Category: Reprints from others.

Categories
Biden Cartel Censorship Government Overreach Leftist Virtue(!) Reprints from others.

IRS Launches Audit Into Conservative Org – Timing Is Oddly Suspicious

IRS going after Conservative org that exposed them.

IRS Launches Audit Into Conservative Org – Timing Is Oddly Suspicious

The IRS is demanding ‘[c]orrespondence files, emails and information posted on a website that relates to current public elected officials’ — clearly a sign that they are targeting our research and education activities.

Who said this wasn’t Obama’s third term? Same tactics as before.

The IRS is investigating the tax-exempt status of the American Accountability Foundation following its reporting on President Joe Biden’s nominees, several of whom withdrew their nominations, according to a letter obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The IRS is requesting AAF submit internal financial data, as well as communications, including meeting notes, publications and newsletters, according to the letter from the IRS to AAF obtained by the DCNF. The conservative nonprofit organization, which the IRS approved for tax-exempt status in August 2021, alleges the investigation is in retaliation for the AAF reporting on several recent Biden nominees who later withdrew their nominations.

 

“This sudden request by the IRS is not random,” AAF President Tom Jones said. “The IRS is demanding ‘[c]orrespondence files, emails and information posted on a website that relates to current public elected officials’ — clearly a sign that they are targeting our research and education activities. It’s a deliberate attempt to punish and suppress AAF’s activities. It is surely no coincidence that AAF — the very organization that exposed the weaponization of the IRS — is now the target of it.”

AAF has actively criticized several Biden nominees, calling on them to withdraw.

For instance, Biden’s FCC chair nominee Gigi Sohn donated to several Senate Commerce Democrats, including $550 to Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia, $100 to Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, and $200 to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennett of Colorado, according to The Washington Examiner. AAF sent a letter to Bennett, Cortez, Masto, Fetterman and Warnock, calling on the lawmakers that received contributions to recuse themselves from voting on Sohn’s nomination and calling for Sohn to withdraw.

The organization also repeatedly criticized Sohn over her assertion “that Fox News has had the most negative impact on our democracy” in 2020.

“It’s state-sponsored propaganda, with few if any opposing viewpoints,” Sohn added.

AAF spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on billboards and advertisements to persuade Americans that Sohn should not be FCC chair, the group said.

AAF also spent weeks in 2022 criticizing National Highway Traffic Safety Administration nominee Ann Carlson for her “radical” statements on energy and climate, including blaming Americans for loving “their cars and their cheap gas.” The White House withdrew her nomination after backlash.

The organization also takes credit for playing a role in the withdrawal of Biden’s Federal Aviation Administration nominee Phillip Washington, according to its website.

Democratic Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse attempted to influence the agency to open an investigation into conservative organization Turning Point USA, according to documents obtained by AAF in November 2022. This included calling for the IRS to look into revoking Turning Point USA’s tax-exempt status due to hosting a large event without masks and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Whitehouse also targeted AAF’s partner and supporter Conservative Partnership Institute’s tax-exempt status in letters to the IRS, according to his website.

The IRS audit is for the purpose of certifying that AAF “operates in accordance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code,” according to the letter.

“We demand that this abuse is put to an end at once,” Jones asserted. “The Biden administration is acting as the gangster arm of the Left. Our Constitution and Declaration of Independence guarantee our God-given right to speak the truth about the powerful without being punished and harassed. We will do everything in our power to keep America free.”

Under former President Barack Obama, IRS officials under Lois Lerner targeted conservative groups when reviewing tax-exempt status. IRS officials under Lerner participated in choosing groups with the words “tea party,” “patriot” or “9/12” in their names for audits.

“As the attorney for many conservative, tea party groups targeted and harassed by the Obama IRS a decade ago, this certainly smacks of the exact same tactics used by the IRS then … and apparently being used again now against AAF,” attorney Cleta Mitchell said in a statement.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Elections Free Speech Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election.

Government Corruption.

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election.

New emails show officials at the Department of Homeland Security created a Stanford University “disinformation” group that censored Americans’ speech before the 2020 election, according to a House Judiciary Committee report exclusively obtained by The Post.

The House panel’s 103-page staff interim report says never-before-seen emails and internal communications were obtained from the group, known as the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and show how it worked with DHS’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to flag, suppress and remove online speech in coordination with big tech companies.

One of EIP’s founding partners — the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab — described CISA’s central role in the alleged censorship effort in a July 31, 2020, email.

“I know the Council has a number of efforts on broad policy around the elections, but we just set up an election integrity partnership at the request of DHS/CISA and are in weekly comms to debrief about disinfo,” the lab’s senior director Graham Brookie wrote.

The staff report says, “[T]he federal government and universities pressured social media companies to censor true information, jokes, and political opinions.

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

A report from the House Judiciary Committee, led by Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), says new emails show officials at the Department of Homeland Security created a Stanford University “disinformation” group that censored Americans’ speech before the 2020 election.Getty Images

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Graham Brookie, director of the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, described a federal agency’s central role in the alleged censorship effort in a July 31, 2020, email.Atlantic Council

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Here is a related email from Atlantic Council DFR Lab Senior Director Graham Brookie.NY Post

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

The online posts labeled “misinformation” were made by public officials such as former President Donald Trump.Getty Images

“This pressure was largely directed in a way that benefitted one side of the political aisle: true information posted by Republicans and conservatives was labeled as ‘misinformation’ while false information posted by Democrats and liberals was largely unreported and untouched by the censors.”

The “misinformation” posts were made by public officials such as former President Donald Trump, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), media outlets such as Newsmax and The Babylon Bee and many conservative commentators.

The Judiciary report also found that while under the purview of CISA’s Countering Foreign Influence Task Force, the central focus of the feds’ effort was to “censor Americans engaged in core political speech in the lead up to the 2020 election.”

DHS acknowledged that it could not “openly endorse” a centralized portal to flag information in a May 2020 email released in the staff report, which cleared the way for Stanford’s EIP to take up the effort in July of that year.

The task force used a tactic known as “switchboarding” to refer to removal requests from state and local officials to Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites, which CISA-CFITF Director Brian Scully confirmed in testimony in the bombshell case Missouri v. Biden.

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Brian Scully, a figure in the controversy, gave testimony in the bombshell case Missouri v. Biden.New Civil Liberties Alliance / Youtube

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Emails in the interim staff report show Scully informing members of the Office of the Colorado Secretary of State that he had flagged parody accounts to Twitter.NY Post

Emails in the interim staff report show Scully informing members of the Office of the Colorado Secretary of State that he had flagged parody accounts to Twitter and advised Facebook to take down a post about the election that was deemed misinformation.

The exchanges show that CISA recognized it was on shaky legal grounds by participating in the effort and chose to add a disclaimer beneath many emails that its requests were “voluntary” and the agency “neither has nor seeks the ability to remove what information is made available on social media platforms.”

However, those emails also included a line that the “information may also be shared with law enforcement or intelligence agencies,” implying those agencies could take action if the posts weren’t removed.

Former CISA Director Chris Krebs, who was fired by Trump after the 2020 election, testified to the subcommittee that “switchboarding” was done before his agency was created as well.

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Exchanges show that group recognized it was on shaky legal ground by participating in the effort and chose to add a disclaimer beneath many emails that its requests were “voluntary.”NY Post

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Former CISA Director Chris Krebs, who was fired by Trump after the 2020 election, testified to the subcommittee.Jim LoScalzo / Greg Nash / Pool via CNP / SplashNews.com

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified in a House Judiciary Committee hearing in July that the agency no longer participates in the practice.

The Judiciary staff report also discloses that Stanford students were working at both CISA and EIP simultaneously.

“Not only were there a number of university students involved with the EIP, at least four of the students were employed by CISA during the operation of EIP, using their government email accounts to communicate with CISA officials and other ‘external stakeholders’ involved with the EIP,” it states.

In a statement given to The Post on Monday, CISA Executive Director Brandon Wales said the agency “does not and has never censored speech or facilitated censorship.

“Every day, the men and women of CISA execute the agency’s mission of reducing risk to U.S. critical infrastructure in a way that protects Americans’ freedom of speech, civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy,” Wales said.

“In response to concerns from election officials of all parties regarding foreign influence operations and disinformation that may impact the security of election infrastructure, CISA mitigates the risk of disinformation by sharing information on election literacy and election security with the public and by amplifying the trusted voices of election officials across the nation.”

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election

New emails show DHS created Stanford ‘disinfo’ group that censored speech before 2020 election© Provided by New York Post

Alex Stamos, who previously served as chief security officer at Facebook, said the idea was to create a “one-stop shop for local election officials, DHS, and voter protection organizations” to coordinate with social media platforms in the censorship effort.REUTERS

The “disinfo” organization was led by Stanford University’s Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) and founded with the help of other academics who communicated directly with Homeland Security officials and members of the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC), the report said.

SIO was conceived as a “one-stop shop for local election officials, DHS, and voter protection organizations” to coordinate with social media platforms in the censorship effort, according to its director Alex Stamos, who previously served as chief security officer at Facebook.

In June, Stamos testified to the House subcommittee that CISA’s coordination with the FBI came across as a threat.

“[D]ealing with a law enforcement agency that has coercive powers is just a risky thing to do if you’re part of some big organization and some other — there might be some investigation involving the organization that you don’t even know about,” he said.

“I think all executives of all public companies understand that there’s lots of parts of the government that can punish you for activity that you thought was appropriate.”

Stamos did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump established CISA in 2018 to improve federal cybersecurity programs and protect government software from hackers.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Government Overreach Links from other news sources. MSM Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Fresh revelations contradict Joe Biden’s sweeping denials on Hunter.

Crime does pay.

Fresh revelations contradict Joe Biden’s sweeping denials on Hunter.

 

Of the many disputes that followed the leaking of Hunter Biden’s laptop contents, one of the thorniest has been the case of the April 2015 dinner at Cafe Milano.

Emails from the cache suggested that Hunter Biden hosted a dinner in a private room at the tony Washington restaurant that included both his father and an executive from the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, which had appointed Hunter Biden to its board. An email from the executive, dated immediately following the dinner, thanked Hunter Biden for the chance to meet his father.

As the media litigated the controversy, the White House insisted, in increasingly forceful terms, that no meeting between Biden and the executive had occurred.

In October 2021, a year after the dinner became a matter of national controversy, a POLITICO article mentioning it prompted an email response from a White House spokesperson reiterating and extending denials that Biden had met the Ukrainian executive, Vadym Pozharskyi.

While some statements from Biden representatives could be construed as only ruling out that a formal meeting took place between Biden and the executive, the White House maintained its denial was more sweeping.

“Does this rule out any informal encounter with Pozharskyi in April 2015?” POLITICO asked.

“Yes,” the White House spokesman wrote back.

Then, this July, a former Hunter Biden business partner who was present at the dinner testified before the House Oversight Committee. Under penalty of perjury, Devon Archer said that the Ukrainian executive did dine with Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and several others at Cafe Milano in April 2015.

Asked to reconcile this discrepancy, the White House did not address the question of whether Biden and the executive met at the dinner. Instead, a second spokesperson responded, “As we have said many times before, the President was not in business with his son or anyone else in the family, and House Republicans’ own witnesses, including Devon Archer, have testified that the President never even discussed business with his son.”

The explicit White House denial of even an informal encounter, reported here for the first time, was not the only time that statements made by Biden and his camp about Hunter Biden’s dealings have been contradicted by others.

Joe Biden and his representatives have repeatedly defended him from criticism related to his relatives, his son in particular, by issuing blanket denials of misconduct and disclaiming contact with their business affairs.

But, in recent months, as congressional Republicans have opened an impeachment inquiry and controversies related to Hunter Biden continue to be litigated in the courts and in the public square, a steady trickle of revelations have contradicted the president’s denials.

A POLITICO review of recent congressional testimony and exhibits, along with court filings and media reports, casts doubt on several statements made by Biden and his representatives.

They include the president’s claim that he has never discussed his relatives’ business dealings with anyone and his suggestion that the appearance of emails apparently belonging to his son was the result of a Russian plot, as well as Biden’s denials that his son made money from China and that his relatives have profited off of the Biden name.

Republicans, meanwhile, have turned up no proof for the claims of Biden’s most zealous detractors: that he took official actions on account of his relatives’ business dealings. And as for the Cafe Milano dinner, there is no indication that Joe Biden discussed business or offered favors to the energy executive that night.

But, as with so much else related to the Hunter Biden affair, the president’s reliance on sweeping denials that end up being called into question by others has allowed the controversy to fester for years.

A Russian plot

Questions about the Cafe Milano dinner have persisted in part because of the doubt Joe Biden cast over the authenticity of emails describing the event.

In October 2020, the New York Post began publishing emails provided by Donald Trump’s ally and sometimes-personal attorney Rudy Giuliani that were purportedly taken from devices Hunter Biden had left at a computer repair shop in Delaware. In the wake of their publication, Joe Biden endorsed an alternative theory about the documents: “There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant” or “Russian plan” (his intended wording is unclear, and news organizations have quoted it both ways), he said at the final presidential debate that month.

The letter cited by Biden stated that “the arrival on the US political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter … has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” while asserting that the signers had no direct knowledge of Russian involvement.

Since then, the nature of the files has been a matter of ongoing controversy.

U.S. intelligence had indeed warned earlier in the campaign that Moscow was seeking to harm Biden’s candidacy by pushing unsubstantiated corruption claims related to the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma. But subsequent reporting has steadily accumulated to support the authenticity of the files, which a Delaware repair shop owner named John Paul Mac Isaac presented to Giuliani and which Giuliani passed on to the Post.

Mac Isaac sued POLITICO, CNN, Hunter Biden, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and the Biden presidential campaign committee for defamation and civil conspiracy in 2022. The case remains pending in Sussex County, Del.

In September 2021, a book by a POLITICO reporter authenticated several emails from the laptop, including two at the center of the original New York Post articles, based in part on interviews with people with independent knowledge of the correspondence.

In March of last year, The New York Times reported that a combination of people involved in the federal investigation of Hunter Biden and people familiar with his business dealings had authenticated an unspecified number of emails from the cache. Later that month, The Washington Post reported that two forensic experts it commissioned had verified thousands more emails.

During the initial firestorm over the release of the files, Mac Isaac told news outlets that he had handed them over to the FBI a year earlier in late 2019.

Last November, CBS News reported that a forensic analysis it commissioned of a copy of the material turned over to the FBI “shows no evidence of tampering or fabrication.”

In March, Hunter Biden sued Mac Isaac for invasion of privacy, stating that “at least some of” the electronic files obtained by Mac Isaac belonged to Hunter Biden. A footnote in that filing specifies that Hunter Biden was not conceding Mac Isaac’s account of how he came into possession of those files.

But in June, House Republicans published interviews with two IRS agents who alleged mishandling of the Hunter Biden case. One of the whistleblowers, Gary Shapley, furnished notes of an October 2020, meeting he held with FBI agents to discuss the devices provided to the Bureau by Mac Isaac.

The notes show that the FBI found further support for the claim that Hunter Biden had left the devices at the repair shop: They include financial records showing that Hunter Biden shopped at a nearby cigar shop around the time the devices were dropped off and phone records showing calls between Hunter Biden and the repair shop.

The White House did not respond to questions about the computer files.

The Cafe Milano dinner

The question of whether Joe Biden met a Burisma executive at a dinner at Cafe Milano has been a subject of controversy since his son’s emails leaked three years ago.

Emails in the cache show that Hunter Biden and Archer, his then-business partner, arranged for a dinner with roughly a dozen other people at Cafe Milano on April 16, 2015. A tentative guest list Hunter Biden sent to Archer included a “Vadym” at the time the pair was working closely with Burisma executive Vadym Pozharskyi.

Other email traffic shows Hunter Biden informing an attendee “Dad will be there but keep that between us for now.” And an email from Pozharskyi to Hunter Biden from the morning after the event says, “thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent some time together.”

That email and the guest list email were among a set from the cache that were authenticated for POLITICO by two digital forensics experts granted anonymity to share their findings. One expert cited a fear of retaliation for weighing in on a political controversy, and the other said contractual obligations limited the matters about which he could speak publicly.

In addition to being verified by forensics experts, the thank you email’s authenticity was further attested to in an affidavit produced by an IRS investigator on the case, which was released by House Republicans in September.

“This email was received by the investigative team via an Electronic Search Warrant served on Google related to [Hunter Biden’s] Google email account,” the IRS agent, Joseph Zeigler, wrote.

At the time of the dinner, Joe Biden was heading U.S. anti-corruption initiatives in Ukraine. They included efforts by the State Department to recover assets allegedly obtained corruptly by Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, who had granted the company lucrative resource licenses while serving as the country’s ecology minister. Zlochevsky has denied wrongdoing.

While attendees of the Cafe Milano dinner agree that Joe Biden was present, his representatives issued repeated denials of any meeting between the then-vice president and Pozharskyi.

And some attendees of the dinner had made public statements that bolstered the notion that, despite the emails suggesting a Biden-Pozharskyi encounter, the two men had never met.

One attendee, Rick Leach, who served as president of the non-profit World Food Program USA at the time of the dinner, told POLITICO he did not believe Pozharskyi had been present. “I don’t think so,” he said. “I don’t remember that name. I don’t remember that person at all.”

In October 2021, a White House spokesperson emailed POLITICO to request that an article be updated to reflect that the president’s representatives denied not only a formal meeting, but any meeting whatsoever. The official cited a statement from campaign spokesman Andrew Bates to USA Today that Biden and Vadym Pozharskyi “never had a meeting.”

While a previous Biden camp denial made reference to “official schedules” — language that potentially left open the possibility of an off-the-books encounter at a dinner — the White House spokesperson assured POLITICO that Biden had not even had an informal encounter with Pozharskyi.

But in July, Archer, who pursued a range of ventures with Hunter Biden during the Obama era, testified to the House Oversight Committee about their dealings. Archer, who was convicted in 2018 of defrauding a Native American tribe as part of a scheme in which Hunter Biden was not implicated, had attended the Cafe Milano dinner.

Archer testified that both Pozharskyi and Joe Biden also attended the dinner, an account that is consistent with Hunter Biden’s leaked emails.

Archer’s testimony specifically contradicted claims relayed in a Washington Post fact-check that Biden had not even sat down at the dinner and had only spoken to one other attendee: Alex Karloutsos, a Greek Orthodox cleric.

“That’s not correct reporting,” Archer testified.

Archer said the then-vice president ate dinner along with the group. “I remember just a regular dinner where there was a table of conversation,” he told House investigators.

Biden’s alleged contact with a Burisma executive is a sensitive matter in part because of claims, promoted by Trump’s allies during the last presidential campaign, that Joe Biden demanded the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who had been investigating Burisma on account of his son’s position with the company.

But subsequent investigations failed to bear out that claim: Officials familiar with U.S. policy on Ukraine testified to Congress that the firing of the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was consistent with that policy, and Senate Republicans found no clear evidence that Hunter Biden’s board position led to changes in U.S. policy.

Questions about Biden’s alleged contacts with Pozharskyi have resurfaced, though, with the publication of an unverified allegation made by an unnamed FBI informant that echoed the initial claims of Trump’s allies.

The informant claimed that Burisma’s owner said privately that he was pressured by Joe and Hunter Biden into bribing them for help resolving Burisma’s legal issues, including Shokin’s firing. The informant first mentioned Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma in a 2017 conversation with the FBI, according to an agency form recording his allegations, which was obtained by congressional Republicans and made public in July. The bureau re-interviewed the informant, whose identity remains secret, in 2020, after the Trump Justice Department began scrutinizing claims about Shokin’s ouster.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr, who served under Trump, told Fox News that Justice Department investigators concluded that the tip did not appear to be disinformation and forwarded it to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware in 2020. It is unclear what came of the allegation from there.

The Biden White House has dismissed the allegations, citing a lack of corroboration.

The White House spokesperson told POLITICO: “Years of investigations by Congressional Republicans have turned up no wrongdoing by Joe Biden because the truth is the President did nothing wrong.”

‘Never discussed’

The White House’s Pozharskyi denial is just one of several that has been contradicted by others.

After the issue of Biden relatives’ business dealings first came up in 2019, Joe Biden issued a sweeping denial that distanced himself from his family’s commercial pursuits: “I have never discussed, with my son or my brother or with anyone else, anything having to do with their businesses. Period,” he told reporters in Spartanburg, South Carolina, that August.

In October 2020, a former Hunter Biden business partner, Tony Bobulinski, said that he discussed Hunter Biden’s Chinese business ventures with Joe Biden.

“That is false,” Bobulinski said, in a prepared statement, of Biden’s claim to have never discussed business with Hunter.

Bobulinski — who had previously given federal campaign contributions predominantly to Democrats and was working with Trump-aligned Republicans to publicize his allegations — said that Hunter Biden and his uncle, James Biden, who is the president’s younger brother, introduced him to Joe Biden in Los Angeles in early May 2017.

“At my approximately hour-long meeting with Joe that night, we discussed the Bidens’ history, the Bidens’ family business plans with the Chinese, with which he was plainly familiar, at least at a high level,” Bobulinski said in the statement.

In a 2020 interview on Fox News with conservative pundit Tucker Carlson, Bobulinski said that James and Hunter Biden also participated in the meeting. “We didn’t go into too much detail on the business,” Bobulinski said, but he said it was “crystal clear” that Hunter Biden had discussed the deal with his father.

In September, House Republicans released an FBI summary of an interview agents conducted with Bobulinski in the fall of 2020, showing that Bobulinski told investigators the same basic story: that he had discussed the China venture with Joe Biden. The summary gives extra heft to Boublinski’s public claims because lying to the FBI in order to influence an investigation can lead to criminal charges.

Bobulinski has said he did not discuss the business in any great depth with Joe Biden. Archer has said that Joe Biden was familiar with his son’s business dealings and that he has seen the president exchange pleasantries with his son’s business partners over the phone, but that he has not seen him engage in the details of his son’s business.

