That was when the Biden family scandals were revealed during the 2020 election race in a computer Hunter Biden abandoned at a repair shop.

The FBI – falsely – told media corporations it was Russian disinformation and they should suppress it. Those intel bureaucrats said the same. And the CIA assisted.

And today, the DOJ has a long list of cases pending against President Donald Trump that have been assembled by Democrat politicians, some of whom actually campaigned for public office on the claims they would “get” Trump.

But Joe Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, now has gone on the record stating DOJ employees “do not bend to politics” and they “will not break under pressure.”

Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland is currently trying to throw President Trump in prison while he says this:

“Our norms are a promise that we will not allow the is Department to be treated as a political weapon.”

He’s gaslighting America. pic.twitter.com/0o1Dy5rx6R

— Steve Cortes (@CortesSteve) September 12, 2024

It is legacy and leftist media cooperative Associated Press that reported that Garland “will denounce” “conspiracy theories” about the politicization of the federal bureaucracy during a speech this week.

That’s even after FBI agents were revealed to have been plotting together to stop Trump’s presidency during the 2016 campaign, when they exchanged emails about how that could happen.

That was when the bureaucrats used a long list of lies assembled by Trump’s political opponent to open DOJ investigations into his campaign. It’s when a special counsel ultimately determined there was no evidence of the “Russia collusion” claims perpetrated by the DOJ.

The report said, “Garland will use a speech to U.S. attorneys gathered in Washington and other Justice Department members to vigorously defend the department’s integrity and impartiality and to condemn what he describes as ‘outrageous’ attacks that put law enforcement in harm’s way.”

According to prepared remarks publicized by the government, he will say, “These attacks have come in the form of conspiracy theories, dangerous falsehoods, efforts to bully and intimidate career public servants by repeatedly and publicly singling them out, and threats of actual violence.”

The comments continue, “Through your continued work, you have made clear that the Justice Department will not be intimidated by these attacks. But it is dangerous — and outrageous — that you have to endure them.”

Garland repeatedly has been called on to defend the actual politicization of his department, as evidenced by cases, court filings and records.

In fact, his department appointed a “special counsel,” who failed to obtain Senate confirmation, to indict Trump over and over.

For instance, Trump was indicted in a government documents dispute that had largely similar circumstances to a documents dispute for which Joe Biden was given a pass.

Trump was accused of a criminal conspiracy for his comments about the 2020 election. A Democrat prosecutor in New York, who campaigned on targeting Trump, indicted him on 34 felonies for misdemeanor business records violations. And a Democrat lawyer in New York, who also campaigned on getting Trump, sued him for hundreds of millions of dollars for business practices that experts confirmed in court were standard practice.

The prosecutions not actually run by the DOJ reportedly have been influenced by that department, with lawyers visiting in Washington during the times they assembled their charges.

Garland’s comments followed by just days Trump’s latest criticism of the DOJ’s politicization.

“It’s called weaponization. Never happened in this country. They weaponized the Justice Department,” the GOP presidential candidate said during a Tuesday debate.

“Every one of those cases was started by them against their political opponent, and I’m winning most of them, and I will win the rest on appeal.”

Some counts, in fact, have been dismissed, others are already on appeal, and some remain mired in a Supreme Court ruling that presidents have immunity for some actions in the White House.

The DOJ also was caught trying to give a special, kid gloves-soft, deal to Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, over a variety of charges. The deal fell apart under questioning by a federal judge, and Hunter now has been convicted of gun charges and pleaded guilty to tax charges.

Social media commenters were harsh on Garland:

“Was there a laugh track behind him?”

“They always accuse us of what they are actually doing.”

“Extreme gaslighting.”

“Do they really think that the American public is that stupid?”

“Funny that he has to hold a press conference to try to convince us that the doj isn’t corrupt.”

Garland: "There is not one rule for friends and another for foes. One rule for the powerful and another for the powerless. One rule for the rich and another for the poor. One rule for Democrats and another for Republicans."

Narrator: There are in fact different rules for all… pic.twitter.com/hv85WCMM0s

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 12, 2024

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

The district paid Panorama Education, an education software company founded by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s son-in-law, Xan Tanner, a total of $64,573 for the surveys, an annual membership fee and a professional development workshop for the 2023-2024 school year, according to documents obtained by PDE and shared with the Daily Caller News Foundation. The survey goes over a number of topics about school climate, including a section titled “Feelings About School,” which has students answer how often their teacher pushes them to think about race and ethnicity, ranging from “almost never” to “almost always.”

“How often do teachers encourage you to learn about people from different races, ethnicities, or cultures,” the survey reads. “How often do you think about what someone of a different race, ethnicity, or culture experiences?”

Students were also asked to weigh in on how their class discusses “major news events related to race” and how often the school encourages them to “think more deeply about race-related topics,” according to survey. Other questions ask students to rate how the school facilitates conversations about race and whether or not it does a good job helping “students speak out against racism.”

Erika Sanzi, director of outreach for PDE, told the DCNF that it was “strange” that a school district would spend thousands of dollars to “badger” students about race.

“There is something strange about spending so much taxpayer money on an outside vendor so you can badger kids about their thoughts and feelings on race, especially when there isn’t a shred of evidence that this relentless focus on race and ethnicity improves any outcomes for students,” Sanzi said.

