specific about that particular call, but we are aware of it. And we are aware of lots of contacts between the people in the White House and different people that were involved obviously in the coup attempt and the insurrection. And that's really what all of our hearings have been about,” he said after being pressed on the matter.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has been a leading figure among the Jan. 6 House committee investigating the Capitol riot.

CNN has since identified the rioter as Anton Lunyk, a 26-year-old Trump supporter. The Brooklyn native pleaded guilty to a charge associated with the Capitol riot and was sentenced to 12 months of probation. The call reportedly came after he and two friends left the Capitol. 

But the individual who placed the call from the White House, shortly after Trump told his supporters to go home at 4:17 p.m., remains unknown. Call logs show the publicly available number for the White House without the relevant extension.

Riggleman’s publishing company has pegged the book — “The Breach: The Untold Story of the Investigations into January 6th” — as “an unprecedented behind-the-scenes look at the Jan. 6 committee’s investigation” and teases knowledge of the almost eight-hour period at the White House where they “supposedly had no phone calls.”

But the panel sees matters differently.

“In his role on the Select Committee staff, Mr. Riggleman had limited knowledge of the committee’s investigation. He departed from the staff in April prior to our hearings and much of our most important investigative work,” select committee spokesperson Tim Mulvey told multiple outlets in a statement.

“The committee has run down all the leads and digested and analyzed all the information that arose from his work. We will be presenting additional evidence to the public in our next hearing this coming Wednesday, and a thorough report will be published by the end of the year,” Mulvey added.

Riggleman’s book tour isn’t the first time the ex-adviser has alarmed his former employer. A TV hit shortly after he left the committee spurred an email to staff that his appearance was “in direct contravention to his employment agreement.” 

“His specific discussion about the content of subpoenaed records, our contracts, contractors and methodologies, and your hard work is unnerving,” the panel’s staff director wrote, according to The Washington Post.

"You get a real 'aha!' moment when you see that the White House switchboard had connected to a rioter's phone while it's happening."

- Denver Riggleman to CBS’s “60 Minutes”

Riggleman appeared to nod to that dynamic in his book.

“I continually called for us to push the envelope and use the toughest approach possible. This ruffled some feathers on the committee,” he wrote.

At another point he questioned the panel’s strategy of dealing with the media.

“The committee had other fears too: leaks. We were obsessed with them, and the fear of leaks led the committee to compartmentalize the various teams of investigators… I wondered sometimes if there was an overabundance of caution — whether in the desire to thwart the press, we deprived the overall investigation of coordinated information. Was that a necessary trade-off?” he asked.

On his book tour, Riggleman has also weighed in on some ongoing matters before the committee, including Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

His comments come just days after the committee was able to secure an interview with Ginni Thomas after months of negotiations. 

Riggleman said it was an “open secret” that her views had gotten more extreme.

Virginia Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has agreed to be interviewed by the Jan. 6 House panel.

“What really shook me was the fact that if Clarence agreed with or was even aware of his wife's efforts, all three branches of government would be tied to the Stop the Steal movement,” Riggleman wrote in his book.

"For me in intelligence, there['s] always the possible and the probable," Riggleman said. "Is it possible that Clarence Thomas had no idea of the activities of Ginni Thomas over decades as a Republican activist? Possible. Had no idea about what was going on during the election and Biden and Trump and her connections to the administration? Possible. Is it probable? I just can't even get my arms [around] that being probable," he added in the "60 Minutes" interview.

Asked on Sunday if he sees the reported call between the White House and a rioter as significant to the panel’s probe, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the Jan. 6 select committee, told CNN's “State of the Union” that relevant information will be presented before the public at Wednesday’s hearing.

“I can't comment on the particulars. I can say that each of the issues that Mr. Riggleman raised during the period he was with the committee, which ended quite some time ago, we looked into,” Schiff said.

“So, we have looked into all of these issues. Some of the information we have found on various issues, we will be presenting it to the public for the first time in the hearing coming up. It will be the usual mix of information in the public domain and new information woven together to tell the story about one key thematic element of Donald Trump's effort to overturn the election,” he added.

Judy Kurtz contributed.

Media Running New ‘Leaked Info’ From Anonymous Sources That Trump Had Files On Foreign Nation’s Nuclear Capabilities

Documents seized during the FBI raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home contained information regarding a foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities, the Washington Post reports.

