Here are the top stories from this week that I think you will want to read:
- GOP candidate for Congress has bizarre J6-related story
- Biden earns the lowest presidential approval rating EVER recorded by Gallup
- Wray to be questioned Thursday in handling of laptop
1. DAILY BIBLE VERSE
So do not fear, for I am with you;
do not be dismayed, for I am your God.
I will strengthen you and help you;
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.
If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected].
GOP candidate for Congress has bizarre J6-related story
On Tuesday, EPOCH TV ran a free (for a few days) episode of CROSS ROADS in which a Republican candidate for U.S. Congress in Arizona, Jeff Zink, claims in an interview with Joshua Philipp that January 6 charges against his son were used in a blackmail attempt to get him to drop out of the race.
Since YouTube doesn’t allow programming that disputes the narrative about January 6, ET doesn’t lead with this. Instead, they spend a little time on monkeypox before departing YouTube and moving to the J6 material. That happens at 21:00.
Before getting into the Jeff Zink story, the show includes another interview, with Kash Patel, in which he brings up another J6 case, this one being heard in a Virginia federal court, being given a continuance by the ‘Justice’ Department until 2023 (!) because, Patel says, they’re waiting for Pelosi’s committee to finish its work “so they can continue their prosecution.” Patel says, “As a former prosecutor, I have literally never heard of that.” Criminal investigations, he explains, always take priority over congressional investigations. Other prosecutors he’s spoken with about this, as well as public defenders, have never heard of this happening, either. For this particular case, at least, they’re doing it backwards, with legislators inappropriately acting like prosecutors.
Patel uses Robert Mueller’s special counsel as an example, saying the “Russia” investigation in Congress always had to yield to him. The Mueller team would never have waited for the conclusion of the congressional investigation to prosecute someone. But this time, they’ve flipped the script. “Why that same historical pattern of law enforcement and investigative authorities [isn’t] being executed here is another question,” Patel says. The DOJ is apparently making up the rules as they go along, “with Crayola crayon.” And they seem to be coordinating their efforts with the hyper-political J6 kangaroo court, which is supposed to be part of the legislative branch (political), not law enforcement (non-political, at least IN THEORY.)
Well, well,well. As inappropriate as this produced propaganda already is, it’s even more so when considering that the producer/propagandist himself has shown such bias --- and, come to think of it, has done something even worse that what some January 6 defendants are charged with. I’m talking about Trump supporters who never threatened anyone, even as a lame joke, but simply were waved into the Capitol building by security guards and committed the horrible sin of “parading.” If on January 6, a Trump supporter had depicted, say, Nancy Pelosi being punched in the face from a moving car, that person would be under the jail.
This segment also touches on the highly “insurrectionist” background of, believe it or not, the chairman of the J6 committee, Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, who, in the 1970s, lent his vocal support to a violent extremist/black separatist group called “Republic of New Africa (RNA).” These were people who wanted to launch a violent revolution and secede from the United States to create a separate black nation over several Southern States. I am not kidding --- this is well-documented, and John Solomon at JUST THE NEWS has reported on it.
This radical group is responsible for, among numerous violent crimes, the shooting of two police officers in which one was killed. So add the past activities and sympathies of the J6 committee chairman to the list of reasons why that committee is laughably illegitimate.
Why, some might ask, does it matter what Thompson did waaaaaay back in the 1970s? John Solomon has the perfect answer: This story is “a pointed reminder that some of the far-left figures of a half-century ago are now the Democrat Party’s establishment leaders, their pasts now a fleeting footnote in the frenzied vitriol of modern-day Washington.”
Finally, we get to Philipp’s interview with congressional candidate from Arizona District 3 (Maricopa County), Jeff Zink. Zink claims his son Ryan has been charged with January 6 crimes that he did not commit, such as entering the Capitol building and clashing with police. He knows Ryan couldn’t possibly have done this because he himself stayed outside and Ryan, he says, was with him “one hundred percent of the time.” Jeff has cellphone videos that he says support this. Jeff was interrogated, he says, for an hour and a half by the FBI and completely cleared, so he doesn’t understand why his son wasn’t cleared as well. Ryan was detained for six weeks in what Ryan describes as “the gulag” in DC. (We’ve described the conditions there as GOP congressional visitors found it, and, yes, “gulag” sums it up.) He has yet to face trial and could face 22 years in a federal penitentiary.
There’s nothing surprising about this, considering what we know about how protesters have been treated. The odd part of Jeff’s tale is that months ago, he alleges, he received a phone, out of the blue, informing him that the charges would be dropped against his son if he dropped out of his congressional race.
The phone didn’t light up, didn’t “act normal,” he tells Philipp. It was just a voice, he says, giving him that message and hanging up. “I’ve had guys that went in, took a look at my phone; the metadata showed that there was no phone call that was taken in. I have no idea to this day how they got to me, but they did.” Over the months, he says, there were several more calls like that one. This alleged offer reminds him of “a Third World country where you have cartels that are in charge.”
