Glenn Greenwald Says FBI Is Manufacturing Domestic Terrorism Cases

$upport via Cash App

Glenn Greenwald on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (07/27/22)

Independent journalist and whistleblower Glenn Greenwald appeared on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (07/27/22) to discuss the recent bombshell whistleblower revelation that the FBI is essentially manufacturing domestic terrorism cases to justify the Biden administration’s push to go after White Supremacists and other domestic violent extremists(DVEs) after the January 6th insurrection. 

Greenwald went even further than that, saying the practice of manufacturing domestic terrorism cases has been going on, even with the original war on terrorism that was launched after the 9/11 attacks–something Yours Truly has constantly screamed about, to your rolling eyes of course. 

This intro by host Ingraham is important in establishing the context for Greenwald’s interview (video at 0:34): “The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee[Rep Jim Jordan(OH)]told Fox Digital that new whistleblower documents allege that the FBI is pressuring[agents]to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism, that are not examples of domestic violent extremism, and Jordan alleges that this is being done in order to justify the Biden administration’s push to focus on these cases and have a special unit focusing on them.” 

Asked by host Ingraham whether the FBI is making up domestic terrorism cases, Greenwald said (video at 1:13): “You know it’s not surprising…even though they now say January 6th is the reason they have to increase their attention to this problem, in fact, even before January 6th the Biden administration was saying one of its key priorities was to import the war on terror on to domestic soil and make that be a new war, only this time aimed at American citizens, and throughout 2021 there were so many instances where DHS issued one warning after the next…none of which materialized. You could see them exaggerating and inflating the threat the entire time because what they want to do is usher in all sorts of authoritarian attacks on civil liberties in the name of this domestic war on terror, and since they don’t have the cases, now they are just making them up, which is by the way what they did with the first war on terror as well.” 

Asked whether our intelligence agencies are abusing these tools to go after their political critics(something Putin and other autocrats are known for), Greenwald responded(video at 2:40): “You know we’ve obtained, and I’ve done reporting on the documents from Homeland Security where they identify the kind of people they regard as “domestic extremists”, and usually it’s just people with anti-establishment politics…people who are against the government, who question the legitimacy of government authority, even there are sometimes people on the left, say animal rights activists or environmental activists, and people on the right who are pro-life activists. It’s clearly aimed at any sort of exercise of free speech and free association and free political protesting that the constitution is supposed to guarantee, that they are going to say are just extremists and now should be regarded as terrorism.” 

Yours Truly has warned you about manufactured terrorism cases and importantly, how that is in itself, a threat to national security–to which you rolled your eyes of course. Here’s the point one more time, so that you finally get it. 

When these terrorism/ counterterrorism resources are abused by our Intel agencies to go after people they know, are not terrorists, and with seemingly zero pushback from Congress & MSM, sooner or later, the public loses confidence in our counterterrorism efforts/intel agencies.

Why is this a national security threat? It is a national security threat because when real domestic terrorism threats arise, like the one we have now with White Supremacists, and the intel agencies need more powers(statutes) and resources($$) to tackle the legitimate problem, the abuses end up ruining the reputations of such agencies so much, that the public(Congress) is unwilling to grant them the extra power and resources they need, even though everybody acknowledges the White Supremacy problem. In other words, the public knows there’s a legitimate White Supremacy/violent extremism problem, they just can’t trust the corrupt intel agencies with any more powers–therein lies the national security threat/problem—the understandable lack of faith. The same applies with the problems we recently saw with COVID vaccines–very skeptical public because of long-running and yet unaddressed questions (zero congressional hearings) about non-consensual human experimentation, primarily by the military industrial complex. 

Greenwald is somewhat of a polarizing figure so naturally, there will be efforts by his former liberal allies in the mainstream media to dismiss his manufactured terrorism charge. It is important to point out however, that other very respectable figures have long raised concerns about this very issue, chief among them former FBI Special Agent Mike German, currently a Fellow at the Brennan Center. This video, on how our intelligence agencies, and the FBI in particular, have become the biggest threats to democracy, is a must watch, and largely validates what Greenwald said on Ingraham’s show.

Bottom line folks, a wise man once said, “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Ever since 9/11, we’ve given our intelligence agencies absolute power to prosecute the war on terrorism. There was a reasonable expectation from the public, that Congress and MSM, would act as checks to this absolute power, something we now know was a total fantasy. This absolute power has corrupted our intel agencies so absolutely, that now when they come begging for more tools to combat the legitimate threat of White Supremacy/domestic extremism, nobody wants to “extend them the extra line of credit.” This is just the latest example as to why strict oversight in instances where government agencies are granted immense powers over people’s lives, is not just good for the public’s interest, but also for the said agencies. 

Also, it cannot be left unsaid that even though the media and some in Congress are just now beginning to speak out about the abuse of our counterterrorism resources, they are yet to start addressing the equally important topic as to what is actually done to the said innocent manufactured terrorists–the so-called targeted individuals. Let’s just say, when that is finally exposed, hopefully soon, many will quibble with the notion that we are “the land of the free”.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Is It Time To Hold Fox News Accountable Over Its Role In The January 6th Insurrection?

$upport via Cash App

An interesting segment on MSNBC’s Katie Phang Show(06/11/22) delved into the burning question among members of the public, as to whether Fox News should be held accountable for what many believe, was an incitement by some of its leading hosts towards the violent insurrection at the Capitol on 01/06/2021. This question is resurfacing because a former senior editor at Fox News, one Chris Stirewalt, who was known to openly criticize the network’s super close ties to the Trump administration and its far right extremist backers, is set to testify at the January 6th Committee’s second public hearing set for Monday(06/13/22). It is expected that Stirewalt will draw a direct connection between some of the leading insurrectionists and Fox News’ hosts. Katie Phang’s guest Danielle Moodie, who hosts the Woke AF Podcast, thinks Fox News should absolutely be held accountable for it’s role in the January 6th insurrection.

Host Katie Phang:“One of the witnesses on Monday, we know, is Chris Stirewalt. He was fired from Fox after calling Arizona for Biden. He’s also been known to say Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party. Do you think the committee is going to start zeroing in on the White House’s[Trump’s] interactions with the network Fox News?”

Danielle Moodie:“I would love for them to do that. I would love for the Department of Justice to do that, I’d love for the FCC to do that, I mean the reality here is that Fox News for the longest time, is the propaganda arm, it is a dangerous entity, and so I think it is incredibly important for them not to just look at this and say, ‘Oh well, freedom of speech, we can’t touch it’. We have to see how all of these pieces fit together, and I think that without Fox News, you wouldn’t have the kind of amplification of the insurrection, and replacement theory, and all of the things that we know that these militias…and the Trump base holds dear, and so yes, I think that they absolutely should be zeroing in on Fox at some point, and I hope it’s soon.”

Bottom line folks, we can complain about the rise of White nationalism and other far right violent extremist groups all we want, but unless we are willing and able to confront the Fox News engine that we know, powers all these dangerous groups, then we might as well start preparing for the next, possibly successful insurrection. If the January 6th Commitee is serious about its stated goal of preventing another violent insurrection, then as Danielle Moodie correctly points out, it necessarily has to deal with the role of Fox News in the 2021 insurrection, and potentially, a future one. Put another way, it’s about time Fox News’ freedom of speech defense got put to the test. Incitement to violence is a well known exception to a freedom of speech claim.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Judge Lina Hidalgo: You Cannot Discuss Public Safety Without Discussing The Role Of Guns

$upport via Cash App

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo on MSNBC’s Last Word w/Lawrence O’Donnell(05/24/22)

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo appeared on MSNBC’s Last Word w/Lawrence O’Donnell show(05/24/22) to push for gun reform in Texas, following the tragic shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, that left 19 children and two teachers dead.

Judge Hidalgo(video at 4:11): “The Houston Chronicle just published an oped and they ask in this context of law and order frenzy that’s taking over the country: What kind of a law and order state does so little to prevent the massacre of 18 babies in their own school? That’s what we need to call out. You cannot have a discussion about public safety without discussing the role of guns, of these weapons of mass destruction…”

This is a point that cannot be reiterated enough. Republicans in Texas and elsewhere, cannot have it both ways. They cannot go around screaming about “rising violent crime under Biden/Democrats” while at the same time seemingly totally oblivious to their/NRA’s huge role in the proliferation of such guns. As Judge Hidalgo stated, citing a report from the Harris County Medical Examiner, there’s a direct correlation between rising crime and the lax GOP gun laws(video at 2:05): “Our Medical Examiner just released data that the percentage of homicides related to guns has only increased in Texas and here in Harris County since the state has relaxed gun safety laws more and more.”

There’s no other way to interpret this other than Governor Abbott and his Texas Republicans have made the state a dangerous place because of their lax gun laws meant to placate the NRA.

Bottom line folks, Republicans, and especially Texas Republicans, should not be allowed to continue with their faux outrage over “rising crime under Democrats.” Democrats need to do a better job in reminding voters as we approach the 2022 midterms, that lax gun laws passed by Republicans, have a lot to do with the rising crime, especially homicides.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Tulsi Gabbard Issues Cease And Desist Letters Against Senator Romney, Keith Olbermann

$upport via Cash App

Former Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard appeared on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson show (04/20/22) where she revealed that she has issued cease and desist letters to Senator Mitt Romney(R-UT) and liberal media personality Keith Olbermann over treason accusations leveled at her by the two, for what they perceive as her support for Russia. Gabbard said treason is one of the most serious crimes in the United States, adding that the invocation of such a serious crime by Sen Romney and Olbermann, is only intended to scare her(and others), into silence–the so-called “chilling effect”. As you know, a cease and desist letter is a precursor to a lawsuit, so she’s basically telling Romney and Olbermann, “knock it off, or I’ll see you in federal court.”

Gabbard told host Tucker Carlson(video at 0:42): “As you mentioned, I still serve in the U.S. Army Reserves today, I’m a Lieutenant Colonel, and 19 years ago when I enlisted in the military, I took an oath to support and defend our constitution. I took that very same oath when I was elected to serve in Congress, where I served for 8 years. Senator Mitt Romney has taken that oath, as has every other member of Congress who has had the priviledge of serving, and if Mitt Romney had read the constitution, he would know that treason, the crime that he is accusing me of, that is punishable by death, is so serious, that our founders deemed it to be the only crime worthy of being defined in our constitution. So the situation we are facing here is a very serious one, not because its about me, but because it has a much bigger impact on our country. When powerful and influential people basically threaten and intimidate people into silence, as Mitt Romney, Keith Olbermann and others are doing, they are hoping to achieve that effect, that if anybody dare speak out against the government, that if anybody dares criticize whatever the permanent Washington establishment’s narrative is, then you’ll be smeared as a treasonous traitor”

So what do you think? Is Tulsi Gabbard right in standing up for freedom of speech, especially unpopular speech, or do you think the treason accusations are justified?

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

House Intel Hearing On Russia-Ukraine Provides Rare Oversight Of Our Intel Agencies

$upport via Cash App

Intel Chiefs from Left to right–Chris Wray(FBI), General Nakasone(NSA), Gina Haspel(former CIA Director), William Burns(CIA Director) and Lt. Gen Scott Berrier(DIA)

A House Intelligence Committee hearing on the Russia-Ukraine war provided a rare opportunity for members of Congress to conduct a backhanded oversight of our intelligence agencies. The hearing, which assembled all the alphabet agency chiefs(FBI, NSA, CIA & DIA) in one room(a very rare occurrence), afforded members of Congress a unique opportunity to raise other domestic issues of public concern regarding our intel agencies. Oversight of our intelligence agencies, as you may know, is an issue Congress has dragged its feet on, ever since the terrorist attacks in September 2001, so this was a breath of fresh air.

Rep Chris Stewart(R-UT) questioned FBI Director Wray about the controversial NSO Spyware Pegasus , which several media reports indicated last year, was being used by dictators worldwide, to illegally track/spy on political dissidents and even journalists. Rep Stewart wanted to know whether Pegasus was being used on U.S. persons for investigative purposes. Director Wray assured Rep Stewart that the FBI purchased Pegasus in 2019 only for “testing and evaluation purposes“, adding that it has never been used on any U.S. person for investigative purposes.

Rep Stewart then asked why the FBI would test a spying software if it didn’t intend to use it? Director Wray, acknowledging that this was a good question, maintained that Pegasus has never been used for investigative purposes on U.S. persons, and that FBI routinely tests products out there, that could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Rep Joaquin Castro(D-TX) followed up on Rep Stewart’s questioning re Pegasus software. He wanted to know whether foreign governments have used Pegasus to target U.S. persons. Director Wray indicated that such a question would be better answered in a classified setting, so we are left hanging on that issue. Yay!!

