MAYFLOWER KURZBERICHTEN (04/15/2022)

MAYFLOWER KURZBERICHTEN (04/15/2022)

Übersetzer: Boston Mayflower —Siche

1) Der nationale Sicherheitsberater des Weißen Hauses, Sullivan, bekräftigte am Donnerstag (14. April) die Sicherheitsverpflichtung der Vereinigten Staaten für Taiwan, und wies darauf hin, dass die KPCHINA aus den Erfahrungen mit Russlands Krieg in der Ukraine lernen könnte, um sich auf eine zukünftige Invasion Taiwans vorzubereiten.
2) Eine Delegation amerikanischer Kongressabgeordneter unter der Leitung von US-Senator Lindsey Graham traf am späten Donnerstag (14. April) in Taipeh ein, um Taiwan einen Tag und eine Nacht lang einen Blitzbesuch abzustatten.
3) CIA-Direktor William Burns erklärte, die Drohung Russlands, in der Ukraine “taktische Atomwaffen oder Atomwaffen mit geringer Reichweite” einzusetzen, dürfe nicht auf die leichte Schulter genommen werden, da sich die russische Armee in der Ukraine in einer “verzweifelten Situation” befinde.
4) Außenminister Blinken sagte, die KPCHINA müsse sich für eine Seite zwischen Aggressor und Opfer, dem bestehenden internationalen System und der chaotischen Konflikt Situation.
5) Einem Bericht des Magazins Vanity Fair vom 12. April zufolge behauptete die US-Handelsbeauftragte Dai Qi kürzlich, dass die handelspolitischen Herausforderungen der KPCHINA die Vereinigten Staaten mehr unter Druck gesetzt hätten als der Konflikt zwischen Russland und der Ukraine. Sie sprach sich dafür aus, dass die Vereinigten Staaten so schnell wie möglich handeln sollten, um eine Dominanz Chinas zu vermeiden.
6) Aus der SEC-Meldung vom 14. April geht hervor, dass Musk angeboten hat, alle Twitter-Aktien für 54,20 Dollar pro Aktie in bar zu kaufen; der Gesamtwert der Transaktion beläuft sich auf 43
Milliarden Dollar.
7) Der Markt zeigt sich besorgt über die Entschlossenheit der KPCh, die Schaffung eines einheitlichen großen Marktes zu beschleunigen, und viele Wissenschaftler glauben, dass dies ein Signal ist, dass die Zentralregierung der KPCHINA zur Planwirtschaft zurückkehren wird.

Tageszitat:
Wenn es auf dieser Welt etwas gibt, das sich die Menschen immer wünschen und manchmal auch erreichen können, dann ist es die Wärme zwischen den Menschen.

Quelle:https://gnews.org/zh-hans/2353585/

Gepostet von Siche

Disclaimer: This article only represents the author’s view. Gnews is not responsible for any legal risks.

Source

Yes, The Senate Should Investigate Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Leniency Towards Sex Predators

Yes, The Senate Should Investigate Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Leniency Towards Sex Predators

Senate Democrats have signaled their intent to begin confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Biden’s nominee to the Supreme Court, as early as next week. Thus far, the only information uncovered about Judge Jackson by the intrepid corporate press is that she will be the first black woman to serve on the Supreme Court.

But research released this week by Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, calls into question Judge Jackson’s judicial philosophy concerning sex predators, particularly sentencing for child sex predators.

Beginning with a paper she authored while a student at Harvard Law School, Judge Jackson appears to have a track record of both advocacy and sentencing decisions demonstrating extreme leniency toward child sex predators. Perhaps more concerningly, her record also demonstrates an attempt to normalize a radical sexual ideology of adults being attracted to minors – categorizing it not as flatly criminal, but simply as misunderstood.

Judge Jackson’s Disturbing Pattern

As Hawley points out in a Twitter thread, beginning in law school, Judge Jackson questioned making convicts register as sex offenders, objecting to the “stigmatization and ostracism” it creates and suggesting the public policy on the issue was driven by a “climate of fear, hatred, and revenge.”

