You know what they say about lies — they only breed more lies.
Take the “insurrection” that happened on January 6, 2021, as an example. We still don’t know the full truth about what happened that day, but we do know with certainty that we were lied to — repeatedly.
To cover these lies, more lies were needed. Those came in the form of the corrupt January 6 Committee — “the Stalinist Pelosi committee,” Mark Levin calls it.
This committee, we were told, was formed to investigate the events of January 6, but actually the opposite was true — it was formed to cover the events of January 6.
That’s why Pelosi appointed Trump-hating “reprobate Republicans” Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger to the board, Levin explains.
For starters, the committee “sent recommendations with a report to prosecutors at the United States Department of Justice to urge the criminal indictment of Donald Trump on a number of issues,” he recounts. “That is not covered by the Speech and Debate Clause [of the Constitution], in my view.”
According to Levin, the committee members can be prosecuted and charged for this because “it's not [their] official congressional duty to be pushing for criminal charges against somebody in the other branch of government.”
“That is not what the framers considered speech and debate on the floor of the House or the Senate,” he says.
On top of that, the committee “destroyed a ton of data and information.”
“If there's exculpatory information for Donald Trump or anybody else who's been charged and you don't provide it and you have it as a committee, or you destroy it … you've committed a crime; you've committed obstruction,” says Levin.
As Oversight Committee Chairman Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) pointed out in his report, “that obstruction statute is 18 USC 1512,” which is ironically “the same obstruction statute that [the committee] tried to use against Donald Trump and the January 6ers.”
“Liz Cheney and every member of that committee … need to answer for this,” says Levin. There’s only one reason you “destroy mountains and mountains of data” — “it’s called a cover-up.”
To hear more of Levin’s analysis, watch the clip above.
To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The House Administration Oversight Subcommittee headed by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), has released its second and final report on its investigation into the House January 6 Committee — and the contents of it are shocking.
Now Rep. Loudermilk joins Glenn Beck to review four key findings of the Subcommittee’s report.
1. Pipe bomber
According to FBI testimonies, the cell phone carrier that possessed data related to the January 6 pipe bomber was corrupted when the FBI received it. When the agency went back to the carrier to ask for the data again, it was allegedly told that the data was no longer available.
Loudermilk says that they now know this was a lie.
“We went to the three major carriers, asked them all. ... All three of them said, ‘Yes, we were subpoenaed by the FBI, we did provide data.’ All three of them said the FBI never came back to us and asked for the data again, telling us it was corrupted,” he tells Glenn.
When he asked whether these carriers still possessed the data, all three said, “Yes, we keep data for every major event.”
“[The FBI] put very little resources into finding who placed the pipe bombs, but yet they will go to all lengths to find anyone who was around the Capitol. That is not an equal application of the law,” he added.
2. The gallows
“The only thing [Democrats] could run on was January 6 and that Donald Trump is a traitor to our country. We systematically dismantled that, but the one thing that they had was the gallows,” says Loudermilk, adding that the Democratic narrative was that it erected to “hang Mike Pence because he wasn't going to object to the certification of votes.”
“But the thing is, Trump didn't even know what Pence was going to do until 1:00 in the afternoon, and the gallows [were] put up at 6:00 in the morning,” he clarifies.
Further, if someone were to put up a small stand on Capitol property, it would be taken down immediately, so how is it that Capitol Police allowed gallows to remain standing all day?
Loudermilk says that he assigned a team to find out how much investigating the FBI did into the gallows. After asking every government building on the street whether the FBI had contacted it asking for video footage of the truck that transported the materials for the gallows, every single one said no.
“The FBI spent no time looking into who erected the gallows,” says Loudermilk.
3. Liz Cheney
“Liz Cheney should be investigated,” he says bluntly.
Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson was the “star witness who came in and testified before the select committee twice under oath.”
“The third time, she started changing her first two testimonies, and then the fourth time, she totally came out with all kinds of crazy stories,” says Loudermilk.
