Below is my column in the Hill on the need for a new “Church Committee” to investigate and reform the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) after years of scandals involving alleged political bias. In response to criticism over its role in Twitter’s censorship system, the FBI lashed out against critics as “conspiracy theorists” spreading disinformation. However, it still refuses to supply new information on other companies, beyond Twitter, that it has paid to engage in censorship.
Here is the column:
“Conspiracy theorists … feeding the American public misinformation” is a familiar attack line for anyone raising free-speech concerns over the FBI’s role in social media censorship. What is different is that this attack came from the country’s largest law enforcement agency, the FBI — and, since the FBI has made combatting “disinformation” a major focus of its work, the labeling of its critics is particularly menacing.
Fifty years ago, the Watergate scandal provoked a series of events that transformed not only the presidency but federal agencies like the FBI. Americans demanded answers about the involvement of the FBI and other federal agencies in domestic politics. Ultimately, Congress not only investigated the FBI but later impanelled the Church Committee to investigate a host of other abuses by intelligence agencies.
A quick review of recent disclosures and controversies shows ample need for a new Church Committee:
The Russian investigations
The FBI previously was at the center of controversies over documented political bias. Without repeating the long history from the Russian influence scandal, FBI officials like Peter Strzok were fired after emails showed open bias against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The FBI ignored warnings that the so-called Steele dossier, largely funded by the Clinton campaign, was likely used by Russian intelligence to spread disinformation. It continued its investigation despite early refutations of key allegations or discrediting of sources.
Biden family business
The FBI has taken on the character of a Praetorian Guard when the Biden family has found itself in scandals.
For example, there was Hunter Biden’s handgun, acquired by apparently lying on federal forms. In 2018, the gun allegedly was tossed into a trash bin in Wilmington, Del., by Hallie Biden, the widow of Hunter’s deceased brother and with whom Hunter had a relationship at the time. Secret Service agents reportedly appeared at the gun shop with no apparent reason, and Hunter later said the matter would be handled by the FBI. Nothing was done despite the apparent violation of federal law.
Later, the diary of Hunter’s sister, Ashley, went missing. While the alleged theft normally would be handled as a relatively minor local criminal matter, the FBI launched a major investigation that continued for months to pursue those who acquired the diary, which reportedly contains embarrassing entries involving President Biden. Such a massive FBI deployment shocked many of us, but the FBI built a federal case against those who took possession of the diary.
Targeting Republicans and conservatives
Recently the FBI was flagged for targeting two senior House Intelligence Committee staffers in grand jury subpoenas sent to Google. It has been criticized for using the Jan. 6 Capitol riot investigations to target conservative groups and GOP members of Congress, including seizing the phone of one GOP member.
The FBI also has been criticized for targeting pro-life violence while not showing the same vigor toward pro-choice violence.
Hunter’s laptop
While the FBI was eager to continue the Russian investigations with no clear evidence of collusion, it showed the opposite inclination when given Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop. The laptop would seem to be a target-rich environment for criminal investigators, with photos and emails detailing an array of potential crimes involving foreign transactions, guns, drugs and prostitutes. However, reports indicate that FBI officials moved to quash or slow any investigation.
The computer repairman who acquired the laptop, John Paul Mac Isaac, said he struggled to get the FBI to respond and that agents made thinly veiled threats regarding any disclosures of material related to the Biden family; he said one agent told him that “in their experience, nothing ever happens to people that don’t talk about these things.”
The ‘Twitter Files’
The “Twitter Files” released by Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, show as many as 80 agents targeting social-media posters for censorship on the site. This included alleged briefings that Twitter officials said were the reason they spiked the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election.
The FBI sent 150 messages on back channels to just one Twitter official to flag accounts. One Twitter executive expressed unease over the FBI’s pressure, declaring: “They are probing & pushing everywhere they can (including by whispering to congressional staff).”
We also have learned that Twitter hired a number of retired FBI agents, including former FBI general counsel James Baker, who was a critical and controversial figure in past bureau scandals over political bias.
Attacking critics
It is not clear what is more chilling — the menacing role played by the FBI in Twitter’s censorship program, or its mendacious response to the disclosure of that role. The FBI has issued a series of “nothing-to-see-here” statements regarding the Twitter Files.
In its latest statement, the FBI insists it did not command Twitter to take any specific action when flagging accounts to be censored. Of course, it didn’t have to threaten the company — because we now have an effective state media by consent rather than coercion. Moreover, an FBI warning tends to concentrate the minds of most people without the need for a specific threat.
