The Bureaucracy Strikes Back

Episode 18 Show Notes- The Bureaucracy Strikes Back

Episode Description

Professor Giordano has argued for years that the Bureaucracy has grown all-powerful. Congress has failed to hold the Bureaucracy accountable and now encourages outright defiance in their attempt to remake America from within. The advocacy news media fails to ask challenging questions, as they have become an extension of a political party. The founding fathers warned of an all-powerful central government, and we are now seeing why we should heed their warnings.

Intro

Welcome everyone to another episode of The PAS Report Weekly Roundup Podcast. This is your host Nick Giordano. As I predicted, impeachment has now usurped all coverage in the advocacy media. All the top articles and top stories are about when president trump will be impeached, not if. More importantly, the advocacy news media fails to ask any substantive questions as they cheerlead the Democrats in the House of Representatives. They can hardly hide their pleasure in this new chapter of America.

Sadly, both Democrats and Republicans have also been silent in pointing out the most obvious of questions. Make no mistake. There is a decent size of the Bureaucracy that has organized themselves in an attempt to take down the President. This is much bigger than President Trump or any other politician, and if these people succeed, America, as we know it, will never be the same.

I have been warning about the increasing size and power of the Bureaucracy for the last 15 years. I have been warning that unelected bureaucrats are never held accountable and this emboldens them to push further. You see, the bureaucrats think they know what is in the best interest of the United States rather than the people do themselves. Many in the Democrat party have aided and abetted those abusing power in the Bureaucracy because they have a common purpose. Democrats, the media, and some in the Bureaucracy are on a mission to seek and destroy the President at all costs. Their hatred and emotion are driving this.

Democrats will regret their shortsightedness because if the Bureaucracy is successful, it is only a matter of time before the Bureaucracy turns on them. Remember when Senator Schumer warned President Trump at the beginning of his administration that the intelligence community has, “six ways from Sunday to get back at you.”

As a Political Scientist, I am well aware of the dangers that are before us. I am not a journalist and don’t pretend to be. I provide analysis on what’s happening and where it can lead to, but there are obvious questions that the media fails to ask. These so-called journalists have failed us because they allow their ideology to drive coverage.

This episode will focus on the current abuses within the Bureaucracy and what can happen if left unchecked. We will focus on the current impeachment issue. Still, I will also bring in other examples of the systematic abuses of power within the Bureaucracy, and the lack of accountability that exists.

As always, if you want to see the show notes go to thepasreport.com.

Congressman Adam Schiff

I want to start by examining the behavior of House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff. I know I slammed Congressman Schiff last week as a loser and I am going to attack him again. See that’s the difference between the media and myself. I can admit that I don’t like this moron, and there are many reasons why, but the hearing last week is a prime example. It also illustrates how the media is nothing more than an extension of the Democrat party.

Throughout the hearing, Adam Schiff continually referred to the transcript and stated that President Trump was trying to get the Ukrainians to manufacture evidence against Joe Biden. When Adam Schiff held a press conference afterward, the media never put Schiff on the spot and ask where President Trump says to the Ukrainian leader to make up dirt on Joe Biden.

Because I read the transcript and nowhere does it come even close to saying something like that. The President says, “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.” Where in the hell do you get President Trump was forcing the Ukrainians to make stuff up about Biden. If that’s what you take away from the call, you are nothing more than a partisan hack who will say anything and do anything solely for politics.

Also, never once did the media question Schiff about his “more than circumstantial evidence” that Trump campaign officials were colluding with the Russians. The media never asked why he didn’t give it to the Special Counsel and why he never released it. If Schiff had this evidence, it would destroy the Trump Presidency, so why hasn’t he released it.

Adam Schiff has no credibility, and he shouldn’t be taken seriously. The moron looks like Mr. Mackey from South Park. The media should request every conversation Schiff has had with foreign officials and let’s see how many deal with digging up dirt on President Trump.

Breaking down the “Whistleblower” complaint

Adam Schiff, many of the democrats, and the media have not provided one ounce of skepticism to the whistleblower complaint, but there are serious red flags that have been raised. (Whistleblower Complaint)

First, as I said last week if you want the complaint to appear nonpartisan, then why leak its existence to Adam Schiff. Why not leak it to more well-respected democrats or a never-Trump Republican? There are even some never-Trump Republicans that it could have been leaked to.

