Connect with us

Politics

Rand Paul Wants To Know Ms. Haspel’s involvement or coordination in possible surveillance of then-candidate Trump

This gets deeper than we imagined.

Published

on

The new CIA director, Gina Haspel, was the London station chief for the CIA in 2016, a busy year and location for undermining a future president.

Senator Rand Paul asked Gina Haspel questions about the Steele dossier—about her and the CIA’s knowledge of the dossier.

His questions, at first, were about whether the CIA put candidate Donald Trump under surveillance.

Trending: Paramedics Staying at Hotel Hear Mother's Screams, Jump Fence to Rescue Unresponsive Boy in Pool

 

As the process continued, however, Senator Paul moved on to questions about the Steele Dossier.

Cassandra Fairbanks writes at the Gateway Pundit, “EXCLUSIVE: Gina Haspel Refuses to Answer Senator Rand Paul’s Questions About CIA Involvement in Steele Dossier.

Senator Paul’s initial letter focused on the practices of the CIA during the 2016 presidential election. They heavily imply that the senator believes that the CIA was involved with the dossier that launched the Russian collusion investigation. Though the agency may not have been the one running the operation, Haspel is an acolyte of former CIA Director John Brennan — a fierce opponent of President Trump who, according to new reports, worked claims from the unverified dossier into then-President Barack Obama’s Presidential Daily Brief.

She answered some of Paul’s question, and seemed to evade others. When asked, she clarified, but she did not address many or Rand Paul’s eight subsequent questions.

“With regard to the current questions raised in your letter regarding Christopher Steele: for Question 3, I was not personally aware of Mr. Steele’s efforts when it was publicly reported in the press,” Haspel continued.

She added that, “As you know, this matter is currently under review by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) as part of their investigation into Russian active measures in the 2016 election — CIA is supporting those efforts. Additionally, many of your question relate to matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the FBI not CIA. I would refer you to SSCI for any additional questions you may have on this issue.”

Haspel did not answer any of the other questions posed by Senator Paul, including if the CIA aware of the efforts of Christopher Steele to collect information on the Trump campaign prior to Election Day or if the CIA received information from Steele’s investigation.

Senator Paul responded with one additional question, but has not yet received a response. He asked, via email, if the CIA received any information from British intelligence about Donald Trump, his campaign, or campaign associates.”

Though Haspel has been confirmed, it does not mean that she cannot be fired if she is found to have been lying in her responses to Senator Paul. If she was working with James Comey, she could and should receive the same fate. The CIA Director serves at the pleasure of the president.

 

Read the entire post.

 

 

Opinion

New Pork Rules Could Outlaw Bacon in California

This would be an unforgivable overreach by the state government.

Published

on

There are plenty of times in which Americans engage in a bit of exaggeration at the expense of our federal government.  It’s a defense mechanism, really, in which we are trained to extrapolate the worst possible outcome of any interaction with our elected officials, to guard against abuse at the hands of the tyrannical among us. Very rarely do these sorts of predictions come true.  Truly, this is just part of the American DNA, and it has deep roots in the caffeinated waters of Boston Harbor back in 1773. And if you thought that a new tax on tea was a flimsy enough excuse to rail against the oppressors, what happens when a state government outlaws bacon? At the beginning of next year, California will begin enforcing an animal welfare proposition approved overwhelmingly by voters in 2018 that requires more space for breeding pigs, egg-laying chickens and veal calves. National veal and egg producers are optimistic they can meet the new standards, but only 4% of hog operations now comply with the new rules. Unless the courts intervene or the state temporarily allows non-compliant meat to be sold in the state, California will lose almost all of its pork supply, much of which comes from Iowa, and pork producers will face higher costs to regain a key market. The threat is no hogwash, either. California’s restaurants and groceries use about 255 million pounds of pork a month, but its farms produce only 45 million pounds, according to Rabobank, a global food and agriculture financial services company. The National Pork Producers Council has asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture for federal aid to help pay for retrofitting hog facilities around the nation to fill the gap. Hog farmers said they haven’t complied because of the cost and because California hasn’t yet issued…

Continue Reading

Politics

Pro-Trump PACs Rake in The Dough, Setting Former POTUS Up with Massive War Chest

The sheer value of Trump’s coffers is nigh unprecedented.

Published

on

Despite his arbitrary removal from both Twitter and Facebook, former President Donald Trump continues to exude a great deal of sway over the American political ecosystem…and he’s only going to get more influential from here. Trump and his surrogates are still months away from officially announcing anything as far as 2024 goes, but, with the 2022 midterms just around the corner, the MAGA machine is already beginning to get tuned up. And let’s just say that there is plenty of fuel in the tank, too. Former President Donald Trump’s political committees brought in $82 million during the first half of 2021 and have $102 million in the bank, according to federal filings made public Saturday evening. The figures, shared first with POLITICO, underscore the profound reach of Trump’s fundraising power. While the former president is out of office and has been deplatformed on social media sites, he maintains a massive online donor network that he could lean on should he wage a 2024 comeback bid. The numbers are extraordinary, historically speaking. The scenario is virtually unprecedented: Never in history has a former president banked nine figures’ worth of donations to power a political operation. Over the first six months of the year, Trump’s political groups whipped up supporters with baseless claims of election fraud to pull in cash on a scale similar to the GOP’s official political arms, the Republican National Committee and the party’s House and Senate campaign committees. The numbers are undoubtedly troubling for liberals listening in from the left side of the aisle, as worries continue to grow about whether or not the Democrats have any shot at holding onto a majority in the House in 15 months’ time.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week