What the Gaetz Amendment means for Hillary, Comey et al.


GAETZ AMENDMENT: Comey, Hillary, ALL OF THEM just might be fried.

It seems like there is a war going on. HR.722 is awful, but there are counter punches happening, and this is one of them.

HR.722 and its subsequent clone is not the only thing out there. The following has become known as the Gaetz amendment. Yesterday I blew this off because it looked like click bait, but today I went over this and it is for real, Comey and the rest of the clan are in for a deep-frying.

This is the text of the amendment:



Strike all that follows after the resolving clause and insert the following:

That the President is requested, and the Attorney General of the United States is directed to transmit, respectively (in a manner appropriate to classified information, if the President or Attorney General determines appropriate), to the House of Representatives, not later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, copies of any document, record, audio recording, memo, correspondence, or other communication in their possessions, or any portion of any such communication, that refers or relates to the following:
1) Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch directing James B. Comey to mislead the American people by stating that he should refer to the investigation into the mishandling of classified data and use of an unauthorized email server by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a “matter, ” rather than a criminal “investigation.”
2) Leaks by James B. Comey to Columbia University law professor, Daniel Richman, regarding conversations had between President Trump and then-FBI Director James B. Comey, and how the leaked information was purposefully released to lead to the appointment of special counsel, Robert Mueller, a longtime friend of James B. Comey;
3) The propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to possible Hillary Clinton co-conspirators Sheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel, and potentially others, by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, during the criminal investigation James B. Comey led into Hillary Clinton’s misconduct;
4) The decision by James B. Comey to usurp the authority of then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch in his unusual announcement that criminal charges would not be brought against Hillary Clinton following her unlawful use of a private email server and mishandling of classified information.
5) James B. Comey’s knowledge and impressions of ex-parte conversation between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on June 27, 2016, at a Phoenix airport on a private jet;
6) James B. Comey’s knowledge of the company ‘Fusion GPS, ‘ including its creation of a “dossier” of information about Mr. Trump; that dossier’s commission and dissemination in the months before and after the 2016 Presidential Election; the intelligence sources of Fusion GPS or any person or company working for Fusion GPS or its affiliates;
7) Any and all potential leaks originated by James B. Comey and provided to author Michael Schmidt dating back to 1993;
8) James B. Comey’s knowledge of the purchase of a majority stake in the company Uranium One by the company Rosatom; whether the approval of the sale was connected to any donations made to the Clinton Foundation; what role then-Secretary of State, Ms. Hillary Clinton, played in the approval of that sale, and whether the sale could have affected the national security of the United States of America;
9) James B. Comey’s refusal to investigate then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
             a. Selling access to the U.S. State Department through Clinton Foundation donations
       b. Huma Abedin’s duel employment at the State Department and the Clinton Foundation simultaneously
               c. Utilization of the State Department to further paid speaking opportunities for her husband
10) Any collusion between Former FBI Director James B. Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller; including but not limited to:
a. The information Comey admitted to leaking to the Columbia University law professor, being intentional such that a special counsel, his longtime friend, Robert Mueller, would be appointed to lead the investigation against the Trump administration; and
b. Any communication between Muller and Comey in advance of the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
11) Whether James B. Comey had any knowledge of efforts made by any federal agency to monitor communications of then-candidate Donald Trump, and to assess any knowledge by Mr. James B. Comey about the “unmasking” of individuals on Donald Trump’s campaign team, transition team, or both; to assess the role that former National Security Adviser Ms. Susan Rice played in the unmasking of these individuals; to reveal the purpose served by unmasking any individual or individuals serving on the staff of then-candidate Donald Trump; the dissemination of unredacted information to various intelligence agencies, and any attempts by to use surveillance of then-candidate Trump for the purposes of damaging the credibility of his campaign, his presidency, or both.
My comment: That’s a lot easier to read than HR.722 because it is not trying to hide anything.




On that note, anonymous sent:

Something is amiss. First of all, there is no way a bill like that should just blow through with a 98% approval rate. Way to controversial to pass so easily. My feeling is that they have become so desperate that they have been forced to use their ace in the hole so to speak. Prior to this bill coming up, I’m guessing that every senator, congressman and representative was paid a little visit and given the ultimatum. Either a yes vote on this bill or the pedophilia is out of the bag, or maybe the wife and kids in a freak car accident, or both.


It is also a good indication of the number of them that have been compromised. 98% of them! That means that there are only 2% of our elected officials that are actually honest, clean and trustworthy that they could not threaten them into compromising their integrity. It also verifies the fact that there are not 2 parties and just 1 uni-party doing the bidding of the same master, with the exception of a couple of good people. However, this is part of the ongoing plot to remove the elected president against the will of the people by the far left lunatics and if it happens, which it undoubtedly will, then it will become open season. What other choice will we have left other than to just roll over and die?”
My comment: I was really surprised such a super majority could push this legislation which appears have been re-branded as HR.3364. After a brief look at the renamed version with a new drafting date of July 24, it appears to be the exact same bill with a new identification. The new introduction has no summary yet but is stated to have passed the Senate is probably the exact same bill. The original bill that appears to read the same was introduced on March 23. So maybe they re-branded it to hide it? At any rate, this is very anomalous and the bill reads like it is going to open the gates of Hell. I am genuinely worried about this one.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.