‘We know that any gun that’s out there in the hands of someone illegally has the potential for violence…’
Photo by Ken Lund (CC)
(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) California’s Santa Clara County announced it will create a new task force specifically charged with confiscating firearms from citizens deemed unfit to own weapons.
The “County Gun Team” will work with the district attorney’s office and the county’s board of supervisors to locate and take weapons from those who have been court-ordered to turn in their guns under Santa Clara’s “red flag” laws.
Every year, the county courts force more than 4,600 people to surrender their firearms. Most of these court orders are the result of domestic-violence restraining orders, according to the Mercury News.
Few of those weapons end up being confiscated, however—which is why the county wants a prosecutor, investigator and three analysts to follow up with people ordered to hand over their guns.
“It used to be a part-time job of the particularly motivated,” supervising Deputy District Attorney Maris McKeown explained. “It needs to be a full-time job of a team of people.”
The new task force will cost nearly $427,000 annually, according to the county’s board of supervisors. But Santa Clara officials said the cost is worth it to keep citizens safe.
“We’re dealing with increasing violent crime involving weapons,” said Heather Randol, deputy chief of investigations for San Jose Police. “Anything that’s going to make the community safer by removing illegal weapons is something we support.”
Concerns about the potential abuse of these firearm restraining orders is overplayed, Randol claimed.
“We have officers who are experts in this area,” she said. “Our special operations takes each case very seriously. There is a step-by-step process that they go through before they actually serve that warrant … We know that any gun that’s out there in the hands of someone illegally has the potential for violence.”
‘It’s an insurance policy to show that we’re doing everything we can, when in fact it wasn’t giving us anything of what we hoped it would get…’
Bassem Youssef / IMAGE: American Library Association via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) The former FBI unit chief who ran its warrantless domestic spying operations during much of the Obama era said he warned top officials that it was both ineffective and open to abuse, but his calls went unheeded.
Retired Special Agent Bassem Youssef, who oversaw the FBI’s Communications Analysis Unit from 2004 to his 2014 retirement, told investigative journalist John Solomon that he relayed his concerns to ex-Director James Comey and ex-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
The program, part of the USA Freedom Act, was implemented after the Sept. 11 attacks with assurances that it would be carefully regulated to respect privacy rights of American citizens.
However, subsequent revelations, including those of whistleblower Edward Snowden and a recent report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz outlined the massive scope of the operations, the litany of abuses and the cavalier attitudes of those in charge.
“I have no doubt, or very little doubt, that it was used for political spying or political espionage,” Youssef said, according to Just the News.
Youssef said he had performed an audit of the highly classified program that revealed it had helped generate leads in two cases but had failed to uncover dozens of other terrorism attacks.
Instead of yielding rich intelligence, it generated countless instances of “false negatives and positives” that cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in fruitless investigations.
Moreover, he said, “there was collateral damage in terms of civil liberties” as the FBI invaded the privacy of innocent Americans.
McCabe, a career bureaucrat at the agency with partisan left-wing ties, was still working his way up the ladder when Youssef raised the issue with him.
“I remember, he was so adamant about, ‘We need this program. We’re keeping it as this, even though we’re not getting anything out of it,'” Youssef said.
Echoing the now notorious text-messages of FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, attorney Lisa Page, Youssef said that McCabe regarded the program as something like an “insurance policy” to prevent the agency from being blamed in the event of another attack.
“It was a way to say, you know, it’s an insurance policy to show that we’re doing everything we can, when in fact it wasn’t giving us anything of what we hoped it would get,” he said.
Shortly before his retirement, he recounted having a lengthy and productive meeting with Comey, then the FBI director.
But rather than being concerned over the program’s wastefulness or its unethical invasion of privacy, Comey seemed only to be worried about whether the FBI might be breaking any laws.
“[A]fter I explained everything to him, his only concern was not that we should shut it down or that we should change it so that we can protect civil liberties,” Youssef said. “… [H]is concern was, ‘Do you have a problem or concerns with the statutory authority?'”
A report released earlier this month by the federal Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board revealed that the same issues flagged by Youssef continued until early 2019, after the oversight authority had begun investigating, when intelligence agencies finally suspended the controversial data collection program.