Finally, the files show that the FBI paid Twitter millions as part of this censorship system — a windfall favorably reported to Baker before he was fired from Twitter by Musk.
Criticizing the FBI is now ‘disinformation’
Responding to the disclosures and criticism, an FBI spokesperson declared: “The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public. It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”
Arguably, “working every day to protect the American public” need not include censoring the public to protect it from errant or misleading ideas.
However, it is the attack on its critics that is most striking. While the FBI denounced critics of an earlier era as communists and “fellow travelers,” it now uses the same attack narrative to label its critics as “conspiracy theorists.”
After Watergate, there was bipartisan support for reforming the FBI and intelligence agencies. Today, that cacophony of voices has been replaced by crickets, as much of the media imposes another effective blackout on coverage of the Twitter Files. This media silence suggests that the FBI found the “sweet spot” on censorship, supporting the views of the political and media establishment.
As for the rest of us, the FBI now declares us to be part of a disinformation danger which it is committed to stamping out — “conspiracy theorists” misleading the public simply by criticizing the bureau.
Clearly, this is the time for a new Church Committee — and time to reform the FBI.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.
Thank you Professor Turley for taking the time to write this extremely important article. The FBI and Merrick Garland are effectively re-defining a person’s legitimate dissent as “conspiracy” to violate a federal criminal statute (any federal statute will work although “Insurrection” seems to be the most popular these days). With this conspiracy narrative they are able to gin up sufficient probable cause for search and arrest warrants. The raid on Mar-A-Lago illustrated to me just how far the FBI has drifted. What is essentially a dispute over records retained under the Presidential Records Act is now a a criminal case involving the National Archives ? Seriously ? The FBI’s official response to the release of the Twitter files shows a stunning lack of self-awareness. While I’ve read several articles recently praising the good men & women of the FBI, it would be completely unrealistic to think that any of them will step forward in sufficient numbers to fix this. I have no doubt that the FBI will vigorously fight any efforts to disband (or even reform) them so this will not be an easy task. I’ve been a law enforcement officer for many years and when you lie on an affidavit to get a search or arrest warrant, either intentionally or by omission, you are labeled a crooked cop. Sure seems to me like there’s a little of that going around the FBI now but what the hell do I know. Thank you again.
That’s a really good listing of the Democratic Party’s Secret Police force’s efforts to silence and silence by surrogate using a fully willful totalitarian Pravda like media.
Open your eyes if you can’t see the forest for the trees?
Totalitarianism is upon us and the “progressive” political left is on the verge of Marxism.
Leaving out the illegal use of FISC and the FISA process. The criminal use of CHS. The payments to extort fabricated information. Etc………..
The FBI (and any other agency) could improve their credibility with annual “Oath of Office” training.
Simply put: 100% of local, state and federal officials (and their contractors/surrogates) swears an supreme loyalty oath to protect the constitutional rights of any person within their legal jurisdiction.
If, for example, a local sheriff were violating the constitutional rights of African-Americans (sheriff being disloyal to their oath of office). When that occurs, it’s perfectly proper for state or federal officials to “check & balance” that disloyal local sheriff. The true life movie “Mississippi Burning” is the FBI at it’s best, the Twitter censorship not so much.
Conversely, if federal agents were to violate the constitutional rights of citizens, it is perfectly proper for local and state officials to “check & balance” those disloyal federal officials. The true life movies “Seberg” and “Richard Jewel” are examples of the FBI at it’s worst.
Another much needed reform, is the U.S. Supreme Court correcting and clarifying the “Supremacy Clause” in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. It’s very clear language says the U.S. Constitution and legally binding treaties are the “supreme law of the United States” – NOT federal agencies. Article I of the U.S. Constitution already grants Congress the authority “to enforce the U.S. Constitution and “Marbury v. Madison” gives the Judicial Branch courts authority to define what is constitutional.
Currently, the government attorneys at Executive Branch agencies seem to have a flawed reading of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court could correct this flawed interpretation by taking cases like “Al Kidd v. Ashcroft”. The high court could simply agree with the enbanc ruling of the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal court that severely reprimanded AG Ashcroft for his abuses of power).
A free society will always have more citizen-crime since it’s not totalitarian, but a totalitarian system will always have more crimes committed by government officials. It’s the price of freedom. Do Americans want a Cold War style communist “Stasi” (secret blacklisting police)? The communist Stasi of East Germany had a motto “To know everything” (totalitarianism). The American system is designed NOT to know everything, to leave citizens alone. Our Bill of Rights “restrains” government authority so they only have limited powers.