What happened between the first two testimonies and the last two?
“She started communicating directly with Liz Cheney,” he says, who ironically referred Donald Trump to the DOJ in July of 2022 to be investigated for “witness tampering.”
Unlike Trump, who was not successful in contacting a witness, “Liz Cheney did communicate with a witness ... and even acknowledged that it was unethical.”
“According to Cassidy Hutchinson, Cheney did recommend her to fire her attorney and that Liz Cheney did help her find a new one,” says Loudermilk.
4. Missing information
Liz Wheeler, sitting in for Stu Burguiere, points to the part of the subcommittee’s report that states, “There was information that was withheld from Liz Cheney and her committee's final report” and “that there was a terabyte of data that was somehow deleted.”
“Do you know what information was held from that final report ... and do you have any way of accessing the deleted data?” she asks.
“Yes, we know what was missing, and we’re releasing it publicly,” Loudermilk says, adding that some of the missing information includes “witness testimonies that exonerated Trump or did not line up with Cassidy Hutchinson’s.”
“As far as deleted documents, we know that they got rid of all the videotapes of all the testimonies, and some of those could have exonerated Stefan Passantino,” he adds.
To hear more about Loudermilk’s report, watch the clip above.
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
House Republicans are finally throwing their weight behind Trump ally and "War Room" host Stephen K. Bannon and his emergency appeals to stay out of jail for defying the Jan. 6 committee's subpoenas.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other House GOP leaders on the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group successfully voted Tuesday to file a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in support of Bannon.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) will also be filing an amicus brief but instead with the U.S. Supreme Court as chair of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight in support of Bannon's emergency appeal.
The line of argumentation in the briefs may not only persuade the high court to spare Bannon from prison but could possibly also ramify for other American prisoners.
Loudermilk's committee is also reportedly crafting legislation aimed at nullifying the work of the Jan. 6 committee.
Christopher Bedford, senior editor for politics and Washington correspondent for Blaze Media, said, "It's great to see the work the committee is putting in here, and this sort of thing probably has more ability to spare Bannon prison time than the attempt to withdraw the subpoena (something that's only been done once — by the same committee that issued the subpoena, and before charges were brought)."
Bannon was convicted in July 2022 of two charges of contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas from the Democrat-controlled House select committee tasked with investigating the Jan. 6 protests. He was sentenced to four months in prison.
While Carl Nichols, the Trump-nominated judge overseeing Bannon's case in Washington, D.C., initially paused his sentence while the populist appealed his conviction, a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel later rejected Bannon's challenges, prompting partisan prosecutors to urge Nichols to send Bannon to prison.
Earlier this month, Bannon was ordered to report to prison by July 1. He had, however, two more arrows left in his quiver: an appeal to a full panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court.
The first arrow missed its mark.
On June 20, Biden and Obama judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 2-1 against keeping Bannon out of jail while he exhausted his legal options.
Blaze News previously reported that Trump-nominated Judge Justin Walker, who cast the lone vote against denying Bannon's emergency motion, noted in his dissenting opinion that Bannon's key argument could potentially succeed before the Supreme Court.
Bannon filed an appeal to the Supreme Court on Friday.
The filing underscored that the stakes were high and noted, "Now that a panel of the D.C. Circuit has said that Licavoli remains binding, there is no obstacle to future indictments of anyone and everyone who allegedly defaults on a congressional subpoena, even when they had good faith defenses like advice of counsel or executive privilege — defenses that Licavoli will bar them even from presenting to a jury."
In his defense, Bannon previously suggested he had not responded to the subpoenas on the basis of both advice of counsel and executive privilege.
"In the future, when the House or Senate and the Executive Branch are controlled by the same party, there is every reason to fear that former Executive Branch officials will face prison after declining to provide privileged materials to a committee, even where the position taken was based upon the advice of counsel in good faith and requested further negotiations," added the filing.
