wrongthink – Page 33 – Hellbound and Down

Whistleblower says FBI abuses security clearance process to ‘purge’ conservative agents

The Security Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is abusing security clearance approval to oust agents believed to be politically conservative, according to a whistleblower complaint reviewed by the New York Post.

(Article by Calvin Freiburger republished from LifeSiteNews.com)

The Post reported that the unidentified whistleblower alleges that the nation’s top law enforcement agency suspends or revokes clearances of agents on the basis of their political affiliations or lack of COVID-19 vaccination, because “if an FBI employee fit a certain profile as a political conservative, they were viewed as security concerns and unworthy to work at the FBI.”

The allegations directly contradict sworn testimony denying the practice to Congress last year by Jennifer Leigh Moore, the Security Division’s assistant director.

A nonprofit called Empower Oversight is representing the whistleblower and submitted his claims to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) on June 28. Empower president Tristan Leavitt also told Congress in a letter that the FBI is also retaliating against the agent for what he is trying to expose.

“The outcomes of clearance investigations and adjudications were often pre-determined by the Division’s acting Deputy Assistant Director and the acting Section Chief responsible for security clearance investigations and adjudications, who often overruled line staff and even dictated the wording of documents in the clearance process,” Leavitt wrote. “Over the last few years, the FBI has used the clearance process as a means to force employees out of the FBI by inflicting severe financial distress: suspending their clearance, suspending them from duty without pay, requiring them to obtain permission to take any other job while stuck in this unpaid limbo, and delaying their final clearance adjudication indefinitely – even years.”

One victim of such practices was former FBI staff operations specialist Marcus Allen, who last year was revealed to have lost his security clearance for circulating news articles and opinion videos related to the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot for “situational awareness,” according to an interim report by the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. “Because these open-source articles questioned the FBI’s handling of the violence at the Capitol, the FBI suspended Allen for ‘conspiratorial views in regard to the events of January 6th.’”

Keep reading

Outrageous: Biden’s Defense Department Labels Pro-Life Organizations as “Terrorist Organizations” During Anti-Terrorism Briefing

The Biden regime’s Defense Department has taken an unprecedented step by categorizing pro-life organizations as “terrorist organizations” during an anti-terrorism briefing held at Fort Liberty’s Directorate of Emergency Services, formerly known as Fort Bragg, on Wednesday.

This deeply concerning slide from an anti-terrorism brief was first exposed by citizen journalist Sam Shoemate, or @samour, on X.

“An anti-terrorism brief was held on Fort Liberty (Bragg) today where they listed several Pro-Life organizations as “terrorist organizations.” The slide you see here followed right after a slide about ISIS, a terror group in the Middle East,” Shoemate wrote on X.

The presentation slide, which has since circulated widely on social media, lists these pro-life organizations that oppose “Roe[sic] v. Wade” under a headline reading “TERRORIST GROUPS.”

The presentation specifically targets groups like National Right to Life and Operation Rescue, which have long been pillars of the pro-life community.

These organizations are dedicated to peaceful advocacy against abortion, grounded in the belief that every life is valuable and worth protecting.

The slide shockingly equates their activities, such as demonstrations, protests, mass demonstrations, Life Chain, The Rescue, The Truth Display, and picketing, along with counseling efforts at sidewalks and crisis centers, with terrorism.

It lists these legitimate forms of protest and counseling alongside heinous crimes like bombings and attempted murders.

Demonstrations, mass gatherings, and sidewalk counseling are all constitutionally protected activities under the First Amendment. Yet, this presentation portrays them in the same light as violent acts.

The pro-life movement has a rich history of non-violent advocacy, including iconic events like the March for Life, which draws hundreds of thousands of peaceful demonstrators to Washington, D.C., each year. Yet, the presentation disregards this legacy, instead painting a skewed picture that associates pro-life advocacy with violence and extremism.

The slide also displayed a New York license plate bearing the text “IM4IT” and a design promoting the “Choose Life” message.

Keep reading

“GAY FURRY HACKERS” CLAIM CREDIT FOR HACKING HERITAGE FOUNDATION FILES OVER PROJECT 2025

SIEGEDSEC, A COLLECTIVE of self-proclaimed “gay furry hackers,” has claimed credit for breaching online databases of the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that spearheaded the right-wing Project 2025 playbook. SiegedSec released a cache of Heritage Foundation material as part of a string of hacks aimed at organizations that oppose transgender rights, although Heritage disputed that its own systems were breached.

In a post to Telegram announcing the hack, SiegedSec called Project 2025 “an authoritarian Christian nationalist plan to reform the United States government.” The attack was part of the group’s #OpTransRights campaign, which recently targeted right-wing media outlet Real America’s Voice, the Hillsong megachurch, and a Minnesota pastor.

In his foreword to the Project 2025 manifesto, the Heritage Foundation’s president, Kevin Roberts, rails against “the toxic normalization of transgenderism” and “the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology.” The playbook’s other contributors call on “the next conservative administration” to roll back certain policies, including allowing trans people to serve in the military.

