Connect with us


Sara Carter: Americans need answers from lawmakers pushing to expand surveillance on citizens



United States Congress

On “The Sara Carter Show” podcast Monday, Sara Carter held the FBI and the government accountable for not enforcing the same standards between the summer’s BLM/Antifa riots and the Capitol riot. Carter wrote the FBI demanding answers regarding investigations into the Jan. 6 insurrection and she revealed the FBI’s response to her probing questions.

The first question Carter asked the FBI was about the information Fox News host Tucker Carlson revealed about Bank of America. According to Carlson, Bank of America, without the knowledge or the consent of its customers, shared private information with federal law enforcement agencies in the days following Jan. 6.

Bank of America “secretly engaged in the hunt for extremists in cooperation with the government,” Carlson explained on Tucker Carlson Tonight. “Bank of America effectively is acting as an intelligence agency.”

According to Carter, Bank of America was not the only bank.

“I know that from sources,” Carter said. “I don’t have the other information on what the other banks were yet, but I did send a very extensive and detailed email to the FBI to see if they would answer any of our questions.”

In Carter’s letter to the FBI, she asked if Bank of America was the only bank the FBI obtained information from.

“If not, what other banking institutions assisted the FBI with this investigation?” Carter asked.

Carter continued, asking if any of the banking institutions contacted by the FBI refused to turn over information on their customers.

“Did the FBI obtain any warrants to conduct these seemingly intrusive investigations? If so, FBI, how did you determine what and who you would be collecting on? Did you use surveillance footage to determine who was in the crowds where they were needed? And what was needed to be investigated? If so, were there any other methods in place?”

“Did the FBI open up a domestic terrorist investigation when people allegedly associated with BLM — along with others connected to Antifa and other left wing organizations — rioted and clashed with police and Secret Service outside the White House during the month of June?” Carter continued. “If so, how many banking institutions provided the FBI with information on their customers during that incident?”

“Did the FBI employ the same tactics of investigation in Portland to determine who pillaged the city? And did the FBI investigators collect data from the banking institutions to monitor the activities of people in the area of Portland?” Carter asked. “Or was it just this rally with President Trump?”

The FBI responded to Carter, however, they avoided answering Carter’s probing questions and instead, “walked around the issue and said it wasn’t up to them to determine whether or not one group could be designated a domestic terrorist group,” Carter said.

The FBI replied with this statement: “The FBI conducts investigations into violations of federal law, regardless of who the actors are, or their motivations. Using our existing legal authorities, our focus is on individuals who engage in illegal activity. We do not focus on group membership or ideology. The FBI does not and cannot designate domestic terrorist groups.”

“I never asked them if they could designate someone a domestic terrorist group,” Carter said. “I asked the FBI if they were investigating investigating groups that they believe to be domestic terrorists.”

“They would not fully answer those questions to me,” Carter said. “They would not explain if they did or did not employ those same tactics.”

In response to Carter’s question regarding Bank of America and if other banks were involved, the FBI said to contact the Treasury Department.

The FBI added that they can never initiate an investigation based solely on an individual’s race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or the exercise of first amendment rights.

“I think what they’re saying is, we’re going to investigate people based on their political ideology,” Carter said. “As long as you don’t cross whatever line they don’t want you to cross.”

“FBI bureau, I think, has done amazing work saving people’s lives and hunting down real terrorists,” Carter said, “but I have seen the bureau weaponized by a political party over the last four years that is unheard of. And this is just part of that weaponization.”

Follow Annaliese Levy on Twitter @AnnalieseLevy

You may like

Continue Reading


Trump: Tanks to Ukraine could escalate to use of ‘NUKES’



ukraine tanks scaled

Former President Donald Trump stated bluntly on Truth Social,  “FIRST COME THE TANKS, THEN COME THE NUKES. Get this crazy war ended, NOW. So easy to do!”

Trump was referring to the escalation of war in Ukraine. He, like many other commentators and lawmakers, are warning that the decision to continue sending weapons – and now tanks – could potentially lead to the use of “nuclear weapons.”

It’s mission creep and it’s dangerous, they say.

Why? Because Russian President Valdimir Putin has indicated in two different speeches that he would use nuclear weapons to defend Russia, if needed. Those warnings are not just bluster but a very real possibility.

And the escalation of war is visible.

Russia launched 55 missiles strikes across Ukraine Thursday, leaving 11 dead. The strikes come one day after the United States and Germany agreed to send tanks to Ukraine in an effort to aide the country. 47 of the 55 missiles were shot down according to Ukraine’s Air Force command.

Eleven lives were lost and another 11 were injured additionally leaving 35 buildings damaged in the wake of the attacks. According to The New York Times, Denys Shmyhal, said in a post on Telegram. “The main goal is energy facilities, providing Ukrainians with light and heat,” he said.

Ukraine is now demanding that they need F-16 fighter jets. In a post on twitter Ukrainian lawmaker, Oleksiy Goncharenko said, “Missiles again over Ukraine. We need F16.”

The US has abstained from sending advanced jets in the chances that a volatile decision could foster more dangerous attacks like former President Trump’s post on Truth referred to. If the US did authorize the decision to lend Ukraine the F-16 jets Netherlands’ foreign minister, Wopke Hoekstra, would be willing to supply them. According to The New York Times, Hoekstra told Dutch lawmakers, “We are open-minded… There are no taboos.”

F-16 fighter jets are complex to work on, they are not the average aircraft that can be learned in a matter of weeks. It can take months for pilots to learn how to fly these birds. European and US officials have the concern that Ukrainian forces could potentially use the jets to fly into Russian airspace and launch attacks on Russian soil.

Western allies are trying to avoid such a provocation, because that could lead to nuclear warfare in reference to what Putin has said he would do to defend his country.


You may like

Continue Reading

Trending Now



Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC