California Dems Silent on Radical Anti-Israel Group's Foiled Los Angeles Bomb Plot

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass, and more than a dozen House Democrats who represent parts of Los Angeles have remained silent on the coordinated bomb plot a radical anti-Israel group was planning before it was foiled by the federal government.

The post California Dems Silent on Radical Anti-Israel Group's Foiled Los Angeles Bomb Plot appeared first on .

Christmas counterattack: '12 days of impeachments'



Unable to successfully impeach President Donald Trump, House Democrats have turned their ire against RFK Jr. — introducing impeachment articles against the Health and Human Services secretary after he “turned his back on science.”

“Yes, he has turned his back on science because, by the way, Dr. Fauci is the science, and he doesn’t like Dr. Fauci. I guess maybe this is their reasoning,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales scoffs.

“What is immediately obvious is the Democrats are not in power this time around. Like this is obviously not going to go anywhere. Nothing’s going to happen. This is all clearly performative,” Gonzales says.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), the woman claiming she is impeaching RFK Jr., made a fool out of herself in 2020 yelling on the House floor while wearing latex gloves to protect herself from the COVID virus — and Gonzales hasn’t forgotten.


“This is the type of person who's leading the charge to impeach RFK Jr.,” Gonzales says. “And I just, this is actually big news. I didn’t realize that we could just make up reasons to impeach people.”

“And I started thinking to myself ... if we’re just making up reasons to impeach people, I think Republicans should say, ‘You know what, Democrats, we’ll play by your rules, that’s fine, that's fine. You guys make these wacky rules, and we will play by them,’” she continues.

“We’re going to take that same energy and impeach some of the Democrats,” she adds.

This is what has inspired Gonzales’ 12 days of impeachments — in the spirit of Christmas.

“On the first day of impeachments ... who other than [Rep.] Nancy Pelosi [D-Calif.]? Now her crime? Being a drunk,” she charges.

On the second day of impeachments, Gonzales would impeach Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for “the crime of marrying her brother,” and on the third day, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) for the crime of “being r*****ed.”

On the fourth day, Gonzales would like to see Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) impeached for the same crime as Crockett, and on the fifth day, “Pencil-neck [Sen.] Adam Schiff [D-Calif.] for the crime of mortgage fraud.”

“Now I would like to be clear. He’s not actually been convicted of these crimes, but that’s OK. It doesn’t matter because you were accused of it,” she jokes.

On the sixth day, “[Rep.] Jerry Nadler [D-N.Y.] for the crime of wearing his pants up to his neck,” and on the seventh, “[Rep.] Eric Swalwell [D-Calif.], for sh**ting himself on live TV, farting, I don’t know.”

James Boasberg comes in at number eight, for “being a rogue judge and blocking President Trump,” and closely following Boasberg is Ketanji Brown Jackson for the crime of “being a DEI hire and not knowing what a woman is.”

The tenth day is the “easiest sell,” with Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) for “sedition, because he actually committed it,” with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) following on the eleventh day “for being a Temu version of Obama.”

“And on the final day, we’d like Beto O’Rourke because he was an embarrassment to the state of Texas. And he looks like the wacky, wild, inflatable guy that you see at car dealerships,” Gonzales says.

“I’m just saying,” she continues. “Republicans, grow some balls.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Eric Swalwell offers melodramatic response to Trump DOJ probe: 'I refuse to live in fear'



California Rep. Eric Swalwell is the latest of several Democrats to come under fire from the Trump administration, this time for alleged mortgage fraud.

Swalwell was referred to President Donald Trump's Department of Justice for allegations of mortgage and tax fraud related to his residence in Washington, D.C.

The California Democrat is just one of four political adversaries the Trump administration has investigated. Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California, Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook, and New York Attorney General Letitia James are also facing allegations of mortgage fraud.

'I will not end my lawsuit against him.'

Because of the Trump administration's string of legal cases against Democrats, Swalwell argues his referral was motivated purely by political purposes.

"As the most vocal critic of Donald Trump over the last decade and as the only person who still has a surviving lawsuit against him, the only thing I am surprised about is that it took him this long to come after me," Swalwell said in a statement Thursday.

RELATED: When I brought the truth to Congress, Democrats lost their minds

Photo by Tom Brenner/Getty Images

In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Bill Pulte alleged that there were several million dollars' worth of loans and refinancing based on Swalwell's declaration of his D.C. home as his primary residence.

Pulte also alleged that Swalwell may have made inaccurate or misleading statements in certain loan documents, prompting an investigation into potential mortgage fraud, state and local tax fraud, insurance fraud, and any other related crimes.

"Like James Comey and John Bolton, Adam Schiff and Lisa Cook, Letitia James and the dozens more to come — I refuse to live in fear in what was once the freest country in the world," Swalwell said.