This attitude was not simply that of a law school student pursuing novel legal theories. In fact, what Hawley has laid out is a pattern of behavior from Judge Jackson, one that began when she was in law school, evolved into advocacy while she served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and critically, one which she went on to implement as a judge.

While at the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Judge Jackson advocated for eliminating the existing mandatory minimum sentences for child porn, suggesting that at least some people who possess child porn aren’t sexually motivated, but simply “in this for either the collection, or the people who are loners and find status in their participation in the community.” While on the federal bench, Judge Jackson demonstrated a continuous string of departures from sentencing guidelines for sex predators.

In one case involving a sex offender over the age of 18 caught with multiple images of child pornography, the sentencing guidelines called for a sentence of up to 10 years. Judge Jackson sentenced the perpetrator to three months. In another case, where the criminal distributed more than 102 child pornography videos and sent lewd pictures of his own 10-year old daughter, the guidelines recommended 97 to 121 months in prison. Judge Jackson sentenced him to 71 months. Hawley’s Twitter thread lists five other similar sentencing examples.

The White House attempted to dismiss these concerns as “cherry picked elements of her record out of context.” But Judge Jackson’s philosophy toward sex offenders is hardly a one-off, as both her statements and sentencing history demonstrate.

Rather, these views appear to be fundamental to her judicial philosophy – beginning as a law student, then as a practicing attorney, and then as a judge. If confirmed to the Supreme Court, Jackson will presumably continue to apply those legal views, but this time with the imprimatur of the country’s highest court. Senators should certainly take notice.

Critiquing Judge Jackson’s Record Is Not ‘Disrespectful’

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the lead Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has pledged to hold “a fair, thorough hearing,” adding, “we won’t get in the gutter, like the Democrats did,” appearing to reference the baseless accusations Democrats hurled at Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and the personal attacks levied at Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s adoption of two black children.

Democrats are already claiming that Hawley’s critique of Jackson’s judicial record rises to the same level as, say, entertaining completely unverified gang-rape allegations against a Supreme Court nominee.

“I’m troubled by it because it’s so outrageous,” said Democratic whip Sen. Dick Durbin. “It really tests the committee as to whether we’re going to be respectful in the way we treat this nominee.”

This is, to put it politely, absurd nonsense. Hawley’s assessment of Judge Jackson isn’t a personal or disrespectful attack. It isn’t attacking her adopted children, or interrogating the nominee’s virginity (yes, Democrats and their media allies did that to Brett Kavanaugh). It is squarely in the lane of jurisprudential analysis.

Far from being “outrageous,” it is, quite literally, the job of U.S. senators, who are constitutionally tasked with the role of advice and consent. It is exactly what senators should be doing – scrutinizing the record and judicial philosophy of nominees to every court, and especially to the Supreme Court.

For Republicans to assume they can take it easy on this nominee — because they assume the confirmation is inevitable, they’re concerned about optics, or because her confirmation to replace outgoing liberal Justice Stephen Breyer will not, at this moment, change the ideological makeup of a 6-3 court — is to fundamentally misconstrue what they are there to do. 

Advice and consent does not mean, “Well, not this time,” or “She’s going to be confirmed anyway.” It means what it says. It means a thorough review of the nominee’s record, judgment, and judicial fitness to serve on the highest court in the country. This is especially true of Judge Jackson who at just 51 years old would be serving on the court for decades to come, through future ideological shifts including ones that might place the court’s liberals back in charge.

A ‘Thorough’ Hearing Will Involve All of Judge Jackson’s Records

The Biden administration and its backers have offered no substantive defense of Judge Jackson’s record. While the White House has dismissed Hawley’s critique as cherry-picking that “buckles under the lightest scrutiny,” they have failed to demonstrate how. They’ve resorted instead to tossing complete non-sequiturs at Hawley, calling him “an insurrectionist,” and bizarrely trying to tie him to the candidacy of former Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore (Hawley represents Missouri). 

