Posted originally on the CTH on December 5, 2022 | Sundance
A 446-page transcript of the deposition of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the chief medical advisor to President Joe Biden, was released today by State Attorney Eric Schmidt (Missouri) and State Attorney Jeff Landry (Louisiana) who filed a lawsuit alleging government collusion with social media companies during the COVID crisis.
Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and several Biden administration officials were named in a lawsuit filed by Eric Schmitt and Jeff Landry. The deposition shows attorney John Sauer of Schmitt’s office conducting the questioning. The deposition contains 63 exhibits, including confidential emails and media reports. The deposition began at 8:08 a.m. on November 23, 2022, and ended at 5:01 p.m. [Direct pdf HERE]
Posted originally on the CTH on December 5, 2022 | Sundance
President Donald Trump came under massive amounts of fire recently for saying, “So, with the revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, the DNC, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great “Founders” did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”
What President Trump is noting, is the exact same reason why Kari Lake’s lawsuit, like every other election lawsuit before it, will fail. Our U.S. Constitution permits election fraud and manipulation, as long as that state level election fraud and manipulation does not break federal law. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:
Obviously, it would be frustrating for President Trump to ask legal advisors what can be done about certified results from fraudulently constructed elections. The reply from the legal advisors around the state certification would frustrate anybody, because the constitution permits fraudulent elections. The decision on how to conduct elections is entirely up to the states.
The states, via state legislature, determine their election rules, laws and outcomes that eventually lead to state certification. If a state wants to block voters, impede voters, or manipulate the voting outcome, there is generally nothing in federal law to stop them – as long as the state or county does not break federal laws protecting classes or protected categories of persons.
Federal law generally prohibits disenfranchisement of people based on race, age, national origin, sex, marital status, disability, pregnancy, gender, sexual orientation and disability, along with other categories.
Federal law does not prohibit disenfranchisement based on ideology, political affiliation or outlook. If a state or local election system wants to block voters based on affiliation or ideology, they can…. as long as it doesn’t have a disparate impact on the protected category.
If a state legislature wanted to assign 1/2 value to each Republican vote, there is nothing in the constitution that would prohibit that rule.
If a state election outcome results in the loss of 50% of the republican votes in the local or state election, there is nothing in the federal law that would correct the issue. The state is responsible for certifying the results.
The supreme court will not hear an election controversy issue or legal challenge based on certified results from states. The constitution permits states to conduct their own elections, and as long as federal laws are not violated, the state certification ends the discussion. This is the great dichotomy within U.S. election around election manipulation by a state or local election officials. There is no federal recourse if no federally protected category was adversely impacted.
The DNC argues election disenfranchisement, rules, dates, times, locations, etc based entirely on protected federal categories, ie. the date or method of the election has an adverse impact to a specifically protected category of racial minorities. This is the typical DNC lawsuit.
EX. the RNC or DNC candidates have no legal footing to sue in federal court if everyone wearing a green shirt was turned away from county polling locations; unless they can prove that a green shirt was worn by a higher percentage of a protected category of persons (i.e., disparate impact).
Additionally, due to the private nature of the corporations that run candidates, notably the RNC and DNC, there is also no prohibition to stop the RNC or DNC from disapproving candidates unless they also were discriminating based on a protected category. Not coincidentally, political parties are not recognized in the U.S. constitution.
This election reality is why control over state level elections is where the battle has to be fought. Once a state certifies the election outcome, there is almost no way the federal courts can/will intervene unless the lawsuit is based on a claim that federally protected voters were specifically targeted.
COMMENT: Marty; you should not be so hard on yourself. Nobody has tried harder than you to alter the outcome. Socrates is just unbeatable. I shared your hope that gold would have just cracked $1000 and that would have been a sling-sot up. But it stopped at $1045 and the reversals were elected and that was the end of that. As a long-term trader, I understood what you meant. I remember 1985 when gold just broke $300 and the leading gold analyst ___________ threw in the towel. You called that low and that’s when I started following your work. You weren’t just an analyst, you were a trader.
