On the heels of a new report from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz saying the “Justice” Department has a problem with public trust and the perception that they are partisan –- surprise! –- the FBI has just taken actions in Mesa County, Colorado, that reinforce that view.

In what is likely the most outrageous and underreported story of the week, the FBI conducted simultaneous early-morning raids Tuesday on at least four people, including Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters –- an outspoken critic of the 2020 election –- and three of her associates. These heavy-handed raids against nonviolent people involved armed agents in combat militia-style gear, the use of handcuffs, and, in at least one case, a battering ram.

One reason for the media’s hesitance to cover this might be that it emerged via the TV channel of “My Pillow Guy” Mike Lindell, who is generally seen in the media as having cooties and absolutely will not be taken seriously no matter how valid a story he breaks. He did interviews with two of the women, Peters and “America’s Mom” Sheronna Bishop. Lindell already knew both of them, as they had participated in his on-air election integrity symposium in August and had reportedly even flown in on his private plane.

The first write-up we saw in print media was at conservative WVW Broadcast Network, which told the story of a raid conducted early Tuesday morning at the home of Bishop, a concerned Christian mom who has become an activist on issues such as Critical Race Theory and forced masking in schools. (She’s homeschooling her kids.) When we first read about this, we suspected the raid on her house probably had something to do with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s dictate that parents who get angry at school board meetings should be dealt with like domestic terrorists. (Garland denied this policy before Congress, but we now know he was not being truthful.)

But the target on her back seems to have more to do with her association with Peters, who is on extremely bad terms with Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold. Peters has apparently been under investigation over allegations of leaking election data, and the search warrant authorized confiscation of her phones and cyber devices.

Brannon Howse conducted the TV interview with Peters on Tuesday, with additional guest cybersecurity expert Sean Smith. In the interview, she explains about the four raids carried out that morning on her and “some of her friends,” saying that one of them indeed had involved a battering ram. Apparently that was the raid at Bishop’s house; Bishop has said her front door was broken down.

Peters said at the time of this interview that the affidavit for her search was still sealed and that she didn’t know what the “probable cause” was. Here’s the interview in full.

Exclusive: FBI Raids Home of County Clerk Tina Peters in Attempt to Cover Up Voter Crimes? | Frank Speech the Home of Free Speech

(SIDE NOTE: At about 38:30 in this video, there’s a phenomenal 6-minute clip of several former FBI agents who are appalled at this new abuse-of-force approach by the FBI against non-violent targets such as Roger Stone. One of them said that if he’d been on a S.W.A.T. team and ordered to do that raid at Stone’s house, he would have refused. That’s the kind of FBI agents we need; too bad so many of them are of the generation that's now retiring from the Bureau.)

Anyway, Peters says that since she started looking into the results of the 2020 election in Mesa County --- she claims that 29,000 election records were illegally deleted --- she's been attacked "on every front" and is facing civil litigation and huge legal bills. She says this raid is obviously an intimidation tactic aimed at the larger community.

In Bishop’s interview with Howse, which debuted Thursday on Lindell TV, she says the agents were likewise armed and in combat gear, that they treated her and her daughters roughly and that she was handcuffed for about 30 minutes. (Peters was not handcuffed.) The agents were in Bishop’s house for about three hours.

Bishop is a former campaign manager for conservative Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert. She describes herself as a “very strong supporter” of Peters.

In the interview, she reads from the search warrant, which authorized them to confiscate her phones and other cyber equipment, alleging that she caused "intentional damage of a protected computer" --- "I have no contact with a computer," she says --- "wire fraud" --- "they couldn't explain to me what that even meant" -- and "conspiracy to cause intentional damage to a protected computer and/or commit wire fraud." It also listed the names of the others who were being searched, including Peters. She says all she has done is exercise her First Amendment freedom to be an advocate for Peters, whom she claims has "hard evidence" about Colorado officials and Dominion Voting Systems, and that they’re trying to make her go away and be quiet. She says officials who are "running Colorado" are criminalizing free speech.