Another interesting line of questioning came from Rep Elise Stefanik(R-NY) who brought up a very troubling case of an FBI counterterrorism informant, who was not only known to have violated the law multiple times, but whose Limo company led to the deaths of some 20 innocent New Yorkers, ruining the lives of their surviving family members. The crux of Rep Stefanik’s question, an excellent one that quite frankly isn’t asked often enough, was whether informants used in counterterrorism cases, are vetted to make sure they are not criminals. Director Wray assured Rep Stefanik that there are strict rules in place regarding the conduct of FBI informants, even when it comes to counterterrorism cases. This was a very important question because there is a widely held belief out there that in counterterrorism cases, “anything goes”, including the use of criminals/criminal gangs to go after/harass terrorism suspects–people who often times, have not been convicted of anything. A sad state of affairs indeed.

Bottom line folks, the hearing today showed just how important it is to have proper oversight of our intelligence agencies, something Yours Truly has been screaming about. There is absolutely no reason why questions about Pegasus spyware and other intelligence-related questions cannot be aired in a public forum like it happened today. Simply put, not every intelligence-related hearing has to be in a private setting. There are enough topics of public interest that can be safely discussed in public. Hopefully when U.S. Senators get their go-around with these intelligence chiefs, somebody will pop the $1 million question–the plight of targeted individuals in the U.S., which maybe, just maybe, may solve the Havana Syndrome mystery.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Sen Cassidy Says SCOTUS Decision Gutting Voting Rights Act Justifies Restrictive State Election Laws

$upport via Cash App

Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) appeared on CNN’s State of The Union show (01/16/22) to put forward the Republican position on the push for a federal voting rights legislation(John Lewis Voting Rights Act), and also discuss the related question as to whether the U.S. Senate should change its filibuster rules to allow for the passage of the said voting rights law via a simple majority vote. When asked by host Jake Tapper why Republicans are now opposed to keeping key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act(VRA) intact, when as recently as a decade ago they were all for it, Sen Cassidy gave a strange response which appeared to suggest that because the Roberts Supreme Court gutted key provisions of the VRA in Shelby County v Holder(2013), there is no need to be concerned about discriminatory state election laws–that this is not 1965 anymore, things have changed.

Yours Truly, and I suspect a lot of other viewers too, found Senator Cassidy’s Response quite strange because while liberals agree that this is not 1965, and that progress has been made on the civil rights front, we need to restore key aspects of the 1965 Voting Rights Act because Trump’s GOP is taking us back to 1965. In other words, Senator Cassidy, and by extension the Roberts Supreme Court, are totally wrong in their assessment that simply because this is not 1965, Republican states are no longer capable of crafting discriminatory election laws. The facts on the ground clearly show that after the 2020 election, relying on former President Trump’s “big lie“, many Republican-controlled states have hurriedly enacted election laws that reasonable people agree, disenfranchise voters of color.

Senator Cassidy specifically said on CNNSOTU(video @ 2:20 onwards): “The Supreme Court decided[paused for effect], the Supreme Court decided that the conditions in 1965 are different than the conditions now. Imagine that. We’ve had an African-American elected President of the United States, we’ve had an African-American elected to the Vice Presidency, an African-American elected to the[U.S.]Senate in South Carolina. Now, if anyone can’t see that circumstances have changed, they’re just not believing their lying eye…There’s more to do, absolutely, we need safeguards, but to argue we are still the same as we were in 1965 is to deny facts that are clearly before us.”

There’s no other way any reasonable person presented with Senator Cassidy’s response(including his pause for effect), would arrive at any other conclusion other than, because the Roberts Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013 citing changed conditions, the voter suppression laws currently popping up in red states are justified. Think about that, the new Republican rationale for voter suppression, as articulated by Senator Cassidy, is that it’s not a big deal because if it was, the Roberts Supreme Court would never have gutted key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act–a sad state of affairs indeed.