In an article published in September, the former president of a hedge fund that was operated by James and Hunter Biden a decade-and-a-half ago told the Wall Street Journal that Joe Biden, then a senator, sometimes participated in business calls with his relatives. Former Paradigm Global Advisors executive Charles Provini said most of Joe Biden’s participation amounted to “just pleasantries,” but that topics like Provini’s job duties and litigation related to the fund were also discussed on these calls. Provini went on to sue Paradigm, and the case was dismissed.

Asked in July by a reporter whether the White House stood by claims that Biden had never discussed his business dealings with his son, spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre responded with a more limited claim: “The president was never in business with his son,” she said.

In response to a question about the phone conversations detailed by Archer, the president said in August, “I never talked business with anybody,” a statement consistent with Archer’s testimony.

Asked whether the president stands by his broad denial of ever discussing his relatives’ business dealings with anyone, the White House cited the testimony of House witnesses who said they did not observe any such interactions.

No money from China

Joe Biden has also faced questions about Hunter Biden’s dealings outside of Ukraine.

At the October 2020, debate, Joe Biden was asked about the appropriateness of Hunter’s work in China and for Burisma during his vice presidency.

“My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what are you talking about, China. I have not had … the only guy who made money from China is this guy,” he said, referring to Trump. “Nobody else has made money from China.”

The moderator’s question referred to Hunter Biden’s work in China during Biden’s vice presidency. Hunter Biden entered into a venture with Chinese asset managers, Bohai Harvest RST, during his father’s vice presidency. The extent to which Hunter Biden profited from his involvement in the venture remains unclear. A Hunter Biden representative has said his work on an advisory board related to the venture during the Obama years was unpaid.

But the more general claim that Hunter Biden did not make money from China is false. In court this July, Hunter Biden acknowledged hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments from a Chinese energy firm, CEFC, and people associated with it, after his father’s vice presidency.

Entities controlled by James and Hunter Biden ended up receiving nearly $5 million in legal and consulting fees from the Chinese energy company and its executives when his father was out of office, according to a Washington Post analysis published last year. At a plea deal hearing this July, Hunter Biden acknowledged receiving income from CEFC.

No profiting from Biden name

Biden has also offered general assurance that his relatives have not profited off of their association with a powerful public official.

In an October 2020, interview, Milwaukee-area television reporter Adrienne Pedersen quoted to then-candidate Biden a statement from Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson alleging that “Hunter Biden, together with other Biden family members, profited off the Biden name.”

“Is there any legitimacy to Sen. Johnson’s claims?” Pedersen asked.

“None whatsoever,” Biden said, adding, “Ron should be ashamed of himself.”

Johnson’s original comment was made in the context of a 2020 report issued by Senate Republicans that scrutinized the foreign dealings of Biden relatives. The report detailed alleged payments made by CEFC and people affiliated with it to accounts associated with Hunter Biden, James Biden and James’s wife Sara Biden.

And there are fresh indications that their association with Joe Biden helped pave the way for those payments.

That includes the summary of the Bobulinski FBI interview released in September by the House Ways and Means Committee. Bobulinski told agents that James and Hunter Biden helped open doors for CEFC around the world during Joe Biden’s vice presidency without being compensated, but that they wanted payment for that help after he left office, according to the summary.

Bobulinski said that James and Hunter Biden “believed CEFC owed them money for the benefits that accrued to CEFC through its use of the Biden family name to advance their business dealings,” according to the FBI’s summary of the interview.

Records from another FBI interview, conducted with former Hunter Biden business partner Rob Walker and released by House Republicans in June, also casts doubt on the president’s claim. Walker told investigators that Hunter Biden arranged for his father to stop by a lunch with their Chinese business partners at the Four Seasons in Washington. Walker agreed with an agent’s suggestion that Hunter Biden arranged the drop-in, which occurred when Joe Biden was out of office, to help him close a deal with CEFC executives.

The 2020 report by congressional Republicans also scrutinized Hunter Biden’s Burisma work. In his congressional interview in July, Archer said that “a large part of the value” Hunter Biden brought to Burisma was the Biden family “brand” — and that Joe Biden “brought the most value to the brand.”

Outside of the dealings covered by that report, there are other signs that Biden’s relatives have profited from the Biden name over the years. They include allegations made by former business contacts of Hunter and James Biden in lawsuits. In one case dating to the first term of the Obama administration, when Joe Biden was vice president, a former business partner at a hedge fund alleged that — in the course of a dispute about a legal bill — James and Hunter Biden, “refused to pay the bill, repeatedly citing their political connections and family status as a basis for disclaiming the obligation.” James and Hunter Biden denied the allegation.

Former business contacts of James Biden alleged in a lawsuit in 2019 that he promised that Joe Biden would incorporate their business model in his presidential campaign in order to entice them into a partnership. “All the promises were on the Biden name,” one of the executives involved in the suit told the Knoxville News Sentinel at the time. James Biden has denied the allegations.

Joe Biden’s youngest brother, Frank Biden, has also invoked the family name in the course of his business dealings. During the Obama administration, Frank Biden served as a lobbyist for, and the president of, a charter school company, Mavericks in Education, at a time when the expansion of for-profit schools was politically contentious.

In the course of seeking approvals for one of the company’s schools, Frank pledged to the Palm Beach County School Board in February of 2011, “I give you my word of honor on my family name that this system is sustainable.”

The company put out press releases describing Frank as “Brother of the Vice President of the United States and President and Director of Mavericks Education” and “brother of Vice President Joe Biden.”

In a 2011 interview with the Washington Post, Frank Biden said he did not trade on the Biden name but that he did benefit from it. “It’s a tremendous asset,” he said of the name. “I enjoy automatic acceptance or at least listening to what I have to say.”