But the flags in Judge Jackson’s record are not cherry-picked, nor are they taken out of context. Rather, they are a pattern. Moreover, hurling unrelated charges at Hawley while failing to offer a defense of Jackson’s sentencing decisions suggests that Democrats know there isn’t one. All of this implies there may be more to uncover – what else do her records at the Sentencing Commission say? 

A truly thorough hearing, the kind that Grassley suggests he wants, will involve the Sentencing Commission turning over all of Judge Jackson’s records. It will involve a rigorous examination of her views and record on child sex predators, as well as other topics like the nominee’s stated positions on critical race theory, and how that shapes her jurisprudence.

But to do any of this requires Republicans on the Senate’s Judiciary Committee to demonstrate rigor in their scrutiny of Jackson’s record. This means they must swat aside criticism from Senate Democrats, who have no grounds to claim anything is “outrageous” ever again, not after the circus they unleashed around the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh. They must demand records from reticent agencies, and they must refuse to accept non-substantive answers from the White House, the nominee, or anyone else.


Rachel Bovard is The Federalist’s senior tech columnist and the senior director of policy at the Conservative Partnership Institute. She has more than a decade of policy experience in Washington and has served in both the House and Senate in various roles, including as a legislative director and policy director for the Senate Steering Committee under the successive chairmanships of Sen. Pat Toomey and Sen. Mike Lee. She also served as director of policy services for The Heritage Foundation.

Source

Graham: ‘Deplorable,’ ‘Dishonorable’ Biden Wouldn’t Give Ukraine Fighter Jets

Graham: ‘Deplorable,’ ‘Dishonorable’ Biden Wouldn’t Give Ukraine Fighter Jets

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on this week’s broadcast of FNC’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that it was “deplorable” that President Joe Biden did not give fighter jets to Ukraine.

Graham said, “I’m calling for the crushing of the Russian economy even though our war and fight is not with the Russian people. It is with Putin. The only way this war ends is with Putin going to jail or being taken out by his own people. How do you make that happen? You have to help the Ukrainians.”

He added, “It is deplorable to me, dishonorable that we would not give 28 fighter jets to the Ukrainians to defend their skies against Russian aggression. The Biden administration stopped that transfer. One minute they say they are not using planes we have, but if we give them more, it would be World War III. What happened is that Putin threatened Biden, and he folded like a cheap suit. Give them the planes. The speech in Poland by the vice president is not an adequate substitute of MiGs going into Ukraine to help the Ukrainians defend themselves. I am all in. I don’t want boots on the ground, no-fly zone yet. But if chemical weapons are used by Putin, then I support a no-fly zone.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

Source

Graham: I’m Going to Introduce a Resolution Declaring Putin a ‘War Criminal’

Graham: I’m Going to Introduce a Resolution Declaring Putin a ‘War Criminal’

Friday on FNC’s “Hannity,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced he would introduce a resolution in the U.S. Senate declaring Russian President Vladimir Putin a “war criminal.”

“I spoke to the Ukrainian ambassador earlier [Friday],” he said. “Your voice is breaking through. After I listen to your program every night, Putin needs a longer table. Here’s what I would say, I’ve been a military prosecutor, defense attorney, judge for 30-something years. I’m going to introduce a resolution next week — I’ll give it to you on your show — declaring that Putin is a war criminal. It’s clear to me the world would be better off if the Russian people took Putin out tonight. The war on Ukraine would end, and Russia would have freedom they don’t enjoy today. A steel curtain has descended upon the Russian people. What does that tell me? That Putin is afraid of his own people. Martial law has been virtually declared by Putin. I think the Russian people are not buying what Putin is selling when it comes to the Ukraine.”

