Anonymous ID: d585eb Aug. 29, 2022, 1:14 p.m. No.17460643   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0701 >>0746 >>0762 >>0941 >>0989 >>1006 >>1013

Notable>>17457995, >>17458001 USA Military Veteran With Top Secret Military Clearance Explains Why Donald Trump Is Still President

 

pb>>17460272 ABC news this morning (don't know why I turned it on) They were breathless that "Donald Trump took documents and they could be stored elsewhere outside of Mar-a-lago." So your theory, imho, may not be too far off. Its clear they are looking for something.

 

IMO: Anon, I think I’m close to one possible reason why the DS raided Mar A Lago, and found it in the Brennan Center description of President GW Bush PEADs. For all those who think my theory about the raid conducted by the DS may have wanted the PEADS President Trump signed, Congress has been trying to get a hold of and change the PEADs rules to see what was done. Bush did not share anything with congress. They are still trying today to limit the President’s power!Call to dig

 

New Documents Illuminate the President’s Secret, Unchecked Emergency Powers May 26, 2022

In 2004, high-ranking staffers in the George W. Bush administration spearheaded a holistic review of the president’s emergency powers. Their goal was to refresh a set of secret plans known as “presidential emergency action documents,” or PEADs, the continuity of government playbook that emerged under President Dwight Eisenhower as a response to the threat of nuclear war. Equipped with the latest tranche of presidential records, we now know that at least some of the most disturbing aspects of early Cold War emergency action documents persisted as of 2008.

Controlling communications At least one of the documents under review was designed to implement the emergency authorities contained in Section 706 of the Communications Act. During World War II, Congress granted the president authority to shut down or seize control of“any facility or station for wire communication”upon proclamation “that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States.” This frighteningly expansive language was, at the time, hemmed in by Americans’ limited use of telephone calls and tele-grams. Today, however, a president willing to test the limits of his or her authority might interpret “wire communications” to encompass the internet — and therefore claim a “kill switch” over vast swaths of electronic communication. And indeed, Bush administration officials repeatedly highlighted the statute’s flexibility: it was “very broad”

Detention authority The records indicate that at least one presidential emergency action document pertained to the suspension of habeas corpus. An internal memorandum from June 2008 specified that a document under the Justice Department’s jurisdiction was “[s]till being revised by OLC [Office of Legal Counsel], in light of recent Supreme Court opinion.” Examining the Court’s rulings over the previous months, it is evident that this must refer to the landmark decision in Boumediene v. Bush, which recognized Guantanamo Bay prisoners’ constitutional right to challenge their detention in court.

Inhibiting the right to travel Restricting the use of U.S. passports, a reported feature of some early presidential emergency action documents— remained on the table as of 2008. Records generated by the Bush administration’s review highlighted a provisions of law from 1978 that allows the government to curtail international movement based on “war,” “armed hostilities,” or “imminent danger to the public health or the physical safety of United States travelers.”

Triggering other emergency powers The national emergency declared after 9/11 — which is still in effect today and continues to prop up the United States’ military presence across the globe — was cited in connection with one or more PEADs. A national emergency declaration unlocks enhanced authorities contained in more than120 provisions of law. Bush invoked several such authorities, but several dozen others were — and still are — available to the president as a result of Proclamation 7463.

Also missing from the records is any evidence that the Bush administration communicated — much less collaborated — with Congress during its review. We have previously noted that presidents have kept PEADs secret, not only from the American public but from lawmakers as well. This lack of disclosure effectively blocks a coequal branch of government from overseeing emergency protocols.

With Congress unable to serve its constitutional role as a check on the executive branch, there remains the possibility that modern PEADs, like their historical predecessors, sacrifice Americans’ constitutional rights and the rule of law in the name of emergency planning. Congress should pass Sen. Ed Markey’s REIGN Act,…to bring these shadowy powers to account.

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/new-documents-illuminate-presidents-secret-unchecked-emergency-powers

Anonymous ID: d585eb Aug. 29, 2022, 1:40 p.m. No.17460762   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0874 >>0941 >>0989 >>1006 >>1013

>>17460643

If you don't think Congress is freaked out about Trump and the PEADs he may have written or used, read this, a lot of articles came out in May 2022 on PEADs including NYTs

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/reform-presidential-emergency-powers-its-too-late

Anonymous ID: d585eb Aug. 29, 2022, 2:36 p.m. No.17461019   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1037 >>1081

08.26.2022

Grassley, Johnson Call on FBI to Explain Interference in Hunter Biden Investigation

Request FBI Personnel Appear for Transcribed Interview

 

BUTLER COUNTY, IOWA – Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), ranking member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, sent a letter to Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Bradley Benavides and FBI Intelligence Analyst in Charge of the Washington Field Office Intelligence Division Nikki Floris requesting their appearance for a transcribed interview to explain the FBI’s interference in the senators’ Hunter Biden investigation.