A Panorama Education spokesperson told the DCNF that the district makes all the decisions about how to administer survey content to its students and what to do with the data after the fact.

“Panorama Education … helps students achieve academic success and well-being, and gives schools and school districts a platform to hear what parents, students and teachers need in the classroom,” the spokesperson said. “Districts own all the data and make decisions on how student data will be used. Our survey technology and research-backed templates are designed to help students succeed—which has become increasingly critical as we embark on academic recovery following the pandemic.”

A Massachusetts school district also paid $30,000 from 2018 to 2023 for social-emotional learning (SEL) surveys from Panorama Education for staff and students. The Old Rochester Regional School District’s “anti-racism subcommittee” conducted a Panorama Education survey of its 6-12 grade students during the 2021-2022 school year to gauge their “cultural awareness and action, diversity and inclusion, and sense of belonging.”

Panorama Education has been the subject of scrutiny due to its connection to Garland, who issued a memo in 2021 ordering the agency to “use its authority” on parents who were protesting at school board meetings all over the country. Some Republicans said that they felt Garland may have a conflict of interest during a 2021 House Judiciary hearing but the former director dismissed the idea, saying that there was “no conflict.”

CSSD did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

Garland testified that he couldn’t remember whether he talked to FBI personnel about the investigation of first son Hunter Biden and didn’t know how many confidential informants entered the Capitol during the riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

The attorney general, appointed by President Joe Biden, also hesitated to answer whether Catholics are “violent extremists,” as an infamous FBI memo said.

Here are seven takeaways from the House committee’s hearing at which Garland, the nation’s top law enforcement officer, testified.

1. ‘Traditional Catholics Are Violent Extremists? Yes or No?’

Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., brought up the January memo out of the FBI field office in Richmond, Virginia, detailing plans to spy on American Catholics. The leaked memo said “radical traditionalist Catholics” had the potential to become “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists.”

Van Drew asked Garland, who as head of the Justice Department oversees the FBI: “Do you agree that traditional Catholics are violent extremists? Yes or no?”

Garland said: “I have no idea what traditional means here.”

Van Drew then defined the term as “Catholics that go to church.”

Garland, who is Jewish, seemed to become indignant over the question. But he didn’t directly answer.

“The idea that someone with my family background would discriminate against any religion is so outrageous, so absurd,” Garland said forcefully.

Van Drew replied: “Mr. Attorney General, it was your FBI that did this.”

“It was your FBI that was sending—and we have the memo, we have the emails—that were sending undercover agents into Catholic churches,” the New Jersey Republican continued.

Garland replied that he and FBI Director Christopher Wray already had denounced the memo from the FBI’s Richmond field office.

“I and the director of the FBI have said that we were appalled by that memo,” Garland said.

Van Drew again asked: “Are they extremists or not, Attorney General?”

Garland responded: “Everything in that memo is appalling.”

2. ‘Don’t Recollect’ Personal Contact

Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., asked about who the attorney general has talked to regarding his department’s investigation of Hunter Biden for failing to file income tax returns reflecting all his overseas business dealings, including in China and Ukraine, and for drug-related gun offenses. That probe began in 2018, during the Trump administration.

“Has anyone from the White House provided direction at any time to you personally or to senior officials at the DOJ regarding how the Hunter Biden investigation was to be carried out?” Johnson asked.

Garland answered, “No.”

From there, the attorney general’s answer became sketchier.

“Have you had personal contact with anyone at FBI HQ about the Hunter Biden investigation?” Johnson asked.

“Uh, I don’t recollect the answer to that question,” Garland testified. “But the FBI works for the Justice Department.”

This answer seemed to surprise Johnson.

“You don’t recollect whether you talked to anybody at FBI headquarters about an investigation into the president’s son?” he asked.

Garland clarified: “I don’t believe that I did.”

Johnson noted that on July 10, 2023, U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss wrote a letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., in which the prosecutor said he “had discussions with departmental officials” regarding prosecuting cases in other jurisdictions under federal law (U.S. 28C Section 515).

Johnson asked: “With whom did Mr. Weiss have discussions?”

Garland replied: “I’m not going to get into internal deliberations of the department.”

Johnson: “But you must, sir. This is important for us. We have oversight responsibility over your department and we need these answers.”

Garland declined to give a clear answer.

“I made clear that if he wanted to bring a case in any jurisdiction, he would be able to do that,” Garland said, referring to Weiss. “The way you do that is to get an order signed by the attorney general, called a 515 order.”

Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys in California and Washington, D.C., declined to allow Weiss, a holdover from the Trump administration, to file charges against the younger Biden in their jurisdictions.

Last month, Garland named Weiss as special counsel, giving him more authority to investigate and bring charges under the law in the jurisdictions of his choice.

3. ‘Defunding the FBI’ Would Be ‘Catastrophic’

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, brought up the fact that some Republican lawmakers had called for shutting down the FBI. They did so in protest of what they saw as unequal treatment of Americans under the law, including the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s Florida home in August 2022.

“What would be the impact on America of defunding the FBI?” Nadler asked Garland.

The attorney general sounded alarms about such a move.

“Defunding the FBI would leave the United States naked to the maligned influence of the Chinese Communist Party, the attacks by Iranians on American citizens, attempts to assassinate former officials, up to Russian aggression, to North Korea cyberattacks, to violent crime in the United States, which the FBI helps to fight against,” Garland said.