In a leaked October 2011 email, Hunter Biden wrote of his appeal to a Chinese business partner, “It has nothing to do with me and everything to do with my last name.” That email was also authenticated by both forensics experts.

Fresh revelations contradict Joe Biden’s sweeping denials on Hunter – POLITICO

Categories
America's Heartland Biden Cartel Commentary Links from other news sources. MSM Opinion Politics Polls Reprints from others.

Winning. NYT poll says that Biden is in trouble in the swing states.

Joe's ALL SHOOK UP.

Winning. NYT poll says that Biden is in trouble in the swing states.

Sadly the only one who doesn’t see this is Biden.

ABC’s “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos said of the new poll: “This is probably going to lead to a lot of Democrats increasing chatter that Joe Biden should step aside and make room for another Democrat.”

“Voters are just plain frustrated across the board — 76% of adults in this poll say the country is headed in the wrong direction,” Stephanopoulos said.

 

 

 

Categories
America's Heartland Biden Cartel Commentary Links from other news sources. Media Woke MSM Reprints from others.

News we missed. Can Alternative Media Really Save America?

Does the mainstream media need Competition? Ren LaForme/Poynter)

News we missed. Can Alternative Media Really Save America? Some tines there are some great article that slip through the cracks. This article is one of those articles.

By Larry Bell

This writer firmly believes that if we had an honest “legacy mainstream” media, America wouldn’t have elected arguably the most inept and dangerous president in our nation’s history.

Were this not the case, major social and commercial networks wouldn’t have buried the demons in Hunter’s laptop from hell revealed in the blockbuster New York Post report which FBI partisans sat on throughout the 2020 election season, going so far as alerting those outlets to dismiss any such reports as the propaganda product of a Russian operation.

An honest media would be outraged that 51 intel officials backed that “earmarks of Russia disinformation” ruse with no evidence whatsoever, an unsupported claim that Joe Biden used to great advantage in the presidential debates.

A responsible media would report congressional whistleblower and eyewitness testimony supported by communications and banking records indicating that Joe Biden not only knew about his son Hunter’s hugely lucrative foreign influence peddling, but that the money trail leads to “the Big Guy.”

One might have reasonably expected some media coverage concerning Hunter’s July 30, 2017, WhatsApp shakedown text message to an executive connected to China’s Communist Party threatening that dad Joe and his political allies would “make certain . . .  that you will regret not following my direction” while negotiating a six-figure business deal.

Referring to his dad, Hunter clarified: “if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the [CEFC] chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction.”

Records revealed to the House Ways and Means Committee show that the following month Hunter’s Owasco P.C. firm received nearly $5 million in a series of CEFC payments.

It’s also been pretty much crickets regarding Hunter business partner Devon Archer’s July 31 testimony before the House Oversight Committee that Joe was plugged into more than 20 of his son’s foreign business telephone conversations.

Included is at least one with a top-level representative of Burisma, a Ukraine energy company where Hunter served as a no-show board member receiving a million-dollar annual salary.

According to Miranda Devine at the New York Post, three days after a Dec. 6, 2015,  phone call involving Hunter, Joe and Burisma executive Vadym Pozharskyi regarding the company’s “need for support,” V.P. Biden — the Obama administration point guy on Ukrainian issues — flew to Kyiv to ironically address its parliament about corruption.

The following month Joe bragged before the Council on Foreign Relations about threatening to withhold $1 billion in U.S. Ukraine aid unless it dropped the Burisma case.

Biden famously said, “I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b***h, he got fired.”

Then in February 2016, roughly two months after Biden’s trip and two months before Shokin’s firing, Hunter sent an email thanking Burisma’s owner Mykola Zlochevsky for “the beautiful birthday gifts,” which he described as “far too extravagant.”

A redacted FD-1023 form released by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, shows that during a 2016 meeting at a Vienna, Austria, coffee shop, Zlochevsky claimed to have been “coerced” into paying Hunter and Joe $10 million; “5 [million] to pay one Biden, and 5 [million] to another Biden.”

Nevertheless, much of the public has remained woefully uninformed regarding such apparent pay-for-play scandals papered over with wall-to-wall coverage of endless transparently contrived charges against former President Donald Trump.

A survey by the Media Research Center (MRC), found that the “Big Three” networks — ABC, CBS, and NBC — avoided discussing national security-compromising Biden influence peddling evidence altogether between June 8-12, while devoting 291 minutes to Trump distractions.

Based upon half-hour newscasts which typically devote 10 minutes to advertising, this amounted to nearly 15 shows devoted to nothing but Trump.

The only good news about blatantly complicit bad Biden-DOJ/FBI scandals is that they’re becoming increasingly difficult to contain.

According to a nationwide June Trafalgar-Convention of States Action poll, fewer than one-third (31.4%) of voters believe Joe Biden to be innocent of allegations connected to a foreign policy bribery scheme.

Somehow, and here I’ll especially thank the New York Post, numerous radio talk show program hosts, some Fox commentators, and yes, most certainly my Newsmax affiliates, for making a difference.

It has been hard to muffle the implosion of Hunter’s proposed DOJ sweetheart deal that allowed the statute of limitations to expire on felony IRS tax fraud charges and provided blanket immunity from a host of other criminal offenses in exchange for pleading out for a couple of misdemeanors.

Reliably anti-Trump Wall Street Journal editors now confirm that “Hunter Biden made big money abroad by dropping the name of his powerful father, and the same tactic seems to have nearly helped him evade tax and gun charges.”

The newspaper’s writer William McGurn has called upon special counsel David Weiss who engineered the Delaware Hunter investigation fiasco to resign.

