In a rare display of unity, House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries announced their joint support for the creation of a bipartisan House Task Force to investigate the attempted assassination of 2024 presidential nominee Donald Trump. The task force will consist of seven Republicans and six Democrats.

“The security failures that allowed an assassination attempt on Donald Trump’s life are shocking. In response to bipartisan demands for answers, we are announcing a House Task Force made up of seven Republicans and six Democrats to thoroughly investigate the matter,” said Speaker Johnson and Leader Jeffries in a joint statement. “The task force will be empowered with subpoena authority and will move quickly to find the facts, ensure accountability, and make certain such failures never happen again.”

According to Speaker Johnson’s office, the House will vote on a resolution this week to formally establish the task force and appoint its members. The task force will have the full investigative authority of the House of Representatives, including the power to issue subpoenas.

The primary objective of the task force will be to investigate the circumstances surrounding the assassination attempt, identify security lapses, and hold accountable those responsible. The task force will also be tasked with making recommendations for reform to relevant government agencies and proposing any necessary legislation to implement those reforms.

The formation of this task force highlights the urgency and seriousness with which Congress views the attempted assassination of a presidential candidate. By working together, both parties aim to ensure that such a security breach never happens again and to reinforce the integrity of the electoral process.

As the House prepares to vote on the resolution, the nation will be watching closely to see how the investigation unfolds and what steps will be taken to address the security failures. The bipartisan nature of the task force underscores the commitment of both parties to uncover the truth and protect the democratic process.

In a significant development, the Justice Department revealed to a federal judge late Monday that it possesses transcripts of President Joe Biden’s conversations with a biographer, contradicting earlier denials. These transcripts are related to the recently concluded criminal investigation into Biden’s handling of classified materials before he became president.

The special counsel, Robert Hur, issued a report in February describing Biden as “a well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” This report has prompted a surge of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and lawsuits aimed at obtaining records related to Hur’s investigation. These requests have come from various news outlets and conservative groups seeking to scrutinize Biden’s mental acuity and fitness for the presidency.

Concerns about Biden’s cognitive abilities were exacerbated by a poor debate performance against Donald Trump, leading Biden to announce on Sunday that he would not seek reelection. It remains unclear how his exit from the race will affect the Justice Department’s handling of the materials from Hur’s investigation.

The Justice Department has argued that releasing the audio of Biden’s interviews would violate his privacy, potentially lead to abuses like deepfakes, and discourage other witnesses from agreeing to recorded interviews. Biden has asserted executive privilege over these recordings to prevent House Republicans from holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusing to release them.

During a hearing last month, DOJ lawyers informed U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich that processing the audio files of Biden’s interviews with writer Mark Zwonitzer would be highly time-consuming. They claimed that the recordings spanned 70 hours and reviewing audio for classified material is more challenging than reviewing written material.

Justice Department lawyer Cameron Silverberg stated at a June 18 hearing that no transcripts from the special counsel existed. However, Silverberg’s recent court filing revealed that the DOJ had found six electronic files, consisting of 117 pages of verbatim transcripts, created by a court-reporting service from Biden’s discussions with Zwonitzer. Some of these conversations contained classified information, but DOJ policy barred pursuing charges against a sitting president.

In an unexpected reversal, the Justice Department reached out to Robert Hur directly after initially resisting requests from the Heritage Foundation to contact him about materials he used for his report. Hur confirmed he relied on the Biden-Zwonitzer audio recordings and a portion of Biden’s handwritten notes regarding a memo about Afghanistan.

Judge Friedrich has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday morning to address these developments. The Justice Department has indicated it will discuss with the parties seeking access to Hur’s materials whether Biden’s notes should also be processed for potential release.

The Justice Department’s admission of the existence of transcripts in the Biden classified material investigation marks a crucial turn in the ongoing scrutiny of Biden’s handling of classified information. As legal proceedings continue, the implications for transparency, presidential privacy, and the political landscape remain to be seen.

SOURCE: POLITICO

In a startling revelation, newly leaked internal emails from BBC correspondent Rami Ruhayem have unveiled serious allegations against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The emails suggest that the BBC has been broadcasting news without verifying claims or seeking evidence, raising concerns about journalistic integrity and ethical practices within the organization.

The leaked emails highlight a pattern of unverified reporting, particularly concerning coverage of the conflict in Palestine. Ruhayem, a Beirut-based correspondent, criticized the BBC for airing sensational stories about alleged atrocities committed by Hamas fighters without proper verification. These unsubstantiated claims were broadcast repeatedly, despite the lack of concrete evidence.

In one instance, Ruhayem detailed how graphic allegations about Hamas fighters were allowed to pass unchallenged on air. “From the start, it was evident that unverified claims of the most atrocious acts by Hamas fighters against Israelis were being circulated and repeated at the highest levels,” Ruhayem wrote. He pointed out that BBC presenters often failed to ask for evidence or clarify that the claims had not been verified.

The emails also accuse the BBC of sensationalizing news stories to push a specific political agenda. Ruhayem suggested that the unverified allegations were part of a broader strategy to garner political support for Israel’s actions. “The BBC’s approach to reporting has contributed to shaping public perception in a way that supports Israel’s actions,” he stated.

Ruhayem’s emails describe how the repetition of unverified and sensational claims served to reinforce extreme portrayals of Israel’s enemies. This biased coverage likely influenced public opinion and political discourse, aligning with Israeli propaganda efforts.

The leaked correspondence reveals deep-seated grievances among BBC staff regarding the organization’s editorial direction. Ruhayem noted that despite numerous evidence-based critiques from staff members, BBC management failed to address these concerns. Instead of fostering thorough examination and inclusive discussions, the management opted to continue the problematic editorial practices.

In an email dated May 1, 2024, Ruhayem wrote to BBC Director General Tim Davie and several departments, detailing the editorial failings. He emphasized the need for mechanisms to ensure accurate and ethical reporting, which he claimed were ignored by the management.

The allegations of journalistic malpractice have significant implications for the BBC’s reputation and credibility. Broadcasting unverified information and sensationalizing stories undermine the core principles of journalism: accuracy, fairness, and impartiality. These practices not only misinform the public but also erode trust in the media.

The leaked emails call into question the integrity of the BBC’s news coverage and highlight the need for rigorous journalistic standards. As the organization faces scrutiny, it must address these issues to restore its standing as a trusted news source.

The bombshell leaks from Rami Ruhayem’s emails expose serious flaws in the BBC’s reporting practices, revealing a troubling pattern of unverified reporting and political bias. As the media landscape continues to evolve, maintaining journalistic integrity and accountability remains paramount. The BBC must take urgent steps to rectify these issues and uphold the highest standards of journalism.