“And if the Ukrainian people continue to fight as brave as they are, I think eventually, the dam will break in Russia,” Graham continued. “But I want to say this crystal clear — without apology, without equivocation — the world would be better off if Putin were gone tonight. And the best way to end this war is not American boots on the ground, but for the Russian people to rise up, reclaim the honor of their country and take this guy out, Putin, by any means necessary. And if you don’t understand that, you don’t understand this war, and you don’t understand the world in which we live.”

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Source

Nolte: Ukraine War Fever Could Kill GOP Midterm Chances

Nolte: Ukraine War Fever Could Kill GOP Midterm Chances

How does any rational or caring human being watch us lose a 20-year war against cave-dwelling barbarians, and not just lose that war, but lose it in the most humiliating fashion imaginable, and less than a year later already have a war-boner for Ukraine?

I’m convinced the unholy alliance between Neocons, the corporate media, and the Democrat party is the Seventh Seal.

For a moment, let’s forget about the fact that America is incapable of liberating anyone; let’s ignore that our definition of “liberating”  is to spend $4 trillion killing hundreds of thousands of innocents and then abandoning them to the enemy. Instead, how about these apples: 1) Putin is not a cave-dwelling barbarian, and 2) Putin has nuclear weapons.

Well, those apples have been met with what is, without question, the single-most irresponsible thing a public official has uttered in my lifetime…

Russian President Vladimir Putin (NATALIA KOLESNIKOVA/AFP/Getty)

And this is a close second…

But they’re not alone. We have high-profile, pro-Trump folks saying the same.

And this is how we blow 2022.

Good heavens, a sitting United States senator is publicly calling for the assassination of the leader of a country that has thousands of nukes. But-but-but we have a missile defense system, those stricken with war fever tell me. Yeah, we do, and that defense system is built by the same government that built the Obamacare website and forgot to order coronavirus tests and made this guy a lieutenant colonel and hasn’t won a war in  75 years.

You might say, Didn’t we win Gulf War I? Maybe technically, but then George H.W. Bush told the Kurds to rise up against Saddam Hussein and didn’t back them. So maybe ask the Kurds if we won that war. Oh, you can’t; they’re liberated dead.

Dear Lindsey: Forget about the nukes. What about the power vacuum? Have you thought about the power vacuum if Russia finds its Brutus? You see, I remember the last power vacuum America had a hand in creating in a little place called Libya, and I also remember that the results were beyond devastating. The rise of ISIS was the least of it. First off, the Bush 43 administration promised Libyan President Muammar Qaddafi that we would not overthrow him if he gave up his nukes. Then Barry and Hillary helped overthrow him, so Good job, America. But Libya was the cork that kept non-European migrants and refugees out of Europe. The fall of Qaddafi flooded Europe with refugees, and now, Europe is a generation or two away from being conquered within without anyone firing a shot.

As far as Kinzinger, a no-fly zone is an act of actual war — not a cold war of sanctions and weapons shipments — but a hot war where America shoots down Russian jets. A no-fly zone means America starts/launches/initiates a hot war against a country with thousands of nukes.

Politically, though, good heavens!

The GOP is on the cusp of not just a red wave, but a generational political realignment, and this is when we start flirting with the 100 percent failure rate of neoconism?

When the Biden White House sounds more sensible than some in our party and some of our most popular talking heads… That’s scary.

We can all see it… The most dangerous thing imaginable is already here… A moral panic where everyone tries to prove their anti-Putin purity through more and more extremism until America is once again killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in a war we’re eventually going to lose anyway. And it’s all being ginned up by a D.C. War Machine that can never get rich enough and a corporate media that put ratings above human life.

We cannot fall for this.

I hope and pray Putin is humiliated in Ukraine. Nothing would make me happier. And I sympathize entirely with Ukraine doing everything in its power, including lying, to get some outside help and save itself from annihilation. But that doesn’t blind me to the fact that 1) Putin has nukes and 2) now that the U.S. military is fully-Vindman’d, we don’t win wars.