Recall how outrageous it seemed but a few years ago when Donald Trump audaciously called out a “fake media”?

Hate Donald Trump, love the guy, or maybe a mix of the two, give him credit for being entirely right on that.

Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and the graduate space architecture program. 

 

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Censorship Emotional abuse Free Speech How funny is this? Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. WOKE

The Cure is Worse Than the Disease.

Left at it's finest.

The Cure is Worse Than the Disease. Supporting the former things..

By ROBERT W MALONE MD, MS

The take home message that I get from this cartoon – is that we all have to get out and vote in the primaries, as well as general elections. It is in the primaries where we lose a lot of our conservative candidates – particularly in purple regions.
It is by getting out and voting, that things will change in the House and Senate.

 

Bonus points for anyone who can figure this out.

A meeting of heroes and martinis last night!

Dr Bhattacharya, Dr Ryan Cole, Dr. Maryanne Demasi, Dr. Simon Goddek, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jeffrey Tucker, among many others were at the Brownstone Conference and Gala in Dallas Texas for a great day of discussions, followed by a fantastic dinner.

Pictured: Naomi Wolf and Jill at the Brownstone Gala last night.

The expression √(1+tan²c) can be simplified using the trigonometric identity:

  • tan²c + 1 = sec²c
  • Therefore, the expression can be rewritten as:
  • √(1+tan²c) = √sec²c
  • The square root of sec²c is simply sec c.
  • So, √(1+tan²c) simplifies to sec c.
  • So the shirt reads:
    “I’m sec c and I know it”

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Free Speech Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Appeals Courts Pauses Trump’s Gag Order as He Fights Restrictions on His Speech.

The man,myth, the legend.

Appeals Courts Pauses Trump’s Gag Order as He Fights Restrictions on His Speech.

A federal appeals court temporarily lifted a gag order on Donald Trump in his 2020 election interference case in Washington on Friday — the latest twist in the legal fight over the restrictions on the former president’s speech.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decision puts a hold on the limited gag order to give the judges time to consider Trump’s request for a longer pause on the restrictions while his appeals play out. The appeals court said the temporary pause “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits” of Trump’s bid.

The court set oral arguments for Nov. 20 before a panel of three judges — all appointees of Democratic presidents.

The gag order, imposed by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, bars Trump from making public statements targeting prosecutors, court staff and potential witnesses in the case accusing him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election he lost to President Joe Biden. It still allows the former president to assert his innocence and his claims that the case against him is politically motivated.

Chutkan, who was appointed to the bench by former President Barack Obama reimposed the gag order on Sunday, after prosecutors pointed to Trump’s recent social media comments about his former chief of staff Mark Meadows.

It’s the most serious restriction a court has put on the speech of the GOP presidential primary frontrunner and criminal defendant in four separate cases. Gag orders are not unheard of in high-profile cases, but courts have never had to wrestle before with whether they can curtail the speech of a presidential candidate.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has said Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric about those involved in the case threatens to undermine public confidence in the judicial system and influence potential witnesses who could be called to testify.

Trump’s lawyers say they will go to the Supreme Court, if necessary, to fight what they say are unconstitutional restrictions on his political speech. The defense has said prosecutors have provided no evidence that potential witnesses or anyone else felt intimidated by the former president’s social media posts.

Appeals court Judges Brad Garcia, Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard will hear the case.

Garcia is a former Justice Department official who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan and was appointed to the bench last May by Biden. Millett is an Obama appointee who, before becoming a judge, argued several dozen cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Pillard was appointed to the court by Obama after serving as a Justice Department lawyer and professor at Georgetown University’s law school.

The appeals court could ultimately uphold the gag order or find that the restrictions imposed by Chutkan went too far. Either way, the issue is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, although there’s no guarantee the justices would take up the matter.

Categories
Commentary Economy Green Energy Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why © Toyot

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs.

Story by James Gilboy 11/02/2023

The Case for Hybrids Over EVs

To illustrate, we’re going to compare the on-road carbon emissions of a few models that are available with internal combustion, hybrid/PHEV, and electric powertrains: the Ford F-150, the 2022 Hyundai Kona and Kia Niro (which use the same chassis) and the BMW 3 Series and i4 (which also share their bones). Again, this is the question we want to answer: What’s the best use of a limited battery supply? Do we spread those materials across a bunch of hybrids, or cram them into a few EVs and leave the remainder with straight gas or diesel engines?

We can answer this by dividing how much each vehicle reduces CO2 emissions over its ICE counterpart by its battery capacity in kilowatt-hours. That’s tricky to imagine, so don’t bother: just look at this equation instead.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Provided by The Drive

Calculating battery use efficiency in electrified vehicles. The Drive

We need more data to fill that out, of course, and obtaining it is simple: The EPA’s FuelEconomy.gov publishes per-mile CO2 estimates, which also estimate the upstream emissions that come from gasoline production.

Things aren’t as straightforward for EVs, though, which the EPA lists as emitting no CO2. While true from an exhaust standpoint, making the electricity needed to charge them does generate CO2: an average of 386 grams of it per kWh in the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration. We can then estimate their hidden CO2 emissions with the equation illustrated below. (It’s the same formula we used to calculate the break-even point for EVs when it comes to charging and production emissions vs their on-road savings last year.)

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Provided by The Drive

Calculating the hidden emissions of EVs. The Drive

Armed with this data, we can then calculate how efficiently each electrified vehicle uses its battery. The equation we’ll use for that is shown above—remember, the goal is to reduce CO2 emissions as much as possible with a limited supply of batteries. And when you do the math, it’s pretty clear what the best option is.

