House Votes, 420-to-0, to Demand Public Release of Mueller Report

House Republicans joined Democrats on Thursday to demand that the Justice Department publicly release the full findings of the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and the possible involvement of President Trump’s campaign.

Though the resolution is nonbinding, Democrats who put it on the House floor are trying to build public pressure on Attorney General William P. Barr before the investigation’s anticipated conclusion.

Far from standing in the way, Republicans joined Democrats en masse. On the 420-to-0 vote, four Republicans voted present.

“This report must see the light of day, must be available to the American public for a catharsis that will allow us to start with the facts, understand what happened and begin to rebuild the faith of the American people,” said Representative Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut and a senior member of the Intelligence Committee, which has undertaken its own Russia investigation.

Republicans debating it on the House floor called the resolution a waste of time and said they trusted Mr. Barr. But they were unwilling to stand in its way.

“I am especially concerned about what would happen if the report was not made available to Congress,” Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the second-ranking Republican, said in a statement. “Since the investigation began, Democrats have used it as an excuse to fund-raise, fear-monger and peddle conspiracy theories about collusion with the Russian government. Let’s bring this chapter to a close.”

The four “present” votes came from two libertarians who routinely oppose such resolutions, Representatives Justin Amash of Michigan and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and two ardent Trump loyalists, Representatives Matt Gaetz of Florida and Paul Gosar of Arizona.Mr. Gaetz said afterward that while he supported making the report public, he objected to other language in the resolution praising the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose team he has repeatedly attacked as partisan.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

The four “present” votes came from two libertarians who routinely oppose such resolutions, Representatives Justin Amash of Michigan and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and two ardent Trump loyalists, Representatives Matt Gaetz of Florida and Paul Gosar of Arizona.Mr. Gaetz said afterward that while he supported making the report public, he objected to other language in the resolution praising the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose team he has repeatedly attacked as partisan.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

The four “present” votes came from two libertarians who routinely oppose such resolutions, Representatives Justin Amash of Michigan and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and two ardent Trump loyalists, Representatives Matt Gaetz of Florida and Paul Gosar of Arizona.Mr. Gaetz said afterward that while he supported making the report public, he objected to other language in the resolution praising the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose team he has repeatedly attacked as partisan.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, tried to move the resolution through the Senate later on Thursday by unanimous consent, but he was blocked by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

Though Mr. Graham, the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, said he supported transparency, he asked to amend the resolution to include the appointment of a new special counsel to investigate the F.B.I.’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email case and its surveillance of a former Trump adviser. Mr. Schumer rejected the request as political and beside the point, and the resolution failed.

The Justice Department has given signals in recent weeks that after 22 months, Mr. Mueller is nearing completion of his work. Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mr. Mueller, offered what many viewed as fresh evidence of an imminent conclusion on Thursday when he confirmed that one of the special counsel’s top prosecutors, Andrew Weissmann, will be departing the special counsel’s office “in the near future.”

The resolution — sponsored by Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the Judiciary Committee chairman, and a handful of other Democratic committee leaders — “calls for the public release of any report Special Counsel Mueller provides to the attorney general, except to the extent the public disclosure of any portion thereof is expressly prohibited by law.”

Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.

Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.
Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.

Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.
Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.
Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.
Under the regulation that governs special counsels, Mr. Mueller is expected to produce a confidential report on his prosecution decisions to Mr. Barr, who will then review it and produce his own report to Congress. Thus far, Mr. Barr has demurred on just what he will release to Congress and the public, reserving the right to keep some matters secret.Democrats seized on Mr. Barr’s resistance to making specific promises about the Mueller findings during his confirmation process in the Senate. They have not let the point rest in the weeks since, with prominent Democratic chairmen and other leaders laying out their case for why all of the special counsel’s findings — including underlying evidence — ought to be shared with Congress for review.House Democrats are prepared to use subpoena power and other tools at their disposal to force the Justice Department to turn over anything Mr. Barr chooses to withhold.They argue that the Justice Department set a new precedent in the last two years when it granted Republicans, who then controlled the House, extraordinary access to hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive investigative material related to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server and the Russia investigation itself.

