Connect with us


Collins: Schiff May Not Like The Outcome Of A 9/11-Style COVID Commission



Doug Collins

Although House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff is eager to start a 9/11-style, independent commission to investigate the federal government’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak, the outcome may not be what Schiff wants, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee Doug Collins warned on “Fox & Friends” Thursday morning.

“At a certain point in time, there will be a look back at this. There will be a look back at how it happened and how it came about.” Rep. Collins, R-GA, said, “But also I think there is going to be a look back here that I’m not sure Adam Schiff wants to talk about and that is China’s role in this and the fact that as Intelligence Committee Chairman, he was so wrapped up in impeachment when all this hit, that I’m not sure that their was a slow response on both sides because no one was looking at this because he was so focused on the President and what he was trying to do in an election that we were missing basically China’s role and others.”

On Wednesday, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-CA, called for the investigation on Twitter. He wrote, “After Pearl Harbor and 9/11, we looked at what went wrong to learn from our mistakes. Once we’ve recovered, we need a nonpartisan commission to review our response and how we can better prepare for the next pandemic. I’m working on a bill to do that.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


BREAKING: Trump ordered to pay over $350M, barred from operating his business in NY in civil fraud case ruling



Former President Donald Trump and his business empire faced a significant setback as a New York judge ruled against them in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The 92-page ruling, handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron, barred Trump from operating his business in New York for three years and imposed over $350 million in damages.

The case, which unfolded over months of trial proceedings, stemmed from allegations that Trump inflated his assets and engaged in fraudulent practices. Engoron’s ruling cited a litany of charges, including persistent fraud, falsifying records, issuing false financial statements, and conspiracy to commit fraud.

Moreover, the judge imposed restrictions on key figures within the Trump Organization, including Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, barring them from serving in certain corporate roles in New York for a specified period.

Engoron’s scathing assessment of Trump’s testimony during the trial further undermined the former president’s credibility. The judge criticized Trump for evasive responses and irrelevant digressions, highlighting the detrimental effect on his credibility.

In response to the ruling, Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, lambasted the court’s decision, alleging political bias and a disregard for established legal principles. Kise argued that the evidence presented during the trial failed to support the allegations of fraud and emphasized Trump’s substantial net worth.

Kise’s assertions were echoed by Alina Habba, another attorney representing Trump, who denounced the verdict as a “manifest injustice” resulting from a politically motivated witch hunt.

Throughout the proceedings, Trump consistently dismissed the trial as politically motivated, accusing both Engoron and James of partisan bias. His legal team also criticized the absence of a jury in the trial, questioning the fairness of the proceedings.

Attorney General Letitia James, who spearheaded the lawsuit against Trump and his organization, portrayed the ruling as a victory for accountability and transparency in business practices. The lawsuit alleged fraudulent conduct and sought substantial financial penalties, a portion of which would contribute to the state treasury.

The fallout from the case extends beyond Trump and his business interests, with implications for the broader business community and the rule of law. The contentious nature of the trial and its outcome underscored deep divisions and raised questions about the integrity of the legal system.

Trump vows to appeal the decision.

Continue Reading