Assault Weapons Ban Dies After Months of Fighting

/0 Comments/in , , /by

An effort to revive a proposed ban on the sale of assault weapons failed in the Delaware Senate on Tuesday, effectively defeating the most controversial gun control measure pending before the Legislature.

Two Democrats sided with Republicans in opposing the maneuver, including Sen. Brian Bushweller of Dover and Sen. Bruce Ennis of Smyrna. That left Democrats two votes short of the 11 needed to bring the measure to the floor.

“It’s very unfortunate that we didn’t have the votes to even have a debate on the issue,” said the bill’s chief sponsor Sen. Bryan Townsend, D-Newark. “I’m a little surprised not to have the vote of all my Democratic colleagues, except for Sen. Ennis.” . . .

“The process that we have followed so far that caused the bill to lose in committee was consistent with my view on the bill,” Bushweller said. “I didn’t see a point in continuing a process that already resulted in what I think is the right thing to do with the bill.”

Tuesday’s vote marked the second defeat for Senate Bill 163 this month and a major loss for gun control advocates who pushed for reform in the wake of recent high-profile mass shootings. That includes Gov. John Carney, who had both called for the legislation to be introduced and urged for it to get a vote on the Senate floor. (Read more from “Assault Weapons Ban Dies After Months of Fighting” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The FBI, the DOJ and Hillary Clinton’s Huge Weiner Problem

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Remember Anthony Weiner, also known as “Carlos Danger” — the former congressman who kept texting people pictures of well, umm, that part of his name? It all made quite the splash because he is married to Hillary Clinton’s consigliere and constant sidekick, Huma Abedin.

Turns out that Anthony was such a perp — and so enthralled with his own — that he was sexting with a minor. That is a federal offense carrying up to 10 years in prison. So, he got raided by the New York Police Department and the New York office of the FBI. . .

Only a few hours after the New York office of the FBI took possession of the Weiner laptop, on September 26, 2016, the FBI computer expert discovered it contained more than 140,000 emails involving Hillary Clinton. They were from multiple domain names: State.gov, Clintonemail.com, ClintonFoundation.org, HillaryClinton.com and Blackberry devices. The agent had what he told the inspector general was an “oh shit moment” — recognizing that he had found evidence important to the most important investigation — and he immediately reported it up the chain.

According to the inspector general’s report of June 14, specifically Chapters IX-XI, the treasure “trove” of emails covered Mrs. Clinton’s entire tenure as Secretary of State.

We already knew that President Barack Obama was emailing her on her unsecure server at Clintonemail.com, and Cheryl Mills had written an email noting how “obvious” it was to anyone that this was not State.gov and therefore unsecure. The president jolly-well knew it was not a secure communication as he used an alias. (Read more from “The FBI, the DOJ and Hillary Clinton’s Huge Weiner Problem” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mark Meadows Drops Multiple Bombshells in Hearing About Clinton, Russia Probes

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By The Daily Caller. North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows made two startling claims in a House hearing on Tuesday, asserting that there is “growing evidence” that FBI officials altered documentation of witness interviews in the Hillary Clinton and Russia probes.

The Republican also revealed the name of an FBI attorney he believes is the bureau employee who was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation in February after he was found to have sent anti-Trump text messages.

Meadows made the revelations in a round of questioning with Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

On Thursday, Horowitz’s office released a scathing report that documented FBI officials’ mishandling of the Clinton investigation. It also laid out a slew of text messages that FBI officials and attorneys sent criticizing Donald Trump.

“I think the other thing that I would ask you to look into, there is growing evidence that 302s were edited and changed,” Meadows said. “Those 302s, it is suggested that they were changed to either prosecute or not prosecute individuals. And that is very troubling.” (Read more from “Mark Meadows Drops Multiple Bombshells in Hearing About Clinton, Russia Probes” HERE)

___________________________________________________

Republicans Tear Into IG Finding on Clinton Probe

By The Hill. House Republicans on Tuesday took aim at a finding from the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) inspector general that anti-Trump bias did not influence the outcome of the Hillary Clinton email probe, during a fractious and extended hearing that pitted dozens of lawmakers against the watchdog.

