Tag: dhs

Biden DHS Head Claims There Is “No Disaster” At The Border

Despite record numbers of encounters will illegal immigrants crossing the southern U.S. border in their thousands every day, including suspected terrorists, the head of the Biden Department for Homeland Security claimed under oath Wednesday that there is “no disaster”.

Alejandro Mayorkas made the claim while testifying before Congress regarding the border security budget and spending, and asking for more funding.

GOP Senator John Boozman told Mayorkas that “by every metric the situation at the border is a disaster,” adding that “what you’re asking for does nothing to get those numbers down.”

Mayorkas attempted to pivot the exchange to suggest Republicans are resistant to providing funding to hire more personnel at the border.

Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith further asked Mayorkas: “So the situation at the border, you’re saying, is not a disaster?”

“That is correct,” Mayorkas then answered.

Keep reading

Revealed: How The DHS’ Stanford “Disinformation” Group Censored 2020 Election-Related Online Speech

Fresh revelations have been loaded into the canon of public discourse around censorship, ready for primed debates on free speech and censorship in light of disturbing findings.

As per a report from the House Judiciary Committee, it appears that speech around US election integrity was potentially compromised before the 2020 polls. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials are implicated in the birth of a “disinformation” team at Stanford University. The ominously titled “Election Integrity Partnership,” based on newly uncovered emails and inside communications, apparently colluded with the DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to monitor and pressure the scrubbing of the digital landscape of certain online speeches alongside big tech cohorts.

The collaboration’s alleged censorship maneuver was revealed by a founding partner of the EIP, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. It was here in an email, dated 31 July 2020, that the EIP’s origin at the behest of DHS/CISA was acknowledged by Graham Brookie, Senior Director of the lab, who stated they were involved in a continuous discussion surrounding “disinfo.”

Notably, the inquest further concluded that the EIP’s operations were biased, leading to the censure of factual content, humorous commentary and political beliefs. Claiming a significant tilt towards the Democrats, the report accused the censors of brushing information under the rug while assuming the role of arbiters of truth. This led to Republican leaders, conservative media and even satire sites like The Babylon Bee getting unfairly flagged for “misinformation.”

Keep reading

House Drops Bombshell Report Revealing Much Deeper Fed Collusion With ‘Free Speech Police’ Than Previously Known

In the runup to the 2020 election, cybersecurity experts at the Department of Homeland Security and Stanford University decided they had discovered a major problem. 

The issue was not compromised voter rolls or corrupted election tallies but a “gap” in the government’s authority to clamp down on what it considered misinformation and disinformation – a gap identified by DHS officials and interns on loan to the agency from the Stanford Internet Observatory. Given what SIO research manager Renee DiResta described as the “unclear legal authorities” and “very real First Amendment questions” regarding this gap, the parties hatched a plan to form a public-private partnership that would provide DHS with an avenue to surreptitiously censor speech. 

The collaboration between DHS’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency and the Stanford outfit would quickly expand into a robust operation whose full extent is only now becoming clear. RealClearInvestigations has obtained from House investigators records revealing in previously undisclosed detail the nature and mechanics of the operation – the SIO-led Election Integrity Partnership.  

They show at a granular level the thousands of tweets and Facebook posts on topics from mail-in voting to aberrant election results – arguably core protected speech – that the public-private partnership flagged to social media platforms for censorship, much of which the platforms would suppress. 

The evidence shows EIP – sometimes alongside CISA – pressuring platforms to target speech that included statements by then-President Trump; opinions about election integrity rooted in government records and even think-tank white papers; and speculative tweets from statesmen and everyday citizens alike. RCI details notable instances here. 

Keep reading

FBI and DHS Heads Are Slammed for Pressuring Big Tech to Censor Americans

During a recent Senate Homeland Security Committee on “Threats to the Homeland,” the heads of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were blasted for their agencies’ roles in pressuring Big Tech companies to censor Americans.

In his opening statement, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) pointed to the 1976 Church Committee final report that documented decades of “widespread abuse by federal intelligence agencies against U.S. citizens” and expressed his fear that now, almost half a century after this report was published, “our federal government is still undertaking many of the same tactics that the Church Committee found to be unworthy of democracy, and occasionally reminiscent of totalitarian regimes.”

He continued by highlighting the ways the FBI, DHS, and other federal agencies operated “in a manner that is outside the scope of their authorities, wasting taxpayer dollars and infringing on the rights of Americans.” The senator from Kentucky pointed to the Fifth Circuit’s finding that the FBI and other federal agencies likely violated the First Amendment when coercing Big Tech companies to censor speech and noted that much of the speech the FBI flagged for censorship was truthful.