He also said the FBI stops “all kinds of espionage” and pursues “domestic violent extremists who have attacked our churches, our synagogues, our mosques, and who have killed individuals out of racial hatred.”

“I cannot imagine the consequences of defunding the FBI, but they would be catastrophic,” Garland said.

4. About Weiss: ‘What Changed?’

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, noted that Weiss at one point wanted to bring charges against Hunter Biden in the District of Columbia, but U.S. Attorney for D.C. Matthew Graves declined to cooperate.

“You said he had complete authority, but he had already been turned down,” Jordan said, referring to Weiss. “He wanted to bring an action in the District of Columbia and the U.S. attorney there said, ‘No, you can’t.’ Then you go tell the United States Senate under oath that he has complete authority.”

Garland replied: “I’m going to say again that no one had the authority to turn him down. They could refuse to partner with him.”

Appearing to be taken aback, Jordan responded: “‘Refuse to partner’ is turning down.”

Garland replied: “It’s not the same, under a well-known Justice Department practice.”

Jordan also asked “What changed?”  in the time between the July 10 letter to Graham in which Weiss said he didn’t ask to be named a special counsel and Garland’s Aug. 11 announcement appointing Weiss as special counsel.

“Several days before my announcement, Mr. Weiss had asked to become special counsel,” Garland testified. “He explained that he had reached the stage in his investigation where he thought that appropriate.”

Jordan sarcastically referenced the launch of the Hunter Biden investigation in 2018.

“After five years, what stage are we in?” the Ohio Republican asked. “Are we in the beginning stage, the middle stage, the end stage, the keep-hiding-the-ball stage?”

Garland responded: “This one I would go back to the videotape, where I said I’m not permitted to discuss ongoing investigations.”

Jordan retorted: “Isn’t that convenient.”

“Something changed in 31 to 32 days from July 10 to Aug. 11,” Jordan added. “I think it’s two brave whistleblowers came forward and a judge called BS on the plea deal.”

Jordan was referring to the testimony of two IRS whistleblowers and the collapse of the Justice Department’s plea agreement with Hunter Biden, in which the president’s son would have faced no prison time.

5. ‘People Don’t Pay Bribes to Not Get Something’

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., suggested that the Biden Justice Department’s decision to close the Trump administration’s China Initiative, which since 2018 had investigated Chinese espionage in the U.S., correlated with millions of dollars from Chinese sources going to the Biden family.

Gaetz asked the attorney general: “Why was the China Initiative dissolved?”

Garland replied that China isn’t the only source of espionage and other attacks.

“We face attacks from four nation-states: North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran, and we need to focus our attention on the broad range of these attacks,” Garland said.

Gaetz seemed to scoff.

“Are you saying that North Korea has the same malign influence risk to the United States as the Chinese Communist Party?” Gaetz asked the attorney general. “Because here’s what it looks like. It looks like the Chinese gave all this money to the Bidens and then you guys came in and got rid of the China Initiative.”

Garland responded: “North Korea is a dangerous actor.”

Gaetz later followed up by asking: “Do you know about the money that moved through Rob Walker’s shell company? Yes or no?”

Garland didn’t give a direct answer.

“As I have said repeatedly, I have left these matters to Mr. Weiss,” he said. “I have not intruded. I have not interfered.”

Financial records show that from 2015 to 2017, Biden family members and their companies received $1.3 million in payments from accounts related to Walker, a Biden family associate, according to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee.

In March 2017, about two months after Joe Biden left the vice presidency, State Energy HK Limited, a Chinese company, wired $3 million to Walker’s company. The next day, Walker’s company wired $1.06 million to a company associated with James Gilliar, another Biden family associate.

Afterward, the Biden family members received approximately $1.06 million in payments to different bank accounts over a three-month period.

“It’s like you’re looking the other way on purpose, because everybody knows this stuff is happening. But people don’t pay bribes to not get something in return,” Gaetz told Garland.

“The China Initiative resulted in the convictions of a Harvard professor, of someone at Monsanto,” the Florida Republican said. “So we were working against the Chinese. They paid the Bidens. Now you are sitting here telling me that North Korea is the big threat?”

6. ‘Agents and Assets’ at Capitol Riot? ‘Don’t Know’

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., asked Garland whether any confidential informants were involved in the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

“How many agents or assets of the government were present on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6 and agitating in the crowd to go into the Capitol, and how many went into the Capitol?” Massie asked. “Can you answer that now?”

Garland replied: “I don’t know the answer to that question.”

Massie then asked: “You don’t know how many there were, or there were none?”

Garland affirmed his lack of knowledge.

“I don’t know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, I don’t know how many. I don’t know if there are any,” Garland said.

Massie said he didn’t believe the attorney general.

“I think you may have just perjured yourself [by saying] that you don’t know that there were any,” the Kentucky Republican said. “Do you want to say that again, that you don’t know there were any?

The attorney general again said: “I have no personal knowledge of this matter.”

On Tuesday, a federal grand jury indicted Ray Epps, a man seen on video telling protesters to enter the Capitol before the riot, on charges of disorderly or disruptive conduct on restricted grounds.

Some politicians and pundits have questioned why Epps had not been charged earlier, and whether he was a confidential informant.

“By the way, that was in reference to Ray Epps and yesterday, you indicted him. Isn’t that a wonderful coincidence?” Massie asked. “On a misdemeanor. Meanwhile, you’re sending grandmas to prison.”