So let me say this to the GOP… It’s a trap, dummies! It’s a neocon/MSM/Democrat trap built by people who could not care less about Ukraine. To them, this war is just a convenient way to move their hate/blacklisting/virtue-signaling supremacism to another cause now that the COVID moral panic has run its course.

Usually, I only speak for myself, but I think I speak for many when I say this to the GOP: Never again, fellas. I was a grown man at the time and take full responsibility, but that doesn’t alter the fact that even though Iraq did not attack us and there were no WMDs, I — much to my eternal embarrassment — stridently defended and supported that stupid goddamned war because I believed you.

Gas prices, inflation, Biden’s oatmeal brain, Critical Race Theory, teaching gay porn in schools, the invasion over our southern border, and all the rest are vitally important, but not as important as staying out of another stupid goddamned war we cannot win.

Putin may very well push things to where we have no choice, and then, fine… We have no choice. We’re still going to lose, but I get that.

Until that point, and we’re a long way from that point, God bless and keep Ukraine, but don’t even think about it.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Source

Senator Lindsey Graham Calls for Putin’s Political Assassination [Video]

Senator Lindsey Graham Calls for Putin’s Political Assassination [Video]

Senator Lindsey Graham Calls for Putin’s Political Assassination

Putin Responds

Becker News

Senator Lindsey Graham appeared on “Hannity” on Thursday night and issued a striking challenge for the Russian people: Assassinate their president Vladimir Putin.

“How does this end?” he asked. “Somebody in Russia has to step up to the plate. Is there a Brutus in Russia? Is there a more successful Colonel Stauffenberg in the Russian military?”

“The only way this ends, my friend, is for somebody in Russia to take this guy out,” he continued. “You would be doing your country a great service and the world a great service.”

Graham also repeated his plea to the Russian people on Twitter.

“The only people who can fix this are the Russian people,” he added. “Easy to say, hard to do. Unless you want to live in darkness for the rest of your life, be isolated from the rest of the world in abject poverty, and live in darkness you need to step up to the plate.”

Putin’s press secretary responded to Graham’s call for the Russian leader’s assassination as an “hysterical escalation of Russophobia.”

“These days, not everyone manages to maintain sobriety, I would even say sanity, and many lose their minds,” the Russian press secretary said.

Dmitry Peskov, the Russian press secretary, is one of a number of Putin associates who have been targeted for sanctions by the Biden administration, including visa bans.

Graham’s call for the Russian president be assassinated was met with bipartisan condemnation. Rep. Ilhan Omar advocated for U.S. officials to be more responsible with their language.

Omar’s remarks were echoed by far right representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (who has been banned from Twitter).

The odd political bedfellows (albeit for undoubtedly different motives) did not go unnoticed.

Rep. Thomas Massie reacted on the Ingraham Angle.

Lavern Spicer argued that Senator Graham is used to being ignored due to his frequent use of hyperbole as a Fox News pundit.

There were a few conservatives who defended Graham’s rhetoric, however, such as Dan McLaughlin of National Review Online.

“He’s right, but there are some things a US Senator shouldn’t say out loud,” McLaughlin wrote on Twitter. “Or, for that matter, things that the US government shouldn’t have its fingerprints on.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who will soon be losing office in Illinois due to redistricting, believes that a “no-fly zone” should be implemented.

The ‘no fly-zone’ has been roundly criticized for being an escalation that would likely lead to a U.S. and NATO war against Russia.

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s proposal that the Russian head of state to be assassinated — a violation of international law — appears to be under serious consideration by others, including a Russian tycoon who has put a million dollar bounty on Putin’s head.

“Alex Konanykhin, an entrepreneur and former banker, posted the bounty on social media as Russia enters a full week of military action against the neighboring country,” Newsweek reported. “Western governments and companies have responded to the invasion by seeking to economically punish Putin and Russia’s ruling elite. The bounty offered by Konanykhin, who is now based in the U.S., places an even more direct target on the Russian leader as backlash over the invasion continues to escalate.”