Paul also took aim at the FBI’s “misuse [of] its authority” under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a warrantless surveillance law that the FBI has used to spy on millions of Americans, including a senator, a state senator, and a judge.

Keep reading

DHS Taps Spooks Who Signed False Hunter Biden Letter for ‘Intelligence Experts’ Group

Three former intelligence officials who signed the debunked letter asserting the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian disinformation plot have landed senior intelligence positions in the Biden administration.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Monday appointed former CIA director John Brennan, former national intelligence director James Clapper, and former CIA officer Paul Kolbe to the 17-person Homeland Intelligence Experts Group, which will “provide advice and perspectives on intelligence and national security efforts,” according to a press release from the agency. The new committee will focus on “foreign nation-state adversaries, domestic violent extremists, cyber criminals” among other issues, according to Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis Ken Wainstein, who served as an attorney for Brennan and Clapper.

The department’s choices to lead its initiative are sure to garner controversy. Neither Brennan, Clapper, nor Kolbe have expressed any contrition for their role in the now-infamous letter released on Oct. 19, 2020, which alleged the trove of incriminating emails found on Hunter Biden’s laptop “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The three former spies signed the letter at the behest of former CIA deputy director Michael Morell, who told Congress he spearheaded the letter in order to help Joe Biden’s presidential campaign and to provide Biden with a “talking point” to use in his upcoming debate with Donald Trump. Morell initially contacted Brennan, his former boss at the CIA, to sign the letter. Brennan immediately agreed, writing in an email to Morell that the letter was a “good initiative.”

There is no evidence that Russia was involved in the release of Biden’s laptop, which contains emails and other correspondences about foreign business dealings that are at the center of House Republican investigations. FBI analysts authenticated Biden’s laptop in November 2019, according to an IRS agent who investigated the younger Biden for unpaid taxes.

Keep reading

U.S. Government Monitoring Pregnant Moms’ Social Media Posts

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) premier law enforcement agency monitors expecting parents’ online posts about their pregnancy and reproductive health issues, according to internal emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by the online privacy activist group, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

The U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE), the DHS agency that conducts criminal investigations and enforces U.S. immigration laws, is one of a handful of government agencies that use a software tracking tool called SocialNet.

SocialNet pulls citizens’ online data from a host of websites, including BabyCenter, a reference and pregnancy tracking site where new and expecting parents can post information about their health and pregnancy experiences.

Eva Galperin — cybersecurity director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a leading nonprofit defending civil liberties in the digital world — said the revelation is “concerning.”

“When people post about their pregnancies to BabyCenter, they’re usually doing it without the expectation that ICE or the local police are checking up on the status of their pregnancy,” Galperin told The Defender.

“ICE could potentially be reading information about your reproductive health and about your pregnancy or your children,” she said, adding that this is particularly concerning due to the current political climate surrounding pregnancy and abortion.

Keep reading

A Nation of Snitches: DHS Is Grooming Americans to Report on Each Other

“There were relatively few secret police, and most were just processing the information coming in. I had found a shocking fact. It wasn’t the secret police who were doing this wide-scale surveillance and hiding on every street corner. It was the ordinary German people who were informing on their neighbors.”—Professor Robert Gellately, author of Backing Hitler

Are you among the 41% of Americans who regularly attend church or some other religious service?

Do you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law?

Do you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car?

Are you among the 44% of Americans who live in a household with a gun? If so, are you concerned that the government may be plotting to confiscate your firearms?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the government and flagged for heightened surveillance and preemptive intervention.

Let that sink in a moment.

If you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you have just been promoted to the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

I assure you I’m not making this stuff up.

So what is the government doing about these so-called American “extremists”?

The government is grooming the American people to spy on each other as part of its Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships, or CP3 program.

According to journalist Leo Hohmann, the government is handing out $20 million in grants to police, mental health networks, universities, churches and school districts to enlist their help in identifying Americans who might be political dissidents or potential “extremists.”

As Hohmann explains, “Whether it’s COVID and vaccines, the war in Ukraine, immigration, the Second Amendment, LGBTQ ideology and child-gender confusion, the integrity of our elections, or the issue of protecting life in the womb, you are no longer allowed to hold dissenting opinions and voice them publicly in America. If you do, your own government will take note and consider you a potential ‘violent extremist’ and terrorist.”

Cue the dawning of the Snitch State.

Keep reading

DHS Uses Social Media Surveillance Tools To Detect Peoples’ Emotions

More and more reports are coming out detailing US government agencies’ desire to expand and “refine” their surveillance operations by including detection of sentiment and emotion, by using “AI”-powered software.