Massie continued:

You are putting people away for 20 years for merely filming [during the Capitol riot]. Some people weren’t even there yet. You’ve got the guy on video who is saying, ‘Go into the Capitol.’ He’s directing people to the Capitol before [Trump’s] speech ends. He’s at the site of the first breach. You’ve got all the goods on him. And it’s an indictment for a misdemeanor? The American public isn’t buying it.

7. ‘That Goes Right to the White House’

Jordan pressed Garland on why Justice Department prosecutors investigating Hunter Biden allowed the statute of limitations to expire for tax charges.

Such charges would have stretched back to the younger Biden’s time on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company that paid him $50,000 a month while his father was vice president.

As vice president, Biden oversaw the Obama administration’s policy on Ukraine.

“They made an intentional decision to say we’re going to let the statute of limitations lapse,” Jordan told Garland. “I want to know who decided that and why they did it.”

Garland punted the answer to Weiss.

“Mr. Weiss was the supervisor of the investigation at that time and at all times,” Garland said. “He made the appropriate decisions. You’ll be able to ask him that question.”

Jordan responded that everyone knows the answer.

“Those tax years involved the president. It’s one thing to have a gun charge in Delaware. That doesn’t involve the president of the United States,” Jordan said. “But Burisma, oh my, that goes right to the White House. We can’t have that.”

Ken McIntyre contributed to this report.

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel to continue investigating President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.

Several 2024 Republican presidential candidates reacted Friday to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of U.S. Attorney David Weiss, the prosecutor investigating President Joe Biden’s son Hunter, to special counsel.

Garland appointed Weiss after the latter told him on Tuesday that he needed to continue investigating Hunter Biden with special counsel status. The GOP candidates hope that Weiss, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, could be an independent-thinker who can reveal the truth about the Biden family’s controversial business dealings, but were skeptic of Weiss’ impartiality.

“Crooked Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and the entire Biden Crime Family have been protected by the Justice Department for decades even though there is overwhelming evidence and credible testimony detailing their wrongdoing of lying to the American people and selling out the country to foreign enemies for the Biden Cartel’s own financial gain,” a spokesperson for Trump told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Weiss was heavily criticized for a plea agreement between the DOJ and Hunter Biden that included a pretrial diversion agreement which would have granted Hunter immunity from future prosecutions. The deal eventually collapsed after the intercession of Judge Maryellen Noreika.

“If this special counsel is truly independent — even though he failed to bring proper charges after a four year investigation and he appears to be trying to move the case to a more Democrat-friendly venue – he will quickly conclude that Joe Biden, his troubled son Hunter, and their enablers, including the media, which colluded with the 51 intelligence officials who knowingly misled the public about Hunter’s laptop, should face the required consequences,” the spokesperson added.

Former Vice President Mike Pence applauded the appointment of the special counsel to investigate the Biden family.

“I just heard news of the appointment of the Special Counsel in the matter involving President Biden’s son Hunter. To be honest with you, I can’t relate to what his son was doing when he was vice president. When I was vice president, my son was flying an F-35 for the Marine Corps defending this country,” Pence said in a statement. “I think it’s about time that we saw the appointment of a special counsel to get to the bottom of not only what Hunter Biden was doing, but what the Biden family was doing.”

BREAKING

AG Garland Holds Press Conference Announcing Special Counsel For Hunter Biden Investigation

GARLAND: "I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint [Weiss] as Special Counsel." pic.twitter.com/RwbMYFWW77

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) August 11, 2023

Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy revisited a previous statement he made in late June where he called for the appointment of a special counsel to the case, and added, “It happened. Good. Now let’s see if it’s more than a fig leaf.”

“I am deeply skeptical of special counsels. We should dispense with the charade that a ‘special’ counsel is somehow unbiased or immune from the Administrative State’s corruption. It’s a lose-lose proposition: either the special counsel still reports to the attorney general and is bound by DOJ rules and policies in which case it’s a farce, or else the special counsel is entirely unaccountable which creates an Inspector Javert dilemma,” Ramaswamy wrote. “But there cannot be a two-tiered justice system in this country. If there’s a Trump-focused special counsel, there *must* be a Biden-focused special counsel too – to investigate mounting evidence of Biden’s potential criminal violations.”

Weiss allegedly told lawmakers in October 2022 that he did not have ultimate authority when it came to what charges should or shouldn’t be filed against Biden, an email presented by IRS Whistleblower Gary Shapley revealed.

Conservative radio personality Larry Elder mocked Garland’s appointment in a statement to the DCNF.

“Too little, too late,” said Elder. “O.J. will find the killer or killers of Ron and Nicole before the special counsel concludes the investigation.”

Though Weiss will have special counsel status in the Biden investigation, he will remain as U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware.

“The appointment of Mr. Weiss reinforces for the American people the department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters,” Garland said Friday. “I am confident that Mr. Weiss will carry out his responsibility in an even-handed and urgent manner, and in accordance with the highest traditions of this department.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

Clear now the Biden Admin is going to charge Trump with seditious conspiracy. This is the end goal of the Garland grand jury and the Proud Boys convictions. GOP primary challengers are telling donors they are betting on it taking him out of the race.

