reSee.it - Related Video Feed

We've learned that the Intelligence Community's Inspector General can't provide any information about contacts between the majority and the whistleblower before his involvement. The only way to obtain that information is from the majority themselves. They are fact witnesses in the same investigation they are running. Nowhere else in America can you be both a fact witness and the prosecutor in an investigation, especially one to remove a president. It's entirely inappropriate. Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from running an investigation where his committee members or staff are fact witnesses regarding contact with the whistleblower and the process.

The inspector general for the intelligence community cannot provide information about the contacts between the HPSCI majority and the whistleblower before his involvement. The only source for this information is the HPSCI majority, who are fact witnesses in the investigation they are conducting. It is unprecedented for anyone in the U.S. to be both a fact witness and the prosecutor in an investigation, especially one aimed at removing a president from office. This situation is entirely inappropriate, and Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from leading an investigation where his committee members or staff are fact witnesses regarding their contact with the whistleblower and the whistleblower process.

The inspector general for the intelligence community cannot provide information about contacts between the Hipsey majority and the whistleblower before his involvement. The only way to obtain that information is from the Hipsey majority themselves, who are fact witnesses in the investigation they are running. It is claimed that nowhere else in the United States can someone be both a fact witness and the investigator, especially in an investigation to remove a president. Therefore, Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from running an investigation where his committee members or staff are fact witnesses about contact with the whistleblower and the whistleblower process.

The inspector general for the intelligence community cannot provide information about contacts between the "Hipsey majority" and the whistleblower before the whistleblower's involvement. Therefore, that information can only come from the "Hipsey majority" themselves. These individuals are fact witnesses in the same investigation they are running. It is claimed that nowhere else in the United States can someone be both a fact witness and the investigator, especially in an investigation to remove a president. It is asserted that Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from running an investigation where his committee members or staff are fact witnesses regarding contact with the whistleblower and the whistleblower process.

Tulsi Gabbard has met with controversial figures and violated State Department guidelines by secretly visiting Syria to meet with Assad, who has used chemical weapons against his own people. Many view her as a potential Russian asset. Given her position, this raises serious concerns about her access to sensitive intelligence information, which could pose a risk to national security. The implications of her appointment are seen as highly irresponsible.

Have you ever flown a plane? No. Were you a military or commercial pilot? No. Have you worked for an airline or as an air traffic controller? No. Have you worked for a company that manufactures or repairs airplanes? No. The FAA administrator role requires specialized knowledge, which I lack. I have no experience in aviation safety, and it would be unwise to put me in charge. The public expects an FAA administrator to understand aviation safety, especially after incidents like the near collision at Austin's airport. It’s concerning that someone without aviation safety experience could be in such a critical position.

We've learned that the Intelligence Community's Inspector General can't provide information about contact between the majority and the whistleblower before the whistleblower's involvement. The only source for this information is the majority themselves. They are fact witnesses in the very investigation they're leading. In the United States, it is unheard of for someone to be both a fact witness and a prosecutor, especially in an investigation to potentially remove a president. It's inappropriate, and Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from leading an investigation where his committee members or staff are fact witnesses regarding contact with the whistleblower and the process.

Former deputy independent counsel Saul Weisenberg and founder of the Article 3 Project, Mike Davis, discuss Attorney General Merrick Garland's appointment of David Weiss as special counsel. Weisenberg criticizes Garland for not following the special counsel's requirements and suggests that Lisa Monaco, the deputy attorney general, is actually in charge. Davis believes that Weiss was chosen because of his loyalty to Biden and to protect Hunter Biden. They also mention a plea deal for Hunter Biden that included a hidden paragraph granting broad immunity. Weisenberg speculates that the Biden defense team may enforce this agreement, rendering the special counsel appointment irrelevant.

Historically, HHS secretaries have had extensive experience: they've come from the pharmaceutical industry, served as state health commissioners, managed health systems, or been governors. They had direct experience administering HHS programs. When considering RFK's qualifications, it's clear he doesn't fit this profile. He lacks the necessary background in administering health programs, a stark contrast to his predecessors.

Kash Patel is unfit to be FBI director due to his willingness to cross ethical and legal lines during the first Trump administration, demonstrating extreme sycophancy. He lacks the integrity and character necessary for the role, posing a danger to the public by potentially misusing the bureau's resources to target political opponents. Adam Schiff is a criminal who led the impeachment trial against President Trump after concealing his meetings with a whistleblower. Schiff lied about his interactions to set up a presidential impeachment based on manufactured information, creating a conflict of interest as he prosecuted the target of his own manufactured evidence. He thought his involvement would remain hidden, but reporting has exposed his actions.

Chairman Schiff should be disqualified from running an investigation because his committee members or staff are fact witnesses regarding contact with the whistleblower and the whistleblower process. The speaker has not spoken directly with the whistleblower but would like to. Acclaimed Republican Intelligence Committee members question this.