She says she has made herself completely available to officials and that there was no reason other than intimidation for them to treat her and her family this way.

Here’s the link to her TV interview.

We’ve seen a few reports of the raids in mainstream media, but they focus not on the violation of civil liberties –- since when do Trump supporters have civil liberties? –- but on allegations that Mesa County election results were allegedly leaked to some “QAnon conspiracy theorists.”

It’s impossible to sort out all the accusations and counter-accusations going on in Mesa County. We just find it interesting that this angle from THE DAILY BEAST doesn’t address the FBI’s intimidating use of force against non-violent targets. The DB also reflexively calls the hypothesis that the 2020 election was stolen “a baseless idea.” That is wrong; it’s not proven, but it’s certainly not baseless.

Another outlet, TALKING POINTS MEMO, describes Peters as “a Trumpy Colorado county clerk already under investigation” and identifies the QAnon personality as Ron Watkins, “a right-wing influencer that many believe to be behind the posts that spurred the QAnon conspiracy theory,” according to reporter Matt Shuham. The armed raids are characterized by a Mesa County spokesperson as “four federally court-authorized operations into potential criminal activity.” All documents related to these “operations” are apparently still sealed.

We can’t say this investigation is being carried out to take focus off what Peters might have FOUND regarding the voting machine data. But we can’t say it isn’t, either.

That’s the story so far. We’ll leave you with an outstanding companion piece by Victor Davis Hanson called “Can the FBI Be Salvaged?” that lists many familiar examples of the FBI overstepping, lying, leaking, colluding, hushing-up, setting-up, intimidating, witch-hunting, infiltrating, improperly surveilling, abusing, withholding evidence and more.

He should add these armed raids in Mesa County to his list.

The Rittenhouse Reaction

November 22, 2021

Since the not guilty verdict for Kyle Rittenhouse was announced, it’s been both instructive and disheartening to see how many political leaders and media figures have proven violently hostile to the rule of law and the rights of due process. They’re the ones whose false reporting and inflammatory language fueled another night of violent protests, riots (in Portland, naturally) and looting. Because nothing says, “I disapprove of the verdict in a trial I didn’t watch in Kenosha, Wisconsin,” like looting a Louis Vuitton store in San Francisco.

Starting at the top: President Biden said he didn’t watch the trial, but “the jury system works and we have to abide by it.” The White House later released a statement reading, “While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken… I urge everyone to express their views peacefully, consistent with the rule of law. Violence and destruction of property have no place in our democracy.”

That’s pretty good, possibly the most presidential statement he’s ever made – except for the part about him feeling angry and concerned, especially since he just admitted he hadn’t watched the trial. It’s reminiscent of his previous false accusation that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist, which helped taint the jury pool. As a chief executive, whether President or Governor, it’s your duty to support the jury system and the rule of law, not try to undermine the public’s faith in it with your own uninformed opinions.

But Biden was practically Abe Lincoln compared to his fellow Democrats. We had Rep. Jerrold Nadler, repeating debunked claims on Twitter and calling for the politicized, weaponized DOJ to subject Rittenhouse to double jeopardy. He thinks a federal civil rights prosecution is in order, since Rittenhouse infringed on the First Amendment protest rights of the people he shot. Note to Nadler: the First Amendment doesn’t give you a right to physically assault someone or point a Glock at his head during a protest. But the Second Amendment gives you the right to use a gun to stop it.

There were also the many Hollywood celebrities and sports stars taking to Twitter to repeat debunked MSNBC talking points and condemn the jury and the verdict. Because how could jurors who’d spent over a week listening to the testimony and examining all the evidence, then days longer deliberating over it, possibly know more about this case than people who heard about it from the media and Twitter?

It’s no surprise that some of the most uninformed, rabble-rousing comments came from America’s worst mayor, worst Governor and worst ex-Governor: Bill DeBlasio, Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo, the Three Stooges of jurisprudence.