Secondly, the complaint starts by saying, “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the POTUS is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 election.” It never says, ‘I have witnessed the POTUS using power to solicit interference.’ It goes on to say that, “Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.” Appears means that the “whistleblower” has no idea.

The Whistleblower freely admits that he never witnessed any of this activity himself and is relying on other people. Well, how the hell can this be a whistleblower than? This is where we directly see the abuse of the Bureaucracy. The Whistleblower says more than a half-dozen U.S. officials informed him. Well, how do we know that? Who are these officials? How would they be in a position to know? Do they have any motives? Do they even exist? Why didn’t they file a complaint? Are they complicit with the President for not filing a complaint?

Another problem is the “whistleblower” uses media reports in an attempt to validate his complaint. Think about that. This is the same exact thing done to justify FISA warrants as the FBI used media reports to validate the Dossier even though the source that wrote the Dossier was the source leaking the contents to the media.

On page 3 of the complaint, he writes, “…there was already a ‘discussion ongoing’ with White House lawyers about how to treat the call because of the likelihood…they had witnessed the President abuse his office for personal gain.” So many problems with that statement. White House Lawyers work for the White House, not necessarily the President. While they advise the President and protect the White House, I cannot imagine them going down for the President by trying to cover-up a crime. I also cannot imagine lawyers sitting around and openly talking about the President abusing power so freely. A couple of sentences later, he writes, “there was approximately a dozen White House officials who listened to the call – a mixture of policy officials and duty officers.” Well, where were the lawyers? How would this person know lawyers were discussing how to treat the call?

The Whistleblower talks about the phone call transcription being placed on “lockdown,” and placed onto a separate system to “store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature.” Literally two sentences later, he writes, “I do not know whether similar measures were taken to restrict access to other records of the call.” Wouldn’t it be smart to ask if this was standard operating procedure at the White House? Especially considering several conversations, the President had leaked to the press at the beginning of his presidency.

Another interesting development is the footnote on Page 4. The fourth footnote references the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. This organization, according to its own website, receives funding and grants from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Soros is a far-left billionaire that has used his money, power, and influence to infiltrate all levels of American society. (OCCRP) Another interesting donor is USAID. USAID is the Agency for International Development. I am sure if the media did their job, they would find many Clinton loyalists still exist in this organization.

This rest of the complaint cites news sources regularly including the Hill, The New York Times, and ABC News. This is an attempt to verify the same information using the same source.

Red Flags about the Whistleblower

There are several red flags about the Whistleblower and their motives. I am sick and tired of hearing that we can’t question the Whistleblower. I am sick and tired of hearing how brave the Whistleblower is. I would like to know the political motivations of the Whistleblower.

The first red flag is leaking to Adam Schiff as I already stated. You wouldn’t leak to that moron if you truly were looking for a fair, impartial investigation. In fact, you would leak to several other more prominent individuals who aren’t viewed as partisan hacks.

The second red flag is the fact that the Whistleblower retained lawyers with questionable connections. Andrew Bakaj interned on Senator Schumer’s staff and then-Senator Hillary Clinton’s staff. Looking at his Twitter feed, it’s clear he is no fan of President Trump’s, while there is nothing over the top; there are a lot of anti-Trump retweets. On January 24, 2017, he wrote a piece for his legal group titled, Whistleblowing in the Trump Era: Real-World Concerns and Considerations.” (Compass Rose Legal Group)

The Whistleblower also retained Mark Zaid. Mr. Zaid is a fervent anti-Trump person, and clearly shows disdain for his supporters when he called them “human excrement posing as human beings.” (Washington Times) Another interesting part of Mr. Zaid is the fact Red State reported a tweet from 11/11/2016 in which the tweet stated, “Journalists: bring my law firm an interesting natsec (national security) FOIA request against the Trump admin, and we’ll handle litigation pro bono.” (Red State) I tried to look for the tweet myself, but it’s deleted.

These lawyers are part of an organization founded in September of 2017 called Whistleblower Aid, which provides financial help to fired whistleblowers. Advertising this, Whistleblower Aid states they will assist with “media and public relations coaching.” (Whistleblower Aid) It would be interesting to ask whether they helped write the whistleblower complaint.

Is the Whistleblower a partisan?