Bottom line folks, Dems must use every tool at their disposal to get holdout Senators Kyrsten Sinema(D-AZ) and Joe Manchin(D-WV) to agree to a filibuster carveout for a federal voting rights legislation before the 2022 midterms because if they don’t, all the gains we’ve witnessed thus far as a result of the 1965 Voting Rights Act will be lost, and the Roberts Supreme Court will not lift a finger to assist. Simply put, it’s now or never for a federal voting rights law that restores key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

New Jersey Concession Speech Heard Around The World

$upport via Cash App

Jack Ciattarelli, The Republican candidate for New Jersey Governor, recently delivered a highly commendable concession speech that was seen by many as a total rebuke of Trumpism. Ever since former President Trump lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden, Trump has promoted without any evidence, the “big lie”, that the election was somehow rigged in Biden’s favor. After initial push back from some prominent establishment Republicans at the beginning of the year, the GOP now appears to have wholeheartedly embraced Trump’s big lie. It is for this reason that Ciattarelli’s concession speech expressing his total faith in our election system, is especially noteworthy and commendable.

Ciattarelli said in his speech: “For those whose faith in our election system is shaken, for those who are angry that I’m not asking for a recount today, let me say this. I’ve worked every day and night for 22 months to become New Jersey’s Governor. If you think I’d be standing here today conceding if I thought I won this election, you couldn’t be more wrong. I hate to lose…but I’m also someone who believes strongly in our republic, and our democratic processes. Enough votes have been counted. There does not appear to be a path to victory or the basis for a recount, nor do we know of any systemic or widespread fraud. So no, I see no proof that this election was stolen.”

Ciattarelli’s eye brow raising concession speech comes on the heels of a similar speech by former New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie, urging the GOP to move away from Trump’s big lie. You’ll also remember a few months ago(May), yet another former New Jersey Republican Governor, Christine Todd-Whitman, openly floated the idea of breaking away from Trump’s GOP and forming a true conservative party. Given former Governor Todd-Whitman’s public statements about breaking away from Trump’s GOP, and the recent statements by Christie and Ciatarelli, one cannot help but wonder whether the Garden State is the Ground Zero for the much anticipated GOP split.

Bottom line folks, as Yours Truly has repeatedly stated, the GOP cannot survive Trumpism, and it’s only a matter of time before the party splits as we approach the 2024 presidential election cycle. The party may remain intact if Trump exits the stage before 2024, but that prospect doesn’t appear likely. Have Garden State Republicans Christine Todd-Whitman, Chris Christie, Jack Ciattarelli, et al, already initiated the split process as we approach 2024? All in all, the 2024 GOP presidential contest will be a sight to behold, with candidates who want the party to remain loyal to former president Trump duking it out against Chris Christie, Rep Liz Cheney, et al, who want to move on. As for you, just remember to remind the mainstream media types when they drop “bombshell pieces” about the split, that Yours Truly saw it from a mile away.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Is The Surveillance State Targeting Dems Using Twitter

California ACLU Technology and Civil Liberties Director Nicole Ozer penned a very troubling piece in December 2016 on how federal spy centers aka fusion centers are increasingly using Twitter for mass surveillance.


According to Nicole’s piece a company called Dataminr, partly owned by Twitter, provides the federal spy centers(fusion centers) with tweet data, including GPS location, which the spy centers use for surveillance purposes. Twitter says it stopped Dataminr from providing tweet data to fusion centers in 2016 but given the Trump administration’s demonstrated hostility towards any form of criticism especially on Twitter, any reasonable person would go back and verify whether Dataminr has indeed stopped its cooperation with federal spy centers.

The article also points out that this kind of Twitter surveillance is  directed more at minorities and political activists. It is therefore not a stretch to suggest that #TheResistance movement which has grown in leaps and bounds on Twitter since December 2016 when Nicole Ozer penned her article, has also become a target of these federal spy centers(fusion centers). In other words there is reason to believe that Dem activists are increasingly being subjected to surveillance by these federal spy centers over their anti-Trump tweets–a clear cut violation of their first amendment rights.

Bottom line congressional Dems must demand hearings on this troubling nexus between Twitter and federal spy centers to make sure the public(especially Dems) are not being punished with unconstitutional surveillance for their anti-Trump posts on Twitter

Alternatively, because congressional Dems have developed a reputation for weakness, ACLU’s Nicole Ozer should revisit the issue and inform the public as to whether Dataminr really terminated its cooperation with federal spy centers as Twitter alleged in 2016.

Yours Truly already knows the answer to this question but will give Twitter/Dataminr the benefit of the doubt nonetheless.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out