Biden admin used counterterrorism powers against parents without cause: House Judiciary report

[excalibur]

Simply fascistic behavior by Biden and Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

​

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.​

​

Citing a trove of recently obtained documents, lawmakers behind Judiciary’s weaponization subcommittee probe into the controversial memo said the Biden administration “misused federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources for political purposes.” ​

​

“The Justice Department’s own documents demonstrate that there was no compelling nationwide law-enforcement justification for the Attorney General’s directive or the Department components’ execution thereof,” the interim report reads. The panel released documents on Tuesday as part of the report. The documents show “strong negative reactions” to Mr. Garland’s memo by local law enforcement officials days after it was issued. ​

​

Several U.S. Attorneys reported back to DOJ headquarters with objections by their local law enforcement counterparts in issues involving local school board meetings in the weeks following the memo. ​

William Ihlenfeld II, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of West Virginia, wrote in a report to DOJ headquarters that there had been “a handful” of local school board meetings where attendees had “been boisterous and disruptive” but that those incidents should be handled by local police. ​

​

U.S. Attorney Steven D. Weinhoeft of the Southern District of Illinois reported that Mr. Garland’s memo was “very poorly received” among local law enforcement officials, some of whom described the threats outlined in the memo as “a manufactured issue.” ​

​

“No one I spoke with in law enforcement seemed to think that there is a serious national threat directed at school boards, which gave the impression that our priorities are misapplied,” Mr. Weinhoft reported to DOJ headquarters. ​

​

“Some expressed concerns that the federal government was meddling in an area where it does not belong,” he added. ​

Despite the lack of a compelling need for federal resources, the FBI acknowledged to the House panel that it opened 25 threat assessments known as “Guardian assessments” in response to concerns raised over threats against school boards, six of which were conducted but the FBI Counterterrorism Division. ​

​

“These admissions supplement whistleblower disclosures about the FBI’s actions, including disclosures the FBI investigated a mom because she belonged to a ‘right-wing mom’s group’ and ‘is a gun owner’ and a dad because ‘he rails against the government,’” the committee said in Tuesday’s report.​

​

...​

Biden admin used counterterrorism powers against parents without cause: House Judiciary report

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[otto105]

Simply fascistic behavior by Biden and Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

​

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.​

​

Citing a trove of recently obtained documents, lawmakers behind Judiciary’s weaponization subcommittee probe into the controversial memo said the Biden administration “misused federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources for political purposes.” ​

​

“The Justice Department’s own documents demonstrate that there was no compelling nationwide law-enforcement justification for the Attorney General’s directive or the Department components’ execution thereof,” the interim report reads. The panel released documents on Tuesday as part of the report. The documents show “strong negative reactions” to Mr. Garland’s memo by local law enforcement officials days after it was issued. ​

​

Several U.S. Attorneys reported back to DOJ headquarters with objections by their local law enforcement counterparts in issues involving local school board meetings in the weeks following the memo. ​

William Ihlenfeld II, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of West Virginia, wrote in a report to DOJ headquarters that there had been “a handful” of local school board meetings where attendees had “been boisterous and disruptive” but that those incidents should be handled by local police. ​

​

U.S. Attorney Steven D. Weinhoeft of the Southern District of Illinois reported that Mr. Garland’s memo was “very poorly received” among local law enforcement officials, some of whom described the threats outlined in the memo as “a manufactured issue.” ​

​

“No one I spoke with in law enforcement seemed to think that there is a serious national threat directed at school boards, which gave the impression that our priorities are misapplied,” Mr. Weinhoft reported to DOJ headquarters. ​

​

“Some expressed concerns that the federal government was meddling in an area where it does not belong,” he added. ​

Despite the lack of a compelling need for federal resources, the FBI acknowledged to the House panel that it opened 25 threat assessments known as “Guardian assessments” in response to concerns raised over threats against school boards, six of which were conducted but the FBI Counterterrorism Division. ​

​

“These admissions supplement whistleblower disclosures about the FBI’s actions, including disclosures the FBI investigated a mom because she belonged to a ‘right-wing mom’s group’ and ‘is a gun owner’ and a dad because ‘he rails against the government,’” the committee said in Tuesday’s report.​

​

...​

Biden admin used counterterrorism powers against parents without cause: House Judiciary report

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.

www.washingtontimes.com

You mean adults who called threats of violence against school officials and cry that they got called out.


I say **** em.

 

[FA_Q2]

You mean adults who called threats of violence against school officials and cry that they got called out.


I say **** em.

What about adults actively committing crimes? Should we say **** them to?

It is rather amazing the doublethink when we shift from cases like Michael Brown to normal everyday parents. It all about police brutality and how we need to change policing in this nation but the instant it moves from ones political position to something else then it is **** them. How dare they be upset when the system sacrifices children.


Sure, anti-terrorism laws should be utilized to deal with PARENTS... How ******* dumb do you really have to be to see that as acceptable?

