Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘testimony’

Secret Service agent and former White House official willing to testify that false claims were made at Jan. 6 hearing about Trump


Reported by CARLOS GARCIA | June 28, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/secret-service-agent-and-former-white-house-official-willing-to-testify-that-false-claims-were-made-at-jan-6-hearing-about-trump-2657578414.html/

A former White House official and a Secret Service agent said they were willing to testify in the Jan. 6 hearings in order to contradict claims that former President Donald Trump got into an altercation while trying to make his way to the Capitol rioting. The claims were made by Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, on Tuesday. Hutchinson said that she heard from Tony Ornato, then-White House deputy chief of staff, that the former president became incensed when he wasn’t allowed to go to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. He is alleged to have grabbed at the steering wheel of the vehicle and then lunged at the agent who was preventing him from leaving.

Later on Tuesday, that Secret Secret agent reportedly said he was willing to testify that this account was false. Ornato also indicated the same willingness to testify contrary to the story. Both Ornato and Robert Engel, the agent, had previously testified for the Jan. 6 Committee behind closed doors about what they witnessed on that day.

A spokesperson for the committee released a short statement about the development.

“The Committee trusts the credibility of a witness who was willing to testify under oath & in public but is also willing to hear any information that others may have that would aid in their investigation,” read the statement.

Among the other shocking claims from Hutchinson, she stated that Trump allegedly said that Vice President Mike Pence deserved to be hanged by the crowd of people rioting at the U.S. Capitol. The former president took to social media to deny some of the claims and to lambast Hutchinson as a person that he hardly knew except for his having heard terrible things about her.

In response to the day’s testimony, Fox News host Bret Baier said the claims were “stunning” and “compelling” because of Hutchinson’s proximity to power.

Here’s more about the claims made in the hearing:

Bret Baier: This is stunning www.youtube.com

Confirmed: Top Democrat Impeachment Witness Lied Repeatedly Under Oath, Ambassador Yovanovitch Caught Lying on Burisma, LOCK HER UP (Video)


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published May 14, 2020 at 7:00am

During her opening statement under oath before Congress Yovanovitch said the Obama administration never raised the issue of Burisma or Hunter Biden with her.

But then during her testimony Yovanovitch admitted that during her confirmation hearing she was warned about Hunter Biden and Burisma.

Then President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani revealed in December that there is documents showing Schiff’s star witness, fired US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch perjured herself at least twice during her impeachment testimony.

Documents prove Yovanovitch was personally involved in the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s investigations and denied visas to witnesses who could prove Biden, Dem corruption, Giuliani said. And now there is more information that former Ambassador Yovanovitch lied under oath about Burisma Holdings and Hunter Biden.

New documents show Ambassador Yovanovitch perjured herself in her impeachment testimony. The fired ambassador left out mention of Burisma meetings, numerous letters on Burisma. Fox News contributor John Solomon and Rep. Lee Zeldin joined Laura Ingraham for the discussion.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:  

DOJ Inspector General Horowitz to Publicly Testify Before Senate Judiciary Committee on December 11 About His Investigation Into FISA Abuses


Posted by 

URL of the original posting site: https://steadfastandloyal.com/politics/doj-inspector-general-horowitz-to-publicly-testify-before-senate-judiciary-committee-on-december-11-about-his-investigation-into-fisa-abuses/

We have been waiting so long for the IG report on FISA abuse and we have been teased many times about the release, but now we know the report has to be released by early December because Horowitz has agreed to testify on his report to the Senate on December 11th, That will be televised nationally and he will have no new ground to cover since it will be all over the conservative media. But, he will be able to rebut whatever smears the Democrats make after the post is released.  The Democrats will do whatever necessary to distract from this if they can.

The fun part will be when they talk about criminal referrals. He will not be able to get into specifics but he will be able to name the ones who face prosecution. There is something else we need to consider. Allegedly, the report was being held up because John Durham was convening a grand jury. If that was true, then we may already see indictments by time Horowitz testifies because it would mean the grand jury has done it’s job and was released

From The Gateway Pundit

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is set to publicly testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee on December 11 about his investigation into FISA abuse.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced on Monday that Horowitz will discuss the findings of his investigation into DOJ and FBI’s conduct

“I appreciate all the hard work by Mr. Horowitz and his team regarding the Carter Page FISA warrant application and the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign,” Graham said.