Although GOP members did not directly criticize the inspector general, Michael Horowitz, they repeatedly made the case that his report showed FBI officials had “prejudged” the outcome of the Clinton probe — a long-held Republican grievance — and suggested that his review was incomplete.

“While we appreciate the [inspector general] and his staff for a very detailed investigation, it is critical for the public to also hear what was not included in the report due to the [inspector general’s] refusal to question ‘whether a particular decision by the FBI and DOJ was the most effective choice,’ ” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.).

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) argued that Horowitz should have probed how federal investigators on the so-called Midyear team voted in the 2016 election, as well as who they gave money to or whose bumper sticker they applied to their car. (Read more from “Republicans Tear Into IG Finding on Clinton Probe” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FL Senate: Yes, Democrat Bill Nelson Could Be in Deep, DEEP Trouble

/0 Comments/in , /by

In the Sunshine State, Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, is banking on incumbency and gun control to get him over the top. He’s been lucky throughout his Senate career in facing opponents who haven’t been the best, especially during his 2000 re-election campaign. This year is different—and he knew it. Last year, Politico reported that Nelson met with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and other Democrats ahead what will be a true contest. He’ll be fighting for his political life and he needs money. Republican Gov. Rick Scott, who is term-limited, has tossed his hat into the ring. Despite his recent betrayal of Second Amendment rights by signing an appalling law that increased the age of gun purchases to 21, he’s a solid candidate. Independently wealthy, he can fund his own race. He’s also proving himself to be an adept campaigner, hitting Hispanic outreach hard, which is making Democratic activists very nervous. Another startling sign: only 49 percent know who the hell Nelson is in the state. Not a good sign for a three-term incumbent (via Politico):

Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s Senate campaign has a Spanish-language web page. Sen. Bill Nelson’s doesn’t.

Scott is advertising in Spanish. Nelson isn’t. . .

For Democrats who recognize protecting Nelson’s seat is essential to their hopes of winning a Senate majority this fall, the veteran senator’s lackluster outreach to one of the fastest-growing voting blocs in the nation’s largest swing state is causing alarm.

The depth of Nelson’s troubles — and Scott’s advantage — came into sharp focus last month in four focus groups conducted in Central Florida’s influential Puerto Rican community, where few knew who Nelson was, despite his three Senate terms and holding elected Florida office for 41 years.

(Read more from “FL Senate: Yes, Democrat Bill Nelson Could Be in Deep, Deep Trouble” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Democrats’ Border Separation Bill Would Let Nearly All Parents Who Commit Federal Crimes Get off Scot-Free

/0 Comments/in , /by

Democrats’ proposed legislation to prohibit so-called border separations would actually prevent federal law enforcement agencies almost anywhere inside the United States from arresting and detaining criminals who are parents having nothing to do with unlawfully crossing the border and seeking asylum.

Every Senate Democrat has now signed on to cosponsor a bill written so carelessly that it does not distinguish between migrant children at the border and U.S. citizen children already within the United States. The bill further does not distinguish between federal officers handling the border crisis and federal law enforcement pursuing the ordinary course of their duties.

Let’s break down Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s proposed “Keep Families Together Act” to see where Democrats went wrong. The bill provides that “[a]n agent or officer of a designated agency shall be prohibited from removing a child from his or her parent or legal guardian at or near the port of entry or within 100 miles of the border of the United States” (with three exceptions to be discussed later). Four immediate warning signs in this provision should put the reader on notice that this bill is not what Democrats claim.

First, “designated agency” here is defined as the entirety of the federal departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and Health and Human Services. The scope of the bill is not limited to those portions of these departments involved with the border crisis, and there is no other limiting factor in the bill that would cabin the prohibition on family separation to immigration-related matters. In other words, this bill is going to regulate conduct across a great many federal offices that have nothing to do with separating children from families arriving unlawfully in the United States.

Second, “agent or officer” is not defined by the legislation, except to say that it includes contractors. Federal law, however, already defines “officer” to include (with exceptions not relevant here) every federal employee appointed to the civil service by the head of an executive agency and ultimately overseen by the head of an executive agency. (Read more from “Democrats’ Border Separation Bill Would Let Nearly All Parents Who Commit Federal Crimes Get off Scot-Free” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The IG Report on FBI’s Clinton Probe Reveals This Saga May Be Just Getting Started

/0 Comments/in , /by

The media has focused almost exclusively on the conclusion of the Justice Department inspector general’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe, which found bias did not impact the probe, as well as the lack of any newly announced indictments or criminal referrals. The goal of course being to downplay the negative findings of the report.