If FBI Director Christopher Wray has integrity, he could start this Oath of Office training in January. He could act before the U.S. Supreme Court does.
If, for example, a local sheriff were violating the constitutional rights of African-Americans (sheriff being disloyal to their oath of office). When that occurs, it’s perfectly proper for state or federal officials to “check & balance” that disloyal local sheriff.
Local sheriffs are elected by the people. The claim of violating civil rights requires much more than an accusation.
As compared to the FBI, Where only the Head of the FBI is installed by the President, approved by the Senate.
“Jim Crow” laws and practices, are when local officials are disloyal to their Oath of Office. When that happens, it requires intervention by state or federal officials.
Reminder
Never talk to an FBI agent without counsel.
Expensive and paranoid?
Yes.
But they are not your friends.
The very best result from that conversation (for you) is a return to the status quo ante.
Every other result is worse for you.
monumentcolorado wrote, “Never talk to an FBI agent without counsel.”
That’s actually great advice when talking to any law enforcement.
You have individual rights it’s up to you to utilize those rights when talking with any law enforcement. When a law enforcement official threatens you into talking or pressures you to talk without an attorney present, put an immediate stop to it and tell them they’re intentionally infringing on your rights by trying to intimidate you into ignoring your rights and don’t say another word until you have an attorney next to you. There are lots of tactics law enforcement will try to use when you don’t have an attorney present but the tone will immediately shift and they will not use those tactics when your attorney shows up.
monumentcolorado wrote, “But they are not your friends.”
Of course they’re not your friends; but, everyone should also remember that the FBI, like all law enforcement agencies, has loads and loads of good people that just want to do their job the best they can and do it right every day. You choose how you react to law enforcement. Treat them with reasonable respect regardless of their inquisitiveness because they are NOT, by any stretch of the imagination, all political left hacks and activists out to get you so don’t exhibit bigotry and treat them like they are!
Be respectful of law enforcement but always demand your rights.
When the FBI comes knocking, better lawyer up.
The agency culture IS corruption and misplaced priorities (MAGA is enemy of state number one? Come on, man.) Corruption IS rewarded within the agency, therefore it flourishes. Abolish the FBI. There is no reforming a deeply and thoroughly corrupt institution.
At the VERY least, rename the FBI building. Why is J. Edgar Hoover’s name still on the building? Because it continues to be a thoroughly corrupt and unnecessary institution. Every freedom-loving and law abiding American (oops, can’t say that word any longer) should fear the FBI, not respect the FBI. The bureau has never ‘earned’ our respect.
“It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”
Based off the evidence we have seen, the FBI discredited the agency all by themselves.
I believe the FBI does have good agents working as they should. Unfortunately it seems there are a number of bad actors within the agency in the upper ranks.
LOL that JT takes the phrase “conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation” and is so desperate to paint the FBI as extreme that he feels compelled to cut out “and others.”
Fine by me for political bias to be investigated, just make sure that it looks at right-wing bias as well as left-wing bias.
“the files show that the FBI paid Twitter millions as part of this censorship system”
That’s false. This describes that actual reason for the payment that is mandated by law:
https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/20/no-the-fbi-is-not-paying-twitter-to-censor/
That’s false. This describes that actual reason for the payment that is mandated by law:
Your stupid pedantry requires the requests are legal and required. NEITHER, apply to what the FBI engaged in.
Both applied to the actual reason for the payment, as detailed in the article, which you are silent about.
The ‘proof’ offered is pure conjecture. The vagueness of the article conflates lots of activities, and no way to prove the divisions of the activities.
The entire article fall apart when it claims the FBI had no part in censoring the laptop story. Considering the hundreds of hours the FBI spent laying the ground work for “evil Russian” mis information. When the FBI had the laptop in hand for a year and never tied any part of it to Russia.
Thanks for posting link. Clearest explanation I’ve seen yet.
You’re welcome.