“Mr. Horowitz will be appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on December 11, where he will deliver a detailed report of what he found regarding his investigation, along with recommendations as to how to make our judicial and investigative systems better,” Graham added. “I look forward to hearing from him. He is a good man that has served our nation well.”

Horowitz is expected to release his much-anticipated FISA abuse report before Thanksgiving and it is expected to contain several criminal referrals, reported investigative journalist Sara Carter.

Horowitz has been working on a report documenting the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] abuses by Obama’s corrupt DOJ and FBI during the 2016 election targeting Donald Trump.

“It’s as thick as a telephone book,” Sunday Morning Futures host Maria Bartiromo recently said. “More than just FISA abuse.”

Hagel throws Obama under bus over Bergdahl


WASHINGTON – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel apparently isn’t going to let the Obama administration throw him under the bus in the Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl scandal. In fact, you could say just the opposite.

In his opening statement this morning at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee, Hagel made a point of saying it was President Obama “who made the final decision” to swap Bergdahl for five top Taliban leaders.

“Mr. Chairman, I want to be clear on one fundamental point – I would never sign off on any decision that I did not feel was in the best interests of this country.  Nor would the president of the United States, who made the final decision with the full support of his national security team.”

The administration recently implied the final decision was made by Hagel.

After administration officials gave members of Congress a closed-door briefing Monday on the swap, committee chairman Buck McKeon, R-Calif., said “They indicated (it was) Secretary Hagel (who made the final call).”

Other members of Congress also left the briefing with the impression final approval for the trade was given by Hagel.

An incredulous McKeon wondered, “It was the president of the United States that came out (in the Rose Garden) with the Bergdahls and took all the credit and now that there’s been a little pushback he’s moving away from it and it’s Secretary Hagel?”

In this morning’s testimony, Hagel emphasized more than once that it was the president who made the call to make the swap, saying, “The President’s decision to move forward with the transfer of these detainees was a tough call, but I support it and stand by it.”

Hagel also told the committee, “The President and I would not have moved forward unless we had complete confidence that we were acting lawfully, in the national interest, and in the best traditions of our military.”

And, “President Obama received a personal commitment in a personal telephone call from the emir of Qatar to uphold and enforce the security arrangements and a final decision was made to move forward with that exchange on that day.”

After Hagel delivered his opening statement, McKeon’s first comment was an expression of appreciation for clarifying that it was Obama’s decision to make the prisoner exchange.

During questioning, Hagel also made sure to note, “The president of the United States has the ultimate responsibility for the security of this country.”

Obama is under intense bipartisan criticism for the swap of Bergdahl for five top terrorists, who, the administration has admitted, it can not guarantee will not return to killing Americans. They were sent to Qatar, where they are supposed to be detained for a year.

Critics say the Taliban leaders were far too dangerous to be released from Guantanamo. Members of Congress were outraged they weren’t given the 30-day advance notice of the deal, as required by law. And several former squad mates say Bergdahl was a deserter, and likely a collaborator, with the Taliban. No former squad mates have contradicted those claims.

The appearance by Hagel did not begin with the fireworks many had expected, given strong bipartisan objections to a number of aspects of the deal.

McKeon actually complimented Hagel for making “a very strong case” for the Bergdahl swap, but, said he left just one thing out.

The chairman noted that negotiations began in January, and 80-90 members of the administration were informed about it, however, no one in Congress knew anything about it. In fact, McKeon speculated, the only elected officials who new about it were the president and, maybe, the vice president.

McKeon told Hagel that if he had met with Congress beforehand and told them what he had just testified, the administration would not have had any pushback at all. He stressed that Congress did not even need to know any operational details. (The chairman later backtracked and said the committee did have another issue with the deal: the wisdom of releasing the five top Taliban commanders.)