One of them is Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and which, according to internal documents obtained through freedom of information act (FOIA) requests, hired a third party in order to scan online posts for “risk terms and phrases.”

The company that provides this tool, Fivecast, does so in multiple languages. Fivecast also sells surveillance of video and image material through what it calls AI-enabled object recognition.

The company’s marketing itself as being able to scrape data for these purposes not only from large platforms such as Facebook and Reddit, but also 4chan, 8kun, and Gab.

It apparently doesn’t stop there, because there is also anti-trafficking and anti-propaganda capability baked in there somewhere, at least according to what are said to be leaked statements made by one employee.

404 Media reports about all these findings stemming mostly from a number of FOIA documents it has had access to, adding that CBP responded to the outlet’s queries by stating that data used in the process is “open source” (meaning, publicly available online).

Keep reading

Georgia fired a state trooper for his conduct. Now he leads Seward County’s Homeland Security task force.

The Seward County Homeland Security task force, sometimes using the controversial practice of civil asset forfeiture, seized $11.8 million from Interstate 80 drivers through civil and criminal forfeiture in its first 32 months.

The Seward-based head of that law enforcement task force trains and supervises officers – despite being barred from becoming a Nebraska police officer himself.

Blake Swicord was fired as a state trooper in Georgia after selling guns to a pardoned felon and allegedly sending sexually explicit texts and photos from his police-issued phone. Swicord, who claims he was wrongfully terminated, then was arrested on suspicion of battery following an alleged domestic violence incident with his then-girlfriend.

The Nebraska agency in charge of law enforcement training has twice denied Swicord admission, saying he didn’t meet the good character requirement for entry. That agency said Swicord failed to disclose his arrest or his firing on his application, as first reported by the Lincoln Journal Star. On Friday, the Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed his latest appeal.

Homeland Security officials told the Flatwater Free Press this week that they had no knowledge of Swicord’s previous dismissal or arrest when he was first placed into a Homeland Security role in 2019. They said they learned of Swicord’s troubles in April 2021, when an assistant U.S. attorney told the agency that the Nebraska Supreme Court had denied Swicord’s first appeal in his quest for police certification.

Swicord will remain in his job as task force coordinator as he continues his legal battle, Seward County Sheriff Mike Vance told a reporter during Tuesday’s Seward County Board meeting.

Vance has previously said he would have to let Swicord go if he can’t become a Nebraska police officer. Vance and dozens of Swicord’s colleagues have praised the 27-year police veteran for his leadership, interdiction skills and professionalism.

“Since his employment with my agency, Mr. Swicord has shown nothing but the upmost integrity and professionalism,” Vance wrote supporting Swicord in 2019. “After conducting this extensive background check I feel very sure that Mr. Swicord is a man of integrity and very honest at all times.”

The Police Standards Advisory Council, which oversees law enforcement certification in Nebraska, has acknowledged Swicord’s qualifications. It also ruled twice that he can’t go through training to become a Nebraska police officer.

“His actions in the application process demonstrate to this body that the petitioner cannot be considered to be a person who can be characterized as being truthful, honest or trustworthy,” the council wrote in its 2019 decision.

Keep reading

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ROUTINELY UNDERCOUNT USE-OF-FORCE INCIDENTS

TWO YEARS AFTER the murder of George Floyd ignited worldwide protests against police brutality, President Joe Biden ordered federal law enforcement agencies to update their policies on use of force. A new report, however, finds that the nation’s largest law enforcement agency ignored the spirit — if not the letter — of that order. 

The Department of Homeland Security has failed to accurately compile data on use-of-force incidents, according to a report issued Monday by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, or GAO. “We found the data were not sufficiently reliable for the purposes of describing the number of times agency law enforcement officers used force,” the watchdog agency wrote. 

DHS updated its use-of-force policy in February to limit the use of no-knock entries, require more frequent training, and ban chokeholds unless deadly force is authorized. The changes brought DHS into compliance with Biden’s May 2022 executive order, which required federal law enforcement agencies to align their use-of-force practices with new Department of Justice policy. The order also included guidelines for improved data collection and reporting on federal agencies’ use of force.

GAO’s report, authorized by Congress last year, determined that several agencies under DHS have been regularly undercounting use-of-force incidents. From April 2022 to July 2023, GAO audited four DHS agencies: Customs and Border Protection, the Federal Protective Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Secret Service. “If officers used force multiple times during one event, the agency counted only one instance of force,” said Gretta Goodwin, a GAO director for homeland security and justice.

Keep reading