White House blocks intelligence report warning of rising homeland terror threat(www.dailymail.co.uk)

15 pointsby heavyset_go4 hours ago4 comments

like_any_other4 hours ago
Why would the war with Iran mean rising homeland threat? Aren't we "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"? With how very proactive the US is with the first part of that strategy, the second part should be a breeze.
- bayarearefugee3 hours ago
  > Why would the war with Iran mean rising homeland threat? Aren't we "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"?
  It turns out that when you do things like bomb a school and kill 175 innocent people (most of them children) it radicalizes their friends and families against you.
  Who would have thought?
  - hshdhdhj44443 hours ago
    As a bonus you were already promoting the extremists who supported bombing those kids.
    So you not only have more extremism you have extremist groups opposing each other, so there are no good sides. Just extremists on both sides.
  - like_any_otheran hour ago
    It's not the "radicalization" (hating someone that bombed your school is hardly radical) that surprises me, but the location. With all of its bombs and drones and facial recognition cameras and PRISM internet surveillance, and last but not least, the Atlantic ocean, the US can't keep the fight "over there"?
keernan2 hours ago
>>The FBI, Homeland Security, and the National Counterterrorism Center were preparing to put out a joint intelligence statement on Friday to state and local authorities alerting them of a heightened threat due to the ongoing war in Iran, a senior DHS official said.
The WH blocked them from issuing the warning.
Trump's 'thin skin' comes first. Public safety isn't even a close second.
camillomiller3 hours ago
While I’ve always doubted the conspiracies around previous domestic incidents, I’m absolutely convinced that Orange Mussolini, Kegseth, Goebbels Miller and co would all be capable of conspiring to organize a false flag large scale event to declare national emergency and avoid losing/suspend the next election. This would be a first step.
- vetrom2 hours ago
  People that repeat this line evince a basic lack of U.S. civics understanding -- the Executive branch simply does not have the authority to cancel or postpone elections.
  If somehow an election still has not completed, there is no legal action short of an amendment which would provide authority for the terms of the Executive or of Congress to extend beyond their end date as well, as mandated by the 20th Amendment.
  If the above somehow happened, the next holder of the office would follow the Presidential Succession acts, as defined and amended by Congress.
  That said, the U.S. has not cancelled its elections, even in the face of significant unrest, the Civil War, or two World Wars. That sort of suspension doesn't even fit possible hypothetical situations.
  If you think they're going to just outright coup and push that past the whole of the other branches of government, say so. Something such as 'suspending elections', in the U.S. is simple fearmongering. If we call that out for engineering, it should also be called out in other fields.
  - solid_fuel2 hours ago
    > People that repeat this line evince a basic lack of U.S. civics understanding -- the Executive branch simply does not have the authority to cancel or postpone elections.
    They don't lack the understanding, they are simply paying enough attention to understand that the administration is already breaking the law and flagrantly violating the constitution. The prediction is not that the administration has the authority to cancel or postpone elections legally, but that they will try anyway. It is a reasonable belief, given all the crimes that they have committed so far.
    > If you think they're going to just outright coup and push that past the whole of the other branches of government, say so.
    That is the implication, yes. Before you dismiss it out of hand, remember that the president has already attempted a coup once before.
    So the situation we are in is apparent to anyone who has actually been paying attention: Congress is functionally non-existent right now, having given up congressional power over both taxation and war. The Supreme Court has demonstrated repeatedly that they are in the pocket of the administration, and even if they change their mind at the last minute when they realize they too will lose power under a dictatorship, they have no way to actually enforce their rulings.
    That leaves it to the states, roughly half of which will align with the administration, against the federal government. Bear in mind the distinguished individual currently in charge of the DoD is an alcoholic and religious extremist and under his leadership commanders throughout the military have started to refer to the war with Iran as a Holy War. [0] So it is unlikely the military will side with the constitution.
    [0] https://newrepublic.com/post/207270/military-leaders-iran-wa...
  - ytoawwhra922 hours ago
    People repeat the line because POTUS has publicly mused about exactly this.
  - bmitcan hour ago
    > the Executive branch simply does not have the authority to cancel or postpone elections
    The executive branch doesn't have the authority of nearly anything it now does. That hasn't stopped it.
- bigbaguette2 hours ago
  Putin did precisely this in the 90s to justify the second war in Chechnya so it became basically textbook
  - kgwxdan hour ago
    He's doing this one too.
al2o3cr2 hours ago
[dead]