So ease up. You have done your best. As you said at the WEC, nobody has tried to defeat your own model as much as you, but you have always lost.
I for one hope you do Dubai in the Spring. It would be nice to see everyone in person again.
PD
REPLY: Oh, yes. I remember that trade. It takes a trader to understand why I said if gold could crack $1,000, it would then be propelled straight up into a slingshot. Perhaps one of the most important trading tools is that the market is like a pendulum. The further it swings in one direction, the fast it will be propelled in the opposite. That is why when bubble markets peak, the vast majority of the decline takes place in two to three key time units thereafter. The failure of gold to have cracked that $1,000 psychological level is also when it has languished thereafter.
Here is the Array from October 1984. It called all the moves correctly and the major low was February with the Panic Cycle the very next month. The next temp high was on the next Directional Change in August 1985.
I have to admit, probably the one forecast of Socrates that really impressed me personally was the Array we published in 1999, which you can find on the Wayback Machine. It had targeted a Panic Cycle in 2008 – 10 years in ADVANCE! It was projecting the collapse globally of the 2008-2009 Financial Crisis. Obviously, my personal comments are not forecasts. I cannot beat Socrates and nobody else can possibly beat it.
Trading observations are not forecasts. Even look at BitCoin Monthly. You see the standard 2-month decline, temp low, then the pendulum moves back in the opposite direction, but the power is diminished. The power is too strong on the decline side. These are just observations from being a trader. They are NOT the computer. So, yes, my comments are not forecasts but observations. The computer does the forecasting not me. Not even I can defeat Socrates.
Naturally, I have received emails from those on the left and Elon Musk appears to be rising to that coveted spot of hatred once monopolized by Trump. Musk has outright suggested that Twitter was acting under government orders to suppress free speech, with his remarks coming hot on the heels of the release of a trove of documents that lift the lid on some of the social media platform’s censorship machinations around the 2020 presidential election.
The problem is that the LEFT never looks at anything objective. They have their agenda to rule over everyone and it will always come down to civil war, violence, and blood in the streets because they will NEVER back down – it has to be their way of no way. They do not believe in any democratic process.
So while they will dismiss such stories as conspiracy theories, in New Zealand, the government has admitted that Facebook gave them direct access to flag what they wanted to be censored. The rumor behind the curtain is that Zuckerberg has provided the same privilege to the USA so he could get the authority to move into banking.
The LEFT has been moving globally to seize power and the risk remains that their objective is precisely one of the points of the WEF’s 8 forecasts – the end of Democracy. They want to seize power and become a dictatorship with their philosophy and strip us of our right to even vote. They argue that the system is collapsing so they need to seize all power, The future they envision is very dark and cold.
In all honesty, if we can buy online securely, then why can we not vote online? My staff could have written the code to allow national voting I bet in less than 30 days. NEVER in my entire life have we ever had to wait so long to find out who won an election. In the ’60s, we knew that night. With the advancement of technology, the method of voting has been moving back in time. Even in the Roman Empire, they knew who would win an election in less than 24 hours.
All of this chaos in voting is ominous indeed. It appears to be setting up the entire affair to end elections and we must then face just a usurpation of power. The net result of these elections is to undermine the public confidence in voting anyhow. Joseph Stalin perhaps is the only one to ever tell the truth about elections.
It is becoming clear day by day why the mainstream media has been so against Elon Muskbuying Twitter for as they say in law enforcement, there is a “Blue Code” where cops do not rat on cops and the same is true about judges. Mainstream media is so LEFT it has forgotten how to walk a straight line. They are no longer the free press – they are propaganda organizations for the takeover of our country and in the process, they will cause civil war and the collapse of Western culture. The Biden Administration clearly violated the law by telling Twitter to delete photos of Hunter smoking crack cocaine which anyone else would be in prison.