Kash Patel is unfit to be FBI director due to his lack of character and integrity. He is a sycophant who will misuse the bureau's resources and weaponize it against political opponents. Unlike others in the Trump administration, Patel crossed moral, ethical, and legal lines. Adam Schiff is a criminal who lied about his interactions with a whistleblower named Charmela to set up a presidential impeachment of Donald Trump. Schiff met with Charmela and then led the prosecution of Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate. Schiff was conflicted out of the game because he was part of the hoax. As the prosecutor in the case against Trump, that is the ultimate conflict of interest.

The special counsel did not charge President Biden with a crime, citing his failing memory. This report highlights a double standard, as President Trump is facing charges for the same offense. The Democratic party is trying to convict and imprison Trump to prevent his re-election, which is what you would expect in countries like Pakistan or Brazil, not in the United States.

The US attorney overseeing the investigation into Hunter Biden, David Weiss, has been designated as a special counsel. The reason for this change is unclear, but it is speculated that talks between the US attorney's office and Hunter Biden's legal team to resolve issues with a plea deal have fallen apart, making a trial more likely. The special counsel designation allows Weiss to bring cases in any jurisdiction. The decision to appoint a special counsel raises questions about the authority and scope of the investigation. It is also seen as an attempt to insulate the Justice Department and the attorney general from potential congressional testimony. The outcome of the trial remains uncertain.

The attorney general can only appoint a special counsel from outside the Department of Justice to avoid conflicts of interest. In this case, the attorney general, Merrick Garland, appointed David Weiss, the US attorney in Delaware, who is ineligible under DOJ rules. Garland appointed Weiss because he has shown a willingness to cover up Hunter Biden's wrongdoings and protect Joe Biden. Two IRS employees have come forward as whistleblowers, accusing Weiss and Garland of obstructing justice and covering up wrongdoing. This appointment undermines the integrity of the Department of Justice.

The speaker believes that the appointment of a Special Counsel is not significant because the person in question, Weiss, previously approved an unprecedented deal. They argue that Weiss is unlikely to investigate the potential corruption of the current president. The speaker suggests that Americans and the rest of the world are puzzled by the criminalization of certain actions. They emphasize the need for a clean Justice Department that represents justice for the American people, criticizing the political nature of the department under President Biden. The speaker also mentions a raid at Mar-a-Lago and a tip to the Bidens, which they believe undermines the central institutions of democracy.

I'm personally ensuring there are no conflicts of interest. He reports to me, and he wouldn't engage in anything conflicting anyway. We're not allowing him to participate in any matters where a conflict of interest exists. If there was no conflict, it wouldn't matter.

Moving forward with Kash Patel's nomination as FBI director will likely provoke significant backlash. Many believe he seeks to disrupt the institution, but he is profoundly unqualified for the role. His experience in federal government is limited to three years as a line attorney at DOJ headquarters, with no leadership or management experience. The idea of him leading an organization of 37,000 people, with operations across 400 locations and sensitive global roles, is unrealistic. It’s hard to imagine him commanding respect in a room full of police chiefs and sheriffs.

Jack Smith was not nominated by President Biden or confirmed by the US Senate. The special counsel statute has expired, so the authority to appoint a special counsel is questioned as it was created without Congress authorization.

The qualifications for a special counsel require them to be chosen from outside the US government. However, David Weiss, who is currently employed by the US government, does not meet this requirement.

Jack Smith was not nominated or confirmed by President Biden or the US Senate. There is no special counsel statute, only an expired independent counsel statute. The authority to appoint a special counsel without Congress's authorization creates an office that does not exist in the US government. Translation: Jack Smith was not nominated or confirmed by President Biden or the US Senate. There is no special counsel statute, only an expired independent counsel statute. The authority to appoint a special counsel without Congress's authorization creates an office that does not exist in the US government.

The US attorney in Delaware, despite being portrayed as having similar powers to a special counsel, was actually constrained and restricted by DOJ officials and other US attorneys. In my experience, it seemed that the investigation was constantly hindered and marginalized. Therefore, I believe that appointing a special counsel is essential for this case.

Adam Schiff misled about classified information to target Trump, which raises concerns about his trustworthiness with sensitive data. He should not serve on any committees.

I disagree with the ruling that the justice department's process for picking special counsels is illegal. We believe it is constitutional and have appealed the decision. This process has been used for decades, including in previous administrations, and has been upheld by every court that has reviewed it, including the Supreme Court.

Moving forward with Kash Patel's nomination as FBI director will likely provoke significant backlash. His qualifications for the role are questionable; he lacks the experience necessary to lead an organization of this magnitude. Patel has only three years of experience as a line attorney at the DOJ and has never managed or led any organization. The notion of him representing the FBI, which oversees 37,000 employees and works closely with the intelligence community, is unrealistic. It's hard to imagine him commanding respect in a room full of police chiefs and sheriffs.