Clear now the Biden Admin is going to charge Trump with seditious conspiracy

This is the end goal of the Garland grand jury and the Proud Boys convictions

GOP primary challengers are telling donors they are betting on it taking him out of the race

— Jack Poso (@JackPosobiec) May 5, 2023

If this is true, and there’s no reason to believe it isn’t, then there are two key takeaways. First and foremost, the Biden-Harris regime is evil, but you already knew that. Second, opportunism trumps righteousness among those in the GOP field who smell blood. This shouldn’t be dismissed as politics-as-usual. Any candidate who doesn’t absolutely admonish the DOJ for going after Trump is a evil as the regime they’re trying to replace.

I’ve also been hesitant to report on any hopeful news about reversing stolen elections or at least holding people accountable for stealing them. That doesn’t jibe with my ongoing fight to try to make those things happen; call me a masochist for continuing to fight for something that I believe is usually futile. But as a United States citizen I am sworn to defend the Constitution and there have been few greater crimes against this nation than the last two stolen elections. So I fight even if I don’t have much hope.

I was not one who “moved on” nor will I ever be until the truth is revealed.

The last couple of days have brought me the brightest glimmer of hope I’ve had in two years when it comes to stolen elections. After talking to many people involved with campaigns in four states, I can tell you that there really is a chance we can have movement on this issue. Arizona is the best one in play, in which I’d give about a 20%-30% chance of success. Earlier this week I was at 5% at best, so this is a good change. MOMENTUM!

In Arizona, we do not have to prove voter fraud. We don’t even need to prove intent. We just have to prove there are enough Arizonans who have valid reasons to not trust the election results. That’s it. And since we’re talking about civil cases, we do not need to achieve the high bar of “beyond a reasonable doubt.” We need a preponderance of evidence in our favor and a judge who’s willing to do the right thing by annulling the election.

Those last two components are easier said than done. Even though we only need a preponderance of evidence in theory, the reality is we need a slam dunk. We need it to be a no-brainer that the voters in Arizona have been disenfranchised by the process, by a vote-counting system that was run by a candidate for governor, and by a series of uncanny events that took place on election day. We also need to get the right judge, which can be challenging.

But it can happen. I have hope, as I detailed on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show.

Here are some of the clips shared by Kari Lake that point to the challenges the Arizona election posed:

After registering at ASU, Tiffany's son received a text offering him $250 to rally for Democrats

In line to vote, he was told to leave & that his vote would not be counted

Inside, he was told he was not registered, given a Sharpie, & told to drop a provisional ballot in box 3. pic.twitter.com/9NGTvGPvSn

— Kari Lake (@KariLake) November 18, 2022

WATCH this whole video @maricopacounty, @billgatesaz & @stephen_richer.

Voting is the most sacred American tradition and this is how you treated our people.

Shameful doesn’t begin to describe what happened.

VOLUME UP pic.twitter.com/ok8r4DWRka

— Tyler Bowyer (@tylerbowyer) November 18, 2022

Watch this. Then tell me what you think. I’ll stand by… pic.twitter.com/uE6xxm7zCa

— Kari Lake (@KariLake) November 18, 2022

Caroline gets it. pic.twitter.com/7WQBDAA0rZ

— Kari Lake (@KariLake) November 18, 2022

If Arizona or any other state can be opened up to full-scale investigations and a healthy sense of skepticism from the electorate, there’s a chance this could be the first domino to fall that could extend to multiple midterm elections. If the momentum picks up, it could even extend back to 2020. Pray, folks.

Unfortunately, Garland and his handlers have decided to double down and appoint a special counsel. According to WSJ:

Attorney General Merrick Garland will appoint a special counsel to determine whether former President Donald Trump should face charges stemming from Justice Department probes, according to a person familiar with the matter.

A formal announcement, which is expected by Friday afternoon, would come three days after Mr. Trump announced another bid for the presidency and would mark the naming of the third independent prosecutor in five years to examine issues involving Mr. Trump. The exact scope of the special counsel’s remit and who it would be couldn’t be determined.

The move reflects the sensitivity of Mr. Garland overseeing any investigation into Mr. Trump now that he is a declared presidential candidate. President Biden, who has said he intends to run for re-election in 2024, nominated Mr. Garland to head the Justice Department in part for the former judge’s promise to insulate the agency from political influence.

Some legal experts have anticipated such an appointment. Regulations governing special counsels provide for the attorney general to name an outsider if he determines that the investigation or prosecution presents a conflict of interest for the department and recusals of certain officials wouldn’t be enough to overcome the concerns.

As I noted in a segment on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, this is all about picking the wrong option, and that should concern us. What do they expect to accomplish? What charges are they going to “trump up” against Donald Trump?

Here’s my take:

Mike Pence gave a seemingly heartfelt speech the other day to defend the “rank-and-file” at the FBI and to call on people to stop attacking them. We can only assume he means we need to stop criticizing them since I do not recall physical attacks against FBI agents recently. So Pence wants us to accept what they do, blame Merrick Garland for political bias, and move on as if there isn’t really anything wrong with the bureau itself.

He said, “Our party stands with the men and women who stand on the thin blue line at the federal and state and local level, and these attacks on the FBI must stop. Calls to defund the FBI are just as wrong as calls to defund the police. I also want to remind my fellow Republicans, we can hold the attorney general accountable for the decision he made without attacking the rank-and-file law enforcement personnel at the FBI.”