RELATED: Eric Swalwell finally answers Chinese spy allegations: 'I would hope that would be enough'

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

"Of course, I will not end my lawsuit against him," Swalwell added. "And I will not stop speaking out against the president and speaking up for Californians."

"As Mark Twain said, 'Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.' Mr. President, do better. Be better."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

California judge disqualifies Trump's LA-area prosecutor — but he's not going anywhere



An acting U.S. attorney in California was disqualified from prosecuting several cases after a judge ruled that he overstayed his temporary status in that role. However, the Trump appointee will continue to serve as the district's top prosecutor.

A judge ruled that Bill Essayli has overstayed his temporary tenure as the acting U.S. attorney for the Central District of California — the largest attorney's office outside of D.C. — since July 29, the AP reported. Essayli was sworn in on April 2 of this year.

'I do the American People’s bidding at the direction of their duly elected President. That’s how our Constitution works.'

The ruling relates to three criminal defendants who sought to have their cases dismissed on the grounds that Essayli was illegally serving as acting U.S. attorney.

U.S. District Court Judge J. Michael Seabright wrote in his ruling on the case, "Simply stated: Essayli unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California. He has been unlawfully serving in that capacity since his resignation from the interim role on July 29, Essayli may not perform the functions and duties of the United States Attorney as Acting United States Attorney. He is disqualified from serving in that role."

However, NBC Los Angeles reported that Seabright declined to remove Essayli fully from the prosecutor's office.

RELATED: Federal judge rules Alina Habba is not lawfully acting as US attorney for NJ

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

According to the order, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Essayli as first assistant U.S. attorney, or FAUSA, on July 29, effective upon his resignation as interim U.S. attorney. This allowed him to remain in the prosecutor's office and to perform FAUSA duties, as Judge Seabright affirmed.

Seabright concluded that the criminal cases against the three defendants would not be dismissed because other attorneys legitimately co-signed next to Essayli, though Essayli would not be allowed to continue prosecuting those cases in his former capacity as acting U.S. attorney.

However, Seabright noted this case does not remove Essayli from his current role as FAUSA: "Essayli remains the FAUSA and may perform the functions and duties of that office."

"For those who didn’t read the entire order, nothing is changing. I continue serving as the top federal prosecutor in the Central District of California. It's an honor and privilege to serve President Trump and Attorney General Bondi, and I look forward to advancing their agenda for the American People," Essayli, whose X profile still calls him the "Acting U.S. Attorney" for the district, said in a Tuesday post that included a portion of the opinion.

Late Tuesday, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) attacked Essayli in light of the judge's opinion. “'Unlawfully serving' in his role. Acting illegally. But left in place? While this Administration continues to replace career professionals with illegitimate political allies eager to do Trump’s bidding, Californians need better relief than this," he said.

In response, Essayli posted, "I do the American People’s bidding at the direction of their duly elected President. That’s how our Constitution works. Try reading and abiding by it sometime."

Acting U.S. Attorney of Nevada Sigal Chattah and acting U.S. Attorney of New Jersey Alina Habba have faced similar attacks in recent months.

Blaze News contacted Essayli's office for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

If it’s ‘worse than Watergate,’ then why the media blackout?



In a sense, this is old news. In December 2021, CNN reported that the House’s January 6 committee had subpoenaed phone records of more than 100 people.

But that was mostly Trump officials, including White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. No surprise there. After all, the January 6 Select Committee was empaneled for the specific purpose of turning President Donald Trump into a criminal for supposedly aiding and abetting the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the Capitol.

It is well past time for the Republican Congress to fulfill its promise to hold accountable those who weaponized the federal government against Trump and his allies.

But when this story resurfaced earlier this month, there was something new, too. For one thing, the scope of the investigation was almost unbelievable — it turns out those subpoenaed phone records consisted of a staggering 30 million lines of phone data.

And when the select committee’s investigation went nowhere, one of the members — GOP malcontent and former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) — informed the FBI about the phone data in Dec. 2023 when it was becoming apparent that Trump was the favorite to win the Republican nomination in 2024.

Greater than Watergate

More revelatory than the numbers of the phone records hauled in by the J6 committee was the news that the FBI had gone after these same records — and possibly more — in an effort to target Trump and his conservative allies. Not only did the agency have its eyes on Trump, it also went after nine Republican members of Congress — eight senators and a stray congressman, in an obvious effort to sweep up accomplices in the coup that never was.

Whether the FBI obtained the same phone records as the J6 committee is unclear. Kinzinger’s tip may have been moot, because an FBI memo released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) shows that by September 2023, the agency had already “conducted preliminary … analysis” on the call data of several members of Congress, including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).

