拜登国土安全部利用 1 月 6 日来证明对特朗普支持者加强监视的合理性:法庭文件
Biden DHS Group Used Jan. 6 To Justify Supercharged Surveillance Of Trump Supporters: Court Docs

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/biden-dhs-group-used-jan-6-justify-supercharged-surveillance-trump-supporters-court-docs

由詹姆斯·克拉珀 (James Clapper) 和约翰·布伦南 (John Brennan) 等人组成的国土安全部“国土情报专家组”在 1 月 6 日抗议活动和海湖庄园袭击事件后寻求扩大国内监控的理由。 美国第一法律公司获得的泄露文件显示,该组织成员之间正在讨论收集有关所谓“国内暴力极端分子”(DVE)的情报,并给宗教人士、军事人员和特朗普支持者贴上此类标签。 此前,在特朗普政府领导下,分析人士认为收集有关美国人的情报是不合适的。 但1月6日之后,收集和报告方式发生了变化。 成员们就如何区分在线言论中的严肃意图和夸张进行了辩论,这表明保守派言论被视为“严肃”的偏见。 拜登政府在收到诉讼后解散了该组织,并向“美国第一法律”移交了文件,这引发了人们对 1 月 6 日事件和海湖庄园突袭后可能计划加强对社交媒体上政治异议的监控的担忧。 此外,与会者还承认 1 月 6 日之后部门对其任务的支持发生了转变,并且他们的工作变得政治化。

相关文章

原文

A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 'Experts Group' that included deep state 'laptop letter' partisans James Clapper and John Brennan, advocated using Jan. 6 and the Mar-a-Lago raid to justify expanding surveillance of political dissent.

Illustration via aflegal.org

This latest bombshell comes from America First Legal, which is suing the Biden DHS along with former acting DNI Richard Grenell over the September 2023 formation of the "Homeland Intelligence Experts Group," which they have accused of violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act due to lack of balance and transparency.

According to these new documents, one group member noted that "prior to January 6th” (i.e., under the Trump administration), analysts thought that “it was inappropriate to collect” intelligence on Americans."

After Jan. 6, however, they observed a change in collection and reporting methods.

Continued via X;

The documents indicate that under the Biden Administration, the federal government has used January 6 to justify expanding efforts to collect intelligence on what they deem “DVE” or “Domestic Violent Extremists.”

As the second installment of the #DeepStateDiaries showed, “DVE” or “domestic violent extremists” is the group’s term for people who are “religious,” “in the military,” or support President Trump.

The Brennan-Clapper group discussed “collection based on sites where they expect to see indicators,” suggesting that the federal government sought to monitor sites they viewed as “domestic extremism threats.”

Notably, one group member asked, “When you are looking at speech online, how do you know if it is serious? Political? Hyperbole?

The Biden Administration’s historical approach, as evidenced by these documents and the DOJ’s sentencing of Douglass Mackey to 7 months in prison for posting memes ahead of the 2016 election, is that speech online should be considered “serious” only when it comes from conservatives.

As another data point, later in the conversation, someone else again mentioned how “efforts to collect” intelligence have noticeably changed post-January 6.

In response to the lawsuit, the Biden administration agreed to dissolve the Experts Group and turn over documents to America First Legal, which is now blowing the whistle.

And yet another participant noted that the “support” for the “mission set” has changed post-January 6 at the “departmental” level and has “become political.”

The translation is that the committee appears to have been interested in DHS using the DHS’ Office of Intelligence and Analysis to push the bounds on activity—traditionally thought to be off limits—and is using January 6 as the excuse to do it.

The following statement, from an unknown Group member sheds some light on where that political support is coming from…

Recall that this Group was full of security state officials who aligned themselves with the political left (98% of the political contributions from the Group members went to Democratic candidates for office, whereas 1% went to Republican candidates for office).

Disturbingly, the group went on to discuss that around January 6, the “FBI testified that they were limited with what they could do with social media,” but that “action reporting” post-January 6 may have changed.

This suggests that the group was planning to potentially advise DHS to ramp up efforts to monitor political dissent on social media.

The group also discussed using the fabricated and illegal raid on President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago – where the FBI staged photographs to manufacture incriminating evidence – to justify its expanded activities...

With respect to Mar-a-Lago, one Group member said there was “reason to be concerned about a violent reaction” after the raid. 

The group also discussed whether this is “politically driven or in [their] mission space,” and one group member noted they should be aware of the “public optics” of this activity.

In considering threats of “violence,” the group also discussed a hypothetical scenario in which “there is a shooting with 12 injured” and whether that would require a national response from DHS and if it falls into a “domestic violent extremism” category.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com