Listen:

Pence: "Calls to defund the FBI are just as wrong as calls to defund the police."
pic.twitter.com/46XwI3hF1Y

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) August 17, 2022

Pence claimed the Republican Party is the party of law and order. This is mostly true, especially compared to the lawless Democrat Party. But the FBI has demonstrated time and again that they are not an organization of law and order. They unleash their devious tactics on the American people in a way that can only be seen as a trial run for a near-future police state. Today’s FBI operates under the vision of Barack Obama who pictured a federal enforcement unit dedicated to keeping law-abiding citizens in line with the Deep State’s nefarious goals.

Pence claimed calls to defund the FBI are like calls to defund the police. This is absolutely wrong. The stark difference here is that the uniformity of tactics and goals of our centralized FBI are fundamentally corrupt. Actions of individual FBI agents are defended by the organization even when they’re universally opposed by the people.

On the flip side, actions by individual cops who go over the line are disavowed by their departments. Cops get fired for doing their jobs wrong. FBI agents get promoted for doing what the people believe to be wrong. Most problems we have with police are diverse and truly one-off while the problems we have with the FBI are systemic.

This is not about holding Merrick Garland, Christopher Wray, or a few “bad apples” at the top accountable, as Pence would have us believe. The reason that so many are calling to defund the FBI is because the rot pervades throughout the bureau.

A majority of Americans believe the FBI is the “personal gestapo” of the Biden regime, but this is inaccurate. Pence and others would have you believe that Biden and Garland have somehow transformed the FBI into what it is today, but they seem to forget that the Gretchen Whitmer fednapping plot happened under Donald Trump and Bill Barr. They forget that people like Ron Paul have been calling out the anti-American foundation of the FBI itself for decades, or that we’ve seen Gestapo-like actions from the FBI since its inception.

There have been about two dozen whistleblowers at the FBI that have come out in recent days. That may seem like a lot, but that means there are around 7,800 special agents and 11,000 other FBI employees who are either too weak to speak out against corruption, too incompetent to realize the corruption exists, or are political hacks themselves who relish in it all.

Julie Kelly over at American Greatness put out an important thread Thursday that highlights why Pence is wrong to say the problems at the FBI are limited and that the rank-and-file are just cops doing their jobs.

Hey @Mike_Pence you should have a chat with these women, tell them to stop criticizing the FBI!

And you need to defend the FBI investigator in the Whitmer case who beat up his wife in a drunken rage and was arrested after driving around town drunk before cops caught him. GOP must defend law enforcement no matter what!

And you need to defend the FBI investigator in the Whitmer case who beat up his wife in a drunken rage and was arrested after driving around town drunk before cops caught him. GOP must defend law enforcement no matter what!https://t.co/YwKGsxMAcS

— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) August 18, 2022

And you should tell Brandon Caserta, one of the 2 men acquitted in Whitmer hoax, that he shouldn’t complain that he spent 18 months in prison after FBI entrapped him. He’s innocent but BACK THE BLUE!

Hey @Mike_Pence hundreds of Americans have been tormented by FBI over Jan 6. Here’s one: Tom Caldwell, a former Navy Lt. Comm, dragged out of his house, watched FBI agents point rifles at his wife standing in her nightgown. Who are they to complain?

Hey @Mike_Pence hundreds of Americans have been tormented by FBI over Jan 6. Here's one: Tom Caldwell, a former Navy Lt. Comm, dragged out of his house, watched FBI agents point rifles at his wife standing in her nightgown.

Who are they to complain?https://t.co/xvpN4ph33l

— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) August 18, 2022

Those four examples are telling and when I was putting together today’s show I started making a list of other clear-cut examples of total corruption within the organization itself. After finding a dozen incidents that proved the point, I realized that chances are strong our audience is already well-aware that the FBI makes political decisions to determine not only which cases they need to pursue, but which ones require a full-blown coverup in order to prevent others from pursuing them.

We saw this in its starkest form with the Hunter Biden laptop coverup. Lest we forget, they had the laptop in their possession since 2019. Under Bill Barr, they chose not to pursue it. Instead, they went after Rudy Giuliani, John Paul Mac Isaac, and others who wanted the truth to get out about Joe Biden. Hammering home more examples of FBI malfeasance simply isn’t necessary for an America First audience who knows the corruption runs deep.

Before aborting that angle of discussion, a few conspiratorial thoughts crossed my mind. Mike Pence may be a backstabbing RINO and a compromised politician, but he’s not an idiot. He had to realize that coming forth now in defense of the FBI would be politically damaging. He could have just as easily skipped the calls to stop attacking the FBI by simply saying Merrick Garland should be held accountable. That’s the type of milquetoast statement he’s made in the past. Why would he risk losing political points to defend the FBI?

The possible reason is not good. As both an agent of the Uniparty Swamp and a minion of the globalist elites, Pence is a tool to spread the messages the powers-that-be want heard. It was conspicuous to me when I first heard it that he said we must stop “attacking the rank-and-file,” but I couldn’t put my finger on what bothered me about it until I stepped back and put more pieces together. We’ve heard warnings since shortly after the Mar-a-Lago raid that domestic terrorists may target FBI headquarters or other federal buildings. We even heard an odd warning from the FBI and DHS about a possible dirty bomb attack. Looking at it all as a whole, it made me wonder if they have something planned.