The chaos and confusion behind closed doors at Twitter in the immediate aftermath of the October 2020 surface of Hunter Biden’s Laptop from Hell, has exposed that the very top-level execs at Twitter decided to label the New York Post’s story as “hacked material” without any evidence — behind the back of then-CEO and founder Jack Dorsey. Historically, those on the LEFT have always done whatever it takes to win for their very basic philosophy is to dominate society and to shut down all resistance.
The New York Times called on President Biden to create a “Reality Czar” to shut down all dissent, which they immediately label conspiracy theories without any real investigation. CNN has called on cable companies to drop Fox News as if everything CNN says is the gospel. We are living in a world where mainstream media has become the enemy of the people pushing a political agenda no different than the New York Times during the 1930s was urging Roosevelt to adopt communism.
The New York Times cheered Stalin and constantly reported that this was the way to the future – Stalinism. They seem to be preaching that again with a “Reality Czar” right out of Stalin’s handbook. They are supporting once again this move to a Marxist Utopia. The New York Times hid the truth about Stalin because they were in favor of Communism during the Great Depression. Stalin’s great economic miracle was achieved by taking all the food from Ukraine to pretend Communism was working in Russia causing over 7 million to starve to death. Today, they are cheering World War III to destroy Russia once more in hopes of adopting this Great Resetand imposing upon the world their cancel culture with a one-world government headed by the United Nations.
I strongly recommend you watch the movie, Mr. Jones. This exposes the TRUE STORY of how the New York Times tried to support Communism in the United States back then, with their top journalist, Walter Duranty (1884-1957), who was their main man in Moscow. The New York Times promoted him to be awarded the Pulitzer Prize for reporting on how Communism was Utopia and our future. When Gareth Jones (1905-1935) in March 1933 reported this was all a lie, the truth finally began to appear.
It took the New York Times until 1990 to admit that their reporting covered up the truth about Stalin and the massive starvation in an effort, like Schwab, once again, to sell “equality” as our salvation. The New York Times covered up the more than 7 million people who died of starvation in the Ukraine famine. The New York Times wrote that their reporting on the Russian Revolution constituted “some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper.” They never revoked his Pultizer Prize for writing fake news about Stalin.
Homeland Security and the FBI both said that Russia’s hack of the DNC did not involve altering the vote. In fact, it was his own paper that reported on November 25, 2016: “The Obama administration said on Friday that despite Russian attempts to undermine the presidential election, it has concluded that the results “accurately reflect the will of the American people.” So, were four years of stating the Russians put Trump in the White House, not misinformation?
The constant lies the press has spun about Russia invading the US elections in 2016 and manipulations seem intent upon creating war, exactly as took place with the Spanish American War. We have returned to yellow journalism, which is based on sensationalism and crude exaggeration. Pulitzer and Hearst went head to head. I remember grade school history class blaming the Spanish American War on fake news. There is one such story that male Spanish officials were strip-searching American woman tourists in Cuba looking for claimed messages from rebels. This was the front page of Hearst’s newspaper showing what has become known as “yellow journalism” whereby the illustration was by Frederic Remington and published in the New York Journal, on February 12th, 1897.
Hearst’s New York Journal was called out for this fake news by its rival Joseph Pulitzer’s, New York World, reporting that this story was erroneous and its graphically illustrated strip-search of a woman aboard a U.S. passenger steamer was fake. The Journal article was written by Richard Harding Davis, who reported that Spanish authorities boarded the U.S. steamer, the Olivette, as it prepared to leave Havana and searched several passengers for contraband. Among the passengers was a young Cuban woman named Clemencia Arango, whose brother was a leader in the insurgency against Spanish rule. The Journal’s article was ambiguous, implying the woman was strip-searched by men, which was created by the accompanying illustration of Frederic Remington.
The New York World attacked the Journal’s fake news, quoting Arango as denying that men had strip-searched her. That task, she said, had fallen to a matron, or “inspectress.” The Journalist Davis, in a letter to the World, then blamed Frederic Remington for having drawn “an imaginary picture” and insisted his dispatch had not reported that men had conducted the search.