He suspects this might be happening in part because he was “part of the Arizona audit,” questioning the election results there. Keep in mind, these are allegations; we’re not tech wizards and don’t know if this type of phone messaging is even possible, but be assured we’re looking into it.
I would encourage you to watch rest of the video, which gets into the problems with the way J6 prosecutions are being handled. Because some of the accused are essentially being railroaded without evidence even being presented, and they know their chances are nil of getting a fair trial before a DC jury, they’re induced to plead guilty to crimes they don’t believe they committed. Those guilty pleas get added to the “official” narrative, which is really a false history, so it grows to increasingly resemble a real insurrection, even though it isn’t.
RELATED STORY: CAPITOL POLICE SEEK TO HIRE THEIR OWN PROSECUTOR
Luke Rosiak at DAILY WIRE has a story that should raise the ire of every constitutionalist. Yes, there are a few of us left!
The U.S. Capitol Police have posted a job position for their own criminal prosecutor, even though prosecutors are supposed to work only for the Executive Branch. “This position,” it reads, “is to represent the United States Government primarily prosecuting individuals and/or groups who have engaged in threats and/or acts of violence against Members of Congress, their staffs, United States Capitol Police employees, visitors to the Capitol complex, and facilities and properties within the Capitol Complex.”
As Rosiak reports, this prosecutor would be working on cases stemming from January 6, and it means that someone working for congressional leadership could have a role in deciding whether to prosecute congressmen or their aides. Look out --- I can think of a few Republicans the Democrats might have in mind.
From the posting: “Work may involve problems of unusual delicacy, such as allegations of wrongdoing against staff or Members of Congress, criminal trespass, investigations of threats or crimes against Members of Congress and arresting or detaining high-profile individuals.” Hmm...high-profile individuals. Of course, this responsibility would never be politicized; perish the thought.
This arrangement is clearly unconstitutional. Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project and former chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee (who also clerked for Justice Neil Gorsuch) explains why…
Biden earns the lowest presidential approval rating EVER recorded by Gallup
Apparently, the media can’t redefine words fast enough to keep President Biden’s approval rating from falling. They’re trying to convince us that a recession isn’t a recession anymore, just like a woman isn’t a woman anymore. Facebook’s “independent” “fact-checkers” are even flagging posts by economists who dare refer to a recession by the textbook definition of two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Economist Philip Magness of the American Institute of Economic Research called it “absolutely Orwellian.”
As Victoria Taft at PJ Media reports, they’re even trying to redefine the word “definition” so they can deny that they’re redefining words.
Unfortunately, unless they can gaslight the public into believing that incompetence is competence and bad news is good news, they’re not likely to help rescue this woebegone Administration. According to a new Gallup Poll released on Friday, Biden’s approval rating sits at 38%, with a sixth quarter average approval rating of 40%. That’s the lowest approval rating of any President in the history of the Gallup poll, which started seven decades ago in 1954 when Dwight Eisenhower was President. Anyone remember Ike? People liked him.
Trump was the second-lowest at 42%, but he had a hostile media attacking him 24/7 and the DC Swamp ginning up fake scandals. Biden has a media so fawning, they’ll rewrite the dictionary to try to save him, but it’s not helping. Say, maybe they should try telling us that “disapproval” has been redefined and now means “approval.” That would make Biden’s “approval” rating jump by 20 points.
Wray to be questioned Thursday in handling of laptop
Just wondering: Why was Nancy Pelosi going to Taiwan in the first place?
It’s not as if Democrats were standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Taiwan against China in their quest to remain free. But suddenly House Speaker Pelosi was intent on kicking the ant bed by going there. It makes no sense, and remember, class: when something makes no sense, it means there’s something we don’t know.
As we continue contemplating that mystery, Peter Schweizer, bestselling author of RED-HANDED and president of the Government Accountability Institute, appeared Sunday on LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN to discuss our current relationship with the CCP.
“The Communist Chinese must not feel really threatened by Joe Biden because now they’re dictating who can and cannot...visit Taiwan,” said Mark Levin.
Schweizer said our political class “basically have capitulated” in the power struggle with Beijing. They threaten us militarily, and it sets a terrible precedent for us now to say, “Hey, we don’t think a trip like this would be a good idea.”
Schweizer observed that we probably wouldn’t be seeing this from China if Ronald Reagan or (even) John F. Kennedy –- or Donald Trump, for that matter –- were in the White House. With Biden, they can smell the fear.
“They know they have this commercial tie with the Biden family and it gives them leverage.” Schweizer refers to Hunter Biden’s connection to an investment firm, controlled by the CCP, that was actively acquiring mineral assets in Africa to take them away from western mineral companies. This administration, he said, is “aiding and abetting” what Beijing is doing. “No question Beijing is emboldened,” he said. “And, frankly, they have reason to be.”