The board is scheduled to meet on March 15, the same day that several provisions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act are due to expire if Congress does not renew them.
‘They expected me to plead guilty for a crime I didn’t commit…’
KT McFarland / IMAGE: American Conservative Union via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) KT McFarland, former deputy national security adviser, said she nearly suffered the same fate as her boss, Michael Flynn, after the FBI interviewed her in connection with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia collusion probe.
“They were able to take Trump tweets, excerpts from text messages, things I said,” she told an audience at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, according to Fox News. “And they said, ‘we think you should have remembered these things, and if you didn’t remember, we think that’s perjury.’”
McFarland said the agents waited until she was alone at home before showing up, unannounced, at her home and trying to get her to talk without so much as a lawyer present.
“[T]hey seized all of my files, my documents, text messages, cell phones from the period I was in government,” McFarland recounted last week on “Fox and Friends.”
After taking her files, they sought to coerce her to either incriminate herself or throw someone else under the bus—even though she had never met with any Russians and remembered little of what they were asking about, she said.
“They expected me to plead guilty for a crime I didn’t commit, or implicate others, like President Trump, to save my own skin,” she told the CPAC audience.
Following a two-year hiatus, in which she traveled to a remote area of the Scottish Highlands to process the ordeal, McFarland has now re-emerged with a new book discussing her experiences.
It comes a month after Flynn—who was indicted under circumstances similar to what McFarland described, accused of making false statements about his conversations with Russian envoy Sergey Kislyak—sought to withdraw his guilty plea amid a sentencing standoff with the Justice Department.
Trump has weighed in on the injustice that some of his advisors, including Flynn and Roger Stone, received from the federal investigators who later found no evidence to support claims of Russian collusion. They nonetheless have pursued heavy sentencing guidelines for those who refused to cooperate with investigators.
McFarland said that the ongoing deep-state efforts helped persuade her to re-enter the spotlight.
“You need to be in this fight,” she told CPAC. “You do not want a government who can do to you what they did to me, what they did to Trump. Do not give your country over to these people.”
‘He contributed to Barack Obama’s campaign and John Kerry’s campaign and Al Gore’s campaign and everybody’s campaign…’
Hillary Clinton / IMAGE: The View via Youtube
UPDATE: The New York Postreports that Harvey Weinstein bundled $1.4 million for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential bid, and gave her more than $73,000 in 1999 when she ran for Senate — more than he gave any other Democratic candidate.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE: (Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton admitted she accepted campaign donations from disgraced entertainment mogul Harvey Weinstein, who was found guilty of third-degree rape on Monday.
However, she said that every other Democratic candidate did, too.
“He contributed to every Democrat’s campaign,” she said during a screening at the Berlin International Film Festival. “He contributed to Barack Obama’s campaign and John Kerry’s campaign and Al Gore’s campaign and everybody’s campaign.”
Clinton added that “the jury’s verdict really speaks for itself” and said “it was time for an accounting” of Weinstein’s crimes.
“I don’t know whether that should chill anyone else from contributing to political campaigns, but it certainly should end the kind of behavior that he was just convicted for,” she continued.
Weinstein donated more than $54,000 to Clinton’s campaigns, according to Fox Business, beginning in 1999 and ending in 2016 with her failed presidential bid.
Weinstein also donated at least $72,000 to former President Barack Obama between 2011 and 2012 and $28,500 to former Secretary of State John Kerry between 2001 and 2004.
Investigative journalist Ronan Farrow alleged a recently released book that Clinton’s spokesperson tried to shut down his investigation into Weinstein.
Clinton denied the allegation and claimed she did not know about the accusations against Weinstein until they had been reported.
“I was shocked and appalled by the revelations about Harvey Weinstein,” she said in a statement at the time. “The behavior described by women coming forward cannot be tolerated. Their courage and the support of others is critical in helping to stop this kind of behavior.”
Many also have criticized Hillary Clinton for her complicity in her husband’s sexual harassment and abuse of subordinates when Bill Clinton was serving as governor of Arkansas and, later, the U.S. president.