BS WARNING BS ALERT

The secretary insisted, “We complied with the law, and we did what we believed was in the best interests of our country, our military, and Sergeant Bergdahl.”

But lawmakers from both parties complained that Obama failed to notify Congress ahead of time, as required by the National Defense Authorization Act for transfers of Guantanamo detainees.

McKeon called explanations for not notifying Congress beforehand made by White House officials at the classified briefing ”misleading and at times blatantly false.”

Hagel admitted the administration should have tried harder to let Congress know about what he called rapidly moving developments, saying, “We could have done a better job of keeping you informed.”

“As the opportunity to obtain Sergeant Bergdahl’s release became clearer, we grew increasingly concerned that any delay, or any leaks, could derail the deal and further endanger” him, Hagel added.

Sparks did fly after Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., asked Hagel why Bergdahl had not been returned to the United States, so that more could .

The congressman noted how seriously wounded soldiers frequently have been returned to the states almost immediately after being stabilized, then asked “You’re trying to tell me that he’s being held at Landstuhl, Germany, because of his medical condition?”

A clearly indignant Hagel raised his voice for the first time during the hearing and bellowed, “Congressman, I hope you’re not implying anything other than that. The fact is…”

“I’m just asking the question, Mr. Secretary, and you won’t answer,” said Miller.

“I’m going to give an answer, too, and I don’t like the implication of the question,” loudly replied the extremely agitated secretary.

“Well, answer it! Answer it! Answer it!” the congressman demanded.

Hagel said Bergdahl was still at a U.S. military hospital in Germany because that was the advice of medical professionals, until he is ready to take the next step in his rehabilitation.

Undeterred, Miiler said asked if Hagel had ever seen a traumatically injured service member brought to the United States immediately upon being stabilized at Landstuhl? “We do it all the time!”

“This isn’t just about a physical situation, Congressman. This guy was held for almost five years in God knows what kind of conditions,” replied Hagel, adding, “This is not just about can he get on his feet and walk and get to a plane.”

“So you’re telling me he cannot be questioned because of his condition?” Miller asked.

Hagel said the “next step” would be taken when medical professionals have determined he is “ready to move on.”

Another heated moment came when Rep. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va., asked if the military would put American lives in danger to recapture any of the five Taliban commanders, if necessary.

When Hagel did not respond directly, Forbes asked the question again, only louder.

As the defense chief continued to evade responding, Forbes kept asking the question, his voice growing louder each time.

Hagel eventually conceded that the military would put American lives at risk to go after any of the commanders, if necessary.

Forbes pressed on, asking Hagel if he had made an assessment of how many lives would be put at risk if we had to recapture the Taliban.

“No,” Hagel replied, and added that the administration had determined “there was a substantial mitigation of risk for this country, for our interest, for our citizens and service members when we made this decision.”

Forbes replied, that “just flies in the face of all the other evidence we have.”

Meanwhile, the White House is planning to transfer even more Guantanamo prisoners, officials said Tuesday.

Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said the White House was “making progress on a number of additional promising opportunities.”

“While we do not generally discuss transfers before they take place, we are fully committed to implementing the president’s direction that we transfer detainees to the greatest extent possible, consistent with national security and our humane-treatment policy, as we work toward closing the facility at Guantanamo Bay,” she said.

Hayden said 17 inmates had been moved out of Guantanamo in the last 13 months, including the five Taliban commanders swapped for Bergdahl.

It was Monday that lawmakers became especially upset to learn that nearly 100 people in the Obama administration did know of the Bergdahl exchange, but no members of Congress had been briefed.

‘It strikes me as unfortunate that they could have 80 to 90 people in the administration aware of what was happening and not be able to trust a single Republican or Democrat in the House or the Senate,” said Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore.

”There was a sense of anger that members of Congress didn’t know about this,” according to Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn, who added, “Obviously, if there is secure information — members of Congress knew about the capture of Osama bin Laden — and yet 80 to 90 staff in the White House knew about this.”