Nevertheless, this story of the strip search discredited the Journal as being unreliable and prone to publishing “fakes” and other thinly documented reports. Welcome to the present where the New York Times and Washington Post seem to be carrying on in the same unreliable manner as well as ABC, CBS, NBC, and of course – CNN.
We will be publishing next year a special report on what the computer is projecting for the Decline and Fall of the United States and how it will separate as was the case for every civilization historically. Like the Roman Empire, the United States will separate into three regions. However, to the surprise of many, this will also include Canada. We will let everyone know when this report is ready.
COMMENT: Thank you for all you do. Your input has guided me well. I suspect my Bank is in deep trouble. _____ bank in ____ CA. They specialize in small business. First red flag was freezing my account for no reason. I then bounced a check because my account was frozen. They could not give me a reason for freezing my account. Then they offered me, according to them, a great investment deal, that was the second red flag. Then I was contacted by a relationship manger. This was the third red flag.
Will be closing all my accounts with ______ next week.
MC
REPLY: There are clearly problems emerging since interest rates have risen and many banks were not in a position to take the losses on long-term investments.
Always keep some cash. A word to the wise should be sufficient
Posted originally on the CTH on December 4, 2022 | Sundance
In a move that could have considerable consequences for the future of the Republican party, Politico is reporting that Harmeet Dhillon is considering a challenge to Ronna McDaniel for the RNC chair position.
Ronna McDaniel said she was going to run for reelection to the RNC chair post despite dismal performance by the national organization against the DNC ballot gathering operation. Additionally, the trust factor between the RNC and the voting base of the party, specifically the MAGA base, has completely evaporated. The RNC has focused more on raising money than supporting elections and candidates.
Previously, New York Congressman Lee Zeldin said he was considering a challenge, and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell announced his full intent to challenge McDaniel for the role and responsibility. Into this dynamic now steps Harmeet Dhillon.
As a party insider, Harmeet Dhillon would represent a significant threat to the Ronna McDaniel wing of the RNC as many members who may not support Zeldin or Lindell would likely support Dhillon over McDaniel.
Arguably, Ronna McDaniel was motivated by self-preservation and using a proclaimed reformer, albeit RNC contracted legal advisor, Harmeet Dhillon, to put a coat of new paint over the corrupt and failed RNC vehicle. Dhillon and Barbour playing a role for the RNC as a failed institution similar to the tamp-down efforts of Bill Barr and John Durham at the DOJ.
In their article, Politico avoids mentioning the financial relationship between Dhillon Law and the RNC. By the time 2022 is completed, the Republican National Committee will likely have paid Dhillon Law over a million dollars for services rendered.
We previously wondered how Harmeet Dhillon was going to vote against the reelection of Ronna McDaniel who is effectively her employer. Obviously, there is a conflict of interest inside the financial dynamic overall.
Ms. Dhillon, claiming all of her work for the RNC was/is voluntary, was furious at criticism over her self-promoted relationship with the notoriously corrupt Henry Barbour, and then secondarily angered by public knowledge about her financial relationship with the RNC.
(Politico) Ronna McDaniel is about to draw a challenge to her post as Republican National Committee chair.
Harmeet Dhillon, a RNC committeewoman whose firm represents Donald Trump, is prepping a bid for party chair, according to two people familiar with her planning. Dhillon has been talking with fellow RNC members about a prospective run, and those close to Dhillon say a formal launch could come within the next few days.
“After three successive terms of underwhelming results at the polls for the GOP, all the while with leaders congratulating ourselves for outstanding performance, I feel that we owe it to our voters to have a serious debate about the leadership of the party and what we must change to actually win in 2024,” Dhillon said in a statement.
A Dhillon candidacy would mark the most serious challenge to McDaniel to date.
Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), who ran an unsuccessful bid for New York governor, has also said he is considering a bid, though he has yet to declare his candidacy. Mike Lindell, the MyPillow executive and Trump backer who has risen to prominence through his denial of the 2020 election outcome, has launched a longshot campaign for the post.
The committee’s 168 members will hold a vote to determine the RNC chairmanship at the committee’s annual winter meeting, which is set to be held in late January in Dana Point, Calif. A McDaniel representative declined to comment on Dhillon’s anticipated candidacy.