“Last year, I directly warned department leadership that in providing these materials to Congress, they were establishing a precedent, and one they would have to live with in the future,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

Democrats also fear that the Justice Department could combine its policies against indicting a sitting president and against disclosing negative information on an investigative target who was not indicted to justify keeping secret all the information collected about Mr. Trump.

“To maintain that a sitting president cannot be indicted, and then to withhold evidence of wrongdoing from Congress because the president cannot be charged, is to convert D.O.J. policy into the means for a cover-up,” Mr. Nadler said during debate over the resolution on Thursday.

Though they voted for the resolution, many Republicans expressed skepticism about the wisdom and likely success of Democrats’ quest. Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters last week that he anticipated hurdles to public disclosure in the form of classified information, information obtained through a secret grand jury process and the need to insulate continuing prosecutions stemming from the investigation.

“Those are also going to be things that we are going to have to litigate,” Mr. Collins said.

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/politics/mueller-report-public.html

GOP/Dem Border Deal: $1.3B for Wall, No Increase in Detention Space

A Republican-Democrat border security deal that is expected to be offered to President Trump funds about $1.3 billion for a United States-Mexico border wall and includes no increase in detention space to control increasing illegal immigration at the border.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have announced that they have reached a deal on border wall funding to avoid a government shutdown. The deal, according to details by the Washington Post, includes about $1.3 billion in border wall funding — a fraction of the $5.7 billion that Trump had requested from Republicans and Democrats.

This funding is set to provide about 55 miles of new border wall along the roughly 2,000-mile long southern border. Much like the 2018 omnibus spending, which prevented Trump from building a border wall out of new materials, the deal is set to tack on stipulations as to what the barrier can be made from and where it can be placed.

Additionally, the deal keeps detention space for federal immigration officials to detain illegal aliens and border crossers at the same levels that have been funded over the last two years. The deal includes about 40,250 beds for immigration detention facilities, about 11,500 fewer beds than Trump had requested.

Read more

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.infowars.com/gop-dem-border-deal-1-3b-for-wall-no-increase-in-detention-space/

Dem Congresswoman Admits Helping Caravan Members Enter US After They Were Denied Entry

It’s hardly a secret that leftists love the idea of open borders and letting illegal immigration run amok.

It’s also a well-established fact that Democrats typically harbor a seething hatred of all things related to President Donald Trump and will stoop to any depth to needle the president.

But it takes a certain level of brazenness, even for a leftist Democrat, to boast about personally helping and bringing members of the migrant caravan across the border just to stick it to Trump.

U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat, apparently has that kind of brazenness.

The 53-year-old Jayapal bragged on her Twitter account about helping migrants get into the United States after they had previously been denied entry.

Read more

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.infowars.com/dem-congresswoman-admits-helping-caravan-members-enter-us-after-they-were-denied-entry/

Ukrainian Whistleblower: Dem/Ukraine Collusion In 2016 & The Buildup To War Now

The tension at the Ukrainian border with Russia has reached a boiling point as Martial Law has now been declared in the country.

Andrii Telizhenko joins David Knight to discuss how Democrats attempted to used the conflict to rig the 2016 election and more.

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.infowars.com/ukrainian-whistleblower-dem-ukraine-collusion-in-2016-the-buildup-to-war-now/

Dem 2020 Candidate Wants Chinese-Style ‘Social Credit’ System For America

You’re going to love our new Democrat overlords (and if you don’t you’ll be blocked from the financial system)!

From The Daily Caller:

New York entrepreneur and Democratic 2020 candidate Andrew Yang wants to implement a system in which a government-run mobile app rewards Americans with “digital social credits” (DSCs) for good behavior.

Americans would receive DSCs under Yang’s system for things such as “participating in a town fair,” “fixing a neighbor’s appliance” or “tutoring a student,” his presidential campaign website explains.