I think the public and certainly the FBI and CIA understand the valuable assistance rendered by the private sector in government investigations of wrongdoing. A major difference – and, possibly, a law violation – occurs when the government initiates or furthers the contact. A simple example explain this: Consider a hotel manager who calls the police to report that a cleaning person spotted drugs and guns in a guest’s room while cleaning it. The police respond, investigate, get a warrant, search the room and arrest the guest. This is all OK. In a different scenario, the police approach a hotel manager and ask that a cleaning person be sent to Room such and such to see if there are drugs and guns in the room. The manager complies and sends the cleaning person who reports that there are drugs and guns in the room. Police get a search warrant, search the room, seized the drugs and guns and arrest the guest. All bad and case will get tossed because police violated Fourth Amendment and via the government’s agent – the hotel manager and cleaning person – the government conducted an unlawful search. Everything after that gets tossed by the reviewing court. So, using this example, if Twitter voluntarily reports something amiss to the FBI or CIA and something comes of it, that’s OK. On the other hand, as soon as the FGBI and CIA refer something to Twitter or ask it to do something, all that something takes on a very different legal status and if in contravention to the First Amendment and one’s freedom of expression, may be unlawful. This should all be addressed in the hearings that begin in the House next week so there’s no need to argue here about it.
“This describes that actual reason for the payment that is mandated by law:”
Only a dupe, or an Apologist, believes propagandists when they emit a smoke screen to cover their tracks.
Only a dupe, or an Apologist, claims that facts are a smoke screen when they dislike the facts.
“. . . claims that facts are a smoke screen . . .”
Yet again, your twisted view of “facts” — whatever claims are made by those I agree with.
(P.S. Can’t you at least try to be original?)
Yet again, you do not actually quote a single T/F claim in the article and provide evidence that it’s false. All you have is innuendo.
I’m original when the situation merits it. Such is not the case in responding to innuendo.
You are seldom if ever are original.
The fact that the payment was mandated by law, means that Twitter was acting as an extension of the FBI.
This is pretty black letter. Once FBI pays twitter – the debate over whether Twitter is acting for government or not – goes away.
Twitter acting as an agent of government engaged in censorship – that violates the 1st amendment.
The next issue is was FBI allowed to even ask ?
The answer is no. They were not targeting foreign actors, they must play by constitutional rules.
anon wrote:”This describes that actual reason for the payment that is mandated by law: https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/20/no-the-fbi-is-not-paying-twitter-to-censor/
So let me see if I understand correctly. The FBI requested information from twitter and then paid Twitter for employee time gathering this information. Under the law Twitter has the right to bill the FBI for expenses incurred in fulfilling the FBI’s request.
And then the information gathered was used by the FBI to help twitter identify breaches of Twitters TOS agreement with its customers.
Given that the FBI was actually providing a service to Twitter and not the other way around this looks like a scam.
And what information does Twitter have besides customer Tweets? It doesn’t seem like providing access to tweets should cost $3 million since that is what Twitter does routinely for free.
The fact that FBI is paying Twitter is proof that Twitter is acting as a government agent.
There is also the issue that the FBI Group is the Task Force on Foreign Influence – and the tweets they were censoring were entirely domestic.
The FBI really does have the broad latitude those on the left claim- with respect to foreign actors.
It DOES NOT with respect to Us Persons.
For MANY reasons this activity by FBI and other government agencies is unconstitutional.
The fact that the FBI goes to Twitter with a court order when investigating crimes like child porn does not make Twitter a government agent.
“The fact that the FBI goes to Twitter with a court order when investigating crimes like child porn does not make Twitter a government agent.”
Is there anything at all that you have correct in this post ?
The FBI did not go to Twitter with a Court order.
Had they done so the issue of whether Twitter would have been a government agent would have been irrelevant.
Government going to anyone with a court order is government acting directly, and there is no doubt that Government acting directly can not censor protected speech.
But lets pretend that somehow the FBI got a court order, and went to Twitter with it. That would be the MOST compelling case that Twitter was a government actor – there was a court order, it had no choice but to comply OBVIOUSLY Twitter would be acting as government.
Do you think about what you write before you post ?
Lets try to make this easy, there is no way to game the constitution or the first amendment.
Government may not censor the protected free speech of individuals PERIOD.
It may not do so directly.
It may not do so indirectly.
It may not do so by proxy.
The constitution and bill of rights were not written as some kind of game to see if progressives could find a way arround the limitations and infringe on peoples rights.
Rights are not speed bumps for government to work arround. They are Full stop barriers to government, with very limited and narrow exceptions.
All infringements on rights – especially first amendment rights must be justified, and there are few justifications for any restrictions on speech.
What is absurd is that in the US we are even discussing this.
Even more absurd is that the left is driving it.
The greatest champions of free speech have been those on the left. Now you are channeling the most vile infringers.
“The FBI did not go to Twitter with a Court order.”
