Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, dropped a bombshell this weekend on the Trump/Russia investigation.
During an interview Sunday morning with Maria Bartiromo, Nunes said there was no intelligence in the original report, known as an “electronic communication,” that triggered the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign.
Let’s back up for a moment. We were initially told that the Steele dossier, opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign, was what launched the investigation. Later we were told that it was comments made in London by George Papadopoulos.
According to Nunes, there is an arrangement between the United States, Great Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, known as the “Five Eyes Agreement,” where we share intelligence but “we’re not supposed to spy on each other’s citizens.”
Nunes said there was no official “Five Eyes” intelligence in the “electronic communication” that triggered the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign.
Bartiromo asked Chairman Nunes to explain how the investigation was launched without actual intelligence. “I think that is the point,” Nunes replied. “We don’t understand, we’ve never understood…”
Bartiromo pressed Nunes again, asking whether Hillary Clinton or her friends at the State Department were “pulling the strings” to launch an investigation of Trump. Here’s what Nunes said:
I can tell you we do know longtime associates of Hillary Clinton, including Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer, were actively giving information to the State Department that was making its way to the FBI… We’re trying to piece it all together and that’s why we are investigating the State Department.
We will keep you posted.
Progress at State
While Rep. Nunes is investigating potential scandals of the Obama-era State Department, I am pleased to report that progress is being made by the Trump/Pence team when it comes to eliminating left-wing extremism from the State Department.
The Trump State Department recently issued its first report on human rights around the world, and there are two big changes. First, when referring to the Palestinian conflict with Israel, the words “occupied territories” have been dropped from references to Gaza and the West Bank.
In addition, the section of the report on abortion as a “human right” is gone. It has been replaced with a section about “coercion in population control.”
This is not a “small thing,” my friends. When the Obama administration pushed abortion as a human right in official documents, that influenced America’s foreign policy.
Under Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, the United States became a global advocate for the “right” of women to abort their babies. This was done with your tax dollars and in the name of your country.
It seems to me that human rights must begin with the right to life.
Bashing the Bible
GQ has jumped into the culture war again, this time by bashing the Bible. The magazine has published a list of books that it thinks should not be read.
Along with classics like Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings and almost anything by Ernest Hemmingway, the Bible makes the list for allegedly being “repetitive, self-contradictory, sententious, foolish, and even at times ill-intentioned.”
Give me a break! Does anyone really care what GQ thinks about the Bible? This is like an ant declaring Mount Kilimanjaro “overrated.” I can’t wait to read GQ‘s review of the Koran.