Politics

#DrainTheSwamp McCabe Testimony Contained Multiple “Conflicts” With Previous Witnesses; Subpoenas Coming

Published

9 years ago

December 21, 2017

(Via ZeroHedge)

After Eight Hours Of Testimony And More Scheduled For Thursday, Congressional investigators tell Fox News that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe dodged questions on the “Trump-Russia” dossier, and his testimony “contained numerous conflicts with the testimony of previous witnesses” so much that the House Intelligence Committee is planning to issue new subpoenas next week to Justice Department and FBI Personnel.

While HPSCI staff would not confirm who will be summoned for testimony, all indications point to demoted DOJ official Bruce G. Ohr and FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, who accompanied McCabe, along with other lawyers, to Tuesday’s HPSCI session. -Fox News

“It’s hard to know who’s telling us the truth,” said one House investigator after McCabe’s questioning – which was reportedly spearheaded by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC).

Individuals thought to be on the new subpoena list include demoted DOJ official Bruce Orr and FBI General Counsel James A. Baker. Notably absent, however, is Peter Strzok – the veteran counterintelligence agent in charge of both the Hillary Clinton email “matter” and the early Trump-Russia investigation who sent anti-Trump text messages to his mistress.

McCabe was described as a “friendly witness” to Democrats in the room, who tried to enlist McCabe in building a case against President Trump for obstruction of justice. “If he could have, he would have” said one witness in the closed door session.

When asked about how hard the FBI worked to verify the anti-Trump “dossier,” McCabe stood by its credibility – despite the FBI’s unwillingness to pay former MI6 spy Christopher Steele an agreed upon $50,000 if he could verify the claims in the document which relied on senior Kremlin officials.

Per the New York Times

The agent said that if Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer.

Ultimately, he was not paid.

When asked about funding for the dossier, McCabe claimed he could not recall whether or not the Clinton campaign and the DNC funded the report – despite the alleged existence of documents which McCabe signed establishing his knowledge of its financing and provenance.

Curiously, ahead of McCabe’s Thursday appearance in front of the House Judiciary Committee for a “transcribed interview,” the DOJ has announced that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe “will not be in a position to discuss matters that are within the scope of the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III.”

Dep FBI Dir McCabe to appear before Hse Judiciary Cmte Thursday in classified setting for a “transcribed interview.” DoJ tells cmte “McCabe will not be in a position to discuss matters that are within the scope of the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III.”

— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) December 20, 2017

The news comes a week after McCabe canceled a previously scheduled testimony after a Fox News report that the wife of Senior DOJ official Bruce Ohr worked for Fusion GPS, the company which created the Trump-Russia dossier.

Perhaps McCabe revealed too much to the House Intelligence Committee – because it appears the Judiciary Committee won’t be able to ask McCabe questions such as whether or not the FBI launched their Russia investigation based on the unverified Fusion GPS “Trump-Russia” dossier, which was funded in part by Hillary Clinton and the DNC and was created with the cooperation of high level Kremlin officials.

Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr

If McCabe can’t talk about the genesis of the Trump-Russia investigation, it likely also means there will be no discussion of the anti-Trump text messages sent by the lead FBI investigator on both the Clinton email probe and the Trump-Russia investigation to his mistress – which includes the infamous “Insurance Policy” text.

Does this also mean the Clinton email investigation is off limits due to Peter Strzok’s involvement?

No questions about the FBI’s extensive edits to the Clinton exoneration statement made by FBI top brass, and overseen by Deputy Director McCabe – which effectively decriminalized the behavior of a candidate for US President while running for office?

No questions about the immunity agreements given to Hillary Clinton’s IT staff which installed her illegal server, and went on Reddit to ask how they could “strip VIP’s emails?”

No questions about which DOJ employees conducted the “mid-year review” during the investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server?
Was McCabe allowed to discuss his potential hatch act violation?

Perhaps little birds in the House Judiciary Committee will relay the details of tomorrow’s testimony to Fox News and we’ll be all the wiser.

Politics

Rob Sand Must Be Audited Along with LGI

Published

7 days ago

November 4, 2026

Populist Wire Editorial Board

Rob Sand won the Iowa governor’s race as the state’s auditor. That dual role demands immediate scrutiny of his own office and of LGI, the family business run by his wife, Christine Lauridsen Sand. Taxpayers have a right to know whether any public contracts, grants, or favorable treatment flowed between the auditor’s office and the company while he held statewide power. Iowa does not get a free pass on conflicts simply because the winner is a Democrat.

America First means accountability for officials who oversee public money. Sand built his career on auditing others. The same standard now applies to him and to LGI. Any overlap in finances, vendor relationships, or use of state resources must be examined by independent review before he takes the governor’s office. Working families in Iowa already face water-quality issues, budget pressures, and education concerns. They should not also wonder whether family business interests influenced decisions made in the auditor’s office.

An audit of Sand’s tenure and of LGI is the minimum required for confidence in the transition. If irregularities appear, they must be referred for further investigation. Sovereignty and basic fairness require that the next governor faces the same transparency he once claimed to enforce. Iowa voters deserve nothing less before he is sworn in.

Politics

2028: America First Dark Horse Must Rise

Published

7 days ago

November 4, 2026

Populist Wire Editorial Board

The 2026 midterms cleared the field. Democrats took Congress after voters punished high gas prices and the Iran war. Establishment heirs now carry that baggage. JD Vance’s odds slipped overnight. Marco Rubio remains tied to the same foreign-policy circle that produced the conflict. Neither can lead a clean America First recovery. The candidate must be anyone but Vance or Rubio.

That dark horse must run on sealed borders, an end to forever wars, energy independence, and trade that puts American workers first. Traditional values and biological reality in policy cannot be treated as optional. The midterms showed the cost of foreign entanglements and elite priorities. Working families want their government focused on home, not distant conflicts or cultural experiments. Only a figure free of prior establishment ties—and free of Vance or Rubio—can make that case without apology.

The next two years will decide whether the movement stays pure or dilutes into another round of managed decline. A dark horse who rejects globalist deals, defends sovereignty, and speaks plainly to the base can consolidate the realignment before 2028. The country does not need another caretaker from the current circle. It needs someone new who will finish what America First started.

Politics

Democrats Gave Ground on Their Wackiest Issues to “Win”

Published

7 days ago

November 4, 2026

Populist Wire Editorial Board

The midterm results show Democrats winning by dialing back the cultural extremes that defined their last several cycles. In Texas, James Talarico walked back earlier progressive positions on transgender issues to make himself viable in a state that rejected those policies for decades. Elsewhere, candidates who once embraced open borders, defund-the-police rhetoric, and identity-first messaging softened or ignored those planks and focused on costs, the Iran war, and gasoline prices. The public had already rejected the full agenda; the party simply stopped advertising the parts voters hated most.

America First voters never accepted boys in girls’ sports, men in women’s shelters, or sanctuary policies that prioritize non-citizens over citizens. Polling and prior elections already showed those positions as losers outside the coastal core. By muting them in red and purple districts while hammering inflation and foreign wars, Democrats could appeal to working-class Hispanics, independents, and some traditional Democrats who had shifted right. The strategy worked for one night because the economic pain was acute and the alternative was a party tied to high gas prices. It does not mean the underlying cultural preferences of the country changed.

Once in power, the same figures and progressive caucuses will push the old agenda again—Medicare for All, ending enforcement, and cultural mandates. The temporary ground they gave was tactical, not principled. Working Americans still want secure borders, biological reality in policy, and government that puts citizens first. The midterms proved the left cannot win by leading with its most extreme ideas. They also proved those ideas remain the party’s destination once the ballots are counted.