Reports indicate that there was hesitation with the Intelligence Community Inspector General that the Whistleblower may have a potential political bias, and expressed support for one of the 2020 candidates. Wouldn’t that be important to know? If the Whistleblower is actively supporting an opponent of President Trump, doesn’t this highlight a significant concern especially considering this individual admits that he did not witness any wrongdoing themselves?

Changes in Whistleblower Reporting Procedure

Also, we know the whistleblower reporting requirements were changed when it came to selecting an urgent concern which is the way to get the complaint to Congress when it comes to first-hand and second-hand knowledge. (The Federalist) In order for an urgent concern complaint, the requirement was that you had to have first-hand knowledge of an incident.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General has come out, pushed back on this, and stated the changes occurred a year ago. He also stated second-hand information was allowed, but the urgent concern request would not be approved. Fair enough, and I will take him at his word. However, I would still like to know who requested the changes be made, and if they have any connections to the current Whistleblower. (Lawfare/Inspector General’s Statement)

Also, in the Inspector General’s statement, he stated that the Whistleblower did check off that he had first and second-hand information in his complaint. I find this rather curious considering I read the complaint, and there is not a single sentence where the Whistleblower said he witnessed the wrongdoing himself. In fact, the Whistleblower clearly states that he never witnessed this activity himself and is relying on others, as well as various news reports.

So, what’s going on here?

The Bureaucracy has been abusing power long before President Trump. However, since President Trump announced he was running for President, and once he began winning Republican primaries, the Bureaucracy kicked the abuse into high gear.

There are some in the Bureaucracy who have chosen to put ideology before their public service. They believe they are right on the issues, and the chain of command be damned. They think they know what’s in your best interest, and the countries best interest, better than you do. From the NSA spying on their significant others to the IRS targeting conservative organizations, bureaucratic abuses are nothing new.

However, since President Trump won the Republican nomination, these bureaucrats now openly mock the system. More importantly, they mock you. They know they cannot be held accountable by the people as they are unelected bureaucrats. They also know that Congress has failed to hold the Bureaucracy accountable for decades.

Rather than use their power of oversight, Congress has weaponized oversight for partisan gains, and this is not exclusive to Democrats. Both Republicans and Democrats have used the power of oversight to hurt the opposition rather than to ensure the Bureaucracy doesn’t abuse their power and acts within good faith.

Also, how can I take this impeachment charade seriously when nearly every Democrat is on record saying they would vote for impeachment before reviewing the evidence and hearing central figures testify? In fact, on the day of his inauguration, several media outlets, including The Washington Post, were already calling for impeachment, as were several Democrats. (The Washington Post)

The talk of impeachment began on day one, and since then, President Trump was supposed to be impeached for Russia, Stormy Daniels, tax returns, the Emoluments Clause, etc. If this were the first time they brought up impeachment, it would be one thing, but it’s not and clearly shows impeachment has been the goal all along. They view the President as illegitimate and are destroying the United States in the process.

Not to rehash the Clinton email scandal, but the bureaucrats led by James Comey violated every department norm. The senior leadership did the investigation as opposed to the rank and file field office. They granted all the witnesses immunity without getting any information first. They allowed Cheryl Mills, who was an advisor to Hillary Clinton and was involved in the email server, to declare attorney-client privilege. They allowed those under investigation to keep their phones and laptops, which would end up destroyed. They allowed a company to destroy the Clinton server even though there was a Congressional subpoena to preserve it. Does that sound normal to any of you? Even if you supported Hillary, you have to admit that this investigation was not conducted the same way as every other investigation.

When looking at the 2016 election, what role did Ukraine play and why are Democrats calling it unfair to investigate the origins of the counterintelligence operations into the Trump campaign. The advocacy news media and Democrats are stating that President Trump essentially committed treason by asking the Ukraine government to look into possible corruption on the part of Joe and Hunter Biden. If President Trump what President Trump did was wrong, why isn’t Congress investigating Ukrainian efforts to derail President Trump’s campaign in 2016? Politico did extensive reporting laying out how “Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump…they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers.” (Politico) Politico is not some right-wing publication. Democrats will say that’s already been investigated and debunked, but push back and ask, when did an investigation take place? What agency conducted the investigation? Where can we get a report of the findings? Ask those questions, and I guarantee they will say it’s not 2016 and we need to move on.