 

[otto105]

What about adults actively committing crimes? Should we say **** them to?

It is rather amazing the doublethink when we shift from cases like Michael Brown to normal everyday parents. It all about police brutality and how we need to change policing in this nation but the instant it moves from ones political position to something else then it is **** them. How dare they be upset when the system sacrifices children.


Sure, anti-terrorism laws should be utilized to deal with PARENTS... How ******* dumb do you really have to be to see that as acceptable?

Are you really trying to cover for people calling in threats of violence against people?

 

[FA_Q2]

Are you really trying to cover for people calling in threats of violence against people?

Nope.

Are you really going to just try and pretend you have not been doing that for years? Of course you are. And now you support the feds going after people with anti-terrorism measures built specifically around circumnavigating rights. As long as they go after people you do not like of course.

 

[otto105]

Nope.

Are you really going to just try and pretend you have not been doing that for years? Of course you are. And now you support the feds going after people with anti-terrorism measures built specifically around circumnavigating rights. As long as they go after people you do not like of course.

Maga fuckups have been doing it from 2016.

 

[excalibur]

You mean adults who called threats of violence against school officials and cry that they got called out.


I say **** em.

Has what to do with the OP? And if anyone actually did do that then local or state police are the ones to deal with it, not Federal counterterrorism powers.

Seems as if school officials made most of the alleged threats up as well.

 

[otto105]

Has what to do with the OP? And if anyone actually did do that then local or state police are the ones to deal with it, not Federal counterterrorism powers.

Seems as if school officials made most of the alleged threats up as well.

Yeah, that's it deflect and protect terrorists.

 

[scruffy]

Simply fascistic behavior by Biden and Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

​

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.​

​

Citing a trove of recently obtained documents, lawmakers behind Judiciary’s weaponization subcommittee probe into the controversial memo said the Biden administration “misused federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources for political purposes.” ​

​

“The Justice Department’s own documents demonstrate that there was no compelling nationwide law-enforcement justification for the Attorney General’s directive or the Department components’ execution thereof,” the interim report reads. The panel released documents on Tuesday as part of the report. The documents show “strong negative reactions” to Mr. Garland’s memo by local law enforcement officials days after it was issued. ​

​

Several U.S. Attorneys reported back to DOJ headquarters with objections by their local law enforcement counterparts in issues involving local school board meetings in the weeks following the memo. ​

William Ihlenfeld II, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of West Virginia, wrote in a report to DOJ headquarters that there had been “a handful” of local school board meetings where attendees had “been boisterous and disruptive” but that those incidents should be handled by local police. ​

​

U.S. Attorney Steven D. Weinhoeft of the Southern District of Illinois reported that Mr. Garland’s memo was “very poorly received” among local law enforcement officials, some of whom described the threats outlined in the memo as “a manufactured issue.” ​

​

“No one I spoke with in law enforcement seemed to think that there is a serious national threat directed at school boards, which gave the impression that our priorities are misapplied,” Mr. Weinhoft reported to DOJ headquarters. ​

​

“Some expressed concerns that the federal government was meddling in an area where it does not belong,” he added. ​

Despite the lack of a compelling need for federal resources, the FBI acknowledged to the House panel that it opened 25 threat assessments known as “Guardian assessments” in response to concerns raised over threats against school boards, six of which were conducted but the FBI Counterterrorism Division. ​

​

“These admissions supplement whistleblower disclosures about the FBI’s actions, including disclosures the FBI investigated a mom because she belonged to a ‘right-wing mom’s group’ and ‘is a gun owner’ and a dad because ‘he rails against the government,’” the committee said in Tuesday’s report.​

​

...​

Biden admin used counterterrorism powers against parents without cause: House Judiciary report

The Biden administration had “no legitimate basis” to deploy federal counterterrorism resources against parents who protested against local education officials, according to an interim report on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 school boards memo released by the House Judiciary Committee.

www.washingtontimes.com

Libtards are so ******* evil now, it's almost at the point where a decision has to be made.

 

[otto105]

Libtards are so ******* evil now, it's almost at the point where a decision has to be made.

And that is what national socialist?

 

[excalibur]

Yeah, that's it deflect and protect terrorists.

You are a true fascist.

 

[FA_Q2]

Maga fuckups have been doing it from 2016.

And there we are.

You don't care if you are just like them, as long as you win. You are just as bad as any nutcase on the right.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yeah, that's it deflect and protect terrorists.

None of them posed a greater threat than your type does.

 

[Independent thinker]

You mean adults who called threats of violence against school officials and cry that they got called out.


I say **** em.

No, he's talking about the DOJ watching all parents who protest, as if they were criminal terrorists.

 

[otto105]

No, he's talking about the DOJ watching all parents who protest, as if they were criminal terrorists.

Peaceful protest is one thing.

Calls for violence are another.

 

[Independent thinker]

Peaceful protest is one thing.

Calls for violence are another.

But the DOJ was using their power to watch peaceful protesters to see if they were terrorists.

