Red alert: Chinese boast of operatives 'inside America's core circle of power'

China influenced American policies for decades through a covert network of “old friends” — sympathizers and agents — who had penetrated the highest levels of the U.S. government and financial institutions before the Trump administration, according to an academic linked to the Chinese government.

Di Dongsheng, a professor and associate dean of the School of International Studies at Renmin University in Beijing, also suggested in a Nov. 28 speech that China’s Communist Party helped Hunter Biden, a son of presumptive President-elect Joseph R. Biden, obtain Chinese business deals.

On influencing the United States, Mr. Di said, he could not provide further details about the work of Chinese agents without compromising their identities. However, he said President Trump’s trade war with China upset decades of close ties between Washington and Beijing that the agent network facilitated.

Disputes such as the Navy’s EP-3 midair collision with a Chinese jet in the western Pacific in 2001 and the mistaken U.S. bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Serbia in 1999 were resolved within months because of the influence operations.

“Now, I’m going to drop a bomb: Because we had people up there inside America’s core circle of power, we had our old friends,” said Mr. Di, adding that he needed to speak carefully because “I can’t sell out these people.”

War Nuse is an excellent resources for this topic. specializes in it. If you click the link you wil find images with more info, too much html for me to copy. It appears that mil executions are lethal injection only, for federal crimes method is whatever manner of executions are legal in the state the crime was committed in. War Nuse specializes in crimes such as treason, insurrection, sedition and other seriuos crimes and who done em. Got banned on twtter so has a new account now.

War Nuse

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1220488754332340225.html

Transcribed Exchange Between Lindsey Graham And Brett Kavanaugh From The Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing.

This Exchange Will Be KEY In The Coming Years Of Revelations, Prosecutions, And Executions.

Graham: “So, When Somebody Says Post 9/11, That We’ve Been At War, And It’s Called ‘The War On Terrorism’. Do You Generally Agree With That Concept?”

Kavanaugh: “I Do, Senator, Because Congress Passed ‘The Authorization For Use Of Military Force’ Which Is Still In Effect, And That Was Passed, Of Course, On September 14th, 2001, Three Days Later.”

Graham: “Let’s Talk About The Law In War. Is There A Body Of Law Called ‘The Law Of Armed Conflict’?”

Kavanaugh: “There Is Such A Body, Senator.”

Graham: “Is There A Body Of That’s Law Called ‘Basic Criminal Law’?”

Kavanaugh: “Yes, Senator.”

Graham: “Are There Differences Between Those Two Bodies Of Law?”

Kavanaugh: “Yes, Senator.”

Graham: “From An American Citizen’s Point Of View, Do Your Constitutional Rights Follow You, If You’re In Paris, Does The 4th Amendment Protect You, As An American, From Your Own Government?”

Kavanaugh: “From Your Own Government, Yes.”

Graham: “Okay. So, If You’re In Afghanistan, Do Your Constitutional Rights Protect You Against Your Own Government?”

Kavanaugh: “If You’re An American In Afghanistan You Have Constitutional Rights As Against The U.S. Government.”

Graham: “Is There A Long Standing…”

Kavanaugh: “…That’s, That’s Long Settled Law.”

Graham: “Isn’t There Also Long Settled Law That, It Goes Back To Isenstrator Case, I Can’t Remember The Name Of It.”

Kavanaugh: “Johnson v. Eisentrager.”
Graham: “Right. That American Citizens Who Collaborate With The Enemy Are Considered ‘Enemy Combatants’?”

Kavanaugh: “They Can Be.”

Graham: “They Can Be?”

Kavanaugh: “They Can Be. They’re Often, Some, They’re Sometimes Criminally Prosecuted, Sometimes Treated In The Military System.”

Graham: “Let’s Talk About ‘Can Be’. I Think The…”

Kavanaugh: “…Under Supreme Court Precedent.”

Graham: “Right. There’s A Supreme Court Decision That Said, That American Citizens Who Collaborated With Nazi Saboteurs Were Tried By The Military. Is That Correct?”
Kavanaugh: “That Is Correct.”

Graham: “I Think A Couple Of Them Were Executed?”

Kavanaugh: “Yeah.”

Graham: “So, If Anybody Doubts There Is A Long Standing History In This Country, That Your Constitutional Rights Follow You Were Ever You Go, But You Don’t Have A Constitutional Right To Turn On Your Own Government, Collaborate With The Enemy Of The Nation...”

Graham: (Con’t) “...You’ll Be Treated Differently. What’s The Name Of The Case, If You Can Recall, That Reaffirmed The Concept That You Could Hold One Of Our Own As An ‘Enemy Combatant’ If They Were Engaged In Terrorist Activities In Afghanistan? Are You Familiar With That Case?”

Kavanaugh: “Yeah. Hamdi.”

Graham: “Okay, So The Bottom Line Is, I Want Every American Citizen To Know You Have Constitutional Rights, But You Do Not Have A Constitutional Right To Collaborate With The Enemy...”

Graham: (Con’t) “...There’s A Body Of Law Well Developed Long Before 9/11, That Understood The Difference Between ‘Basic Criminal Law’, And ‘The Law Of Armed Conflict’. Do You Understand Those Differences?”

Kavanaugh: “I Do Understand They Are Different Bodies Of Law, Of Course, Senator.”

(End Transcription)

During The Exchange Above Between Graham And Kavanaugh Two U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Were Referenced.

The First Was ‘Johnson v. Eisentrager’.

‘The Germans Argued That Their Courts-Martial Violated Their Fifth Amendment Due-Process Rights.’

Explaining Eisentrager | National Review
As the Supreme Court considers whether the U.S. Constitution protects the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay–it hears oral arguments today in the case–the central issue is the meaning of a case involvi…

https://www.nationalreview.com/2004/04/explaining-eisentrager-dave-kopel/

The Second Was ‘Hamdi v. Rumsfeld.’

‘Does The Constitution Grant An American Citizen Held In The United States As An Enemy Combatant The Due Process Right To Challenge The Factual Basis For His Detention Before An Impartial Decisionmaker?’

casebriefs.com/blog/law/const…

‘Charter Of The International Military Tribunal.’

‘18 U.S. Code Chapter 115.’

‘Unlike Other Human Rights Violations, War Crimes Do Not Engage State Responsibility But Individual Criminal Responsibility. This Means That Individuals Can Be Tried And Found Personally Responsible For These Crimes.’

‘The Death Penalty - U.S. Government Vs. U.S. Military.’

No Hangings, No Execution Squads, Lethal Injection Is The Sole Method.

Pain Coming?

Definitely.

I Cannot Emphasize Enough The Significance Of This Exchange Between Graham And Kavanaugh From Kavanaugh’s Confirmation Hearing.

The Entire Exchange Transcribed And In Screenshots.

Did The Guantánamo Upgrades Include A Lethal Injection Execution Chamber? A [Black Hat] Graveyard?

With The New Facilities And Increased Troop Deployments, Guantánamo Is Prepped And Ready For Military Tribunals, Sentencing, And Long Term Incarcerations.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.