At the time, the Clintons sought to discredit his accusers and suggested that they were part of a “vast right-wing conspiracy.”
Weinstein was found guilty of two convictions on Monday, which could land him in prison up to 29 years. He has continued to deny the charges against him, and his attorneys said this week that they’ll be appealing the court’s sentencing.
‘I would like to inform the public … [i]f anything were to happen to me and my safety that Ilhan Omar and her team will be responsible…’
Ilhan Omar/IMAGE: VOA News via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Once dismissed as salacious rumor, many of the details about a corrupt scheme in which future US Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., married her biological brother have been confirmed by media reports, Federal Elections Commissions complaints and IRS records.
Now, the Somali whistleblower who first shed light on the issue said he fears for his life.
Every indication is that she married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi for the express purpose of committing immigration fraud, student-loan fraud and other felony offenses.
At the time, Omar continued to live and file taxes with her common-law husband, Ahmed Hirsi, whom she would also formally marry and have children with prior to their divorce last year.
Abdihakin Osman Nur, a member of the same Minneapolis community of Somali immigrants, was among the first to make the issue public prior to Omar’s 2018 run for Congress.
“I confirmed that the marriage was fraudulent and that I was personally aware since I was a close friend and neighbor to both Ahmed Hirsi and Ilhan Omar,” Nur said. “It is also an open secret in the Minnesota Somali community but everyone is afraid of problems from supporters of Ilhan Omar, at least one of whom has a felony criminal record.”
Nur, who is disabled, said he had been mocked and ridiculed within the Somali community, as well as threatened.
“I would like to inform the public and the government of the USA [i]f anything were to happen to me and my safety that Ilhan Omar and her team will be responsible,” he wrote in a Facebook post, as reported by the conservative Powerline blog.
“I also ask for the support of the American people in case I’m set up or something happens to me because I have talked,” Nur continued.
Some of the posts on Nur’s Facebook feed attacked him while casting aspersions on his own motives. However, Powerline’s Scott Johnson vouched for his credibility.
“I have met with him frequently over the past three and a half years and confirmed everything he has told me with other sources (including law enforcement) and other researchers,” Johnson said.
Nur’s post relaying his fears follow shortly after the death of former Homeland Security agent Phil Haney, a whistleblower during the Obama era who had exposed the administration’s surreptitious support of radical Islam in America.
Although Haney, who was found shot by the side of the road with a single bullet wound, was initially ruled a suicide, those close to him say the circumstances seem highly suspicious.
“No one in the family believes this is a suicide,” Haney’s stepmother, Judith, told True Pundit.
“I mean he was enjoying doing talk radio and was working on another book and was excited about that,” she added. “With his history with the government and everything, it is very, very suspicious.”
‘We can’t simply reauthorize the system that allowed those lies and omissions to happen…’
William Barr / IMAGE: Fox News via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Only months since a report from the Department of Justice inspector general shockingly identified 17 abuses committed by the FBI in its Russia collusion investigation, GOP legislators are at odds with the Justice Department over the implementation of reforms.
Using the false pretenses offered by the Steele Dossier, a debunked series of reports commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign, they continued to renew the FISA warrants with information they knew to be incorrect, and later sought to discredit the president-elect by leaking the salacious details of the dossier.
Parts of the FISA law are due to expire on March 15, reported the National Review.
Attorney General William Barr is calling for a clean renewal as he seeks additional time to oversee the reforms, but GOP leaders in Congress are ready for an immediate overhaul to prevent possible recurrence during the upcoming election.
“We cannot reauthorize these counterterrorism provisions without instituting critical safeguards that protect the civil liberties of all Americans,” Collins said. “We must reform our FISA system in order to restore the American people’s confidence in our law enforcement and intelligence communities and ensure what happened to Carter Page and the Trump campaign never happens again.”
House Democrats, meanwhile, sought to use stall tactics to block any possible modifications to their FISA bill prior to the renewal vote.
On Wednesday, top Trump adversary Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., urged his fellow committee chair, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-NY to postpone a scheduled Judiciary Committee hearing on the reforms.