As Robert Spencer at PJ Media points out about Cuomo, a man who was forced out of office after trying to cover up thousands of COVID deaths in nursing homes due to policies he imposed while allegedly sexually molesting multiple female staffers has no business calling a legitimate jury verdict a “stain on America.” All of these men, who hold (or held) top leadership positions that require them to defend and protect the Constitution and the rule of law used this occasion to stain themselves by trashing those concepts, to repeat claims that anyone who followed the trial knows were exposed as lies, and to do so knowing full well they were encouraging more mob violence.

How dare they claim this verdict encourages vigilante justice? Rittenhouse was arrested, given a trial in front of a jury of his peers (a jury taken from a pool so tainted by liberal media misinformation that two-thirds of them came to court convinced he was guilty), and yet was still found innocent. So they’re now ginning up mob violence. Who’s promoting vigilante justice again?

While it was obvious before now that none of these men should be in any position of power, this should draw a big red line under it. But perhaps even worse was the condemnation of the verdict (complete with more repeating of media falsehoods) by the ACLU.

This is an organization supposedly created to defend the Constitutional rights of every American, yet they’re siding against Rittenhouse’s now-jury-affirmed right to self-defense and in favor of a prosecution that repeatedly broke the rules in an attempt to railroad him into prison, including hiding evidence from the defense and violating Rittenhouse’s Fifth Amendment rights. And that’s just the tip of the corruption iceberg. Here’s some of what the ACLU is actually defending.

Finally, the comments that tick me off the most are the ones that try to sow more riots and racial division by claiming the jury was protecting “white supremacy” (FYI: everyone involved was white) or that Republicans who sided with Rittenhouse would never have defended the rights of a black teenager in the same position.

Excuse me? I’ve publicly defended the due process rights and presumption of innocence even for Andrew Cuomo, and believe me, that’s not easy! Like most Republicans, I absolutely believe that all law-abiding Americans of all races have fundamental rights to trials by jury, to own legal firearms and to use them responsibly to defend themselves and their families from attackers. That includes violent radicals who were attacking black people and burning down black neighborhoods during the 2020 riots that Democrats approved of. These were the same anarchists Democrat officials refused to prosecute and who were bailed out of jail by donations from the staff of our current Vice President.

I would remind these race-baiters that in an earlier time, other Democrat radicals like the KKK were also burning black neighborhoods, and Democrat public officials also refused to provide protection. Who stood up for black people’s right to defend themselves with firearms? The NRA.

Not Guilty

November 22, 2021

In breaking news Friday afternoon, Kyle Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all charges. No one can say these jurors didn't do their duty and carefully consider all the evidence before rendering a verdict, as it took them four days of deliberation under tremendous psychological pressure. We'll have a roundup of commentary and our own analysis over the weekend. Meanwhile, pray for peace in Kenosha, Wisconsin, tonight.

Prior to the verdict being announced, the two biggest developments had to do, as is typical of this case, not with justice but with media malfeasance and prosecutorial misconduct. First, the judge barred anyone from NBC or MSNBC from the building after a freelancer working for NBC was stopped for running a red light and claimed he was trying to keep up with the sealed juror bus. He said an NBC News booker in New York had assigned him to follow the jury bus, possibly in hopes of booking interviews with jurors whose identities are being shielded for their own protection from mob threats.

NBC released a statement reading, “While the traffic violation took place near the jury van, the freelancer never contacted or intended to contact the jurors during deliberations, and never photographed or intended to photograph them. We regret the incident and will fully cooperate with the authorities on any investigation.”

Fine, but you’ll be doing it from outside the courthouse, where you belong. Considering what a huge role MSNBC has played in promoting indendiary false information about this case from day one, I wouldn’t blame the judge for banning them from Kenosha permanently. I doubt that any locals would complain.