You’re wrong. The 2703(d) requests that they reimbursed require a court order. The article I linked to in my original post links to the relevant laws.
The fact that you still do not understand this means that you didn’t read the article with the intention of understanding the relevant laws.
You are correct I rarely follow the links of anonymous posters or of posters with a track record of linking irrelevant or useless material, or worse material that often directly contradicts their own claims.
If you want me to follow your links – post under an identity develop a reputation for referencing credible sources.
I am not going to go back through this chain and sort out what you might have gotten correct, or I might have gotten wrong,
as you continue to post anonymously and therefore are not entitled to any presumption of credibility.
Regardless, there are sources that Confirm that atleast some payments to Twitter were based on 2703(d) orders.
Regardless, read the remainder of My Post. If Twitter was following a court order, what they are doing when following that order is a Government act.
Twitter is not free to second guess whether the actions they are taking is unconstitutional, or illegal.
BUT WE ARE.
A 2703(d) order is very similar to a warrant. Frankly I am not sure what the difference is. It requires alleging a crime as well as providing evidence of that crime.
Todate I am not aware of anyone being prosecuted.
Further we know from the collusion delusion that the FBI has been known to lie to get warrants.
Regardless, Where the FBI is actually dealing with real criminal conduct – and many of us are not prepared to accept that is true just because the got a warrant or 2703(d) order, there is no objection, there is even an expectation that Twitter will work with the FBI.
But nothing we have seen thus far in the Twitter files has demonstrated that.
Twitter has been used in the past, and continues to be used to disseminate child porn.
One of Musk’s openly stated objectives is to do far better at dealing with Child porn.
Bother FBI and Twitter before Musk were not that interested in thwarting child porn.
That said there MUST have been some efforts including Warrants and arrests.
And I would think no libertarian or conservative is criticising Twitter or the FBI for working together to end child porn.
I suspect most on the right have no problems with actually thwarting Russian Election interferance.
I however do. If the russians or other foreign powers are trying to hack our voter registration databases of election systems – go after them.
If they are voicing their own political oppinions on US elections – I do not give a schiff.
Unlike those of you on the left – I trust voters to make up their own minds.
While they may not make the choices I prefer and they may do so for reasons I am offended by, that is how elections work.
Mostly I think voters get it right, they are mostly able to sort out the truth from the lies – when they are not being censored.
If the russians are able to persuade voters – that is fine with me.
Free speech is not mind control.
And in the end if followed the constitution protects us from the mistakes the electorate makes.
“Under the law Twitter has the right to bill the FBI for expenses incurred in fulfilling the FBI’s request.”
Generally one has a right to bill for expenses. In this case it would be by the page at a cost of $1-$5 probably on the low side. Did the article state how many pages were requested?
You didn’t understand correctly.
First, I suggest that you read the laws in question, which the article links to. Masnick even explicitly notes “These are investigatory requests for information, or so called 2703(d) requests, which require a court order“: “A court order for disclosure under subsection (b) or (c) may be issued by any court that is a court of competent jurisdiction and shall issue only if the governmental entity offers specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the contents of a wire or electronic communication, or the records or other information sought, are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.”
“Under the law Twitter has the right to bill the FBI …”
Under the law, the FBI *must* pay Twitter for the information Twitter provides in response to a court order in a criminal investigation, not simply that Twitter has a right to bill.
“And then the information gathered was used by the FBI to help twitter identify breaches of Twitters TOS agreement with its customers.”
No. The information gathered was used by the FBI to prosecute people for crimes they were investigating (e.g., child porn).
“what information does Twitter have besides customer Tweets?”
They have a variety of other info, including DMs and IP addresses.
Turley is not the only public figure calling for a “Church”-like committee hearing in the FBI’s abuses and those of the CIA. Yet, this is a different time and the parties today are more aggressively in dispute with each other. Frank Church, a liberal Democrat from Idaho, at least had the benefit of knowing – or at least believing – that his colleagues on the other side were honorable and in favor of good government. I’m not so sure that we have the same conditions today. And don’t forget the warning of Sen. Chuck Schumer that the intel community has “six ways from Sunday” to get back at anyone who goes after them. Church and his party learned this the hard way. Two years after the committee’s work resulted in the enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 – an Act supposedly designed to prevent corruption in the FBI and CIA and that created the FISA warrant process recently violated by the FBI that submitted a fraudulent affidavit for a secret surveillance warrant on Carter Page – the FBI got their six ways to Sunday by indicting and convicting seven members of Congress for bribery and conspiracy in the ABSCAM case. The seven included one Democrat senator and five Democrat representatives, along with one hapless Republican representative. Five additional federal and state officials – all Democrats – were also arrested by the FBI and prosecuted for various law violations. I certainly do not offer this analysis to argue against cleaning up the FBI and CIA. On the contrary, there is much to learn from how Church’s committee addressed important provisions of laws governing foreign and domestic intelligence gathering. Let us, simply, not duplicate the weaknesses of the Church Committee that 45 years ago laid the groundwork for the corruption we find in today’s FBI and CIA. There are precise means for eliminating the loopholes through which the Committee’s ambitions were later thwarted so cavalierly.