“We’re strongly against Project 2025 and everything the Heritage Foundation stands for,” one of SiegedSec’s leaders, who goes by the handle “vio,” told The Intercept.

In its Telegram post, SiegedSec said it obtained passwords and other user information for “every user” of a Heritage Foundation database, including Roberts and some U.S. government employees. Heritage Foundation said in statement Wednesday that SiegedSec only obtained incomplete password information.

The remainder of more than 200GB of files the hackers obtained were “mostly useless,” SiegedSec said.

Keep reading

Three Columbia deans permanently removed over disparaging texts containing ‘antisemitic tropes’

Three Columbia University deans have been “permanently removed” from their posts for sharing “very troubling” texts that “disturbingly touched on ancient antisemitic tropes,” school officials said Monday.

The three administrators — Susan Chang-Kim, Matthew Patashnick and Cristen Kromm — have been on leave since last month since it emerged they’d been involved in the disparaging text exchange that unfolded during a panel discussion about antisemitism on campus.

“This incident revealed behavior and sentiments that were not only unprofessional, but also, disturbingly touched on ancient antisemitic tropes,” Columbia president Minouche Shafik said in a statement.

“Whether intended as such or not, these sentiments are unacceptable and deeply upsetting, conveying a lack of seriousness about the concerns and the experiences of members of our Jewish community that is antithetical to our university’s values and the standards we must uphold in our community.”

Provost Angela Olinto said that “the three staff members involved have been permanently removed from their positions at Columbia College and remain on leave at this time.” It was not immediately clear what their current status was on staff.

Keep reading

A Law Professor’s Beef With a First Amendment ‘Spinning Out of Control’: Too Much Speech of the Wrong Sort

“The First Amendment is spinning out of control,” Columbia law professor Tim Wu warns in a New York Times essay. While Wu ostensibly objects to Supreme Court decisions that he thinks have interpreted freedom of speech too broadly, his complaint amounts to a rejection of the premise that the principle should be applied consistently, especially when it benefits speakers and messages he does not like.

The immediate provocation for Wu’s diatribe is yesterday’s Supreme Court decisions in two cases challenging Florida and Texas laws that aimed to restrict content moderation on social media. Although the justices remanded both cases for further consideration by the lower courts, Justice Elena Kagan’s majority opinion in Moody v. NetChoice made it clear that the “editorial discretion” protected by the First Amendment extends to the choices that social media platforms make in deciding which content to host and how to present it, even when those decisions are inconsistent, biased, or arguably unfair. And that discretion, she said, includes the use of algorithms that reflect such value judgments.

Although Wu has reservations about “the wisdom and questionable constitutionality of the Florida and Texas laws,” he thinks “the breadth of the court’s reasoning should serve as a wake-up call.” He faults the justices for “blithely assuming” that “algorithmic decisions are equivalent to the expressive decisions made by human editors at newspapers.” The ruling, Wu says, reflects a broader trend in which “liberal as well as conservative judges and justices have extended the First Amendment to protect nearly anything that can be called ‘speech,’ regardless of its value or whether the speaker is a human or a corporation.”

As Wu sees it, freedom of speech should hinge on the “value” of the ideas that people express. It is hard to imagine a broader license for government censorship.

Keep reading

Boy, 12, is referred to counter-extremist Prevent officers by his own school after declaring there ‘are only two genders’ and ‘I’m gay not queer’

A 12-year-old schoolboy has been investigated by counter-extremism officers after he declared there ‘are only two genders’.

The child made a video, posted online, in which he also stated: ‘There’s no such thing as non-binary’.

And in response to school bullies who mistakenly believed he supported transgender ideology, he said: ‘[I’m] gay not queer.’

Originally a homophobic slur, trans activists claim the word ‘queer’ now describes people who don’t adhere to ideas of sex or gender.

But the school told the boy’s mother they would refer him to Prevent, the Home Office programme that attempts to stop people becoming terrorists, amid fears he could be at risk of being radicalised by the far-right.

The Mail is aware of the boy’s identity but has agreed not to disclose it, and has also viewed the social media posts.

The boy’s mother was visited by Prevent and Northumbria Police officers this week, in a meeting she described as ‘an interrogation’.

Officers listed a string of allegations to illustrate the boy was at risk of radicalisation.

The boy’s mother said: ‘We think that he was targeted as the children believe gay people agree with trans ideology.

‘He made a video which I uploaded to YouTube where he said there ‘are only two genders’ and ‘I’m gay not queer’.

‘The school phoned up and were incensed by it. They said that they would refer him to Prevent for that video.

‘They said that he was at risk of radicalisation – not that he had been, but was a risk when he gets to 13 and is entitled to his own social media accounts.

Keep reading

	Majority Of North Ca… on Majority Of North Carolina Tru…
	Minnesota’s Fraud Sc… on If Fraud In Minnesota Looks Ba…
	Mining firm in Green… on Greenland mining firm hires Tr…
	freemattpodcast on Maduro’s Right-Hand Man Reappe…
	freemattpodcast on Trump Ending Automatic Green C…