McDaniel, who has been RNC leader since 2017 and would be the longest-serving chair in more than a century should she be reelected to a third term, may be tough to unseat. Her allies say she has already received commitments of support from more than 100 members — more than the majority of votes she would need. On Friday, McDaniel received an endorsement from David Bossie, an influential Maryland RNC committeeman once seen as a potential contender for the chairmanship. Trump himself has not endorsed.
People close to Dhillon, however, insist that McDaniel’s support is soft and that she could win over those who are unhappy with the party’s disappointing showing in this year’s midterms. (read more)
It is likely that Harmeet Dhillon could fracture the support base for Ronna McDaniel at the RNC.
What is lesser known is the difference that might exist within the organization if Dhillon replaced McDaniel.
The DNC wants power. The RNC wants money. The DNC uses money to get power. The RNC uses power to get money.
The ideology of the DNC drives their donor activity. The donor activity of the RNC drives their ideology. This is the essential difference.
The priority of the DNC is to win elections, assemble power and by extension control the mechanisms that deliver them wealth. The priority of the RNC is money, and by extension winning elections is not the most important thing. The priority of the RNC is the accumulation of wealth for itself.
The DNC has ideology as their core mission objective, that focus drives their fundraising and ballot collection. In this approach the ideology remains consistent. However, the RNC has monetary gain as their core mission objective, and that drives their ideology. The RNC ideology is therefore subject to being purchased by the desires of the current biggest buyer.
The democrats want power. The republicans want money. The DNC uses money to get power. The RNC uses power to get money.
Every single decision by Ronna McDaniel emphasized this RNC dynamic over the past six years. Would the RNC prioritization of money change under Harmeet Dhillon? Some might say yes, but Dhillon’s aversion to sunlight on her paid role for the RNC points to an answer by itself.
The biggest issue within the dynamic of the RNC is the lack of honesty, transparency and clear-thinking stewardship. The RNC regards republican voters as annoyances to be overcome and managed in the assembly of their priority, money. Harmeet Dhillon has expressed on her social media she wants to change this dynamic. However, change comes first by looking in the mirror and dropping the conflicts of interest.
Ronna McDaniel, Harmeet Dhillon, Mike Lindell and possibly Lee Zeldin.
If honesty, integrity and a willingness to take slings and arrows in defense of the country are the main organizational attributes desired in an RNC leader, you can look at the names and make the prediction. However, if the priority of RNC members is the desire to continue business operation for maximum financial gain, that too is predictable.
Money, it’s what the modern RNC is all about. Nothing else has mattered in the past 15+ years.
Given the outcome of the November election, I don’t see that priority changing. However, given the outcome of 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022, maybe there is enough pressure now to change it.
Posted originally on the CTH on December 4, 2022 | Sundance
Incoming House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (U-DC) appears with Maria Bartiromo to promise House investigations of the Biden Laptop and Twitter Files from Elon Musk.
Kentucky’s best and brightest DC republican, and formidable letter writer, becomes the 5th Republican Chairman in the past ten years on the Oversight Committee to promise investigations and accountability based on demonstrable corruption. Chairman Comer is very concerned about the possibility of corruption. Additionally, Comer is very excited to get into the details of the Elon Musk “Twitter Files” and explore all the investigative possibilities they provide.
Finally, on an issue close to the personal interest of Mr. Comer, he states his desire to investigate the Joe Biden energy policy. WATCH:
.
.
Hidden camera video provided by the Kentucky republican delegation gives us a preview of James Comer in full attack mode. WATCH:
Posted originally on the CTH on December 4, 2022 | Sundance
Sooner or later someone, if not Donald Trump, is going to have to start a second party.
Appearing on CBS with Margaret Brennan, incoming House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner walks through the priorities of the new HPSCI committee, to include that President Trump is horrible, Ukraine President Zelenskyy is awesome, Joe Biden is doing an awesome job and Ukraine needs more U.S. money and weapons.