Continuing into the origins into the 2016 Trump Russia investigation, why do Congressman Schiff and his ilk show no interest in getting to the truth about how the investigation stated. The New York Times came out with a massive bombshell on Monday about Attorney General Barr soliciting information about Australian, Italian and British intelligence being involved in the 2016 election. If we care about foreign interference, surely this should be looked in to. However, the advocacy news media and their partners in the Democrat party want any and all investigations into this matter squashed. In fact, a Washington Post article essentially says it is a waste, “…a nearly three-year-old election still consumes significant resources and attention inside the federal government.” (Washington Post) They accuse the Attorney General of “going rogue.” My question is, what are they so afraid of? Why are they trying to minimize this by calling it a sideshow? Shouldn’t members of Congress at least be curious to know if the Bureaucracy abused its powers by targeting a campaign? The media has called what President Trump did an impeachable offense. Yet, from the information we have, what the President did is nowhere even remotely close to having foreign intelligence agencies used to spy and justify an investigation into a campaign. Why is it an impeachable offense for the President, but it is okay for the Bureaucracy to do with impunity?

What about the DNC servers? The FBI continually requested access to the server, but the DNC refused and instead allowed a third party called CrowdStrike to conduct a forensic analysis in order to determine who hacked into the DNC servers. In fact, the FBI never examined the servers themselves and relied on CrowdStrike’s analysis. If I am being audited, would the IRS allow me to give all the information to a third party CPA that I select and accept the results? Come on. Why didn’t the FBI get a warrant and take the server? If we are arguing that Russian interference was akin to an Act of War and a grave national security threat, shouldn’t we do our own analysis rather than rely on a third party?

How about former Secretary of State John Kerry meeting with Iranian officials and telling them to wait President Trump out? First of all, this is clearly illegal because no American can conduct foreign policy on America’s behalf without being authorized to do so. Secondly, take a second and think, did the former Secretary coordinate this meeting on his own, or was he assisted with loyalists from the State Department? How come this hasn’t been investigated?

What about when the Department of Justice officials were spying on Journalists, including labeling reporter James Rosen as a possible co-conspirator, in 2013? What about spying on Sharyl Attkisson, a well-respected journalist, and winner of many prestigious journalism awards including the Edward R. Murrow Award.

This administration has had major leaks since day one. All of the leaks are designed to damage the president and his team. This is an all-out assault, particularly by those in mid to senior-level positions. Under Obama’s administration, there were 315 classified leaks. In 2017 and 2018, the Trump administration had 208 leaks. If the current rate continues, President Trump’s administration will have 832 leaks if he serves for eight years. (Federation of American Scientists) And how many people have been prosecuted? Current and former intelligence officials told NBC News, “…there has been an outpouring of leaks meant to push back against Trump administration policies, including the sorts of disclosures rarely seen before.” (NBC News)

The resistance is real, and the problem was so bad within the federal government that the Office of Special Counsel issued guidance to federal workers to refrain from using the terms “resistance” and “impeachment,” reminding federal employees that they were not allowed to engage in resistance activities while at work because it can violate the Hatch Act. Think about how disturbing that is. If these advocates are engaged in resist activities while at work, and calling for the impeachment of the President, how can they conduct their daily work without letting their ideology and bias in the way? Amazingly, The American Federation of Government Employees is suing the OSC. (Government Executive)

We saw this with FBI Strzok and Lisa Page where they were constantly sending texts back and forth about how horrible a person Donald Trump and his supporters are all while conducting investigations on him and his opponent. Of course, they said they did not allow their biases to guide their decisions, but do they really believe we are that stupid? If you have that much hatred and believe the president is evil, how can you possibly keep your biases in check or put them aside?

If you hate the President to the point that you are engaging in resist activities, especially at work, how can you possibly do your job and carry out his policies? See, what’s happened is these people think they are the modern-day heroes, and that they will be viewed as people who are putting country first. However, they are the exact opposite. They are nothing more than rabid partisans that believe President Trump is not worthy of the presidency. It doesn’t matter that millions of Americans voted for him, and it doesn’t matter that he won the electoral college. He should not be President because he doesn’t fit their vision.

The elitist attempt to take down a sitting President and marginalize his supporters

The elitists have shown their true colors. They despise the man and his supporters. And since a large portion of Americans can support a man like this, they now want to remake every institution of government because they know what’s best for you and you’re too stupid to make the right decision.