Add Schweizer’s name to the list of observers (including me) who want a special counsel to investigate Hunter. “You cannot trust the ‘Justice’ Department,” he said, “whose senior officials are appointed by the President, to actually investigate the President’s family. You need to have an independent counsel not only to look into the criminal allegations here...but the American public needs to have...an accounting of what was uncovered. That’s true even if the statute of limitations has passed. “The American public still needs to know the financial entanglements of the First Family with our chief rival on the global state, which is Beijing.”
A grand jury or DOJ investigation is not going to dive into that, which Schweizer calls “a grave miscarriage.” Their scope is too narrow: “They’re focusing on very specific issues rather than the broader question of, ‘Is this family compromised?’” But since the Biden family apparently received $31 million from Chinese businessmen “with direct links to the highest levels of Chinese intelligence,” how could they NOT be compromised? This is unacceptable, and I contend it would’ve been similarly unacceptable to voters if they’d learned about it before the 2020 election. They were duped by the FBI and the media.
Speaking of the FBI’s handling –- well, mishandling –- of the Hunter Biden case, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, who authored the recent letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray, appeared on Trey Gowdy’s Sunday show to talk about what he learned from FBI whistleblowers. If you read my newsletter last week, you know all about the FBI’s deep-sixing of the laptop by two very partisan agents, Brian Auten and Tim Thibault, who falsely labeled it “Russian disinformation.” (Auten, as we reported, was also instrumental in getting warrants for the FBI’s earlier “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation.) Thibault, Sen. Grassley explained, was making decisions about which investigations to pursue and which ones to close. Guess which category the Hunter Biden laptop fell into?
Director Wray has been called before the Senate Judiciary committee this Thursday. This won’t be like Nancy Pelosi’s sham J6 committee, so Republicans will actually be able to question Wray. “He’s going to get a lot of questions about this,” Grassley promised. He’ll be pressured to explain his “concrete program” to make the cultural changes needed at the FBI, so that “none of this political bias ever happens again,” though I would add that if Wray had a plan, he would have implemented it by now. And sure enough, Grassley said he waited “six or seven months” just for a phone call with Wray, which came only after Grassley had issued a press release about his findings regarding Thibault.
Grassley did give Wray tentative credit for moving Thibault out of the responsibility of determining which cases go forward, and said Thibault is also “presumably” being investigated for violating the Hatch Act (electioneering). Too little, too late, I’d say. We don’t know where he was reassigned or what he’s doing now.
So, is Grassley getting cooperation? In his words, “I get all kinds of help from the Democrats when I’m investigating things in a Republican administration, but I never get any help...when I’m investigating things in a Democrat administration.”
For more on Sen. Grassley’s discovery of the FBI’s method for hiding the Biden laptop story, Andrew C. McCarthy has a MUST-READ piece. It was in 2019 that Grassley and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson first started looking into the Biden family business of profiting from Joe’s political influence. McCarthy points out that by then, “the Justice Department and FBI had been on to Hunter’s shenanigans for over a year...long before the laptop’s existence emerged.”
McCarthy details how the Biden family was lavishly compensated by CEFC, the Chinese energy conglomerate that was acting as an agent of the Chinese Communist Party. “If the FBI didn’t know about the Bidens and the Chinese regime,” he writes, “then we should be asking why we’re plowing billions of dollars into the foreign-counterintelligence budget.” But, of course, they did know.
McCarthy points out that even if dedicated case agents work to follow the evidence and uncover this corruption, they can’t be sure their “political hack bosses” won’t undermine their effort. Those agents must feel like the cops who arrests the bad guys, only to see them no-bailed and released from jail over and over. Why even try?
We saw in the Durham trial against Michael Sussmann that when Democrats want to get their preferred narrative out before an election, they just call their friends at the FBI. Sussmann even had his own security badge that let him walk right in.
So now, we have virulent anti-Trump FBI agents Auten and Thibault. McCarthy offers more details and also reviews the allegations in Sen. Grassley’s letter. I think we’ve learned from this that when the Democrats need help within seconds, the FBI is...seconds away! Just pick up the phone.
Let’s face it, McCarthy says. The FBI has been investigated numerous times for its political bias, misconduct and abuse of power, and nothing ever happens to reform it. So he has an intriguing suggestion: reassign the FBI’s foreign-counterintelligence mission to another agency that is “strictly an intelligence service with no police responsibilities.” Take the FBI completely out of areas that are classified, restricting them to law enforcement only. And make them operate in the open. This is the first I’ve heard of this plan, and it’s already growing on me.
Extra: Speaking of Mark Levin (but on a different subject), here’s the link to his Sunday monologue, a must-watch history lesson from 1803 that puts the election dispute of 2020 into perspective. An election is NOT over, Levin said, until Congress says it is.
I Just Wanted to Say:
Thank you for reading the Sunday Standard.