If nothing happens, then Pence’s defense of the FBI will hang over him every time the bureau does something bad. But what if something happens? What if there are literal attacks against the rank-and-file at the FBI? Donald Trump has been hitting the FBI hard for their raid and his supporters have been outraged by the clear political bias they’ve demonstrated. If an actual terrorist attack DOES happen, Pence will be viewed as being on the right side of the matter for calling on people to stop attacking while Trump would be blamed for inciting the attacks.

Average Americans do not want to believe our own government would engage in false flag attacks despite decades of evidence that they do. Today, the United States is a powder keg of division that’s ready to blow up in the streets of cities across the country with one major inciting incident. Were the Mar-a-Lago raid, subsequent warnings of domestic terrorism, and Pence’s politically inexplicable statement of support for the FBI all seeds planted in preparation for a false flag attack that would put a target on the backs of every America First patriot?

God forbid.

Dividing America has been one of the intentions of the globalist elites for some time. The riots of the summer of 2020 were a trial run. Imagine if both sides of the political aisle were prompted to act out. Imagine if the civil war most Americans desperately want to avoid is prompted by a false flag attack and subsequent crackdown on America First patriots. In such a scenario, Mike Pence would have the opportunity to be “the great uniter” of the nation. He would be positioned to be installed into the White House in 2025.

They say when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. It seems all the machinations and moving parts in the various plots against America bring me back to The Great Reset as the end goal. It’s possible that my single-mindedness to prevent that ugly future makes me see conspiracies in every shadow. Then again, perhaps the reason I and others see it like that is because it’s true.

During the last two years, the federal agency has provided $1,369,000 to fund some 40 climate-focused projects. The 29 such grants approved for fiscal year 2022 include support for multidisciplinary artist Hajra Waheed’s collaboration “with researchers and organizers on issues such as land sovereignty and food and climate justice”; development of a Baltimore Center Stage production titled, “A Play for the Living in a Time of Extinction”; and a grant to the Dance Exchange in Takoma Park, Maryland, to use “movement and storytelling to explore the ways different landscapes and communities are navigating climate change.”

Never mind the prospect of reins on executive climate action in light of the Supreme Court’s stinging regulatory rebuke last week: These art projects are one small piece of an explosion of climate spending since President Biden called during his first days in office for a “whole-of-government approach to combating the climate crisis.” In response, every department, bureau, and agency has climate-related budget lines, responding to Biden’s mandate by claiming a slice of the climate pie.

Where the Trump administration’s 150-page budget overview for the fiscal year 2020 mentioned the word climate just once (and that was a reference to “school climate” – that is, educational environment), the current White House 2023 budget overview mentions the word “climate” 187 times and the phrase “climate crisis” 33 times in its 158 pages.

The administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2023 calls for “a total of $44.9 billion to tackle the climate crisis,” $16.7 billion more than climate spending in 2021, according to the president’s budget.

“Climate change is not only a real and growing threat,” Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan said, “but it also presents an economic opportunity.” These include:

• The Department of Health and Human Services plans to boost spending on the CDC’s Climate and Health Program from $10 million to $110 million, to “identify potential health effects associated with climate change and implement health adaptation plans.”
• The National Institutes of Health are ramping up research on “climate change impact on health,” with grants for projects “that address the impact of climate change on health” and technologies for measuring “the effects of climate change and extreme weather events on human health.”
• Even as it struggles with the growing crisis on the southern border, the Department of Homeland Security in its 2023 fiscal year budget asks for $55 million to battle climate change. Of that, $2 million will be spent “to stand up a Climate Change Program Management Office,” and $4 million will go to the bureaucratic activities of “tracking, monitoring, and auditing … environmental planning compliance actions.” DHS is also committed to electrifying half its fleet of motor vehicles by the end of the decade.
• The State Department is seeking $2.3 billion for a broad range of climate-related expenditures including $2 million on “support for post-led climate diplomacy”; $7 million for “global climate diplomacy”; $2.6 million for the “Climate Change Public Diplomacy Fund”; $7.9 million for the “Center of Climate and Sustainability”; $17 million for “Overseas Climate Resilience, Building Energy, and Sustainability Projects”; and over $16 million to support the “Special Presidential Envoy for Climate” — aka John Kerry currently.  State is also seeking $5 million to buy or lease electric vehicles for the department.

Linda J. Bilmes, a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government who studies the federal budget, says that the Biden administration is “trying to send a message that in everything we do, we should be attentive to the issue.” Part of “the problem of dealing with an issue so big,” Bilmes added, “is that responsibility is so fragmented.”

Increased funding to protect coastlines, inspect wind turbines and solar farms, and promote the use of carbon-free energy sources directly align with Biden’s call to address what he calls the “existential threat” of climate change. But there are other organizing principles – reflecting progressive concerns – that inform the budget requests. Chief among these is Biden’s belief that climate should be addressed across the government as an issue of “environmental justice.” The NIH supports that agenda, stating that “Research has shown the impact of climate change differs across populations depending on socioeconomic advantages.”

The Department of Housing and Urban Development plans to spend over $1 billion in “climate resilience and energy efficiency improvements.” For example, HUD promises to advance “climate resilience and environmental justice by redeveloping and replacing distressed public and multifamily housing and neighborhood amenities with resilient and energy-efficient structures.” It might be pointed out, however, that one of HUD’s main responsibilities is to redevelop distressed public housing. Is HUD’s commitment to confronting the threat of climate change a new imperative, or just a new way to justify the department and its activities?