I discussed the increasing push for censorship in a previous episode. The attempt to silence anyone who disagrees with their point-of-view. From Sleeping Giants to the Open Society Foundation. The attempt to silence others is setting a dangerous precedent. They are attempting to marginalize any open support for the President. You cannot donate, you cannot hold fundraisers, you cannot display signs and wear Trump gear, and if you do, you will pay the price.

I discussed the attempt to throw away the Electoral College in a previous episode. I explained how there are many that want to move to a national popular vote usurping the authority of the States and empowering urban areas. In fact, shortly after The PAS Report Podcast episode on the Electoral College, the head of the Federal Election Commission openly questioned President Trump’s electoral victory and the legitimacy of the electoral college. For God’s sake, this is the head of the FEC. (Washington Examiner)

I discussed how, because of their hatred of President Trump, the idea of Democratic Socialism is becoming normalized. In fact, the amount of times I have heard “party over country” seems to be pretty amazing. So, swallow the bullet and vote for a candidate that doesn’t represent any of your values because Orange Man bad. The fact is those who support impeachment because they hate President Trump have chosen party over country. They could care less about the optics, and what you think.

They want to change the makeup of the Senate, which I intend to get to next week, and the judiciary. They want to change who is eligible to vote, and they want to introduce new territories for statehood.

Closing

Not satisfied with their current crop of candidates, they have moved towards impeachment because they fear President Trump is reelected, and they worry this time he may win the popular vote. If he wins the popular vote, it validates the President, and it will set the far-left agenda back decades.

How can I take this impeachment charade seriously when nearly every Democrat is on record saying they would vote for impeachment before reviewing the evidence and hearing central figures testify?

In fact, on the day of his inauguration, several media outlets, including The Washington Post, were already calling for impeachment, as were several prominent Democrats. (The Washington Post) The talk of impeachment began on day one, and since then, President Trump was supposed to be impeached for Russia, Stormy Daniels, tax returns, the Emoluments Clause, etc. If this was the first time they brought up impeachment, it would be one thing, but it’s not and clearly shows impeachment has been the goal all along. They view the President as illegitimate and are destroying the United States in the process.

Unfortunately, many that hate President Trump do not realize the shortsightedness of this seek and destroy mission. What is being done now has far-reaching ramifications that go well beyond this presidency and will affect future Presidents and generations. They set the impeachment bar so low that every future President will be at risk of impeachment. Also, what do they think Republicans are going to do once they get in power, and you have a Democrat president? Everything one party does when they are in the majority will be adopted and expanded on by the other party once they are in the majority.

At what cost will these people try to achieve power and control. For those that don’t like President Trump, they need to realize this country is bigger than one office and one person. The country can survive a President, we have had plenty of good Presidents and plenty of bad Presidents.

The country cannot survive an all-powerful bureaucracy that can pick and choose its leaders. We cannot survive a bureaucracy that believes it knows better than the people do. The country cannot survive a bureaucracy going unchecked and held accountable by no one.

Congress has abdicated its responsibilities because the Bureaucracy is on the same side as them in their hatred for President Trump. But what happens when they select someone the Bureaucracy doesn’t approve of? What happens when the Bureaucracy doesn’t like their policies or ideas? What happens when this Bureaucracy sees everything they do as offensive?

As I said last week, a fair-minded person not blinded by ideology would agree, and I would be speaking no matter which party is abusing power. We should heed the wisdom of the Founding Fathers who warned about an all-consuming bureaucracy. At the founding of the United States, we had three cabinet-level departments. Today we have 15 Departments and hundreds of agencies and sub-agencies.

This should not be a partisan debate. If we are going to create new standards for President Trump, then every single politician should be held to the same standards.

Let us see the conversations of all members of Congress with foreign officials. Members of Congress should turn over not just their financial records, but that of immediate family that has become enriched because of who they are. How’s about Congress releases the names of all members of Congress that used the $17 million slush fund to pay off victims of sexual abuse and sexual harassment claims at the hands of members of Congress.

Let’s investigate the Ukraine/Clinton connection in the 2016 election, and let’s get the DNC server so that it can be adequately analyzed. Shouldn’t the same standards be applied to everyone? We should examine all the politicians that have used their power for financial gain, including Joe Biden. Let’s look at how previous administrations, regardless of the political party, abused their powers with the Department of Justice to conduct investigations for political purposes.