If you listen closely, you might even catch the part where Mike Turner says he is working swimmingly with current HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and current Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner. Yes, folks, you just cannot make this stuff up. Ms. Brennan is absolutely smitten with Mr. Turner, he’s an acceptable republican. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: And we turn now to Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman Turner, good to have you here in person.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE TURNER: Thank you. Yes. It’s great to be here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So just yesterday, the Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said that Russia was perhaps struggling to keep up with the amount of munitions that it’s using in this war in Ukraine, the cold weather is slowing combat. The Secretary of State, though, didn’t really give hope for diplomacy at this moment. Given what you know, when will this war end?
REP. TURNER: Well, the one thing that we know is that the- the gains that Ukraine is making are real, they’re real in the battlefield. They’re real in the support that they have around the world, they have with democracies on the floor of the United Nations, in condemning this aggression by Russia. But Ukraine really has to be the one that decides that if, when, and how negotiations are entered into, and at this point, you know, they’re battling for their country. They’re losing lives for democracy. President Zelenskyy says, I was just in Ukraine, just before the elections, he says openly, he understands that he’s the frontlines for democracy, and he’s fighting an authoritarian regime. And I think, you know, obviously, Russia has to reevaluate how they look at this conflict and how Putin looks at what he has started–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you agree with the administration on this?
REP. TURNER: I agree absolutely. That this is, this is something where, that this is a war of aggression, that Russia needs to reevaluate and to withdraw from Ukraine.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’ve said, because you are poised to run the intelligence committees since you are at the top Republican when Republicans take control in January. Is this going to be an area where as you promised, you can take politics out of it and actually work across the aisle? What does that mean?
REP. TURNER: Right. So, you know, we’ve, when I went we went on a bipartisan trip to deliver to President Zelenskyy a message that there’s bipartisan support for Ukraine. I think there’s a number of issues that we’re going to be working on a bipartisan basis. What should the United States policy be? How do we make certain that the I serve on the Armed Service Committee and the Intelligence Committee? How do we make certain that they get the weapon systems that they need? How do we hold together this world alliance that-that we have where the world is condemning what Russia is doing? And of course, the expansion of NATO, we’re looking forward to Sweden and Finland, joining NATO, which is the opposite of what Putin believed he was going to achieve and attacking Ukraine. He’s now sees the expansion by two valuable partners with great military capabilities joining NATO.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to show our viewers some pretty extraordinary video that the Pentagon unveiled this week, a B-21 Raider. It’s the first US nuclear stealth bomber aircraft in more than 30 years. And it’s being packaged as this deterrent to Chin- to China. How concerned are you about the pace of Beijing’s nuclear development?
REP. TURNER: Extremely, and I want to co-co-commend the-the administration because they’ve been very forward leaning in releasing and declassifying information about what China is doing. They are expanding their nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons capabilities, their ICBMs that are targeting the United States. This plane is incredibly important. I served as chair of the air and land subcommittee as we, on a classified basis, began the process of working on this plane. And it gives us an additional balance, because it’s an additional delivery vehicle, additional way to combat what China’s doing–
MARGARET BRENNAN: to drop nuclear weapons?
REP. TURNER: to cause people not to drop nuclear weapons. I mean, that’s what’s so–
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s- it’s really the deterrent.
REP. TURNER: Right. It is to make certain that the balance of power is there so that people understand that the-that the cost is just too great. When China is expanding the nuclear weapons, they’re looking at United States if we blink if we don’t, if we don’t respond, and they assume that they can get first strike capabilities that not only holds us at bay, but really holds us at risk, because then you have the leader of a nuclear power that might make that miscalculation and of course, cost unfathomable lives.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You talked about being open about intelligence. I’m wondering, in your new role, will you be asking the Director of National Intelligence for a briefing and a damage assessment related to Mar-a-Lago and the documents the former president took to his private home?
REP. TURNER: That’s already in process. I mean, we’ve already talked–
MARGARET BRENNAN: It hasn’t happened. In the new Congress will you ask for it?