The details were provided only by sources described by the Post as “people familiar with the matter” and come just days after a federal judge approved Trump’s request to appoint a special master to independently review records obtained during the raid, due in part to concerns over media leaks.

The outlet notes that some documents were so top-secret that only a handful of people were granted access to view them. So top-secret that this information was immediately passed on to one of the largest newspapers in the world.

Among the files seized during the raid, according to the anonymous sources, were those which held “information about a foreign government’s nuclear-defense readiness.”

But, the Washington Post adds: “These people did not identify the foreign government in question, say where at Mar-a-Lago the document was found, or offer additional details about one of the Justice Department’s most sensitive national security investigations.”

RELATED: Federal Judge Grants Trump’s Request to Have Special Master Independently Review Documents Seized by FBI

Trump Raid Allegedly Yields Document on Foreign Nuclear Capabilities

Does anyone else pine for the days when sources were named and multiple people were contacted by the media to corroborate a source’s story prior to print?

The bombshell report comes just days after Judge Aileen Cannon delivered a significant victory to Trump and his legal team by granting a special master, allowing an independent party to review the documents and assess any attorney/client or executive privilege that may exist.

Part of her reasoning was prescient in light of the Washington Post report.

One of the reasons for Cannon’s ruling involved “the interest in ensuring the integrity of an orderly process amidst swirling allegations of bias and media leaks.”

Last month, leaks to the same newspaper led to reports from “people familiar with the investigation” who alleged that the raid on Trump’s home was an attempt to retrieve documents pertaining to “nuclear weapons.” 

The implication, of course, is that Trump was putting America in danger.

Trump at that time railed against the reporting.

“Nuclear weapons issue is a Hoax, just like Russia, Russia, Russia was a Hoax, two Impeachments were a Hoax, the Mueller investigation was a Hoax, and much more,” he wrote on his Truth Social media platform. “Same sleazy people involved.”

RELATED: Trump Demands Immediate Release Of Search Warrant, Denies Reports That FBI Raid Was Over Nuclear Weapons Documents

Media Running Wild With Irresponsible Speculation

The Political Insider reported just last week that the DOJ’s so-called guideline holding off on any possible charges against Trump until after the midterm elections would only allow the media to run wild with speculation.

“Trump and his supporters can instead brace themselves for 2+ months of selective leaking to the media, loads of reports citing ‘people who asked to remain anonymous,’ and lots of speculative reporting from the left-wing media,” we wrote.

And here we have yet another example.

And the usual suspects jumped on this latest information to help spread the unverified reports.

POLL: Do you believe this latest 'leak' about Trump?

By voting, you agree to receive email communication from The Political Insider. Click HERE for more information.

Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), once blasted by former congressman Trey Gowdy for selectively leaking information about the Trump/Russia collusion hoax “like a sieve,” was up to his old tricks.

“New reporting that Trump had highly classified information, including on foreign nuclear programs,” Schiff tweeted. “If true, it raises yet more questions.”

If true.

Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, despite testimony from officials time and again admitting they had no evidence of Russian collusion with the campaign of President Trump in 2016, repeatedly told friendly media outlets that there was “direct evidence.”

He never provided any. Nor could Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Or any other Democrat for that matter.

Others are also pushing the Trump nuclear capabilities story without any actual evidence at this stage of the game.

Legendary director Rob Reiner called for Trump to be arrested following the report.

“Donald Trump stole Top Secret Highly Classified Nuclear Documents. He has put our Nation in danger. No more deference. No more political considerations. No man is above the law,” Reiner tweeted. “Time to make an arrest.”

And it wasn’t just the far-left, either.

Fox News host Eric Shawn, following previous reporting on the nuclear documents, made the laughable suggestion that Trump was looking to sell the foreign nation’s nuclear secrets to Russia or Saudi Arabia.

“And more questions are being raised this morning. Did former President Trump try to sell or share the highly classified material to the Russians or to the Saudis or others?” he asked.

“Or were the documents innocently mishandled and stored because he thought he had a legal right to have them?”

Yes, because a man who made billions over his lifetime would choose ‘selling nuclear secrets’ from a foreign country to a hostile regime as his next lucrative side project.

Trump attorney Christopher Kise slammed the leaks coming out about the FBI raid, lamenting they “continue with no respect for the process nor any regard for the real truth.”