The story involving more possible prosecutorial misconduct relates to a witness identified only as “Jump Kick Man.” He’s a man in white pants seen in a video running up and drop-kicking Rittenhouse as he was running away, which allowed the two men to catch him and attack him, and get shot.

It was reported that a man named Maurice Freeland was “Drop Kick Man,” and that he’d offered to testify for the prosecution. They turned him down, ostensibly because they couldn’t positively identify him, but critics note that it might have hurt their case because Freeland is a convicted felon with a violent criminal record who was on probation. The misconduct charge could arise from the prosecution failing to inform the defense about Freeland, whom they might have wanted to call as a defense witness.

And as long as we’re rightfully bashing the prosecution, they also told the jury that Rittenhouse shouldn’t have used a gun to stop someone who was beating him over the head with a skateboard because “Nobody’s ever died as a result of being hit with a skateboard.” Putting aside the fact that it’s rather hard to ponder that question when you’re being HIT OVER THE HEAD WITH A SKATEBOARD, Todd Starnes did some research. He came up with numerous news stories about people being beaten to death or nearly to death with skateboards.

Finally, as we wait, please read this article by Bari Weiss, who was driven out of the New York Times for daring to stand up for free expression and against the paper’s capitulation to woke Twitter mobs.

It’s her own confession of how she was misled by the media into believing a long list of things about Rittenhouse and this case that the trial has exposed as complete lies. She goes through those lies one by one, and then gives us specific examples of the politicians and media figures who spread them. It’s a great thing to bookmark in case you ever experience a weak moment and start to trust any liberal media outlet again.

Defamation Watch

November 22, 2021

Many legal analysts are saying that Kyle Rittenhouse, like Nick Sandmann and Richard Jewell, has a strong case for suing a number of media outlets and public figures, including President Biden, for defamation.

Here’s a list of just a few of those who put their mouths in gear before engaging their brains and potentially placed themselves in legal jeopardy. And yes, it includes the “fact-checking” site, Politifact, which knew that Rittenhouse running from people who were trying to attack him must be “False” because Donald Trump said it:

Here’s a serious article on the subject of Rittenhouse’s lawsuit odds:

And here’s a satirical one that I can’t resist sharing because I just love the idea.

14 Stories Edited

November 22, 2021

The Washington Post has added editors' notes to 14 stories dating back over several years to correct its false reporting on the Trump/Russiagate “scandal” that has now been revealed to be a politically-motivated hoax (FYI: we don’t have to do that because we smelled a politically-motivated hoax from day one.)

I would call that “a good start,” but it’s not even that. It’s just a start. A good start would be issuing an abject apology for misleading readers and undermining Trump’s Presidency, then firing all the reporters who fell for that garbage, and returning the bogus (and no doubt also politically-motivated) Pulitzer Prize the paper won for it.

Speaking of that, I’ll link again to this article by Julie Kelly at American Greatness, demanding the same thing.?

And in addition to the corrections, apologies and firings over Russiagate and every other hoax they’ve pushed in recent years, if media outlets ever want to start stitching their shredded reputations back together, they should all immediately cease acting like Biden PR agents and DNC groupies and start behaving like actual reporters again. I know they didn’t learn how in “journalism” school or on the job, but maybe they could watch a few old movies on TCM and learn how.

Grilled by the Senate

November 22, 2021

Wednesday, President Biden’s inexplicable nominee for Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova, faced grilling by Senators. The Republican Senators grilled her so hard, I’m surprised she didn’t come out looking like a charcoal briquette.

They demanded explanations of her long history of radical comments, including her support for killing private banks and having the government take over and run banking and direct all investment spending; and her claim that to advance the left's climate agenda, we need to bankrupt the oil, gas and coal industries. She tried to downplay those as old comments she no longer stands by or didn’t really mean, but Sen. John Kennedy noted that she joined a Marxist Facebook group in 2019 and said he didn’t know whether to call her “Professor or Comrade.”