I agree on there needing to be a Church like Commission, Turley. In fact, the intelligence community writ large would benefit by having such a commission every five years or so. Not only that, the people within the agencies who value the best intelligence would actually be all for such a routine screening as it would help with efficacy across the board…
One of the worst hangovers from the 9/11 days and the advent of the Patriot Act is it lowered (sometimes even removing entirely) the bar for solid intelligence gathering. Combined with the advent of social media and the internet, suddenly, almost anyone could access previously guarded information from an early 90’s era computer at the home office. The result was >>> more information didn’t equate with being better information.
But Jon, I don’t believe your concern is sincere since you are a part of a massive disinformation campaign being continuously run through your employer. Seems you’re just upset that the disinformation you wish to allude to publicly is getting called out for being as such. That’s where you put yourself by choosing to make money the way you choose to.
Anonymous, you are certainly entitled to express your opinions in this forum. Please know that others who follow Professor Turley’s blog appreciate his courage and candor in calling out government agencies that engage in subterfuge of epic proportions. It’s unfortunate that so many people cannot see that the mainstream media is complicit as a result of its failure to cover developments that should be of concern to the taxpayers who fund the activities of these agencies and pay the salaries of their employees. Some of us feel that we are working hard to support government employees who have engaged in misconduct. How ironic is it that the current administration wanted to create a “disinformation bureau” when a great deal of misinformation is coming from the putative leader of the free world. Wake up America! The emperor has no clothes!
Thanks for your original thought.
“But Jon, I don’t believe your concern is sincere since you are a part of a massive disinformation campaign being continuously run through your employer.”
The Professor comments for both Fox and The Hill, which strongly suggests he is considered a responsible constitutional scholar by both sides.
When you write “your employer,” I assume you’re throwing shade on Fox. Fox definitely editorializes to the right in its reporting (The Hill does the same to the left), but both publications are known to tell their readers truths that don’t conform to their preferred narratives. For that matter, the NY Post has been surprisingly frank about Trump on Jan 6.
And Newsweek has shown amazing balance of late. I may start subscribing.
If you want to complain about flat-out liars and censors, WaPo, NYT, Yahoo, and Huffpo are national disgraces. You should direct your outrage at them before complaining about Fox and its commentators.
Very true, Catherine. The Professor is one of those prophets who is never honored in his own house. Academia has betrayed his ideals.
The left is running low on excuses. From “basket of deplorables” to “conspiracy theorists” and “white supremacists,” the Left has used name calling and slurs to shut down free speech and all opponents of their irrational woke delusion. But when they go unchecked, and when the opposition cowers in fear, these linguistic weapons of destruction become embedded in the culture. It’s not too late to stand up to the bullies and refuse their depiction of the country and conservatives.
“and when the opposition cowers in fear,”
Tonight, on national mainstream news (NBC, ABC), there’s much criticism against TX governor for sending ILLEGAL immigrants to DC.
But not a *WORD,* not a *PEEP,* about the smashing and looting in blizzard-ravished Buffalo, NY, especially at Family Dollar store and a sports store selling expensive basketball shoes….police say they’re not even grabbing things they need, ‘like food and water,’ they’re grabbing TVs, stereos, electronics.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/BuffaloLooting?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Most FBI officials are probably well-meaning and otherwise good public servants, but each FBI official swears a supreme loyalty oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution in their job authorities – that includes NOT violating the 1st Amendment or 4th Amendment.
We expect our doctors to uphold their loyalty oath (to do no harm). We expect our clergy to uphold their religious oaths. We expect our spouses to uphold their vows.
Why do voters tolerate our public servants NOT having fidelity to their Oath of Office? We pay their salary and pay for their budgets, why shouldn’t they be required to uphold their Oath of Office? One cannot hold governing authority without agreeing to this employment contract, which is also federal law under Title 5 U.S. Code 3331 (statute defining Article VI of the U.S. Constitution).