According to CNN, “The FBI, as part of special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation, used court orders in 2023 to obtain the phone records of nine GOP lawmakers.” These were not actual phone calls or text messages, but rather information about who called or texted whom and when.

Grassley posted the memo to his X account, with the message:

This document shows the Biden FBI spied on 8 of my Republican Senate colleagues during its Arctic Frost investigation into "election conspiracy." Arctic Frost later became Jack Smith's elector case against Trump.

He concluded, in all caps: “BIDEN FBI WEAPONIZATION = WORSE THAN WATERGATE.”

Which raises the question: Why did the story turn out to be a one-day wonder? Here we have the discovery of a partisan investigation seeking to uncover dirt on fellow members of Congress (if the records did indeed start with the J6 committee), or at the very least a rogue element of the executive branch targeting political enemies in the legislative branch.

As Johnson said:

They’re casting this net, this fishing expedition against members of the Senate and the House. There is no predicate. There’s no reason for this other than a fishing expedition, which, again, should outrage and shock every American.

Once again, a member of Congress implied that we are witness to a political scandal (one of many in the Biden administration) that is among the worst in our history. Yet when you do a Google search for stories related to phone toll records being subpoenaed by either the J6 committee or the FBI, virtually nothing comes up beyond Oct. 7, the day after Grassley released the memo.

Crickets …

A few news outlets reported in the following days that FBI Director Kash Patel had fired agents involved in the Arctic Frost investigation. In addition, scattered reports surfaced on Hagerty questioning why Verizon released his phone records without informing him.

Verizon told Fox News Digital:

Federal law requires companies like Verizon to respond to grand jury subpoenas. We received a valid subpoena and a court order to keep it confidential. We weren't told why the information was requested or what the investigation was about.

Grassley and Johnson followed up with their own letter to Verizon and three other telecommunication companies demanding to be supplied with the same data that was provided to the FBI or special counsel Jack Smith. In addition, the senators expressed their belief that the records should have been privileged because they concerned the official constitutional duties of certifying the 2020 presidential election.

It seems like a real story — one that deserves the full attention of the press — but where are the special investigation teams at the New York Times and the Washington Post? What have you heard about this story on CBS, NBC, and ABC newscasts? Very little if anything. Certainly nothing in comparison to the coverage provided to Watergate.

Most recently, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Smith demanding a transcribed interview and documents along with communications related to his investigation of Trump. Well and good, but that interview will be conducted in secret, as were the interviews of Smith’s subordinates — one of whom, according to Jordan, “invoked the Fifth Amendment approximately 75 times.”

RELATED: Exclusive: House Republican seeks criminal investigation into Jack Smith's alleged surveillance scheme

Photo by Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images

Time for Congress to step up

It is well past time for the Republican Congress to fulfill its promise to hold accountable those who weaponized the federal government against Trump and his allies. Press releases and secret interviews won’t do the job. We need public televised hearings, with witnesses ranging from members of the J6 committee, including Kinzinger, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), and now-Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), to former FBI Director Christopher Wray and Jack Smith.

Would the legacy media networks cover it? Probably not, because as we all know by now, those outfits are still after Trump’s scalp, and they will only seek to discredit Jordan and the other congressional investigators who want to know the truth. That doesn’t mean Republicans should give up.

Watergate started as a one-day story about a botched break-in. But even without Woodward and Bernstein, the famous team of reporters from the Washington Post, the story would never have been kept quiet unless Senate Democrats and congressmen didn’t do their job.

Now it’s time for Jordan, Grassley, and Patel to do theirs.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

Robert De Niro Is One Of The Worst Old Men In America Today

What De Niro ' just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard ... Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.'

Trump Wants His ‘Ukraine Impeachment’ Investigated

'The Ukraine Impeachment (of me!) Scam was a far bigger Illegal Hoax than Watergate'

Welker Asks Jeffries If Sombrero Memes Hurt His Feelings: All The Questions From Meet The Press

Welker is less interested in answers, and more interested in telegraphing the propaganda loaded in her questions to onlookers.

New Docs Reveal How Media Colluded With The Government To Manufacture Russiagate

Recently declassified documents indicate leaks of classified information to reporters were designed to portray Trump as in league with Russia.

'We Still Get Paid': Shutdown Dems Lament Lost Wages for Federal Workers While Collecting Their Own Taxpayer-Funded Salaries

All but four congressional Democrats voted against a GOP funding bill that would have kept the federal government open. Many of them have since lamented that millions of federal workers will not receive a paycheck until the government reopens—while still getting paid themselves.

The post 'We Still Get Paid': Shutdown Dems Lament Lost Wages for Federal Workers While Collecting Their Own Taxpayer-Funded Salaries appeared first on .