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. said the officials who knew were likely from the State and Defense departments, the National Security Council and the White House.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) claimed he was told the day before the Bergdahl was released, but administration officials say that was not true.

Here is what Bergdahl’s former squad mates have said about him.

Buetow

Former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow was the team leader when Bergdahl disappeared on the night of June 30, 2009.

He said he heard Afghans from a nearby village say on the radio, “There’s an American here looking for someone who speaks English so he can talk to the Taliban.”

Buetow said “we were incredibly worried” about what Bergdahl might tell the Taliban, and their improvised explosive device, or IED, attacks became much more effective in the weeks after the soldier left his post.

“Following his disappearance, IEDs started going off directly under the trucks. They were getting perfect hits every time. Their ambushes were very calculated, very methodical,” said Buetow.

“Bergdahl is a deserter, and he’s not a hero,” Buetow told CNN. “He needs to answer for what he did.”

hagel 02

Bethea

Fellow soldier Nathan Bradley Bethea told the Daily Beast, “Bergdahl was a deserter, and soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down.”

Bethea wrote that one morning, Bergdahl simply failed to show for the morning roll call.

“The soldiers in 2nd Platoon, Blackfoot Company discovered his rifle, helmet, body armor and web gear in a neat stack. He had, however, taken his compass. His fellow soldiers later mentioned his stated desire to walk from Afghanistan to India.”

The soldier wrote that Bergdahl did not “lag behind on a patrol, as was cited in news reports at the time. There was no patrol that night.”

Rather, Bethea said, Bergdahl was “relieved from guard duty, and instead of going to sleep, he fled the outpost on foot. He deserted.”

Vierkant

Another member of Bergdahl’s platoon when he went missing, Sgt. Matt Vierkant, told CNN, “Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war, and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him.”

Vierkant said Bergdahl needs to face a military trial for desertion under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Korder

Army Sgt. Josh Korder bluntly told CNN that Bergdahl was “at best a deserter, and at worst, a traitor.”

traitor

Baggett

Former Pfc. Jose Baggett said he was close to two men “killed because of his (Bergdahl’s) actions.”

He told MSNBC that not only was Bergdahl not a hero, he “left his guard post and got real heroes killed,” referring to the men who went searching for the missing soldier.

baggett

Full and Sutton

Former Army specialists Cody Full and Gerald Sutton were platoon mates of Bergdahl who appeared on Fox.

Full contradicted the claim made by National Security Adviser Rice that Bergdahl served with honor and distinction. He said Bergdahl “violated his oath and put Americans in jeopardy” and wanted to see him court-martialed as a deserter.

Although Sutton was a friend of Bergdahl, he agreed, it was desertion.

last

At least six soldiers were killed in searches for Bergdahl, according to soldiers who looked for him.

Remember

Follow Garth Kant on Twitter @DCgarth

HeartSorry Yet 02Community Organizer TwoHey Lefties. What about these menVOTE 02

 

 

 

Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower


http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/november/fox-news-highly-reluctant-jesus-follower-kirsten-powers.html?paging=off

Of all people surprised that I became an evangelical Christian, I’m the most surprised.
Kirsten Powers
[ posted 10/22/2013 2:21PM ]

PHOTO BY SCOTT SUCHMAN

Just seven years ago, if someone had told me that I’d be writing for Christianity Today magazine about how I came to believe in God, I would have laughed out loud. If there was one thing in which I was completely secure, it was that I would never adhere to any religion—especially to evangelical Christianity, which I held in particular contempt.

I grew up in the Episcopal Church in Alaska, but my belief was superficial and flimsy. It was borrowed from my archaeologist father, who was so brilliant he taught himself to speak and read Russian. When I encountered doubt, I would fall back on the fact that he believed.

Leaning on my father’s faith got me through high school. But by college it wasn’t enough, especially because as I grew older he began to confide in me his own doubts. What little faith I had couldn’t withstand this revelation. From my early 20s on, I would waver between atheism and agnosticism, never coming close to considering that God could be real.