“Democrats are yet again putting our national security at risk with their stall tactics,” Collins said. “Critical counterterrorism provisions are hanging in the balance because Democrats chose to delay an already ill-timed markup.”
He said the bill being offered by House Democrats failed to address the serious issues in need of reform.
FreedomWorks, an influential conservative grassroots activist group, said it would be better to have no bill at all when weighing the case for FBI surveillance powers over the risk of exploitation.
“Our Fourth Amendment protections against unwarranted government intrusion are not a bargaining chip,” said Jason Pye, FreedomWorks’ vice president of legislative affairs. “If Chairman Schiff wants to pull serious reform off the table, then maybe it’s finally time that we let these problematic portions of the Patriot Act expire.”
Despite receiving support from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Barr’s wish for an immediate renewal faces slim prospects given the substantial Republican opposition and Democratic foot-dragging.
The rift made for some unlikely alliances among congressional Republicans, with some of Trump’s biggest allies teaming with some of his biggest intra-party critics to reject the pending renewal as-is.
House Freedom Caucus leaders Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Mark Meadows, R-NC, both sounded their opposition.
Comey’s FBI misled the FISA Court 17 times.
We can’t simply reauthorize the system that allowed those lies and omissions to happen.
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who frequently pushes back against all manners of executive overreach, welcomed the solidarity of his colleagues after having long advocated for FISA reforms.
“Some are arguing the program needs no reform and that DOJ can put in place internal quality control mechanisms,” Lee said. “That’s not good enough.”
Lee told the National Review that he and other renewal opponents were waiting to see what happened with the House markup before further strategizing.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told Politico on Monday that those caught in the middle were weighing alternative options to make it through the looming showdown.
“A lot will happen between now and March 15,” Kennedy said. “We may do a placeholder and take it past March 15. We’ve got to get this right.”
The Times ‘has engaged in a systematic pattern of bias…’
Photo by alextorrenegra
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) President Donald Trump sued The New York Times for libel over a March 2019 opinion piece that claimed—without evidence—that he had a quidpro quo arrangement with Russia during the 2016 campaign.
The piece suggested that Trump had communicated with Russian emissaries to solicit their support in taking down Democratic rival Hillary Clinton by hacking her campaign emails and publicly exposing her corruption.
In return, Russia would benefit from a more favorable foreign policy, although it is unclear that the bargain was fulfilled.
Those accusations “were and are 100 percent false and defamatory,” said Jenna Ellis, a legal advisor for Trump’s campaign, according to CNBC.
Ellis said the newspaper “was aware of the falsity at the time it published them, but did so for the intentional purpose of hurting the campaign, while misleading its own readers in the process.”
The op-ed piece, by former Times executive editor Max Frankel, came directly on the heels of the Mueller Report, which cleared Trump for claims of Russian collusion after a two-year investigation that Democrats had campaigned heavily on in 2018.
The article’s invocation of the Latin term quid quo pro hinted at the accusations Democrats would resurrect half a year later, when a partisan deep-state activist filed a whistleblower complaint alleging Trump had sought such a bargain with Russia’s adversary, Ukraine.
The president was impeached by the House Democrats in a largely party-line vote but was acquitted by the majority-GOP Senate.
Trump’s libel suit said that the Times exercised willful negligence and reckless disregard that was purposely intended to harm him and his chances at re-election.
In order to win a libel suit, one must prove that the offending statement was false, that the writer knew—or should reasonably have known—it to be false, and that it resulted in demonstrable damages.
However, it is rare—if not unprecedented—for a public figure in Trump’s position to meet the high bar designed to support the First Amendment press freedoms.
“The Trump Campaign has turned to the courts to try to punish an opinion writer for having an opinion they find unacceptable,” said a Times spokesperson, according to CNBC.
“Fortunately, the law protects the right of Americans to express their judgments and conclusions, especially about events of public importance,” the spokesman said. “We look forward to vindicating that right in this case.”
Notwithstanding, the suit signals another way in which Trump, having passed through the gauntlet of impeachment, is continuing to push back and, if necessary, settle scores against those who long have colluded to undermine his presidency.