Since 2001, the DOJ has ordered doctors and lawyers to violate their own professional oaths with the Bush torture program that violated Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty – maybe start here? Those disloyal Bush officials then gave illegal orders to the CIA and DOD – approved and pushed by the DOJ. The DOJ drove the torture program.
None of the leaders of the Bush torture program have been held accountable. Arguably the most disloyal public servants to ever hold constitutional authority in America.
[source: book titled “Disrupt, Discredit and Divide” written by former FBI field agent Mike German who specialized in rightwing terrorism for more than a decade].
It seems pretty clear to me that Turley is spending much time promoting (and encouraging others to promote) the theory that FBI officials conspired with Twitter officials.
What I can’t understand is why Turley objects so much about being labeled a “conspiracy theorists”?
Jinn, you sound as if you may be on the FBI payroll. After Turley’s cogent, logical and well cited column you end up echoing the FBI talking point of making anyone argument against them a “conspiracy Theory”. How does it feel to be in the pocket of the intelligence community?
hullbobby wrote: you end up echoing the FBI talking point of making anyone argument against them a “conspiracy Theory”
___________________________________________________________
We are not discussing any old argument against the FBI.
We are talking about a very specific argument that says the FBI engaged in a conspiracy.
The contradiction here is similar to when the 911 Commission came up with a conspiracy theory of what happened that day, but then labeled all other explanations of what happened as “conspiracy Theory”.
How does is feel, hullbobby, to delude yourself that the only way others might have views that are different from your own is if they’re on the FBI payroll?
The FBI’s legitimate activities are not defined by feelings.
They are defined by the constitution.
It is not an opinion that the FBI is not free to do as they please.
Those of you on the left keep trying to claim that whatever it is that FBI has done that you like must be legitimate.
The FBI inflitrated civil rights groups in the 60’s. They tried and sometimes succeeded in entrapping them.
Was it OK for the FBI to do this ?
If NOT why are similar activities OK today ?
You need not agree with my reading of the constitutional limits of FBI conduct.
But are you actually arguing there are no limits on FBI conduct ?
What it seems like is that bad conduct by the FBI only offends you when it targets groups YOU favor.
Regardless, I have provided a bright line reading of the constitution that makes it clear not only what the FBI can and can not do, but what any in government can and can not do.
If you do not like that. Fine. Provide your own criteria for determining what the FBI or those in government can and can not do.
The standard for conduct for the FBI is NOT who is outraged and by how much.
Anonymous, how does it feel to be on the other side of being called unpatriotic due to your arguments? It is you and your ilk that called everyone a Russian stooge for the last 5 years for disagreeing with what they KNEW was obviously a lie.
Anyone that sides with the FBI censoring regular citizens for their anodyne comments is an enemy if freedom, and that is you!
I don’t care what a conservative shill calls me, so the feeling is indifference.
The good little Stalinist you are is correct above, but for the word shill.
Stalinists make good liars. They have a lot of practice.
jinn, be an adult. Rebut Turley’s facts. Not to bright trolls, or paid leftists using the assigned talking points, settle into the too easy ad hominem attack.
Well Turley is doing a fine job of rebuting his own argument by denying it is a a “conspiracy Theory”
“[W]hy Turley objects so much about being labeled a ‘conspiracy theorists’?”
Because a free country does not have “political officers” pulling the strings of media companies and censoring dissenters. Those are the tactis of a Stalinist.
I have no problem with the everyday working FBI employees. It’s the corrupt management at the top that needs to go first!
SFK48
The grunts on the ground???? so far we are less then 20 whistle blowers
Who do you think is doing the actual dirty work?
I have no problem with the everyday working FBI employees. It’s the corrupt management at the top that needs to go first!
Those everyday working FBI employees are the enforcement arm of the corrupt management. Does that mean they are all corrupt or that all of them are carrying out unconstitutional orders? Absolutely not. But where corrupt management extends into corrupt enforcement, the entire tree needs to be uprooted.
Example 1: I was working for JPMorgan Chase back in 2011 when the company was caught overcharging and foreclosing on members of the military, in violation of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The company “apologized” and “vowed” to set things right. As a veteran, I was pissed. I had clients that had been affected by their abusive practices. I waited to see exactly what they were actually going to do. And true to form, they did what they always did when they suddenly lost a revenue stream. They found a different channel to abuse. Small business banking customers lost perks and their fees went up. I resigned.