Made with LiveGap Charts

Consider just how much battery your typical mass-market EV uses. Operating an F-150 Lightning may generate less than a third of the CO2 emissions of a gas F-150, but each one hoards 98 kWh of battery, most of which will be used only on the rare prolonged drive. Meanwhile, an F-150 Powerboost hybrid battery is just 1.5 kWh. It doesn’t achieve nearly the emissions reduction the Lightning does, but Ford could make 65 of them with the batteries that go into a single Lightning.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Provided by The Drive

That adds up, because if Ford sells one Lightning and 64 ICE F-150s, it’s cutting the on-road CO2 emissions of those trucks as a group by 370 g/mi. If it sold 65 hybrids—spreading the one Lightning’s battery supply across them all—it’d reduce aggregate emissions by 4,550 g/mi. Remember, this is using the exact same amount of batteries; the distribution is just different.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Provided by The Drive

The pattern holds true for the Hyundai/Kia combo and the BMWs, too—going full hybrid lowers emissions far more than building a handful of EV and a ton of gas cars. Split up an i4’s battery, and you can make seven 330e PHEVs, cutting 560 g/mi to one i4’s 266. Divvy up a Kona EV’s, and you can make seven Niro PHEVs worth 1,085 g/mi in reductions (one EV’s worth 239), or 41 regular Niro hybrids, for 4,797 g/mi eliminated.  Like the Ford, they make better use of a fixed battery supply by spreading it across a large number of hybrids, rather than concentrating them all in a single EV.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Provided by The Drive

Of course, EVs’ cases improve when they’re run exclusively on renewable energy. We can zero their per-mile CO2 emissions to simulate that, and it helps them out—but it doesn’t change the fact that their battery use is still inefficient. Powering a handful of EVs with renewables still just doesn’t have the immediate effect that a broader hybridization of new cars would.

It comes down to this: By using its limited battery supply on a small number of (expensive) EVs, the auto industry gets plaudits from investors and the public despite implementing an inefficient decarbonization scheme. It gets to greenwash itself with a handful of flashy products, while in fact not cutting CO2 emissions nearly as much as it could. The numbers strongly suggest that hybridizing as many new cars as possible is more effective, and to increasing degrees as battery technology evolves and supplies hopefully go up. That would allow hybrids to graduate to PHEVs, before being superseded by full EVs where appropriate.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here's Why

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why© Toyota

Most of the benefits of a full EV transition, however, would present themselves with widespread PHEV adoption. They offer enough range to make short trips on electric power alone, often at comparable up-front cost to an EV, but also the flexibility and efficiency of a hybrid powertrain for longer journeys. This lets them sidestep most of the obstacles to EV adoption, namely battery supply and poor charging infrastructure.

That said, there are reasons why PHEVs haven’t taken off. They’re less efficient and more complicated to produce and service than EVs or regular hybrids, not to mention heavier and more expensive than regular hybrids. They’re also not helped by their confusing names, never mind the PHEV acronym.

2023 Toyota Prius. Peter Nelson

Hybrids as a whole have taken a long time to capture market share, accounting for just 5.5 percent of the light vehicle market in 2021, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. That’s over a period of 24 years since the pioneering Toyota Prius entered production. EVs meanwhile achieved a similar market share in less than half that time, attaining 5.8 percent of the U.S. market in 2022 according to The Wall Street Journal. That’s only a decade since the paradigm-shifting Tesla Model S entered production.

But EV buyers benefited from more generous tax incentives than hybrid customers ever did, with the previous federal EV tax credit effectively conjuring the market out of thin air. Like it dictates the sizes and kinds of cars we buy, both directly via the Chicken Tax and indirectly a la CAFE regulations, government policy strongly influences which powertrains we choose.

So far, the government has favored the shiny, hype-driven solution of fast-tracking EV adoption, when the math suggests that’s suboptimal—at least for the short and medium term. If anything, it’s probably fair to say the over-emphasis on EVs is slowing the decarbonization of the auto industry for the time being. We can’t afford to overlook the role hybrids have to play here and now in favor of a far-flung future where every car on the road is pure electric.

Besides, when the 2023 Toyota Prius is one of the best-looking cars on sale today, it makes the pragmatic solution that much easier to choose.

Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why (msn.com)

Categories
Biden Cartel Censorship Corruption Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Progressive Racism Reprints from others. White Progressive Supremacy

Trump White House aide points finger at Jan. 6 National Guard call-up in 14th Amendment trial.

Telling the truth.

Trump White House aide points finger at Jan. 6 National Guard call-up in 14th Amendment trial.

Former Trump administration aide Kash Patel on Wednesday denied claims that President Trump chose not to call up the National Guard during the Jan. 6 attacks or delayed efforts to approve their deployments in testimony he provided in the former president’s 14th Amendment case in Colorado.

Patel, who was the chief of staff to acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller during the Jan. 6 attacks, argued that it was instead D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser who delayed calls for the National Guard in the days before the riot.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Government Overreach How sick is this? Opinion Politics Reprints from others. theft in office. White Progressive Supremacy

National Archives releases 82,000 pages of Emails Joe Biden Sent or Received on Three Private Pseudonym Accounts.

Joe's ALL SHOOK UP.

National Archives releases 82,000 pages of Emails Joe Biden Sent or Received on Three Private Pseudonym Accounts. It going to be interesting to see what’s in those e-mails.

To date, there is no indication from the National Archives in the court case that any of Biden’s email contain classified information. However, the president is under criminal investigation by Special Counsel Robert Hur for taking classified documents from his time as vice president and as a senator and storing them improperly in insecure locations in the garage of his Delaware home and a think tank office he kept in Washington D.C.

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2023-10/SELF-NARA-BidenPseudonymEmails.pdf