 

[otto105]

But the DOJ was using their power to watch peaceful protesters to see if they were terrorists.

Link.

 

[Independent thinker]

Link.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-03-21-school-board-documents-interim-report.pdf

CONCLUSION Internal Executive Branch documents indicate that the Biden Administration’s use of federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources is an example of government weaponization against American parents. If the Justice Department performed any due diligence prior to the issuance of the Attorney General’s memorandum, it would have understood clearly and forcefully that federal intervention was unwarranted. Because that due diligence did not occur—and the Administration acted out of political motivations rather than for law-enforcement reasons—parents around the country had FBI “assessments” opened into them.94 Ensuring the effective and even-handed use of federal law-enforcement authority should be a noncontroversial priority. Americans deserve to have confidence that the enormous power and reach of federal law enforcement will be used fairly and free of any indication of politicization. Committee Republicans have repeatedly called on Attorney General Garland to rescind his memorandum. He has declined to do so to date. The use of these resources chills protected First Amendment activity as parents rightfully fear that their passionate advocacy for their children could result in a visit from federal law enforcement. The Committee’s and the Select Subcommittee’s work is not complete. This oversight will continue as the Justice Department and the Education Department continue to produce responsive documents. In addition, the FBI has produced only fourteen pages of documents to date in response to the Committee’s subpoena—a flagrant disregard of the serious concerns about the Bureau’s misuse of its authorities against parents. 95 There remain open questions about the development and issuance of Attorney General Garland’s memorandum—issued only five days after receipt of the NSBA’s letter to President Biden—and the coordination between the Justice Department and White House on that point. There remain open questions about how the FBI quickly operationalized the Attorney General’s directive, and whether the Bureau objected to the civil liberty concerns inherent in the Attorney General’s memorandum. The Committee has outstanding subpoenas for testimony from Chip Slaven and Viola Garcia, senior NSBA officials who signed the letter to President Biden. Until all responsive documents are produced and interviews with the necessary parties take place, the Committee and the Select Subcommittee will continue its oversight to uncover facts that will inform potential legislative reforms.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Quite the Pandora's box we opened up for ourselves -- because some Neo-cons (Bush) wanted to use fear to pass policies that were going to be used against US citizens for decades...


Oh wait!


They been doing this to black folks forever.....and rightwingers never complained...funny...

‘Discredit, disrupt, and destroy’: FBI records acquired by the Library reveal violent surveillance of Black leaders, civil rights organizations

It was the late 1960s, and J. Edgar Hoover smelled trouble. The status quo — hallowed by hate, sanctioned by Jim Crow — was beginning to crack.Behind the scenes, Hoover’s Federal Bureau of Investigation was keeping watch. In 1967, the FBI quietly unleashed a covert surveillance operation...

www.lib.berkeley.edu

Whelp. glad yall have joined the fight now....make sure to keep that same energy when a Republican is back in the White House.....but you won't

 

[otto105]

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-03-21-school-board-documents-interim-report.pdf

CONCLUSION Internal Executive Branch documents indicate that the Biden Administration’s use of federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources is an example of government weaponization against American parents. If the Justice Department performed any due diligence prior to the issuance of the Attorney General’s memorandum, it would have understood clearly and forcefully that federal intervention was unwarranted. Because that due diligence did not occur—and the Administration acted out of political motivations rather than for law-enforcement reasons—parents around the country had FBI “assessments” opened into them.94 Ensuring the effective and even-handed use of federal law-enforcement authority should be a noncontroversial priority. Americans deserve to have confidence that the enormous power and reach of federal law enforcement will be used fairly and free of any indication of politicization. Committee Republicans have repeatedly called on Attorney General Garland to rescind his memorandum. He has declined to do so to date. The use of these resources chills protected First Amendment activity as parents rightfully fear that their passionate advocacy for their children could result in a visit from federal law enforcement. The Committee’s and the Select Subcommittee’s work is not complete. This oversight will continue as the Justice Department and the Education Department continue to produce responsive documents. In addition, the FBI has produced only fourteen pages of documents to date in response to the Committee’s subpoena—a flagrant disregard of the serious concerns about the Bureau’s misuse of its authorities against parents. 95 There remain open questions about the development and issuance of Attorney General Garland’s memorandum—issued only five days after receipt of the NSBA’s letter to President Biden—and the coordination between the Justice Department and White House on that point. There remain open questions about how the FBI quickly operationalized the Attorney General’s directive, and whether the Bureau objected to the civil liberty concerns inherent in the Attorney General’s memorandum. The Committee has outstanding subpoenas for testimony from Chip Slaven and Viola Garcia, senior NSBA officials who signed the letter to President Biden. Until all responsive documents are produced and interviews with the necessary parties take place, the Committee and the Select Subcommittee will continue its oversight to uncover facts that will inform potential legislative reforms.

A gym jordan propaganda screed.

Do you have any actual proof of your assertion the DOJ targeted innocent maga fuckups.