Bannon's attorney further argued that the Biden Department of Justice's recent decisions to ignore congressional subpoenas demonstrate "both the significance of the mens rea issue as a matter of law and also the illogic of preventing Mr. Bannon from even arguing to the jury that his reliance on advice of counsel undermined the government's case for 'willfulness.'"
The DOJ is set to file a brief with the Supreme Court Wednesday demanding the Trump critic's immediate jailing.
Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) leaned on Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to spearhead a legal effort to support Bannon's emergency appeal.
Banks noted in a Monday letter to the speaker that "several factors separate the Committee's illegitimate and unenforceable subpoenas [to Bannon and Peter Navarro] from lawfully issued congressional subpoenas."
"As you know, the Committee is the first and only congressional committee in history composed on entirely partisan lines," continued Banks.
'The January 6 committee was, we think, wrongfully constituted. We think the work was tainted.'
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (Calif.) Jan. 6 committee rejected then-GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy's proposed committee members, prompting McCarthy to pull his members and boycott the panel. The committee ultimately had no GOP-appointed ranked minority member.
"Furthermore, the Committee repeatedly violated House Rules and its own charter, House Resolution 503, including provisions limiting its deposition authority," wrote Banks.
In addition to the likelihood of its illegitimacy, Banks noted that thanks to the work of Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), "We now know that the Committee deleted hundreds of records shortly before the 118th Congress and the start of the House Republican majority. This willful destruction of evidence violates House Rules, and because the improperly destroyed documents potentially included evidence of the Committee's misconduct, they could have assisted either Mr. Bannon's or Mr. Navarro's defenses during future appeals."
Banks underscored to Johnson that an amicus brief filed filed on behalf of the chamber in support of Bannon's appeal would have his full support.
Johnson confirmed on Fox News and CNN Tuesday night that the House was working on an amicus brief in support of Bannon's appeal.
"The January 6 committee was, we think, wrongfully constituted. We think the work was tainted. We think that they may have very well covered up evidence and maybe even more nefarious activities," said Johnson. "We will be expressing that to the court and I think it will help Steve Bannon in his appeal."
Johnson noted in a joint statement with Republican Reps. Steve Scalise (La.) and Tom Emmer (Minn.) Wednesday morning that the amicus brief will be "submitted after Bannon files a petition for rehearing en banc and will be in support of neither party."
"It will withdraw certain arguments made by the House earlier in the litigation about the organization of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol during the prior Congress. House Republican Leadership continues to believe Speaker Pelosi abused her authority when organizing the Select Committee," added Johnson.
The Daily Caller reported that Loudermilk was planning to file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court Wednesday morning, emphasizing the Jan. 6 committee lacked the authority to conduct depositions under the House resolution that authorized it.
Loudermilk's office told the Caller that the brief indicated that the Jan. 6 committee held Bannon in contempt for "failing to appear for a deposition," which it was not able to conduct for lack of a ranking member to notify.
"While Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney’s two year inquisition may have entertained the media and kept numerous Democrat lawyers busy, it had very real world implications, which we see in the imprisonment of Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon," Loudermilk told the Caller.
"We're in uncharted constitutional waters here. Congress's ability to compel people to appear before it is long-established, but has been eroding since Eric Holder refused to enforce a subpoena against himself. The ability to moot a contempt charge after the fact is hard going, but the ability to convince the court the committee itself was illegitimate? That could be easier," Christopher Bedford told Blaze News.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Details about the funding and composition of the select subcommittee are still being arranged. Authorizing language is being drafted and will be finalized within the next two weeks.
A look at the top 10 lies of Liz Cheney and the January 6th Committee four years after the Capitol demonstrations.
Democrats are trying to insulate their Jan 6. probe from scrutiny because they know they destroyed and suppressed evidence.
'The DoD IG knowingly concealed the extent of the delay in constructing a narrative that is favorable to DoD and Pentagon leadership,' the letter says.
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com