While too numerous to catalog, the Times attacks on Trump—some of which have involved leaks of classified information from anonymous deep-state sources—have long been a sore spot. He has previously called on others to hold journalists accountable for leftist media bias—signaling his support for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to do so, among others.
Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can’t let that happen!
Trump also was vocal in supporting Nick Sandmann, the Kentucky teenager who was smeared by the national media after misleadingly edited footage suggested he and a group of classmates had jeered at a Native-American activists.
Sandmann was cleared when complete footage showed the opposite to be true, revealing that Nathan Phillips, an adult protester, had confronted the teenagers and entered into their space during the annual March for Life rally.
Sandmann won a settlement for an undisclosed amount in his $275 million lawsuit against CNN and may have other cases pending against additional media outlets that resulted in threats against the high school sophomore and his family.
Trump also has called out the Times specifically for its outrageous violations of journalism ethics, such as espousing anti-Semitic views in an editorial cartoon that depicted him walking Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu like a dog.
In the NYTimes international: Bibi Netanyahu characterized as a dog leading a blind, Jewish Trump.
When did the @nytimes hire David Duke as an editor? pic.twitter.com/7bGf1jLrri
Trump’s legal team will attempt to prove not only that the March 2019 allegation was false and negligent, but that the Times “has engaged in a systematic pattern of bias,” said CNBC.
The paper itself has, at times, acknowledged that its openly hostile coverage of the president was a journalistic novelty, driven in part by sales and in part by the ideology of those in charge, such as managing editor Dean Baquet, who determined even before Trump’s election that they would refuse to “normalize” his candidacy.
The shift in editorial policy and the ongoing credibility crisis ultimately drove a wedge between the media and news consumers, who have grown increasingly polarized and tribal in the aftermath.
However, that has had little impact on Trump, whose approval rating has held steady just above 40 percent for much of his presidency and even enjoyed a bump following his impeachment.
‘The president’s comments and behavior shows he clearly favors Senator Lee over Romney…’
Mike Lee / IMAGE: TheDC Shorts via Youtube
(Joshua Paladino, Liberty Headlines) Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, has positioned himself as the Senate’s most vocal ‘NeverTrump‘ Republican, but he votes with the president much more than Mike Lee, Utah’s senior Republican senator, The Salt Lake Tribune reported.
Trump joked about Lee’s opposition to the president at the post-acquittal celebration at the White House.
“Whenever I sign bills—-you know, we do sign a lot of legislation that’s big and … powerful,” Trump said. “Everybody has to approve it. And I see 99 to one. I say, ‘Don’t tell me who’s the one.’”
Trump knows that it’s Lee, a stalwart constitutional conservative who believes that Congress has ceded far too much authority to the executive branch and administrative agencies.
FiveThirtyEight conducted an analysis that found that Romney voted with the president’s policy agenda nearly 80 percent of the time, whereas Lee has voted with the president only 63.6 percent of the time.
He frequently criticizes the executive branch’s war-making powers, citing the constitutional provision that Congress, not the president, has the sole authority to start and end wars.
He recently voted for a resolution that said the president does not have power to authorize military strikes against Iran.
But he didn’t vote for the measure to spite the president. He pushed for similar resolutions when President Barack Obama controlled the executive branch.
Lee also hates the omnibus budget process, in which Congress throws together a massive spending bill without giving senators and representatives any time to debate the bill or amend the provisions.
Despite Lee’s principled opposition to the omnibus budget process and presidential war-making authority, he has remained in good standing with the president, even serving as a co-chairman on Trump’s reelection committee in Utah.
“Based on their voting history, both Romney and Lee clearly back President Trump’s policy agenda and their Republican credentials are not really in doubt even if they sometimes disagree with the president,” said Jason Perry, the head of the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics. “Even so, the president’s comments and behavior shows he clearly favors Sen. Lee over Romney.”
“Obviously, we have to beat Trump, but if we beat Trump and go back to the same policies that we had before, a worse Trump is going to come,” Ocasio-Cortez said during an interview with “The Breakfast Club” radio show.
“A Trump that’s more sophisticated, whose fascism is less obvious, is going to come, and things could get even worse,” she added.
