Former President Donald Trump slammed Democrats on the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government, who attacked FBI whistleblowers throughout a Thursday hearing.
"Very sad watching what took place today in Congress regarding Whistleblowers and the FBI," Trump wrote on Truth Social late Thursday night. "There has never been a time like this in our Country, the complete weaponization of Justice."
"I am a victim also, but the real victim is the United States of America," Trump continued. "Congress must use its purse strings to straighten it out, before it is too late! MAGA 2024."
During the 3.5-hour hearing, Republican members on the panel repeatedly pushed back against Democrats' complaints that they didn't have transcripts of prior remarks from suspended FBI agent Marcus Allen. The Republicans argued that the FBI whistleblowers didn't feel safe with Democrats, given a history of leaks that later appeared in regime-friendly media outlets.
"Democrats leaked the committee’s first subpoenas. Democrats leaked and mischaracterized whistleblower testimony, forcing several news outlets to correct their stories," a subcommittee spokesman told the Epoch Times. "Democrats issued a report attacking these whistleblowers and disparaging their character," the spokesman continued. "Simply put, whistleblowers are not comfortable speaking to Democrats because of their record of slandering whistleblowers."
HEARTBREAKING: FBI whistleblower warns his colleagues considering exposing corruption NOT to come forward, “…this government will crush you and your family…” The republic is broken.pic.twitter.com/Fs0RW5TqPl
— @amuse (@amuse) May 18, 2023
Journalist Michael Shellenberger - who was slandered along with Matt Taibbi by House Democrats - put things perfectly on Thursday, writing: "The FBI whistleblowers who testified before Congress today are not actually whistleblowers, say the FBI and Democrats. Rather, they are disloyal Americans who undermined investigations into the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C."
And as Taibbi notes,
Both in the accustatory questions thrown at three FBI whistleblowers in congress yesterday and in two new contributions to Racket’s “Report on the Censorship-Industrial Complex,” it’s clear America’s tendency toward debilitating state paranoia, deranged ideological surveillance schemes, and wild accusations of disloyalty are not only not over, but trace more than a hundred years into our past, with no signs of stopping.
At the whistleblower hearing before the House Weaponization of Government Subcommittee yesterday, we saw yet another loud display of the once-disgraced tactic of questioning the loyalty and patriotism of American witnesses, in this case FBI agents who’d taken issue with the Bureau’s handling of J6 cases. The Democratic members’ questions gave off a strong echo of the infamous House Committee on Un-American Affairs. A scene involving California Democract Linda Sanchez and agent Marcus Allen was particularly upsetting.
Allen’s security clearance has been revoked, he’s lost his health insurance, and the FBI has not given him permission to seek other employment, all because he quietly sent a letter to superiors suggesting “federal law enforcement had some degree of infiltration among the crowds gathered at the Capitol,” which he felt raised “serious concerns” about the case.
Stipulate for a moment that Allen was totally wrong, that he’d gotten bad information and there was zero “degree of infiltration” at the Capitol. I’d find this hard to believe, given the fact that even the lead investigator of the Democrats’ J6 Committee, Tim Heaphy, said there was “ample intelligence” about threats heading into the event, but let’s say he was 100% wrong all around. Would that justify the conclusion of the FBI and Sanchez, whose questioning of Allen recalled a hearing from the fifties?
SANCHEZ: The FBI’s reason behind your suspension was because it found you to have “espoused conspiratorial views, both orally and in writing, which indicates support for the events of January 6th, is that correct, yes or no?
ALLEN: That is the language they placed on the letter—
SANCHEZ: That’s a yes, then. Do you believe it’s important for federal agents to have allegiance to the United States, yes or no?
ALLEN: It is absolutely important that—
SANCHEZ: (cutting him off) I’ll take that as a yes. Do you believe you should have allegiance to the United States to possess a security clearance, yes or no?
ALLEN: Absolutely.
In many ways this is even crazier than the events of the McCarthy era, because the congressional questioners aren’t even asserting links to a nebulous conspiracy, or some overt act. They’re simply taking the fact that an agent privately raised a question about an FBI operation — his right under both the First Amendment and under the FBI procedure for making a protected disclosure — and using that to publicly imply that the man lacks “allegiance to the United States.” Have we all gone mad?
* * *
And then there's this absolute idiocy;
It would appear Linda Sanchez found a random Twitter account with 118 followers with the same name as the witness that she brought to the hearing and claimed was his haha. pic.twitter.com/Ix4QajY0I1
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) May 18, 2023
Former President Donald Trump slammed Democrats on the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government, who attacked FBI whistleblowers throughout a Thursday hearing.