At the same time, the press gave, at most, passing mention to the statement Attorney General Jeff Sessions simultaneously released. But his statement and the findings of the report make one thing clear: This isn’t over.

Here’s why. Throughout the 568-page report, the IG highlighted several areas meriting additional investigation. And Sessions said the report “reveals a number of significant errors by the senior leadership of the Department of Justice and the FBI during the previous administration,” and stressed “this is not the end of the process.”

United States Attorney John Huber continues his work in cooperation with the IG to review certain prosecutorial and investigative determinations made by the Justice Department in 2016 and 2017. Based on his review of the report and his own investigation, Huber will provide recommendations as to whether any matter not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation required further resources, or whether any matters merit the appointment of Special Counsel.”

Put simply: There is still much to be done and much to come. What is likely over is the possibility the Justice Department will re-investigate Clinton for mishandling of classified information, or prosecute her. That’s a good thing. Clinton is done. While she may never face justice in a court of law, perhaps losing the presidency is a more prescient and proper punishment. (Read more from “The IG Report on FBI’s Clinton Probe Reveals This Saga May Be Just Getting Started” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mike Pence Slams Schumer for What He Just Said About GOP Solutions for Family Separation

/0 Comments/in , /by

By The Blaze. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday that Democrats would reject Congressional efforts to ban the policy separating migrant children from their families in order to keep the focus on President Donald Trump. . .

Schumer addressed the crisis of families being separated at the border on Tuesday, but rejected two bills that Republicans had offered as solution to the policy some called “cruel.”

“There are so many obstacles to legislation and when the president can do it with his own pen, it makes no sense,” Schumer said to reporters Tuesday. “Legislation is not the way to go here when it’s so easy for the president to sign it.”

Democrats have accused the administration of purposely changing immigration policy in order to separate families as a deterrent against illegal immigration, but the Trump administration has argued that the law was enacted prior to his term.

“Again, the president can change it with his pen,” the Democratic leader continued after being asked if Democrats would support a Republican bill to keep families together at the border while seeking asylum.

(Read more from “Mike Pence Slams Schumer for What He Just Said About GOP Solutions for Family Separation” HERE)

_____________________________________________

Obama Security Chief Napolitano Saw Separating Families at Border as ‘Bad Idea,’ She Says

By Fox News. Janet Napolitano, who served as Homeland Security secretary under President Barack Obama, said in an interview Tuesday that she once considered the option of separating families at the border but decided “pretty quickly that it would be a bad idea.”

Napolitano, now president of the University of California system, told the Los Angeles Times that the idea was considered while the Obama administration worked to create a safe area at the border.

“As you work through and you realize the difference between handling these as civil deportation matters as opposed to criminal prosecution matters, it was pretty clear off the bat that this would not be a good idea,” she said. She also said the plan was inconsistent with American values.

Nearly 2,300 children have been separated from their families over a six-week period in April and May after U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a new “zero-tolerance” policy that refers all cases of illegal entry for criminal prosecution. U.S. protocol prohibits detaining children with their parents because the children are not charged with a crime and the parents are.

The Trump administration has been sending babies and other young children to at least three “tender age” shelters in South Texas, the Associated Press reported late Tuesday. (Read more from “Obama Security Chief Napolitano Saw Separating Families at Border as ‘Bad Idea,’ She Says” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Largest in History: Ex-CIA Engineer Charged With Massive Leak to Wikileaks

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

By Politico. A former CIA computer engineer has been indicted on charges he masterminded what appears to be the largest leak of classified information in the spy agency’s history.

Joshua Schulte, 29, was charged in a new grand jury indictment with providing WikiLeaks with a massive trove of U.S. government hacking tools that the online publisher posted in March 2017, the Justice Department announced on Monday.