Kise said a “responsible course of action here would be for someone — anyone — in the government to exercise leadership and control.”

Good luck waiting for that. You can expect the corrupt media to run with any and all leaks – factual or otherwise – from now right up until November.

In reality, the reports may very well be true. But the media has not earned the benefit of the doubt after years of bombshell stories that ultimately fizzled out into nothingness.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Media Running New ‘Leaked Info’ From Anonymous Sources That Trump Had Files On Foreign Nation’s Nuclear Capabilities appeared first on The Political Insider.

37 Years And 7 Tours In The Military, And All We Get Is Our President Calling Us Extremist Fascists?

My husband and I consider ourselves ordinary people. We rent a 3 bedroom town home and pay our taxes. We raise our children as best we can, and my husband homeschools our 6-year-old daughter. My husband is an artist, and I am a writer and content creator. 

What makes us extraordinary is the cumulative 37 years of service to our nation. My husband was in the Air Force for 17 years, and I retired last year from the Air Force after 20 years and 8 months of service.

We both deployed numerous times to various locations, including Afghanistan.

We both saw varying levels of combat, including gunfights, explosions, enemy detention facility riots, and death on a scale that words cannot do justice.

And for all that sacrifice, we were treated to our President calling us extremists. 

How Could You?

My husband and I often joke that if it wasn’t for the defense issues, we’d probably be Libertarians versus Republicans. We believe that government rarely fixes anything and that government should stay out of social issues and trust in the people to innovate and know what is best for themselves and their families.

We voted for Donald Trump both times. The first time I voted for him was because there was absolutely no way I could vote for Hillary Clinton. Still, for the sake of word count and my editor’s sanity, I’ll just drop one big reason: Benghazi.

I voted for Trump the second time because while I didn’t care for the tweets, and I personally think he often lacks class, I do believe that President Trump had done wonders for the economy pre-COVID, and I liked his fresh take on Foreign Policy.

Besides, Joe Biden is an establishment politician who I believe is disingenuous. I feared he would bend to the will of his more dare I say it… extreme left members of his party.

RELATED: Trump Has Perfect Response To Biden’s ‘Enemies of the State’ Speech Attacking MAGA Republicans: ‘He Must Be Insane’

How Dare You

So we voted for Trump twice. Does that make us “MAGA Republicans?” I don’t think so because, personally, I think the term is stupid.

We are Republicans. I think the President believes, along with the elite members of his party who like to tout inclusion and civility, that we are too dumb to know that when they say MAGA Republicans, they really mean all Republicans.

I was still in uniform when January 6th happened. I was so upset by what I saw on TV; I felt like the air had been sucked out of my chest. I would only feel this sick feeling one other time while watching the botched withdrawal in Afghanistan.

My husband and I spent large chunks of our young adult lives in Afghanistan. We were lucky; we came back alive with all our appendages. But, unfortunately, many of our friends didn’t come back or left parts of themselves behind. 

Are we extremists? No. We know what an extremist looks like. We are well acquainted with what an extremist is capable of. We didn’t leave parts of our bodies in Afghanistan, but parts of our minds will never leave. 

Men and women like us have PTSD at various levels thanks to the extremism we witnessed at the behest of politicians. How dare you, Mr. President, call us extremists.

RELATED: Biden Called for Ending ‘Uncivil War.’ Now Calls GOP ‘Threat to Democracy’

With Honor and Distinction

My husband and I are ordinary people who sacrificed our young adult lives in an extraordinary act by swearing an oath and wearing the uniform with pride. We served with honor and distinction, following lawful orders of those appointed over us and representing the best of what our country has to offer.

When you deploy to a war zone, you put your life on hold. Relationships and family plans get put on pause, your education goals often get put on hiatus, and no one who hasn’t done it can ever fully understand what you miss when you are away from home for so long. 

For the families we leave behind; the wives, husbands, and children – their lives must continue without you. They have to learn to live day-to-day events without your presence. And when we return, they have to relearn how to live with you back in their lives. 

My husband and I aren’t the only veterans who voted for Donald Trump. We aren’t the only veterans that the Commander-in-Chief called extremists last night. 

Shame on you, Mr. President.

RELATED: MAGA Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls For Biden’s Impeachment Following ‘President Butterbeans’ Divisive Speech

The Truth

I didn’t want to just say what I believe in this piece. While I’m the writer in my family, my husband is also a veteran and had some thoughts about last night.