The Environmental Protection Agency is also pursuing environmental justice. Under EPA’s new strategic plan, the top goal is to “Tackle the Climate Crisis.” Following a close second is Goal 2, which commits the EPA to “Take Decisive Action to Advance Environmental Justice and Civil Rights.” In practice that means embedding environmental justice into all of the agency’s “Programs Policies and Activities.”

It isn’t clear, however, whether the EPA will be able to re-invent itself as a ministry of environmental justice, given the Supreme Court’s consequential decision Thursday limiting what powers the agency can exercise without explicit authorization by Congress.

The Court’s ruling in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, with its requirements that regulators stick to their lanes, may also put the brakes on President Biden’s efforts to turn every department and agency into climate police.

At least for now, the Department of Justice is committed to “environmental justice” too. Don’t confuse the new effort with the old. The Environment and Natural Resources Division at DOJ, has been enforcing federal environmental laws for more than a century. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced in May a new DOJ Office of Environmental Justice. “Although violations of our environmental laws can happen anywhere, communities of color, indigenous communities, and low-income communities often bear the brunt of the harm caused by environmental crime, pollution, and climate change,” he said.

The Army Corps of Engineers is tasked with advancing environment justice, as is the Department of Energy. DOE recently awarded $3.6 million in cash prizes to fund “Climate solutions for underrepresented communities.” Climate change isn’t just a crisis, it is a crisis that demands redistribution, which in turn calls for greater intervention by the federal government. The prizes involved various offices and entities within Energy – the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, and the Office of Technology Transitions.

In response to the president’s call for “climate adaptation plans” across the government, the Department of Education came up with a “Green Ribbon Schools” award for institutions that “teach effective environmental and sustainability education.” This year’s Green Ribbon School winners were announced in April. One awardee was Escuela Verde in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a public charter school devoted to “ecopedagogy.” The Department of Education celebrates the “school’s emphasis on food and food justice” which “has led to an entirely vegetarian school lunch.”

“I’ve seen this before,” says Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute. “When an issue gets hot, every federal agency knows they can maximize their budget by tailoring their programs and messaging around the hot theme.”

Among the topics that have been used to justify spending are everything from rural broadband to gender and structural racism. “Even the Department of Transportation is receiving money to deal with past racial discrimination related to the Interstate Highway System.”

The sweeping agenda has also inspired projects that tap into New Deal nostalgia. With overtones of the Great Depression program to put young, unemployed men to work on public lands – the Civilian Conservation Corps – the Department of the Interior proposes to launch a new Civilian Climate Corps. And Interior is hardly the only department getting into that action: The Department of Labor proposes spending $10 million “to partner with AmeriCorps and other agencies to establish a Civilian Climate Corps.” Among those agencies is the department’s Employment and Training Administration.

Kate DeAngelis, international finance program manager for Friends of the Earth, says she is pleased with the Biden administration’s whole-of-government approach. She’d actually like to see even more of it. “Unfortunately,” she says, “not every agency is doing its fair share to combat climate change.” DeAngelis’ complaint is that agencies such as the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the U.S. International Development Corporation continue to support fossil fuel projects around the world, “despite the devastating impacts it will have on the climate.”

Still, some agencies appear to be hard-pressed to find a slice of the climate pie they can call their own.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is promoting new building codes, calling for research on “the impacts of climate change” to shape those codes. (One easy approach might simply be for state and local governments to deny permits for oceanside high-rises built on sand.) FEMA shows how departments and agencies have been using the specter of a climate crisis to build political support for government actions. One of FEMA’s main goals is to “Drive public action on building codes,” an effort spurred by using “climate science messaging to increase public demand for building codes and standards.”

Agencies few Americans have ever heard of are trying to get in on the action. Among the environmental initiatives being promoted at the Department of the Treasury are those found at the office of the Inspector General for Tax Administration, or TIGTA. With a proposed budget for the 2023 fiscal year of $182 million, TIGTA has many responsibilities. It is tasked with protecting taxpayer information, improving tax compliance, and overseeing Internal Revenue Service “efforts to implement tax law changes.” The tax IG investigates scams targeting the elderly; prosecutes cyber criminals who attack IRS web sites; and improves “the integrity of IRS operations by detecting and deterring waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct.”

Treasury promises that in its audits and investigations TIGTA will support the department’s strategic goals. Among them, “Combat Climate Change.” But how? TIGTA points to its fleet of 200 vehicles and promises to replace them with electric vehicles.

But that may be easier said than done. Plans to replace government cars and trucks with electrics, whether at TIGTA, Homeland Security, or the State Department, “are not to be taken seriously,” says Benjamin Zycher, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Eliminate every vehicle used by the federal government and the effect on the climate – even under the worst-case scenario calculations – would be vanishingly small. Even if one were to eliminate the auto emissions of the entire federal government, the change in expected global temperatures would be “essentially zero.”

Professor Bilmes says that energy efficiencies are important across the federal government, and particularly at the Department of Defense, given that DOD “is the world’s single largest purchaser of fuel and vehicles.”

“We spend so much money on government,” says Bilmes, “that government should be in the vanguard of being energy efficient.”

Image by COP26 via Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0. Article cross-posted from Real Clear Investigations.