Schulte was previously facing child pornography charges in federal court in New York, but the indictment broadens the case to accuse him of illegally gathering classified information, damaging CIA computers, lying to investigators and numerous other offenses.

In January, attorneys involved in the child porn case revealed in court that Schulte was the target of a major investigation into WikiLeaks’ release of a CIA collection known as “Vault 7.” (Read more from “Largest in History: Ex-CIA Engineer Charged With Massive Leak to Wikileaks” HERE)

__________________________________________________

Ex-CIA Worker Charged for Massive Leak of ‘Vault 7’ Hacking Tools to Wikileaks

By South China Morning Post. A former employee in the CIA’s cyber-spying operation was indicted Monday on charges of leaking hacking tools to WikiLeaks in one of the most damaging of the agency’s breaches in recent years.

Joshua Schulte, 29, was charged with leaking unspecified information on the Central Intelligence Agency’s intelligence-gathering capabilities to a group identified only as “Organisation-1”, which then released the information on the internet.

While the indictment gave no other details, in earlier filings Schulte’s lawyer indicated the investigation involved the leak to WikiLeaks of the “Vault 7” collection of hacking tools, malware, viruses, trojans, and “zero day” exploits which comprised the CIA’s most valuable tools for tapping into adversaries’ computers.

WikiLeaks began releasing the 8,761 documents from Vault 7 in March 2017, embarrassing the agency and providing professional and amateur hackers around the world with the same tools that US spies used. (Read more from “Ex-CIA Worker Charged for Massive Leak of ‘Vault 7’ Hacking Tools to Wikileaks” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here’s How ‘Challenging’ It Was to Find Strzok’s ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Text Message

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Department of Justice’s inspector general said Monday that his investigators went to extensive lengths to obtain a text message in which former FBI official Peter Strzok suggested that he planned to help prevent President Donald Trump from becoming president.

Michael Horowitz, the head of the DOJ’s office of inspector general (OIG), said that his cyber forensics team took four separate investigative steps before discovering a controversial Aug. 8, 2016 text message that Strzok sent to former FBI attorney Lisa Page.

The forensic team went as far as contacting the Pentagon for help in extracting text messages that were missing from Strzok and Page’s FBI-issued cell phones. . .

Republicans have pointed to the text message as evidence of political bias on the part of Strzok, who worked for several months on the special counsel’s Russia investigation. The OIG report said that the text message showed that Strzok “of a biased state of mind” and implied “a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.” . . .

Horowitz said that while the initial process of obtaining Strzok-Page messages from the FBI was “easy,” recovering the “We’ll stop it” text proved “challenging.” He also said that the painstaking process used to recover the message and others raises concerns about the FBI’s text message retention system. (Read more from “Here’s How ‘Challenging’ It Was to Find Strzok’s ‘We’ll Stop’ Trump Text Message” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Wonder Why Strzok Agreed to Testify? He Never Said ‘Under Oath’

/0 Comments/in , /by

The long-awaited Department of Justice Office of Inspector General’s report on the FBI’s mishandling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation was finally released last week, and anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok figured heavily in the many examples of political bias among bureau officials.

Strzok had been a lead agent on the Clinton email investigation as well as the FBI’s investigation of alleged collusion between Russia and candidate Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign. He also served briefly on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, until his aggressively anti-Trump text messages with former FBI lawyer Lisa Page were initially revealed in 2017.

Given Strzok’s apparent and quite obvious animus against Trump, certain congressional committees had discussed issuing a subpoena to compel his testimony, such as the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Virginia Republican Rep. Bob Goodlatte, according to Politico.

But it would seem that a subpoena will prove unnecessary to compel Strzok’s testimony before the committee, as a Politico reporter shared via Twitter a letter from Strzok’s attorney to Goodlatte stating that the FBI agent would voluntarily testify before the Judiciary or any other committee that wanted to speak with him. . .

On the other hand, it has also been noted that Strzok’s offer to appear before Congress lacked the words “under oath.” If he were to appear of his own volition, rather than under a subpoena, it’s possible he could avoid being sworn in before he testified, meaning he’d have a bit more wiggle room to speak without fear of potentially committing perjury. (Read more from “Wonder Why Strzok Agreed to Testify? He Never Said ‘Under Oath’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.