We both acknowledge that there are bad actors who are Republicans who are extremists. Just as there are bad cops, bad teachers, bad soldiers, there are bad Republicans. 

But my husband said to me last night while we were watching our President call us extremists:

“What about the extremists in his party? Will he call them out too?”

What is my husband referring to? The Democrats who advocate for abortion up to birth. The Democrats who advocate for parents to be cut out of the education of their children. Democrats who advocate for violence against Supreme Court Justices. Democrats who celebrated the Summer 2020 BLM riots. 

That is who my husband is referring to. My husband and I don’t believe all Democrats are extremists, evil, fascists, or any other terrible blanket moniker floating around. But not calling out both sides makes you a hypocrite, Mr. President, and is part of why we didn’t vote for you.

Who We Are

My husband and I are ordinary people. We love our country, we love our family, and we believe in something greater than ourselves. 

We are two people that want to raise our kids in peace, teach them to be critical thinkers who contribute to society, and perhaps serve in some way as service to something greater than yourself teaches you about sacrifice, duty, and resilience.

We are two people who have had family members disown us because of our political beliefs. Yet, we are two people who spent decades sweating, bleeding, and crying with one of the best families you can ever sign onto…our brothers and sisters in arms.

We are Republicans. We are Americans. We are Patriots. 

And you, Mr. President, should be ashamed of yourself. 

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post 37 Years And 7 Tours In The Military, And All We Get Is Our President Calling Us Extremist Fascists? appeared first on The Political Insider.

MAGA Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls For Biden’s Impeachment Following ‘President Butterbeans’ Divisive Speech

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene called on President Biden to be impeached following his speech Thursday night in which he vilified “MAGA Republicans” as extremists and a “threat to this country.”

“Joe Biden just declared all of us enemies of the state. Biden is a danger to us all,” she tweeted from her official account. “Joe Biden must be impeached!”

Greene was incensed over the President’s remarks, posting various tweets in which she mocked Biden as “President Butterbeans” and compared the speech – including the blood red lighting behind him – to that of Hitler.

“They chose this imagery. It’s unreal,” she seethed. “Joe Biden is Hitler.”

That tweet included the hashtag ‘#NaziJoe.’

RELATED: Trump Has Perfect Response To Biden’s ‘Enemies of the State’ Speech Attacking MAGA Republicans: ‘He Must Be Insane’

Marjorie Taylor Greene Wants Biden Impeached

In another social media post, the firebrand congresswoman shared a video in which Biden’s speech is altered to look like Hitler speaking in front of Nazi imagery.

“What we all saw tonight from Biden,” Greene wrote.

“I guess when President Butterbeans is frail, weak, and dementia ridden, the Hitler imagery was their attempt to make him look ‘tough’ while he declares war on half of America as enemies of the state.”

Just to be clear, it’s not real. I know that’s a ridiculous statement to have to make, but we also know full well the fact-checkers are going to write a column clarifying that Biden does not have a mustache and did not deliver a speech in German.

Biden, during his speech, did however declare that “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.”

“There is no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans, and that is a threat to this country,” he added.

RELATED: Marjorie Taylor Greene Picks A Fight With ‘Never Trumper’ Cheney On The House Floor: ‘You’re a Joke!’

Biden Just Declared War on Half of America

President Biden’s speech was such an authoritarian production that criticism was everywhere.

Ohio Republican Senate nominee J.D. Vance accused Biden of “declaring war” on 74 million MAGA Republican voters.

“I just can’t imagine anything more divisive and more dangerous coming from a president who if he said anything during his campaign, it’s that he would unite the country,” Vance told Fox News. “This is not uniting at all. He’s declaring war effectively on half of the country.”

That’s saying something, considering Vance once viewed Donald Trump as either “a cynical asshole” or “America’s Hitler.”

Turns out – It was Biden all along.

Speaking of Trump, the main target of Biden’s divisive speech, he asked people to explain to the President what ‘MAGA’ stands for “slowly but passionately,” and suggested there were indications he was “suffering from late-stage dementia.”

Then there was this American hero who captured the thoughts of most sane people watching Biden’s speech.