After college I worked as an appointee in the Clinton administration from 1992 to 1998. The White House surrounded me with intellectual people who, if they had any deep faith in God, never expressed it. Later, when I moved to New York, where I worked in Democratic politics, my world became aggressively secular. Everyone I knew was politically left-leaning, and my group of friends was overwhelmingly atheist.

I sometimes hear Christians talk about how terrible life must be for atheists. But our lives were not terrible. Life actually seemed pretty wonderful, filled with opportunity and good conversation and privilege. I know now that it was not as wonderful as it could have been. But you don’t know what you don’t know. How could I have missed something I didn’t think existed?

Very Open-Minded

To the extent that I encountered Christians, it was in the news cycle. And inevitably they were saying something about gay people or feminists. I didn’t feel I was missing much. So when I began dating a man who was into Jesus, I was not looking for God. In fact, the week before I met him, a friend had asked me if I had any deal breakers in dating. My response: “Just nobody who is religious.”

A few months into our relationship, my boyfriend called to say he had something important to talk to me about. I remember exactly where I was sitting in my West Village apartment when he said, “Do you believe Jesus is your Savior?” My stomach sank. I started to panic. Oh no, was my first thought. He’s crazy.

When I answered no, he asked, “Do you think you could ever believe it?” He explained that he was at a point in life when he wanted to get married and felt that I could be that person, but he couldn’t marry a non-Christian. I said I didn’t want to mislead him—that I would never believe in Jesus.

Then he said the magic words for a liberal: “Do you think you could keep an open mind about it?” Well, of course. “I’m very open-minded!” Even though I wasn’t at all. I derided Christians as anti-intellectual bigots who were too weak to face the reality that there is no rhyme or reason to the world. I had found this man’s church attendance an oddity to overlook, not a point in his favor.

As he talked, I grew conflicted. On the one hand, I was creeped out. On the other hand, I had enormous respect for him. He is smart, educated, and intellectually curious. I remember thinking, What if this is true, and I’m not even willing to consider it?

A few weeks later I went to church with him. I was so clueless about Christianity that I didn’t know that some Presbyterians were evangelicals. So when we arrived at the Upper East Side service of Redeemer Presbyterian Church, I was shocked and repelled by what I saw. I was used to the high-church liturgy of my youth. We were meeting in an auditorium with a band playing what I later learned was “praise music.” I thought, How am I going to tell him I can never come back?

But then the pastor preached. I was fascinated. I had never heard a pastor talk about the things he did. Tim Keller’s sermon was intellectually rigorous, weaving in art and history and philosophy. I decided to come back to hear him again. Soon, hearing Keller speak on Sunday became the highlight of my week. I thought of it as just an interesting lecture—not really church. I just tolerated the rest of it in order to hear him. Any person who is familiar with Keller’s preaching knows that he usually brings Jesus in at the end of the sermon to tie his points together. For the first few months, I left feeling frustrated: Why did he have to ruin a perfectly good talk with this Jesus nonsense?

Each week, Keller made the case for Christianity. He also made the case against atheism and agnosticism. He expertly exposed the intellectual weaknesses of a purely secular worldview. I came to realize that even if Christianity wasn’t the real thing, neither was atheism.

I began to read the Bible. My boyfriend would pray with me for God to reveal himself to me. After about eight months of going to hear Keller, I concluded that the weight of evidence was on the side of Christianity. But I didn’t feel any connection to God, and frankly, I was fine with that. I continued to think that people who talked of hearing from God or experiencing God were either delusional or lying. In my most generous moments, I allowed that they were just imagining things that made them feel good.

Then one night on a trip to Taiwan, I woke up in what felt like a strange cross between a dream and reality. Jesus came to me and said, “Here I am.” It felt so real. I didn’t know what to make of it. I called my boyfriend, but before I had time to tell him about it, he told me he had been praying the night before and felt we were supposed to break up. So we did. Honestly, while I was upset, I was more traumatized by Jesus visiting me.

Completely True

I tried to write off the experience as misfiring synapses, but I couldn’t shake it. When I returned to New York a few days later, I was lost. I suddenly felt God everywhere and it was terrifying. More important, it was unwelcome. It felt like an invasion. I started to fear I was going crazy.