“Konanykhin said in a Facebook post Tuesday that he promised to pay the officer or officers the money for arresting, ‘Putin as a war criminal under Russian and international laws’,” the report noted.

Vladimir Putin has divided the right with his attack on Ukraine. Many conservatives believe that the battle between the two corrupt, undemocratic nations is a no-win situation for the United States, and not worth risking World War III over.

**********

(TLB) published this article from Becker News as compiled and written by Kyle Becker

Header featured image (edited) credit: Graham/Putin/ussanews.com

••••

••••

Stay tuned to …

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Share this…
Share on FacebookPin on PinterestTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Source

Ted Cruz Rebukes Lindsey Graham: ‘Exceptionally Bad Idea’ to Assassinate Vladimir Putin

Ted Cruz Rebukes Lindsey Graham: ‘Exceptionally Bad Idea’ to Assassinate Vladimir Putin

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) rebuked his fellow Republican colleague Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC) for calling on the assassination of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

On Thursday, Graham lit the internet ablaze when he called for a Russian “Brutus” – a reference to famed Julius Caesar assassin Marcus Brutus – to take out Putin, an apparent call for his assassination.

“Is there a Brutus in Russia? Is there a more successful Colonel Stauffenberg in the Russian military? The only way this ends is for somebody in Russia to take this guy out,” tweeted Graham. “You would be doing your country–and the world–a great service.”

Graham then called upon the Russian people to rise up against Putin, lest they should “live in darkness” for the rest of their lives.

“The only people who can fix this are the Russian people. Easy to say, hard to do,” he continued. “Unless you want to live in darkness for the rest of your life, be isolated from the rest of the world in abject poverty, and live in darkness, you need to step up to the plate.”

Graham’s tweet sparked heavy criticism on social media from both the left and the right, who charged the assassination of Putin could not only spark a full-scale war with Russia but could destabilize the country into losing control of its nuclear stockpile.

“This is an exceptionally bad idea. Use massive economic sanctions; BOYCOTT Russian oil & gas; and provide military aid so the Ukrainians can defend themselves. But we should not be calling for the assassination of heads of state,” responded Ted Cruz.

Cruz was not the only one to hit back against Graham.

Graham and McFaul are not the only ones openly calling for Putin’s assassination. National Security journalist Eli Lake would like to see a Nobel awarded to Putin’s assassins:

Source

Graham: Trump’s Pardon Offer to January 6 Rioters ‘Inappropriate’ — ‘I Hope They Go to Jail’

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that it was “inappropriate” for former President Donald Trump’s offer to pardon those charged for the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Partial transcript as follows:

BRENNAN: Senator, more than 730 people have been charged by the Justice Department for their role in the attack on the Capitol on January 6 to stop–

GRAHAM: Right.

BRENNAN: the certification of our election. Last night, President Trump, at a rally, said this.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: If I run and if I win, we will treat those people from January 6 fairly. And if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons because they are being treated so unfairly.

BRENNAN: Pardons? Do you agree?

GRAHAM: No, I don’t want to send any signal that it was OK to defile the Capitol. There are other groups with causes that may want to go down to the violent path that these people get pardoned.

BRENNAN: But isn’t that a dangerous thing to say?

GRAHAM: Kamala Harris- Yeah. Well, I think it’s inappropriate. I- I don’t want to reinforce that defiling the Capitol was OK. I don’t want to do anything that would make this more likely in the future. And just let me finish my thought here. When Kamala Harris and her associates and the people that work for her, her staffers, raised money to bail out the rioters who hit cops in the head and burned down stores. I didn’t like that either. So I don’t want to do anything from raising bail to pardoning people who take the law into their own hands because it will make more violence more likely. I want to deter people who did what–

BRENNAN: Yes.

GRAHAM: on January 6. And those who did it, I hope they go to jail and get the book thrown at them because they deserve it.

BRENNAN: That was clear, Senator.

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)