'Dangerous lunacy': Liz Cheney says QAnon has 'no place' in US politics

Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney condemned the online QAnon conspiracy theory one day after President Trump said he appreciated the support from QAnon followers. Cheney, the third highest-ranking House Republican, called QAnon "lunacy" after Trump questioned whether it was a "bad thing" that its adherents believe there is a group of elite pedophiles attempting to bring down the president. "QAnon is dangerous lunacy that should have no place in American politics," Cheney said in a statement reported by Politico.

At least one Republican who has voiced support for QAnon won her primary elections, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and has a good shot at winning a seat in Congress. She has also received praise from the president. Other Republicans have been more hesitant than Trump to embrace Greene and Laura Loomer, a far-right congressional candidate who won a Florida GOP primary race. Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, the House Republican whip, endorsed Greene's Republican opponent after old videos revealed racist remarks that Greene had made. Scalise called her statements "disgusting." Prior to her election win, Greene noted that Cheney was not supportive of her bid. She suggested that Cheney was forced by the media to speak out against her. "Liz Cheney, I’ve never met or talked to her. I think that was unfortunate that they were pressured, probably pressured, so to speak, maybe by people in the media, to make statements about me, and they just hadn’t learned about me yet," Greene said.

The online movement surfaced on internet message boards in 2017, with posts by a self-proclaimed government insider identified as "Q." An internal FBI report from 2019 included QAnon in a list of "anti-government, identity-based, and fringe political conspiracy theories" that could "very likely motivate some domestic extremists to commit criminal, sometimes violent activity." Greene has rejected the "QAnon candidate" label. "I don't expect a lot of the left-leaning media to change their stance," she told Fox News on Friday. "I think they're going to continue to attack me because they actually do see me as someone who's unapologetically conservative. And I won't back down on my beliefs and my values."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/dangerous-lunacy-liz-cheney-says-qanon-has-no-place-in-us-politics

'Is that supposed to be a bad thing?': Trump says he appreciates the support of QAnon conspiracy theorists

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/is-that-supposed-to-be-a-bad-thing-trump-says-he-appreciates-the-support-of-qanon-conspiracy-theorists

Trump administration petitions Supreme Court to let president block accounts on Twitter

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to overrule a lower court's decision that prevents President Trump from blocking accounts on Twitter. Justice Department acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall submitted a petition on Thursday appealing a lower court decision in Donald Trump v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, a First Amendment case that addresses the question of whether or not Trump is allowed to block third-party accounts from a personal account he uses to announce government actions. "Although President Trump is currently a public official, the @realDonaldTrump account belongs to him in his personal capacity, not his official one. He created and began frequent use of that account in 2009, well before taking public office," the petition reads. "In contrast to the @WhiteHouse and @POTUS accounts, over which he may exercise control only by virtue of his office, he will continue to have control over the @realDonaldTrump account after his term of office has completed." Blocked accounts would not prevent users from viewing his tweets, as they would be visible while not logged into Twitter, Wall said. They argue users could later post screenshots, express criticisms, and "view replies that others have posted in response to @realDonaldTrump tweets."

Should the high court agree to hear the case, it would be scheduled for the fall session. A full decision would be issued by the summer of 2021. The Knight Institute filed a lawsuit against the president and other White House aides in 2017, when seven accounts were blocked after posting criticisms in reply to Trump's tweets. They argue Trump's account is a "public forum" for discussion, and he may not exclude others based on their political views. Blocking third-party accounts, they say, blocks users from participating in that public forum.

Judge Naomi Rice of the U.S. District Court in Southern New York ruled the president's actions blocking users were unconstitutional in 2018. "We hold that portions of the @realDonaldTrump account — the “interactive space” where Twitter users may directly engage with the content of the President’s tweets — are properly analyzed under the “public forum” doctrines set forth by the Supreme Court, that such space is a designated public forum, and that the blocking of the plaintiffs based on their political speech constitutes viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment," the ruling said. "In so holding, we reject the defendants’ contentions that the First Amendment does not apply in this case and that the President’s personal First Amendment interests supersede those of plaintiffs." The decision was appealed, but unanimously affirmed by a 3-0 panel decision in the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in July of 2019. "Because we agree that in blocking 7 the Individual Plaintiffs the President engaged in prohibited viewpoint 8 discrimination, we affirm," the decision reads. "The irony in all of this is that we write at a time in the history of this nation when the conduct of our government and its officials is subject to wide‐open, robust debate. This debate encompasses an extraordinarily broad range of ideas and viewpoints and generates a level of passion and intensity the likes of which have rarely been seen. This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing. In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern is more speech, not less," it continues.

The decision also notes that in 2017, then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters at a press briefing that all tweets from the president were to be considered official White House statements because Trump "is the president of the United States, so they’re considered official statements by the president of the United States.” The full appeals court declined to rehear the case in March earlier this year. “The Supreme Court should reject the White House’s petition and leave the appeals court’s careful and well-reasoned decision in place,” said Knight Institute Executive Director Jameel Jaffer in a statement Thursday. Jaffer says the case “stands for a principle that is fundamental to our democracy and basically synonymous with the First Amendment: government officials can’t exclude people from public forums simply because they disagree with their political views.”

>>10363822

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-administration-petitions-supreme-court-to-let-president-block-accounts-on-twitter

GOP duo seek access to Russia investigation documents from Senate Intelligence Committee

Two top Republican senators asked the Senate Intelligence Committee for access to records that the committee had obtained during its own lengthy inquiry into Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election. Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa sent acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, and his Democratic vice chairman, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, a two-page letter on Thursday “to request access to certain transcripts of interviews conducted and records acquired by your committee that overlap with ongoing investigations” by their own committees. “As part of our investigation into the presidential transition in 2016 and early 2017, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee authorized the issuance of subpoenas, if necessary, to several individuals regarding the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation and the ‘unmasking’ of U.S. persons or entities during the transition period. While seeking the voluntary cooperation of several prospective witnesses, several have requested — and provided permission for — us to review transcripts of their testimony before your committee because of the overlapping subject matter,” Johnson and Grassley wrote. “The review of these discrete number of transcripts would assist in our investigation by narrowing the areas to be addressed with each witness.”

Grassley and Johnson told the Senate Intelligence Committee that they also wanted records related to the CIA’s contacts with Perkins Coie lawyers Michael Sussmann and Marc Elias. It was Elias who hired the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which turned around and hired British ex-spy Christopher Steele, and both Sussmann and Elias had contact with Steele during the 2016 election. The two senators also asked for records related to former CIA Director John Brennan meeting with former Democratic Sen. Harry Reid in 2016. Johnson and Grassley said Thursday that they “respect the authority” of the Senate Intelligence Committee to protect its interests, adding that “ultimately, we have the right as United States Senators” to access the records. The senators made it clear that “we are not asking to take possession of the transcripts, but rather will be available to review them at an agreed upon time and place.” The senators asked that one Republican and one Democratic staff member from each committee be allowed to review the selected witness transcripts.

The Senate Intelligence Committee said that “the five volumes of the Committee's Report capture the results of three years of investigative activity, hundreds of witness interviews and engagements, millions of pages of document review, and open and closed hearings.” The committee’s fifth and final volume was released on Wednesday, detailing the “counterintelligence threat” posed by Russian election interference in the race between President Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, revealing new details about Russia’s efforts, describing shady connections between former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and a number of Russians, and highlighting significant flaws with the U.S. government’s response and its investigations, including criticizing the FBI’s reliance upon Steele’s discredited dossier.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gop-duo-seek-access-to-russia-investigation-documents-from-senate-intelligence-committee