[CROSS TALK]
REP. TURNER: Yes. I’ve just talked to the director of national intelligence about this particular issue. One issue that we have discussed with the director, which is very, very interesting is is that, you know, prior to the Mar-a-Lago and raid, no one in the intelligence community or in the national security community was engaged at all by the FBI to request an assessment as to what the risk of the documents that had been surrendered from Mar-a-Lago,or that might have been at Mar-a-Lago, or that were even perceived as being missing–
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you the Justice Department–
[CROSS TALK]
REP. TURNER: This was just the FBI and the and the archivist, which is basically a glorified librarian, coming together and deciding to raid Mar-a-Lago. Now-
MARGARET BRENNAN: But you’re not downplaying that taking classified material to your private home is a problem particularly for the commander in chief.
REP. TURNER: Absolutely not. There were just- there were other options that the FBI had versus the escalation that- that they did. That’s certainly going to be one of the questions we have. The Director of National Intelligence indicated they have conducted their risk assessment, and they are prepared to give both of our committees on the Senate and the House presentations as to what those are–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you have a sense of when or what the scale of the damage is?
REP. TURNER: At this point it’s just a scheduling issue. We just had a meeting with the director, but both Sen. Warner, myself and Adam Schiff. And as they look to how do we get everybody scheduled together, and those who’ve done the assessment, because again, it’s not just a director that will be coming–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
REP. TURNER: They’ll have to come forward to give us, what did they see, what did they have, and how do they perceive the threat that may or may not have existed from some of these documents.
MARGARET BRENNAN: This may seem a basic question, but all elected leaders swear to uphold the Constitution. Does calling for its suspension, is that disqualifying for a presidential candidate?
REP. TURNER: It’s certainly not consistent–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You know why I’m asking this question?
REP. TURNER: I do. It’s certainly not consistent with the oath that we all take.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So yesterday, the front runner for the Republican nomination, the standard bearer for your party, posted on Truth Social, and we know he lost the 2020 election, but continues to claim he did not. “A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution.” Should the standard bearer for the Republican Party, the front runner for the nomination for the presidency for your party in 2024, say this?
REP. TURNER: Well, I you know, I, first of all, I vehemently disagree with- with the statement that Trump has made. Trump has made, you know, 1,000 statements in which I disagree. There is a political process that has to go forward before anybody–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Constitutional conservatives are pretty clear about where they value the constitution–
REP. TURNER: Exactly. There has to be–
[CROSSTALK]
REP. TURNER: You do get picked questions, but I do get to pick my answer.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I know. I’m trying to get you to answer the question I’m asking.
REP. TURNER: There is a political process that has to go for before anybody’s a front runner or anybody is a- even the candidate for the party–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you condemn him saying something like this?
REP. TURNER: Absolutely. And I believe answering your question that people certainly are going to take into consideration a statement like this as they evaluate a candidate.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I also have to ask you about the other statement and the people that he has been spending time with, a neo-Nazi, pro-Putin misogynist, named Nick Fuentes came to have dinner with the former president at his home alongside Kanye West who just this past week, praised Hitler.
REP. TURNER: This is atrocious. This is- everybody I think- everyone both condemns and is shocked and is as disgusted and nauseated by the fact that we’re even in this year, in 2022, having anyone that would make statements like that, nevertheless, have anybody who would engage in a conversation with someone who’s having- making statements like that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So having classified documents at the same place where they’re having the dinner–
REP. TURNER: Well that’s- that’s not–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –which we’re not necessarily securely held, and they’re government records that should be in government property, all those things together, it’s a problem.
REP. TURNER: Well, as you know, the FBI raided his home, and I suppose there are not classified documents there. But all of these are issues of judgment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The president is saying he doesn’t know who he’s having dinner with at that home.
REP. TURNER: These are all issues of judgment, and a political process has to go forward. And I believe voters are smart, and they’ll take those things into consideration in a political process.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman, thank you for coming on and answering questions. We’ll be back in just one minute so stay with us. {End Transcript}
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 