This isn’t the first time Marjorie Taylor Greene has called on President Biden to be impeached. In fact, she’s one of only a few people with the stones to call for it every time he commits a heinous act, of which there have been many.

POLL: Should President Biden be impeached?

By voting, you agree to receive email communication from The Political Insider. Click HERE for more information.

Just over a year ago, Greene introduced three impeachment resolutions against Biden, one focusing on his deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan, another involving the crisis at the border, and one more pointing to his extension of an eviction moratorium during the pandemic.

Now imagine a speech like that was delivered by Trump instead of ‘Dark Brandon.’

How many Democrats today would be accusing Trump of being a fascist and calling for his impeachment? And the thing about the Democrats – they’d actually follow through on it.

What are Republicans going to do? Anything?

What Biden did last night was effectively call for a civil war in this country. He spoke from the standpoint of a true fascist. He did everything Trump has been accused of doing by the media.

And it’s nothing new. He’s been calling Republicans “ultra-MAGA” for some time. He essentially called people who wanted kids unmasked and to be able to attend school in person Neanderthals. He launched his Justice Department against parents by equating them to ‘domestic terrorists.’

Biden should be impeached. It should have happened a long time ago. But it better happen if Republicans take back the House.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post MAGA Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls For Biden’s Impeachment Following ‘President Butterbeans’ Divisive Speech appeared first on The Political Insider.

Intelligence Official Who Claimed Hunter’s Laptop Was ‘Russian Disinformation’ Appointed To Intelligence Advisory Board

Jeremy Bash, one of over 50 senior intelligence officials who signed a letter prior to the 2020 election suggesting the Hunter Biden laptop story was ‘Russian disinformation’ has been named as a key member of President Biden’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

An announcement for Bash’s appointment was published on the White House website late last week.

The White House cites his past credentials as a national security lawyer as well as his roles as Chief of Staff at the CIA and the U.S. Department of Defense under former Secretary Leon Panetta.

Bash has also been a frequent contributor to MSNBC and was previously married to CNN’s Dana Bash.

RELATED: NY Post Slams Intel Officials Who Claimed Hunter’s Laptop Was ‘Russian Disinformation’: Desperate To Get Biden Elected

Intel Expert Jeremy Bash, Who Falsely Claimed Hunter’s Laptop Was Russian Disinformation, Named to WH Intelligence Board

Jeremy Bash belongs on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board the way Hunter Biden belongs in a parmesan cheese quality control factory.

Which is to say, he shouldn’t be anywhere near it.

Bash was one of over 50 intelligence officials who falsely claimed just before the 2020 presidential election that a New York Post bombshell regarding the President’s son’s laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

“If we are right, this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this,” the group wrote.

They weren’t right. Multiple media outlets, albeit well over a year after the story was first reported, confirmed the material found on the laptop as being Hunter Biden’s.

RELATED: Whistleblowers Allege ‘Scheme’ by FBI, DOJ to Suppress Negative Information About Hunter Biden Before 2020 Election

Refused to Apologize

When offered an opportunity to apologize or amend their previous attempts to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop scandal by the New York Post editorial board, none of the intelligence officials, including newly tapped Intelligence Advisory Board member Jeremy Bash, jumped.

Bash didn’t respond to a request for comment on whether or not he regrets spreading false information.

“More than a year later, even after their Deep State sabotage has been shown again and again to be a lie, they refuse to own up to how they undermined an election,” the Post said of those who signed the letter.

They then revealed the scheme for what it truly was.

“The 51 former ‘intelligence’ officials who cast doubt on The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop stories in a public letter really were just desperate to get Joe Biden elected president,” they wrote.

Bash has other examples of ‘inventing’ intelligence that was detrimental to former President Donald Trump on his resume.

In a segment from October of 2019, Bash essentially fabricated quotes by Trump in his argument in favor of impeachment over a phone call to Ukraine’s president.

“…this was part of a carefully orchestrated effort by a number of key administration officials to present an ultimatum to the Ukrainians,” he claimed adding what he surmised was the President’s words:

“‘You’ve got to get involved in the 2020 election, help Trump win reelection, and if not, then you’re not gonna get the benefit of American support, including military support.'”

Not exactly a reliable source of intelligence there.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Intelligence Official Who Claimed Hunter’s Laptop Was ‘Russian Disinformation’ Appointed To Intelligence Advisory Board appeared first on The Political Insider.