“As individuals rack up DSCs, they would have both a permanent balance they’ve earned over their lifetime and a current balance. They could cash the points in for experiences, purchases with participating vendors, support for causes, and transfer points to others for special occasions,” Yang states on his website. “As their permanent balance gets higher, they might qualify for various perks like throwing a pitch at a local ballgame, an audience with their local Congressperson or meeting their state’s most civic-minded athlete or celebrity.”

“The most socially detached would be the most likely to ignore all of this,” he added. “But many people love rewards and feeling valued.”

Yang’s social credit plan bears some similarities to the social credit systemimplemented by China’s authoritarian government.

Every citizen in China is assigned a social credit score that determines whether they can buy plane or train tickets.

Unlike the Chinese system, Yang’s plan does not include using digital social credit for punitive measures.

That’s how it starts. You can add in punishments with a few lines of code at any time.

Campaign chair Matt Shinners emphasized in an email to The Daily Caller News Foundation that Yang’s system lacks the coercive element featured in China’s social credit system:

My understanding of the Chinese system (which is admittedly limited) is that it’s more of a rating that’s externally imposed based on a number of non-opt-in factors, almost like a credit rating, and collates information captured from public surveillance, economic and social media activity, etc… to create a ‘score’ that would then, possibly, be used to ‘blacklist’ people from certain activities. Under my understanding, the Chinese system is more of a score/rating than a system of credits.

Andrew’s platform calls for a system that’s much more akin to time banking, or to points that people earn on their credit cards. There’s no general monitoring of individual activity, and no scraping of social media sites to see what people are up to. Instead, activities such as volunteering or helping your neighbors would earn you credits that could then be traded with others for receiving similar help. For example, I spend 4 hours/week coaching a hockey team in my community, and I use the credits I earn to have a local electrician (who possibly has a kid on the team) help me install a garage door opener. There would also be backing by the federal government for conversion to currency (that would be taxed), or traded in for “fun” activities (such as getting to attend a bill signing).

Yang, a lifetime New Yorker, faces an uphill battle in a crowded Democratic primary.

Though he hasn’t received much media attention, Yang’s campaign is actually in its ninth month. The candidate is currently on a national tour he labeled the “Humanity First Tour.”

WATCH:

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.infowars.com/dem-2020-candidate-wants-chinese-style-social-credit-system-for-america/

Dem Staffer Held Without Bond in Doxxing Case

The Democratic staffer accused of leaking personal details of GOP lawmakers during the Kavanaugh hearings was ordered held without bond on Tuesday.

Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson said she believed the staffer, Jackson Cosko, was a risk to the community after prosecutors said he threatened to release even more personal data on Republicans.

Additionally, investigators said they found cocaine and methamphetamine during a search and claimed Cosko may have been under the influence when, according to them, he used his credentials to ‘dox’ several lawmakers by leaking their personal addresses and phone numbers.

Investigators also suggested that the search of his home, car and storage unit uncovered evidence that he was trying to target other lawmakers and even had a checklist on how to cover his tracks.

Cosko was “caught in the act” of breaking into the office of Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), whom he had worked for earlier this year as a tech staffer before being asked to resign, according to assistant US attorney Demian Ahn.

“These are serious offenses that were directed at one of the cornerstones of American democracy,” Ahn said.

Cosko was caught by a current Hassan staffer who knew he wasn’t supposed to be in the office, the police stated.

A police affidavit also claimed Cosko sent an email to the staffer afterwards, threatening to release even more personal information if his intrusion was reported.

“If you tell anyone I will leak it all. Emails signal conversations gmails. Senators children’s health information and socials [sic],” the email read.

The suspect was working for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) at the time of his arrest, although her office told reporters he has since been fired.

FOLLOW THE LINK FOR THE FULL REPORT – JR

https://www.infowars.com/dem-staffer-held-without-bond-in-doxxing-case/