 

On August 6, 2020, Ms. Floris and Mr. Benavides provided Sens. Grassley and Johnson an unnecessary briefing on behalf of the FBI and Intelligence Community on matters purportedly related to the senators’ investigation into Hunter Biden. The briefing led to a leak that falsely labeled the investigation as advancing Russian disinformation.

 

The senators wrote, “FBI officials initiated a scheme to downplay derogatory information on Hunter Biden for the purpose of shutting down investigative activity relating to his potential criminal exposure by labeling it ‘disinformation’” and “whistleblowers have also alleged that local FBI leadership instructed employees not to look at the Hunter Biden laptop immediately after the FBI had obtained it.”

 

Sens. Grassley and Johnson have previously requested additional records related to the briefing, but have not received a sufficient response from FBI Director Christopher Wray. “The FBI has consistently failed to respond in full to each request and failed to provide those critical records which casts further doubt on the true purpose for the briefing,” said the senators.

 

Read the senators’ September 2020 report here and November 2020 supplemental report here.

 

Read more about the letter in Fox News and Washington Examiner.

 

The full text of the letter can be found HERE.

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-johnson-call-on-fbi-to-explain-interference-in-hunter-biden-investigation

 

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/grassley_johnson_to_fbi_-_august_2020_briefing.pdf

Anonymous ID: d585eb Aug. 29, 2022, 2:49 p.m. No.17461081   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>17461019

This letter is fucking great, the body of the letter

 

Dear Ms. Floris and Mr. Benavides:

 

On August 6, 2020, as we were finishing our September 23, 2020, report on Hunter Biden’s financial connections to foreign governments and questionable foreign nationals, you provided a briefing to us on behalf of the FBI and Intelligence Community.1 As we have publicly and privately stated to you and Director Wray since that briefing, the briefing was unnecessary and was only done because of pressure from our Democratic colleagues, including Democratic Leadership, to falsely attack our Biden investigation as advancing Russian disinformation.2

 

For example, on July 13, 2020, then-Minority Leader Schumer, Senator Warner, Speaker Pelosi and Representative Schiff sent a letter, with a classified attachment, to the FBI to express a purported belief that Congress was the subject of a foreign disinformation campaign.3 The classified attachment included unclassified elements that, among other things, attempted – and failed – to tie our investigation into the Biden family’s financial deals to foreign disinformation. Those elements were then leaked to the press.4

 

As you are undoubtedly aware, we’ve successfully refuted those false allegations and, most recently, we’ve made public a series of authentic bank records relating to the Biden family’s connections to the communist Chinese government, which Democrats had previously tried –and failed – to claim advanced Russian disinformation.5 In addition, on July 16, 2020, then-Ranking Member Peters and then-Ranking Member Wyden wrote to us requesting a briefing from the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force on matters purportedly relating to our investigation.6

 

On July 28, 2020, we responded to them and reminded them that in March 2020, the FBI and relevant members of the Intelligence Community had already briefed our committees and provided assurances that there was no reason that our committees should not continue their investigation.7

 

Nonetheless, the FBI succumbed to the Democratic pressure and provided the infamous August 6, 2020, briefing.

 

With respect to the substance of the briefing, it consisted primarily of information that we already knew and information unconnected to our Biden investigation. We made clear to you at the briefing that it was not relevant to the substance of our work. In response, you stated that the FBI is not attempting to “quash, curtail, or interfere” in the investigation in any way. 8 We also made clear our concern that the briefing would be subject to a leak that would shed a false light on the focus of our investigation. Indeed, on May 1, 2021, the Washington Post did exactly that and so did the other inaccurate media articles during the course of our investigation which falsely labeled our investigation as advancing Russian disinformation.9

 

Moreover, whistleblowers have recently alleged that in August 2020, the same month you provided the briefing to us, FBI officials initiated a scheme to downplay derogatory

information on Hunter Biden for the purpose of shutting down investigative activity relating to his potential criminal exposure by labeling it “disinformation.”10

 

Whistleblowers have also alleged that local FBI leadership instructed employees not to look at the Hunter Biden laptop immediately after the FBI had obtained it.11 At the briefing as well as after, we requested relevant records relating to what happened at the briefing, including the 302 or similar summary, the intelligence basis for the briefing and the personnel involved in making the decision to brief us. On August 12, 2020; May 3, 2021; July 25, 2022; and August 11, 2022, those requests were made.12

 

The FBI has consistently failed to respond in full to each request and failed to provide those critical records which casts further doubt on the true purpose for the briefing.

 

Simply put, the unnecessary FBI briefing provided the Democrats and liberal media the vehicle to spread their false narrative that our work advanced Russian disinformation. Although you stated that the FBI didn’t intend to “interfere” in our investigation, the practical effect of such an unnecessary briefing and the subsequent leaks relating to it created interference, which frustrated and obstructed congressional oversight efforts.

 

The FBI answers to Congress and the American people; therefore, we request that you appear before us for a transcribed interview on these and related matters no later than September 8, 2022. In addition, at the time of our initial request in August 2020, all records relating to the briefing should have been preserved.13 This letter reiterates that request.