Bloomberg’s past policies, “from stop and frisk, to the surge in housing costs in New York City, to even his own history on red-lining, to how he talks about transgender people,” are disturbing, Ocasio–Cortez continued.
The votes who do support Bloomberg are simply unfamiliar with these problematic policies, Ocasio–Cortez suggested. She, on the other hand, knows firsthand what Bloomberg’s administration was like, she explained.
“We lived under his tenure as mayor. We know exactly what he did, and this is part of what he’s doing, when he comes in, swoops in super late in the game, with billions of dollars at his disposal and is able to shower the airwaves with his cash,” she said. “People see what he’s done with his money … without seeing what he’s actually done with his power.”
Ocasio–Cortez also threw some jabs at President Trump, suggesting that he wouldn’t say to her face what he says about her online.
“Oh no, he would not,” she said when asked if Trump would insult her directly. “Yeah, he never would. … Well, I mean, I think he’s scared.”
Ocasio–Cortez, who has endorsed Bernie Sanders, also condemned the online behavior of Sanders’s most aggressive supporters, calling their rhetoric “dehumanizing.”
Several of the other Democrats in the presidential primary recently directed their attacks on the front-runner for his complicity in allowing so-called “Bernie Bros” to bully those who disagree with them.
“The thing about the internet is that it is just like, it puts dehumanization on hyperspeed,” Ocasio–Cortez said.
“And we see that everywhere from our schools all the way up to, you know, adults,” she continued. “Like, it’s just so easy now for a kid to drop a comment, for a person to drop a comment that they would never say in real life.”
(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) An Obama-era whistleblower was found dead last week due to a “self-inflicted” gun shot wound, but law enforcement officials are still unsure whether his death can be conclusively ruled as a suicide.
Philip Haney, a former Department of Homeland Security official, blew the whistle on his own agency after Obama officials forced him to delete dozens of records from the DHS system that tracked Islamic militant extremists and supporters of sharia law within the U.S.
On Friday, Haney was found dead by the side of the road in the area of Highway 124 and Highway 16 in Plymouth, Calif.
“Upon their arrival, they located and identified 66-year-old Philip Haney, who was deceased and appeared to have suffered a single, self-inflicted gunshot wound,” the Amador County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. “A firearm was located next to Haney and his vehicle. This investigation is active and ongoing. No further details will be released at this time.”
Despite declaring it in the initial statement to have been a “self-inflicted” injury, the sheriff’s office later clarified that it was an ongoing investigation and had not been deemed a suicide conclusively.
It said the investigation into Haney’s death was ongoing, noting that “no determination will be made until all evidence is examined and analyzed.” The FBI is reportedly assisting the investigation.
Haney’s friends, however, have warned that Haney could be the victim of foul play.
Haney, who authored several books and prominent articles on the radical Islamic incursion in America, had “never been happier” than he was this year and was planning a return to the public eye, according to some of his friends who recently spoke to him.
One added that there’s “no way he would have taken his own life,” according to NoQReport.
Haney reportedly feared being “suicided,” the outlet reported, and even told friends at one point, “If I am found dead, it was’t suicide.”
Even Republican Rep. Steve King argued that there’s no way Haney would have taken his own life.
Phil Haney was a friend & patriot. He was a target because of all he knew of Islamic terrorist coverups. He insured his life by archiving data that incriminated the highest levels of the Obama administration. Phil Haney didn’t kill himself. RIP, Phil. https://t.co/pvy7MflFwc
In 2016, Haney testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and said that Obama’s DHS ordered him to delete hundreds of files of people with ties to Islamist terrorist groups. He even argued that several terrorists attacks could have been prevented if certain files had not been scrubbed.
Haney was reportedly in talks with the DHS about returning to the agency, and was working on his second book about his experience as a whistleblower.
At least one conservative site, Frontpage Mag, linked Haney’s death with what some fear could be a sustained deep-state counter-attack to silence the opponents and critics of a globalist new world order.
“The coup clan failed to removed Trump from office and may now be convinced that Trump will be reelected,” it wrote. “So it is entirely possible that the death of DHS whistleblower Phil Haney was the first shot fired in the deep state coverup.”
Liberty Headlines’ Ben Sellers contributed to this report.