“Very sad watching what took place today in Congress regarding Whistleblowers and the FBI,” Trump wrote on Truth Social late Thursday night. “There has never been a time like this in our Country, the complete weaponization of Justice.”
“I am a victim also, but the real victim is the United States of America,” Trump continued. “Congress must use its purse strings to straighten it out, before it is too late! MAGA 2024.”
During the 3.5-hour hearing, Republican members on the panel repeatedly pushed back against Democrats’ complaints that they didn’t have transcripts of prior remarks from suspended FBI agent Marcus Allen. The Republicans argued that the FBI whistleblowers didn’t feel safe with Democrats, given a history of leaks that later appeared in regime-friendly media outlets.
“Democrats leaked the committee’s first subpoenas. Democrats leaked and mischaracterized whistleblower testimony, forcing several news outlets to correct their stories,” a subcommittee spokesman told the Epoch Times. “Democrats issued a report attacking these whistleblowers and disparaging their character,” the spokesman continued. “Simply put, whistleblowers are not comfortable speaking to Democrats because of their record of slandering whistleblowers.“
HEARTBREAKING: FBI whistleblower warns his colleagues considering exposing corruption NOT to come forward, “…this government will crush you and your family…” The republic is broken.pic.twitter.com/Fs0RW5TqPl
— @amuse (@amuse) May 18, 2023
Journalist Michael Shellenberger – who was slandered along with Matt Taibbi by House Democrats – put things perfectly on Thursday, writing: “The FBI whistleblowers who testified before Congress today are not actually whistleblowers, say the FBI and Democrats. Rather, they are disloyal Americans who undermined investigations into the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.”
And as Taibbi notes,
Both in the accustatory questions thrown at three FBI whistleblowers in congress yesterday and in two new contributions to Racket’s “Report on the Censorship-Industrial Complex,” it’s clear America’s tendency toward debilitating state paranoia, deranged ideological surveillance schemes, and wild accusations of disloyalty are not only not over, but trace more than a hundred years into our past, with no signs of stopping.
At the whistleblower hearing before the House Weaponization of Government Subcommittee yesterday, we saw yet another loud display of the once-disgraced tactic of questioning the loyalty and patriotism of American witnesses, in this case FBI agents who’d taken issue with the Bureau’s handling of J6 cases. The Democratic members’ questions gave off a strong echo of the infamous House Committee on Un-American Affairs. A scene involving California Democract Linda Sanchez and agent Marcus Allen was particularly upsetting.
Allen’s security clearance has been revoked, he’s lost his health insurance, and the FBI has not given him permission to seek other employment, all because he quietly sent a letter to superiors suggesting “federal law enforcement had some degree of infiltration among the crowds gathered at the Capitol,” which he felt raised “serious concerns” about the case.
Stipulate for a moment that Allen was totally wrong, that he’d gotten bad information and there was zero “degree of infiltration” at the Capitol. I’d find this hard to believe, given the fact that even the lead investigator of the Democrats’ J6 Committee, Tim Heaphy, said there was “ample intelligence” about threats heading into the event, but let’s say he was 100% wrong all around. Would that justify the conclusion of the FBI and Sanchez, whose questioning of Allen recalled a hearing from the fifties?
SANCHEZ: The FBI’s reason behind your suspension was because it found you to have “espoused conspiratorial views, both orally and in writing, which indicates support for the events of January 6th, is that correct, yes or no?
ALLEN: That is the language they placed on the letter—
SANCHEZ: That’s a yes, then. Do you believe it’s important for federal agents to have allegiance to the United States, yes or no?
ALLEN: It is absolutely important that—
SANCHEZ: (cutting him off) I’ll take that as a yes. Do you believe you should have allegiance to the United States to possess a security clearance, yes or no?
ALLEN: Absolutely.
In many ways this is even crazier than the events of the McCarthy era, because the congressional questioners aren’t even asserting links to a nebulous conspiracy, or some overt act. They’re simply taking the fact that an agent privately raised a question about an FBI operation — his right under both the First Amendment and under the FBI procedure for making a protected disclosure — and using that to publicly imply that the man lacks “allegiance to the United States.” Have we all gone mad?
* * *
And then there’s this absolute idiocy;
It would appear Linda Sanchez found a random Twitter account with 118 followers with the same name as the witness that she brought to the hearing and claimed was his haha. pic.twitter.com/Ix4QajY0I1
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) May 18, 2023
Loading…