But the coup de grace came from Sen. Tim Scott, who went through a rundown of her radical writings, then finished with, “I don’t have any questions for you because there’s nothing you can say today to undo what you’ve said for years, including this year.”

That’s quite a choice for a President who ran as a moderate, but then, I seriously doubt that Joe Biden had any more to do with choosing her than Donald Trump does with hiring bellboys at Trump Plaza. Democrats who tried to defend her had nothing but their worn-out race card, so some accused the Republicans who quoted her own outrageous words to her of being racists (I guess that includes Tim Scott, who is African-American.)

On the plus side, if the Senate actually does confirm Omarova, she will make history as the first US Comptroller of the Currency who was ever arrested for allegedly stealing $218 worth of stuff from T.J. Maxx.

As noted at the link, in case you think that escapade, like her flirtation with Marxism, was just a weak moment from her immature youth, she was 28 at the time. But then, feeling that you have a right to take other people's stuff is something that Marxists and shoplifters have in common.

As of this writing on Friday morning, the House just passed the massive $1.75 trillion “Build Back Bankruptcy” bill, 220-213.

I’ll spare you all the usual balloon juice from Nancy Pelosi about the wondrous, historic things it will do for Americans once the people who voted for it find out what’s actually in it, because now it goes back to the Senate where the real fight recommences. The Dems have tortured the term “reconciliation bill” to try to turn a massive piece of transformative leftwing government bloat into a simple budget bill that isn’t subject to a filibuster. The parliamentarian should have shut that garbage down from day one. Now, we have to rely on Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to protect America. If it does pass in some form, it will go back to the House again.

While House Democrats voting to spend trillions we don’t have and greatly expand government power was never really in doubt, there were a couple of interesting side notes to the vote. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy deserves a golden box of Sucrets as an award for his record-setting 8-hour, 32-minute speech, ripping this monstrosity to shreds.

He called it “the single most reckless and irresponsible spending bill in our nation’s history,” one that will worsen inflation, harm the long term economy and introduce a large degree of socialism into America. He also called the Democrats “out of touch” with the needs and wishes of ordinary Americans, adding, "Never in American history has so much been spent at one time. Never in American history will so many taxes be raised and so much borrowing be needed to pay for all this reckless spending."

All of that is true, and of course, the Democrats voted for it anyway. But while you can’t talk sense into some people, you can accomplish what McCarthy did: he talked so long that the Democrats went home, blocking them from passing this in the dead of night, as they usually do with unpopular, radical spending bills, and forcing them to vote on record in the bright light of morning when everyone was watching. That will make it much easier to remember this day when you go into the polling places next November.

Some other interesting gamesmanship came from the report on the cost of the bill from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Democrats loudly touted an early leak claiming the CBO found that the bill would reduce the deficit. But it turned out that was just about the part that raises taxes. When the full CBO report came out and said it would add $367 billion to the federal deficit over the next 10 years, not counting the potential revenues from a sure-to-be-wildly-popular IRS crackdown on taxpayers, the Dems turned on a dime and started dismissing the CBO’s assessment as meaningless.

The CBO was rightly skeptical of claims that all the new taxes and IRS crackdowns in the bill would raise taxes enough to pay for it, or that much of the cost would be offset by eliminating waste and fraud. Rich people can always find ways to avoid high taxes, and those are usually ways that involve pulling income out of productive, job-creating investments which depresses economic growth so that tax revenues fall across the board.

As for “eliminating waste and fraud,” that’s hilarious! How many times have politicians dangled that one in front of us over the years, like Lucy fooling Charlie Brown into trying to kick that football one more time (he should’ve kicked Lucy instead, the way we should kick politicians out of office who promise to eliminate waste and fraud and then go to DC and vote for more of it.)

Is there anyone dumb enough to believe that Democrats will pay for trillions in new spending by “eliminating waste and fraud”? I hear that these days, when you join the Democratic Party, you get a membership card, an autographed picture of AOC and a T-Shirt that says “I (Heart) Waste and Fraud.”