Example 2: In 2017, I was president of our Church Council. I was voted in to replace a president and his council that had mismanaged finances and hidden that from the congregation. Then, 1.5 years into restoring the integrity of our council, the school board unilaterally decided to defy our bylaws and move from a Christian-based curriculum to a secular curriculum. When confronted on this, they argued it was necessary for financial solvency for both the school and the church. A majority on Church Council voted to approve violating our bylaws and constitution for perceived exigent circumstances. The minority, including myself, resigned and left the church.
Did my resignations affect JPMorgan and/or the church? That wasn’t the point. I chose to not violate my conscience. We need more of that.
All most all the Democrat elected politicians and a good share of the Republican politicians (Cheney and Kinzinger are examples) are LEADING the FBI in their extra constitutional actions. Believing Congress will do anything is ignoring a substantial body of evidence the FBI is merely working for congress.
The FBI was a major player in constructing the Russia scam. Invented by a Democrat that enlisted the aid of THE FBI (intel, not criminal)
The same FBI is pushing a simple document dispute with Trump. (that is a civil not criminal jurisdiction) Again invoking ‘national defense ‘
The DoJ is a tool used by the Jan 6 show trial. Again ‘national defense’
All of this to keep Trump from being elected to clean house in DC. DeSantis is already under control of GOPe, plus congress is only going to get what the IC allows them to have.
The top 100 people and all the civil servants that serve those 100 need to be fired and barred from future Federal employment.
We do not need a federal bureau of investigation. Abolish the FBI. It has become the American Stasi. And yes, even the rank and file just ‘following orders.’ Not one of them is to be trusted or given benefit of the doubt. Not one. How many rank and file have resigned in protest?
Who do you think will reform the FBI? Christopher Ray, the man who’s run the place for the past 6 years? Or Merrick Garland who labelled men and women who criticized school boards as domestic terrorists? Do you think Joe Biden will change his mind about MAGA Republicans after calling them fascists?
Keep in mind that these people have the power to send dozens of heavily armed men to arrest elderly men asleep in the middle of the night, or middle-aged pastors in front of their children. Probably thousands of college-educated men – and women – would love to be in on these raids believing they are saving the country.
Seriously, what is Jim Jordan going to do when Ray, or Garland tells him that he’s got a plane to catch and can’t stay to chat? That’s what we got when the Left created a “cabal of powerful people” and decided to – the Time Magazine’s words – “save” the 2020 election. Mao wasn’t kidding when he said that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
Is Mister Turley experimenting with new ways of spelling “eliminate”?
I have no problem with simply eliminating the agency altogether.
Howie Carr has been talking and writing about the corruption within the FBI for years.
A taste: https://www.bostonherald.com/2018/07/15/howie-carr-rampant-corruption-the-norm-in-fbi/
This corruption, now being wielded against political opponents, must be rooted out and consequences must be doled out to those who promoted and engaged in this malfeasance.
As a former Bostonian I must say that I miss Howie Carr very much. Having lived through the FBI’s malfeasance in the Whitey Bulger era it is not a shock to see the corruption that exists in the agency. The added problem today is the corruption that has occurred in the Justice Department. Merrick garland is the most corrupt AG in memory, and that even includes the politically corrupt Eric Holder, Obama’s “WING MAN”. Of course the Democrats had a president’s own brother being appointed AG in Robert Kennedy, so we have no idea how low that party will sink in appointing corrupt AGs.
The Republican Jeff Sessions actually recused himself from a sensitive case, can you imagine RFK, Holder or Garland doing the same?
LOL. Garland appointed a Special Counsel for a sensitive case, but hullbobby can’t imagine Garland doing something he already did. Holder also recused himself, but hullbobby can’t imagine Holder doing something he already did.
Garland appointed a Special Counsel AGAINST TRUMP, not for the Hunter/Joe situation. It is so funny to watch a dumb guy try to lie by using facts that we all know are useless and/or wrong.
Imagine claiming that Garland isn’t political?? This is why Anonymous must be on the payroll of the Democrats, nobody is that dumb or partisan.
It’s funny for you to call a truth you dislike a lie.
I didn’t claim that Garland isn’t political. All AGs are political appointees.
Hullbobby, I listen to hosiery occasionally. I am amazed that the Bulger family hasn’t had him knocked off. In fact, I believe that whitey had a hit on him for a while.
“Time to reform the Bureau.” — No, it is way past that time.