I didn’t know what to do, so I spoke with writer Eric Metaxas, whom I had met through my boyfriend and who had talked with me quite a bit about God. “You need to be in a Bible study,” he said. “And Kathy Keller’s Bible study is the one you need to be in.” I didn’t like the sound of that, but I was desperate. My whole world was imploding. How was I going to tell my family or friends about what had happened? Nobody would understand. I didn’t understand. (It says a lot about the family in which I grew up that one of my most pressing concerns was that Christians would try to turn me into a Republican.)

I remember walking into the Bible study. I had a knot in my stomach. In my mind, only weirdoes and zealots went to Bible studies. I don’t remember what was said that day. All I know is that when I left, everything had changed. I’ll never forget standing outside that apartment on the Upper East Side and saying to myself, “It’s true. It’s completely true.” The world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it. I had not an iota of doubt. I was filled with indescribable joy.

The horror of the prospect of being a devout Christian crept back in almost immediately. I spent the next few months doing my best to wrestle away from God. It was pointless. Everywhere I turned, there he was. Slowly there was less fear and more joy. The Hound of Heaven had pursued me and caught me—whether I liked it or not.

Kirsten Powers is a contributor to USA Today and a columnist for Newsweek/The Daily Beast. She is a Democratic commentator at Fox News.

Police forensic scientist at Newtown hearing


The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller

Police forensic scientist at Newtown hearing: ‘Assault weapons’ ban won’t work

Patrick Howley
The forensic scientist for the Bridgeport, Conn. Police Department sharply criticized proposed assault weapon and high-capacity magazine bans and pointed out the small number of crimes committed by high-capacity weapons in public hearing testimony last week.

Marshall K. Robinson, who said his area of expertise is “firearm and tool mark identification,” testified at the Gun Violence Prevention Working Group, which was convened at the Connecticut State Capitol in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. There he opposed statements from many of the other 1,300 speakers in attendance advocating for banning high-capacity AR-15 and AK-47 firearms.

Robinson pointed out that less than two percent of the firearms he has examined since 1996 that have been linked to violent crime in Bridgeport have been the caliber of AR-15 or AK-47 weapons.

“Since November 1996, I have examined approximately 2,370 firearms. Of that number 36 of them were either .223/5.56 mm or 7.62×39 mm,” Robinson said. “The percentage of those guns was about [1.5 percent].”

“I did further research on homicides and assaults in the years 2006 to 2012 inclusive. Of the 217 such cases, there were 912 bullets and 466 cartridge cases recovered. One assault involved .223 caliber and none involved 7.63×39 mm caliber. The largest number cartridge cases recovered in one case was 37 and that involved two guns. The investigations that involved the recovery of eleven or more cartridge cases was 22. Of the 22 cases, 21 involved 2 or more guns,” Robinson added.

Robinson went on to criticize past gun control measures and argued that new proposals will not work to reduce violent crime in any meaningful way.

“These are real numbers from real cases in a real city police department. This is not something made up or fabricated. High capacity magazines have been ‘banned’ before. It proved nothing and the ban was lifted a few years ago,” he said. “There are many guns in existence, since the 1860s, which hold more than 10 cartridges, the early Winchester lever action rifles, for example, and many tubefeed 22 caliber rifles. There are some modern firearms for which no other magazine exist. What do you propose we do with them?”

“In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed bayonet lugs, flash hiders, and collapsible stocks,” he testified. “In over forty years of being a firearm and tool mark examiner, I have never seen these components inflict any injury whatsoever on any person. In your infinite wisdom, you outlawed fully automatic firearms that have the capability of firing a single shot. Ladies and gentlemen, I really need help with that one.”

“We all agree that the Newtown case is a tragedy. I submit to you that you cannot legislate away insanity, which I think is the root cause of this case,” Robinson said. “Laws must be passed based on research and logical thinking, not on emotions.”

Robinson also works at the state police forensic lab in Meriden, Conn.

Marshall K. Robinson testimony by

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: