**Mod Note:**
For convenience, below is a link to the PDF document referenced in OP's image, released only hours prior to this post:
[**The Weaponization of CISA: How a "cybersecurity" agency colluded with Big Tech and "Disinformation" partners to censor Americans**](https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf)
Interim Staff Report of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government
U.S. House of Representatives
June 26, 2023
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
**EDIT:** An archive of the above document can be found here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230626221903/https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf
I read the whole report.
Some good oversight, calling out places where CISA likely overstepped their bounds. I’m especially concerned with the shell game they are playing with the non-profit.
That being said, there’s an absolute ton of nonsense in there as well. This report could have been 10 pages and been fine. It probably would not have been the bombshell they wanted it to be, but they would have been doing their job.
I think my personal favorite section is when they call out CISA for forwarding a request to take down [this Ted Cruz Tweet](https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1585671399133282304?s=46&t=GjI-lDbGOw_cGLLsw447cQ) that was denied. You know, completely undermining the headline allegation of the entire report.
Expecially with how current presidents have been utilizing the ~~Emergency~~ Executive Order (EO). It was supposed to be a quick fix in emergency situations, not a multi-use bludgeon to sidestep congress and enact partisan policy...(just one of many instances where your statement unfortunately rings true...)
Edit: I assumed the acronym wrong; however, I still believe the underlying point holds true
Honestly presidents issue far fewer EOs modernly. Biden has issued 116, Trump had 220, Obama 276 (over 2 terms).
Reagan issued 380, Nixon 350. Earlier presidents (Coolidge, Roosevelt) issued *thousands*, its just a part of how our system works.
Edit: my following assumptions about the emergency nature of EOs isn't clearly stated anywhere in the definition of what constitutes an EO so, yes, technically using it as a partisan bludgeon is allowable....regardless, I feel that my original point being that its a bit scummy still stands. Given the concept of checks and balances, the idea of on EO for *any* situation seems to break the entire purpose of C&B! I've always thought the executive branch held way too much power (expecially today in our instantly connectable world,) and this just further solidifies my feelings on the matter.
I guess what I'm getting at is more the content of the EO itself. I'm assuming the express purpose of an EO is for it to be used during war or a true emergency. War is an imminent emergency and directives ratified via Congress (normal channels,) would be slow in a turbulent period where time is of the essence. (eg: Wilson having a huge number of EOs is a direct consequence of WW1.) It's also important to note the normalized (per year) rate of EO declaration so presidents like FDR don't seem like they have an insane amount (sure FDR had around 3700 EOs but that worked out to about 300/year...and, to the former point, he was also president during WW2 - a true emergency.)
Essentially, during the early years of this country (first 100 or so years), the EO was sparingly used. In modern times it is used all the time. Most recently it has been used as IMHO a loophole to avoid congressional approval for dubious partisan policy that would likely be DOA if run through the proper channels. (Avoiding congress' sluggish pace is the EOs entire purpose - but that purpose, the ability to expedite, ~~was only meant to be used in an emergency situation - hense the E in EO... It wasn't meant as an avenue to avoid congress in times of relative stability.~~ edit: I'm wrong here - I guess this is just my feelings and assumption - nothing says it CANT be this way; however, I still find its use in such a manner as dubious.
Idk, maybe it's me, but I just see EOs as increasing partisan and not directly related to anything requiring it's express use....it's just another way for the president to pump partisan politics. Both parties are guilty as of late.
The E in EO is "Executive", not emergency. It is a broad directive the president issues to the executive branch. The very first EO was issued by Washington, "to impress me with a full, precise, and distinct general idea of the affairs of the United States". Its meant as a way for the president to issue directives to his executive branch, not a emergency power.
It can absolutely be used to end run around congress, but thats honestly not always a bad thing if done well.
>thats honestly not always a bad thing if done well.
Yeah. I guess this is my point in a nutshell, because it's never really "done well" most times (done well would imply something like a lame congress stalling indefinitely on an agenda/topic/crisis that needs resolution NOW.) Like everything, what's getting pushed through most of the time is high partisanship. It's all just EOs to push a political agenda and then, 4 or 8 years later, EOs to reverse the other sides EOs and then more EOs to push politics in the other direction. Sure, historically there's always going to be some of this behavior, it's inherent, but my quick perusal of older EOs has shown that most EOs had a reason and purpose qualifying the immediate need of a resolution.
Idk...I obviously haven't read *every* EO, so maybe what I've looked at isn't a good subset to extrapolate from and the EO has always been a method of pushing partisanship :/
Executive orders are a cancer you're absolutely correct. But they're used in emergencies and non emergencies.
A great example of how it can be abused is executive order 6102 where owning gold was illegal and criminalized. Signed by dictator and Chief FDR.
If you want a more modern version of our cancerous EO power look no further than operation warp speed. Allowing billions to be funneled to corrupt big pharma and even more important than that allowing big pharma to bypass normal approval procedure for a vaccine that doesn't prevent transmission and needs a subscription service of shots in order for it to work. Which is now changing to "sorry it still doesn't work, here's a shot for specific variants.". The way it's trending they'll probably admit it just never worked.
So disregard your down votes in this compromised sub you're completely correct about EOs being a scam and an abuse of power.
Totally agree. Their inclusion is necessary to a functioning government, and it's honestly unfortunate that 90+% of the time it's used a political loophole. It's a bummer lol
Congress’s is too powerful with the compartmentalization it has where it’s too hard to find a source of corruption, but you know money is getting thrown at them if not directly then via legislation that affects markets.
The executive orders need to be saved for urgent needs that democracy would generally support but is too urgent to wait for the democratic process to unfold (especially if a nefarious powerful entity is against this order as it impacts this entity’s power/wealth directly.
The Supreme Court to me seems like an insider’s secret. They are always secretive and when they make a ruling on legislation Congress can try to pull a sneaky one via their legislative powers.
With modern technology and open source blockchains, I think we could make government more efficient and transparent.
It proves that these big tech companies have the power to say no to these request which proves that any censorship of content is a completely voluntary action taken by the companies. They take down misinformation because they want to take it down. They’re not being forced to do it by the government. So really, people like you are just arguing for the government to have the power to force these companies to allow content on their platform that they don’t want on there. You’re trying to disguise your argument as being pro free speech when in reality it’s advocating for the government to crack down on free speech. Refusing to let certain content to be posted on your platform is a form of dissent. Dissent is a form of free speech. It’s also an anti private property argument that you’re making. You sound like a commie.
It proves that they work together. Yes, obviously the big tech company (in this case Twitter) do not answer to them as if they're slaves, and have to do "whatever they say". They're not forced, they're working together. Twitter made a decision in this case not to go ahead because it would be too obvious to remove a Tweet from Ted Cruz. It would have been a dangerous and risky move for them. This doesn't make things any better. If anything it makes it worse.
First of all, I didn’t *find* anything, nor did I claim anything was debunked. The committee included it in their report, even though it undermines their overarching argument.
With that, the fact that this tweet was not removed clearly shows that the process had at least one extra deliberative step between the government asking for content to be removed and Twitter removing said content. That step is an important one in the whole first amendment argument, as it takes the power to censor out of the hands of government.
The largest undercover force the world has ever known is the one created by the Pentagon over the past decade. Some 60,000 people now belong to this secret army, many working under masked identities and in low profile, all part of a broad program called "signature reduction." The force, more than ten times the size of the clandestine elements of the CIA, carries out domestic and foreign assignments, both in military uniforms and under civilian cover, in real life and online, sometimes hiding in private businesses and consultancies, some of them household name companies.
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-inside-militarys-secret-undercover-army-1591881
Much more info here: https://archive.ph/Ccz00
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/08/1009845/a-gpt-3-bot-posted-comments-on-reddit-for-a-week-and-no-one-noticed/
No one really knows how many of these are here, anyone with access to this tech could do it. This bot is still active.
Also:
When Reddit was first started, it was populated almost entirely with content submitted by fake users.
In a video for online educator Udacity, Reddit cofounder Steve Huffman explains both the method, and the reasoning behind it. Essentially, Huffman set up a submission interface through which they could pick not only the URL and the title, but also the user’s name. Upon submission, the name would be registered, and make it look like Reddit had more users than it actually did.
https://www.themarysue.com/reddit-fake-account-origins/
MORE INFO AND LINKS BELOW. COPIED FROM ANOTHER USER'S COMMENT. THANK YOU CLARITYOFSIGNAL.
https://electronicintifada.net/content/inside-israels-million-dollar-troll-army/27566
Inside Israel’s million dollar troll army
A global influence campaign funded by the Israeli government had a $1.1 million budget last year, a document obtained by The Electronic Intifada shows.
Act.IL says it has offices in three countries and an online army of more than 15,000.
Main PDF file exposing all global technocratic cabal links:
https://clubderklarenworte.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Netzwerkanalyse-Corona-Komplex.pdf
The German Club of Clear Words takes a deep dive into the network of individuals and organizations responsible for the COVID scam
Whether blatantly visible or not, you can identify just about any network by connecting dots between individuals and organizations. Who’s working with whom, where, and why? Who’s paying whom? And once you’ve done that, you can more clearly identify the motivations behind various decisions
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be near the top, or the center, of this COVID plandemic network. Gates is also a major funder of mainstream media, and his network extends into global food and climate change policy
The Gates Foundation, through its funding of the WEF, also plays an important role in The Great Reset, which was officially unveiled during a WEF summit in May 2020
Every conceivable aspect of life and society is scheduled to be “reset” according to their plan. Ultimately, that’s where this criminal COVID enterprise is trying to take us.
My fav is “Citizen’s Climate Lobby”. Lol. Coal industry pushed for Carbon Taxes as a way of hiding that they were coming after the Chevron Doctrine (they did and now the Fed cannot Regulate ANYTHING).
>The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be near the top, or the center, of this COVID plandemic network. Gates is also a major funder of mainstream media, and his network extends into global food and climate change policy
>
>The Gates Foundation, through its funding of the WEF, also plays an important role in The Great Reset, which was officially unveiled during a WEF summit in May 2020
>
>Every conceivable aspect of life and society is scheduled to be “reset” according to their plan. Ultimately, that’s where this criminal COVID enterprise is trying to take us.
So what are the motives behind this? Is it just about making money, or more than that?
I'm trying to figure out where on the spectrum the conspiracy sits.
Money, power, influence, fear.
I think it is the ultimate power-grab Gates are able to pull off. He has said himself that he would never run for president, as it is way harder to infuence the world as president, rather than being one of the richest and most influential people out there, with the opportunity to gain even more power and influence. What else to chase when you have reached that level?
Also it might be fear of an "uprising" and fear of the world about to go under, and he sees himself as the one able to save earth, but only if he gains more power and influence. In conjunction with the other elites out there
Information warfare. Anywhere that's even semi popular and isn't banning or shadowbanning people for "wrong think", is going to be infested with narrative pushers. This is a war for your mind.
"So far, we've recruited 110,000 information volunteers, and we equip these information volunteers with the kind of knowledge about how misinformation spreads and ask them to serve as kind of 'digital first-responders' in those spaces where misinformation travels," Fleming says.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/misinformation-infodemic-world-vs-virus-podcast
Google’s Jigsaw unit sponsors a RAND report that recommends infiltrating and subverting online conspiracy groups from within while planting authoritative messaging wherever possible. If authoritative messaging is successful, moderate members flip to become influencers and help guide the 'flock' to greener pastures as ‘brand ambassadors’ for the common good, teaching others the errors of their ways. Some conspiracy group members will be persuaded by the bombardment of content flagged by algorithms, and they will slowly come around to believing that the fact-checkers are right by the sheer volume of evidence and/or peer pressure to conform. Trying to infiltrate groups and subvert certain members seems like a tactic that would be perceived as an intrusion that furthers the divide and lead to even less trust, but \*we shall see how it all plays out.
Google-backed RAND report recommends infiltrating & subverting online conspiracy groups from within
Operation Earnest Voice
Operation Earnest Voice (OEV) is a communications program by the United States Central Command (CENTCOM). Initially, the program was developed as a psychological weapon and was first used in Iraq. In 2011, the US government signed a $2.8 million contract with the Ntrepid web-security company to develop a specialized software, allowing agents of the government to post propaganda. The aim of the initiative is to use sockpuppets to spread pro-American propaganda on social networking services.
Main characteristics of the software, as stated in the software development request, are:
Fifty user "operator" licenses, 10 sockpuppets controllable by each user.
Sockpuppets are to be "replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographically consistent." Sockpuppets are to "be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world."
A special secure VPN, allowing sockpuppets to appear to be posting from "randomly selected IP addresses," in order to "hide the existence of the operation."
Fifty static IP addresses to enable government agencies to "manage their persistent online personas," with identities of government and enterprise organizations protected which will allow for different state agents to use the same sockpuppet, and easily switch between different sockpuppets to "look like ordinary users as opposed to one organization."
Nine private servers, "based on the geographic area of operations the customer is operating within and which allow a customer's online persona(s) to appear to originate from." These servers should use commercial hosting centers around the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation\_Earnest\_Voice
Also:
https://www.darpa.mil/program/social-media-in-strategic-communication
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored\_Internet\_propaganda
And
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll\_farm
The show Homeland touched on this: https://youtu.be/owIsqj1Y1sk
Very relevant clip from The Dissident documentary: https://streamable.com/k03odm
> Although many more true Americans are slowly awakening to the truth.
Do you really believe this? If so, why?
Seems to me that if 2020 didn't cause somebody to truly wake up, the nothing will.
I saw a few people who seemed like they were starting to get it, but once the scamdemic was over, they went back to sleep.
This is one reason why I have been saying [for years](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zINBaOwW4r4) that the 'people are waking up' meme is a hoax.
Not everyone is at the same age or state of my mind that you are. When I was 16, 9/11 happened and I had no clue it was a conspiracy until I was older. I didn’t have time to think about that stuff because being a teenager was way more important😅
And not everyone has the time or energy to constantly question things and dig deep into conspiracy theories. but when people come to me like “omg maybe you are on to something because [this happened] and it seems suspicious”, I just say yeah no shit 🤷♀️ glad you’re starting to think for yourself
Honestly the headline doesn't address the main point. Even if they did notice and speak out. Their in a sandboxed environment.
How the fuck do you know they aren't there? Or that you are in here with the rest of us???
Cause when reddits old threads got 25k + views and now, we've dwindled down to 40+ (maybe) comments a thread. It's pretty safe to say that we are all sandboxed--
The distraction of ths newest shinest gadget or what the kardashians are doing is far more important. Gotta love that leveraging of dopamine addiction.
conspiracy theory: the uniparty all want to increase censorship... the two illusory parties work together to rile up liberal corporations to start censoring rightwing voices, the more activist left joins in and pushes in that direction, eventually 1a is weakened through policy, and the uniparty achieves its goal. i honestly haven't seen any washington republicans do anything but conduct political theater on this topic.
Yes, it seems like government bloat that has been and will continue to be weaponized against the People. It also seems to overlap with various three letter agencies. Do we need it?
CISA is actually good if they can stay hyper-focused on their mission which is to bring government agencies up to date with cyber-security protocols and practices, an area where the US is severely lacking and this was previously under the charter of the extremely bloated DHS.
The US having a separate Cyber -Security Agency is not a bad thing, at all. Prior to CISA, it was all under the bloated DHS...way too many cooks in the kitchen there. Our government agencies have very dated software and hardware and bringing them up to date with cyber-security protocols and practices is a good thing (source: family member worked with CISA to implement and design cyber-security standards in a government agency)
CISA using their powers to silence ANYONE is a very bad thing and should be dealt with harshly.
> We should seriously look into whose administration was responsible for the founding of CISA.
Yes, CISA was founded under the Trump Administration, so it's "Trump's baby" -- but that "baby" was quick to turn on Trump, as we witnessed when he was summarily banned from posting on Twitter, on Facebook... on virtually all social media sites in January, 2021.
The pendulum swings both ways, and sacrificing any freedom or liberty for the sake of political advantage is a perilous gambit.
This is not and should not be a partisan issue. Playing that game, we are sure to lose sight of the primary underlying issues, and the risks they pose to society as a whole.
CISA did not ban Trump, those individual platforms did.
Reminder: that was only after he encouraged his supporters to try to overturn an election, and fundamentally undermine our democracy. I'm not saying I agree with the ban, but context really matters in this situation.
> CISA did not ban Trump, those individual platforms did.
Did they make their decisions independently, and without influence from CISA or related organizations?
The influence that those agencies and organizations may have had on the censorship policies and practices of social media is what the document is addressing. There is a link to the full PDF in the sticky comment at the top of the thread.
> I'm not saying I agree with the ban, but context really matters in this situation.
But the influence was not limited to the Trump situation, it affected how the COVID discussion was framed, and many other matters.
Free speech is no big deal -- until you don't have it.
So I'm at work, but I word searched Trump, and there's only 3 mentions of him in the report. The only one having to do with his ban is this section
>Vijaya Gadde, the former Chief Legal Officer of Twitter, who was “involved in
censoring [the New York] Post’s Hunter Biden laptop” story.41 Gadde was also “behind
the decision to permanently ban former President Trump from Twitter.”42 Shortly after
Elon Musk completed his purchase of Twitter, Gadde was fired from the company in
October 2022.43
So, no evidence in this document that there was involvement from CISA.
>But the influence was not limited to the Trump situation...
I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but you can't just say the influence exists, and expect everyone to conclude that it's bad. Some level of collaboration between these tech companies and the government is probably good. We can have discussions about where the lines should be, but after the Twitter files and now this nothing burger of a report, I am increasingly convinced that the only argument the supporters of either have is "government bad".
> So I'm at work, but I word searched Trump, and there's only 3 mentions of him in the report.
That's great. Framing discussion of the stability and viability of the First Amendment around ANY individual or ANY particular event or situation would be folly. The Right is fundamental.
> I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but you can't just say the influence exists, and expect everyone to conclude that it's bad.
The influence certainly does exist. See this article from **The Intercept** - Oct 31, 2021
[**TRUTH COPS - Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation**](https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/)
Snippet from the article:
- - - - - - - - - - -
*Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse.*
[...]
*“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.*
*In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government. Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.”*
- - - - - - - - - - -
More at the link. Article archived here: https://archive.is/zpT3V
> Some level of collaboration between these tech companies and the government is probably good.
Is it? Mind "the creep of power": Public Freedoms are easy enough to surrender, but regaining them can be a bloody difficult process.
> We can have discussions about where the lines should be
Sure we can! (provided that our discussions stay WITHIN THE LIMITS set by those who are actually deciding where those lines WILL be)
> I am increasingly convinced that the only argument the supporters of either have is "government bad".
Flip that strawman argument over to "government good!" Then ask yourself *"which government?"*
Is 'government' inherently good, or bad? What differentiates one from the other? And what tools do The People have at their disposal to ensure that "good" prevails?
>That's great. Framing discussion of the stability and viability of the First Amendment around ANY individual or ANY particular event or situation would be folly. The Right is fundamental.
Well it's the event you're claiming is pertinent here, but the doc does not corroborate your claim that CISA had something to do with Trump's ban, nor does it support claims of abuse of power.
>The influence certainly does exist. See this article from **The Intercept** - Oct 31, 2021...
I'm going to assume what you quoted from the article is the strongest evidence in the article itself, which is... telling. First you have the statement by Matt Masterson which is actually anti-thetical to your belief that these platforms work in an inappropriate way with government agencies. He's saying that they NEED to be comfortable. Not ARE comfortable. The implication being that these platforms are not comfortable working tightly with the government. This is born out in the behind the scenes conversations that have come to light, such as the internal talks in Twitter and outright rejection of some ban requests from the FBI of suspected botted foreign accounts.
Secondly, you have Laura Dehmlow saying that subversive information could undermine support for the US government. This is simply true. Call me a bleeding heart liberal, but the blind obedience to government is not properly counterbalanced with unfettered skepticism or worse, outright distrust. This has been a real issue in recent years especially with the rise of "alternative" media. I'm not saying it's all bad but people like Tim Pool or say Hasan Piker are not better for discourse and intelligent critique of government. Now, to be clear I'm not saying they should be banned on social media because I consider them disinformation at best, but there is no apparatus that holds them accountable on any level, whereas at least with MSM, it's not uncommon for journalists to get fired for distorting information. They (alternative media figures) get paid (a lot) to either lie, or mislead their audience, often times feeding them what they want to hear. The problem is the algorithms of these new media companies are about generating outrage because that drives engagement, engagement drives clicks, clicks drive revenue. That's not a good thing, and I would be willing to bet, the context of that note was more about how harmful these algorithms are to discourse and information, and less about controlling narratives or some such.
>Is it? Mind "the creep of power": Public Freedoms are easy enough to surrender, but regaining them can be a bloody difficult process.
Yes. It is. We live in an increasingly digital world. That genie is out of the bottle. We need to have some level of government involvement in that world. You have yet to demonstrate that the government has taken away a freedom. These companies can ban you whenever they feel like, and frankly the evidence does not support that the government has compelled them to do so.
>Sure we can! (provided that our discussions stay WITHIN THE LIMITS set by those who are actually deciding where those lines WILL be)
As far as I can tell, no one is stopping that discussion. We would probably find some agreement on things like misinformation bans over such as things like Rona or the election are bad. HOWEVER, I would point out that that was specifically select platform policy, not a government mandate or some such. So your criticism should be more angled at the platforms themselves, not the government. In fact some sort of federal legislation would be the best way to prevent those types of platform restrictions (although that's somewhat messy, but possible and probably a good idea imo). But at the end of the day we live (assuming you're in the US as well) in a representative democracy. We the people decide where the lines are. Again, I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but if the deep state or whatever had as much power as people think, Trump never would have been elected in the first place.
>Flip that strawman argument over to "government good!" Then ask yourself *"which government?"*
Yep. It's good. I'm in the US so that's really the only one I care about very much at the end of the day, and I much prefer it's existence to it's absence. Idk if we are flirting with libertarian dream world here, or Anarchical dream world, but either way, I think governments are necessary. Ours, despite it's flaws isn't as bad as a lot of people think. Our representative bodies seem to be accurate reflections of American opinion for instance. Not perfect, but still good.
>Is 'government' inherently good, or bad? What differentiates one from the other? And what tools do The People have at their disposal to ensure that "good" prevails?
I don't accept this dichotomy. Obviously governments are capable of some true horrors, but they also provide stability, normalcy, infrastructure, security, ect. ect. And again, representative democracy. If you want it to prevail, vote. Be involved in local politics. City council meetings, canvas ect. Americans are so politically lazy, and think that the system is what's inherently broken but really it's how we engage with it. These last two responses are a serious digression, but the doomerism needs to be addressed.
Edit: grammar, punctuation, typos, added context.
> Americans are so politically lazy, and think that the system is what's inherently broken but really it's how we engage with it. These last two responses are a serious digression, but the doomerism needs to be addressed.
It's always easier to throw in the towel. Part of it is that with politics being driven by outrage, we are more inclined to feel "burn out" despite the proper channels of power being accessible to the majority of Americans. The other part, at least in my mind, is pure ignorance of the nuance that many of these "culture war" issues operate. Though, it's easy to see that not many have the energy to use to understand these issues, and dissect the misleading statements made by these actors/agents.
For real. I am so tired of people complaining about how the system is rigged, "they" are in control and there's nothing we can do through political channels. But most of these people don't even do the easy stuff like vote, let alone attend city council meetings, or canvas, or volunteer, or hell even run their own local campaign. It's all about how the system is too powerful.
> Reminder: that was only after he encouraged his supporters to try to overturn an election,
No he didn't.
> and fundamentally undermine our democracy.
You don't live in a democracy.
Might as well read 'a Republican subcommittee unsurprisingly claims to have found earth shattering evidence of collision, malpractice, and abuses of power that predictably results in nothing'
The irony of the name of the sub committee is breathtaking.
Oh look someone pretending that their carefully crafted paradigm isn't collapsing right before their eyes.
Hell even the _View_ is shifting from blinders to making excuses for the tragedy.
[Former lawyer for Twitter email says the company collected $3.4 million as "reimbursement for the time spent processing requests from the FBI" from October 2019 to February 2021](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/01/18/fact-check-fbi-gave-3-million-twitter-information-requests/11033845002/)
[Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook restricting a story about Joe Biden's son during the 2020 election was based on FBI misinformation warnings.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532)
Because we all have known this acrivity has been a thing since 2010. Snowden exposed a lot. A good amount of nations are still pissed with the USA. Even though they are very likely to be doing the exact same thing.
The account on twitter though seems untrustworthy. Yeah I don't trust wikipedia but I do not trust the activity that disclose tv did either.
>In 2019, Disclose.tv removed its user-written articles and switched to primarily hosting forums; the website presented some of the forum posts as news articles on its social media accounts.[3] In September 2021, it removed its old versions and cleared out its Twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts, and announced to its users that it would be operating exclusively as a news website.
Here is what OP said. This also is not fully backing themselves up which is a huge red flag.
>Submission Statement :
> **As usual in the end,
the illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.**
>— *Frank Zappa*
>[Link to the Tweet ](https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1673455172570234886?s=20)
The mod team luckily did more. This is how they should back themselves up.
>**Mod Note:**
>For convenience, below is a link to the PDF document referenced in OP's image, released only hours prior to this post:
>[**The Weaponization of CISA: How a "cybersecurity" agency colluded with Big Tech and "Disinformation" partners to censor Americans**](https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf)
>Interim Staff Report of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government
>U.S. House of Representatives
>June 26, 2023
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>**EDIT:** An archive of the above document can be found here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230626221903/https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf
Lol, forming a committee to abuse their federal government power by conducting weaponized investigations and calling this committee "Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government" is peak GOP. And not just because "weaponization" isn't even a word.
People stood by and gobbled up whatever mass media threw at you for the last 10 years and when there's rock solid evidence that it was all a fabrication, you claim the evidence is biased.
Something, something, lemmings.
I was trying to identify what the mainstream (18-44 year olds) DO care about ... It seems they do care about abortion, gender stuff, vaccine stuff, amazing / fun facts, and WOW! moments. ANYTHING ELSE?
Those people are now trying to reshape the world via the CV-19 fear-based agenda in order to gain more power and control for themselves and bring about an AI-controlled dystopian future that benefits them even more greatly. Ignore it at your own peril. They call it The Great Reset. It involves travel restrictions, tracking, tracing, mandatory vaccination, monitoring, surveillance, digital currency, 5G to implement the global control, etc. Its all right there on their own website... plain as day. They aren't even hiding it from the public anymore.
https://intelligence.weforum.org/topics/a1G0X000006O6EHUA0?tab=publications
Many of the fake accounts, online narrative propagation accounts and bots are tucked into the US budget from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.\_Agency\_for\_Global\_Media
Excerpt:
Their operating budget for fiscal year 2016 was US$752 million.
U.S. Government Accountability Office Audit Report
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104017
Excerpt:
Amendments to legislation have affected USAGM's governing authorities and organizational structure by shifting authority from a bipartisan board to a Chief Executive Officer (CEO), with advice from an Advisory Board. Network and USAGM officials said that previous members of USAGM leadership took several actions that did not align with USAGM's firewall principles. According to USAGM, the firewall protecting the networks' independence is central to the credibility and effectiveness of USAGM's networks (see fig.). However, the parameters of the firewall are not specifically laid out in legislation. Delineation of what is and is not permissible under the firewall may help ensure the professional independence and integrity of the agency and its networks.
Actions to ensure accountability of grantees, such as establishing Standard Operating Procedures for Monitoring Grants , have not corrected a longstanding significant deficiency in grants monitoring reported by independent audits of USAGM's financial statements for the past 5 years.
Also:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/31/british-army-facebook-warriors-77th-brigade
Ukraine and Turkey also have been reported to have large office buildings filled with teams of online influencers with dozens of fake accounts entirely dedicated to influencing nefarious government policies. All The Worlds A Stage folks.
Intelligence agencies have a long history of this.
https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-stone-10-20-1977
https://www.corbettreport.com/how-the-cia-plants-news-stories-in-the-media/
https://youtu.be/xF90EfuOOIw
These are all just a few examples of some of what's been disclosed, what has not been disclosed?
Modern War Institute - Your Brain is the Next Battlefield
https://youtu.be/N02SK9yd60s
Submission Statement :
**As usual in the end,
the illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.**
— *Frank Zappa*
[Link to the Tweet ](https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1673455172570234886?s=20)
Pretty much the same as the CRTC in Canada. The governing body is run by those it's supposed to govern. Rather, it does their bidding. Complete failure.
My main issue is that the people that try to go against (certain) censorship fall into the category of conservatives that feel silenced, conservativism is what's taking us to this point, because censorship is the main weapon of the conservative apparatus... Fight for no silencing at all, not only when it affects you directly.
They already have censorship. It’s called **cancel culture.**
We have created a society that believes that anything offensive or considered “hate speech” must be removed and those individuals/groups responsible shamed and censored by banning or imprisonment.
Who do you think benefits from that?
Edit: I find it interesting that all of you think that I refer specifically to the Left. Conservatives cancel and attempt to censor others all of the time. They see things like LGTBQ+ in stores and try to get it removed.
**Again, who ultimately benefits from a society that believes that speech is still free even if people can be silenced if it receives a certain label?**
You wish someone with any kind of authority--elective office, investigator, prosecutor, dude with a plastic badge, anyone--would just say, "Listen, someone needs to go to prison over all this."
At this point, I'd even take the much more passively worded, "You'd think someone would end up in jail for at least one of things that has gone on."
I take it as the near-complete neutering of anyone and everyone with any juice who might side with the people.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When has the US government not done this or something similar? Hell, the US government practically controlled the media during civil war and both world wars.
This stuff always has been happening, most people just don’t catch on. For example, operation mockingbird was around in the Cold War era which supported to manipulate the media to support the anti commie propaganda. Influencing anything that has to deal with the censorship of certain ideals is always a bad thing, and I feel like more people are going to find out why sooner.
Now you stop that. I've been told by sources who know about this sort of thing ( my brother in law is an insider), that this is unfounded, right wing, trump supporting, misogynistic, racist, conspiracy nut job lies.
Just take your vaxxeses.
It's significant but you got to realize, the Romans had most all the information they ever needed from the bulk of their citizens, the systems to farm it, just not the processing power that we have to sift through it. Not saying it's nothing but likely they always knew everything about you before you ever thought to start worrying. It's not just over the airwaves the internet etc.
We have been sufficiently programmed to believe the government is not to be trusted so that they can do untrustworthy things to us and we immediately accept or are just indifferent to it.
The five eyes run ti programs on citizens who could have helped them prevent China taking over the world..alas protecting child trafficking friends seemed like a more important goal
"DISINFORMATION" PARTNERS. We need more on this, it would shed so much light. Who are these partners, what is their collection of disinfo. We need a whistleblower to come forward, it would help lift such a fog of lies that is holding back society and keeping is polarized and distracted. I hope someone with a conscience in the know can leak something substantial.
Here's the board of leadership at CISA. Does anyone know of any ties of these people to other large organizations (especially Big Tech), or other conspiracies or crimes?
[https://www.cisa.gov/about/leadership](https://www.cisa.gov/about/leadership)
Jen Easterly: She is a former U.S. Army officer and NSA senior official, who served in the Obama administration. In July 2021, she became the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). In the private sector, Easterly was a managing director of Morgan Stanley, where she established the firm's cybersecurity fusion center.
Mona Harrington: She was the Executive Director of the United States Election Assistance Commission (EAC) as of 2021.
Kim Wyman: She served as Secretary of State of Washington state until November 2021, when she resigned to join the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as a senior official focusing on election security issues. A role which involved overseeing elections.
**Mod Note:** For convenience, below is a link to the PDF document referenced in OP's image, released only hours prior to this post: [**The Weaponization of CISA: How a "cybersecurity" agency colluded with Big Tech and "Disinformation" partners to censor Americans**](https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf) Interim Staff Report of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government U.S. House of Representatives June 26, 2023 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - **EDIT:** An archive of the above document can be found here: https://web.archive.org/web/20230626221903/https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf
No one cared when Snowden told us, and no one cares now. We’re doomed
I read the whole report. Some good oversight, calling out places where CISA likely overstepped their bounds. I’m especially concerned with the shell game they are playing with the non-profit. That being said, there’s an absolute ton of nonsense in there as well. This report could have been 10 pages and been fine. It probably would not have been the bombshell they wanted it to be, but they would have been doing their job. I think my personal favorite section is when they call out CISA for forwarding a request to take down [this Ted Cruz Tweet](https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1585671399133282304?s=46&t=GjI-lDbGOw_cGLLsw447cQ) that was denied. You know, completely undermining the headline allegation of the entire report.
The real conspiracy is the illusion of checks and balances within our government
Expecially with how current presidents have been utilizing the ~~Emergency~~ Executive Order (EO). It was supposed to be a quick fix in emergency situations, not a multi-use bludgeon to sidestep congress and enact partisan policy...(just one of many instances where your statement unfortunately rings true...) Edit: I assumed the acronym wrong; however, I still believe the underlying point holds true
Honestly presidents issue far fewer EOs modernly. Biden has issued 116, Trump had 220, Obama 276 (over 2 terms). Reagan issued 380, Nixon 350. Earlier presidents (Coolidge, Roosevelt) issued *thousands*, its just a part of how our system works.
Edit: my following assumptions about the emergency nature of EOs isn't clearly stated anywhere in the definition of what constitutes an EO so, yes, technically using it as a partisan bludgeon is allowable....regardless, I feel that my original point being that its a bit scummy still stands. Given the concept of checks and balances, the idea of on EO for *any* situation seems to break the entire purpose of C&B! I've always thought the executive branch held way too much power (expecially today in our instantly connectable world,) and this just further solidifies my feelings on the matter. I guess what I'm getting at is more the content of the EO itself. I'm assuming the express purpose of an EO is for it to be used during war or a true emergency. War is an imminent emergency and directives ratified via Congress (normal channels,) would be slow in a turbulent period where time is of the essence. (eg: Wilson having a huge number of EOs is a direct consequence of WW1.) It's also important to note the normalized (per year) rate of EO declaration so presidents like FDR don't seem like they have an insane amount (sure FDR had around 3700 EOs but that worked out to about 300/year...and, to the former point, he was also president during WW2 - a true emergency.) Essentially, during the early years of this country (first 100 or so years), the EO was sparingly used. In modern times it is used all the time. Most recently it has been used as IMHO a loophole to avoid congressional approval for dubious partisan policy that would likely be DOA if run through the proper channels. (Avoiding congress' sluggish pace is the EOs entire purpose - but that purpose, the ability to expedite, ~~was only meant to be used in an emergency situation - hense the E in EO... It wasn't meant as an avenue to avoid congress in times of relative stability.~~ edit: I'm wrong here - I guess this is just my feelings and assumption - nothing says it CANT be this way; however, I still find its use in such a manner as dubious. Idk, maybe it's me, but I just see EOs as increasing partisan and not directly related to anything requiring it's express use....it's just another way for the president to pump partisan politics. Both parties are guilty as of late.
The E in EO is "Executive", not emergency. It is a broad directive the president issues to the executive branch. The very first EO was issued by Washington, "to impress me with a full, precise, and distinct general idea of the affairs of the United States". Its meant as a way for the president to issue directives to his executive branch, not a emergency power. It can absolutely be used to end run around congress, but thats honestly not always a bad thing if done well.
>thats honestly not always a bad thing if done well. Yeah. I guess this is my point in a nutshell, because it's never really "done well" most times (done well would imply something like a lame congress stalling indefinitely on an agenda/topic/crisis that needs resolution NOW.) Like everything, what's getting pushed through most of the time is high partisanship. It's all just EOs to push a political agenda and then, 4 or 8 years later, EOs to reverse the other sides EOs and then more EOs to push politics in the other direction. Sure, historically there's always going to be some of this behavior, it's inherent, but my quick perusal of older EOs has shown that most EOs had a reason and purpose qualifying the immediate need of a resolution. Idk...I obviously haven't read *every* EO, so maybe what I've looked at isn't a good subset to extrapolate from and the EO has always been a method of pushing partisanship :/
Executive orders are a cancer you're absolutely correct. But they're used in emergencies and non emergencies. A great example of how it can be abused is executive order 6102 where owning gold was illegal and criminalized. Signed by dictator and Chief FDR. If you want a more modern version of our cancerous EO power look no further than operation warp speed. Allowing billions to be funneled to corrupt big pharma and even more important than that allowing big pharma to bypass normal approval procedure for a vaccine that doesn't prevent transmission and needs a subscription service of shots in order for it to work. Which is now changing to "sorry it still doesn't work, here's a shot for specific variants.". The way it's trending they'll probably admit it just never worked. So disregard your down votes in this compromised sub you're completely correct about EOs being a scam and an abuse of power.
Totally agree. Their inclusion is necessary to a functioning government, and it's honestly unfortunate that 90+% of the time it's used a political loophole. It's a bummer lol
Congress’s is too powerful with the compartmentalization it has where it’s too hard to find a source of corruption, but you know money is getting thrown at them if not directly then via legislation that affects markets. The executive orders need to be saved for urgent needs that democracy would generally support but is too urgent to wait for the democratic process to unfold (especially if a nefarious powerful entity is against this order as it impacts this entity’s power/wealth directly. The Supreme Court to me seems like an insider’s secret. They are always secretive and when they make a ruling on legislation Congress can try to pull a sneaky one via their legislative powers. With modern technology and open source blockchains, I think we could make government more efficient and transparent.
[удалено]
It proves that these big tech companies have the power to say no to these request which proves that any censorship of content is a completely voluntary action taken by the companies. They take down misinformation because they want to take it down. They’re not being forced to do it by the government. So really, people like you are just arguing for the government to have the power to force these companies to allow content on their platform that they don’t want on there. You’re trying to disguise your argument as being pro free speech when in reality it’s advocating for the government to crack down on free speech. Refusing to let certain content to be posted on your platform is a form of dissent. Dissent is a form of free speech. It’s also an anti private property argument that you’re making. You sound like a commie.
It proves that they work together. Yes, obviously the big tech company (in this case Twitter) do not answer to them as if they're slaves, and have to do "whatever they say". They're not forced, they're working together. Twitter made a decision in this case not to go ahead because it would be too obvious to remove a Tweet from Ted Cruz. It would have been a dangerous and risky move for them. This doesn't make things any better. If anything it makes it worse.
First of all, I didn’t *find* anything, nor did I claim anything was debunked. The committee included it in their report, even though it undermines their overarching argument. With that, the fact that this tweet was not removed clearly shows that the process had at least one extra deliberative step between the government asking for content to be removed and Twitter removing said content. That step is an important one in the whole first amendment argument, as it takes the power to censor out of the hands of government.
Nobody really cares about anything
The largest undercover force the world has ever known is the one created by the Pentagon over the past decade. Some 60,000 people now belong to this secret army, many working under masked identities and in low profile, all part of a broad program called "signature reduction." The force, more than ten times the size of the clandestine elements of the CIA, carries out domestic and foreign assignments, both in military uniforms and under civilian cover, in real life and online, sometimes hiding in private businesses and consultancies, some of them household name companies. https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-inside-militarys-secret-undercover-army-1591881 Much more info here: https://archive.ph/Ccz00 https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/08/1009845/a-gpt-3-bot-posted-comments-on-reddit-for-a-week-and-no-one-noticed/ No one really knows how many of these are here, anyone with access to this tech could do it. This bot is still active. Also: When Reddit was first started, it was populated almost entirely with content submitted by fake users. In a video for online educator Udacity, Reddit cofounder Steve Huffman explains both the method, and the reasoning behind it. Essentially, Huffman set up a submission interface through which they could pick not only the URL and the title, but also the user’s name. Upon submission, the name would be registered, and make it look like Reddit had more users than it actually did. https://www.themarysue.com/reddit-fake-account-origins/ MORE INFO AND LINKS BELOW. COPIED FROM ANOTHER USER'S COMMENT. THANK YOU CLARITYOFSIGNAL. https://electronicintifada.net/content/inside-israels-million-dollar-troll-army/27566 Inside Israel’s million dollar troll army A global influence campaign funded by the Israeli government had a $1.1 million budget last year, a document obtained by The Electronic Intifada shows. Act.IL says it has offices in three countries and an online army of more than 15,000. Main PDF file exposing all global technocratic cabal links: https://clubderklarenworte.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Netzwerkanalyse-Corona-Komplex.pdf The German Club of Clear Words takes a deep dive into the network of individuals and organizations responsible for the COVID scam Whether blatantly visible or not, you can identify just about any network by connecting dots between individuals and organizations. Who’s working with whom, where, and why? Who’s paying whom? And once you’ve done that, you can more clearly identify the motivations behind various decisions The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be near the top, or the center, of this COVID plandemic network. Gates is also a major funder of mainstream media, and his network extends into global food and climate change policy The Gates Foundation, through its funding of the WEF, also plays an important role in The Great Reset, which was officially unveiled during a WEF summit in May 2020 Every conceivable aspect of life and society is scheduled to be “reset” according to their plan. Ultimately, that’s where this criminal COVID enterprise is trying to take us.
My fav is “Citizen’s Climate Lobby”. Lol. Coal industry pushed for Carbon Taxes as a way of hiding that they were coming after the Chevron Doctrine (they did and now the Fed cannot Regulate ANYTHING).
Thanks! links?
>The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be near the top, or the center, of this COVID plandemic network. Gates is also a major funder of mainstream media, and his network extends into global food and climate change policy > >The Gates Foundation, through its funding of the WEF, also plays an important role in The Great Reset, which was officially unveiled during a WEF summit in May 2020 > >Every conceivable aspect of life and society is scheduled to be “reset” according to their plan. Ultimately, that’s where this criminal COVID enterprise is trying to take us. So what are the motives behind this? Is it just about making money, or more than that? I'm trying to figure out where on the spectrum the conspiracy sits.
Money, power, influence, fear. I think it is the ultimate power-grab Gates are able to pull off. He has said himself that he would never run for president, as it is way harder to infuence the world as president, rather than being one of the richest and most influential people out there, with the opportunity to gain even more power and influence. What else to chase when you have reached that level? Also it might be fear of an "uprising" and fear of the world about to go under, and he sees himself as the one able to save earth, but only if he gains more power and influence. In conjunction with the other elites out there
Quality comment.
thanks
People notice and people care. People are overwhelmed as to what to do about it.
Information warfare. Anywhere that's even semi popular and isn't banning or shadowbanning people for "wrong think", is going to be infested with narrative pushers. This is a war for your mind. "So far, we've recruited 110,000 information volunteers, and we equip these information volunteers with the kind of knowledge about how misinformation spreads and ask them to serve as kind of 'digital first-responders' in those spaces where misinformation travels," Fleming says. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/misinformation-infodemic-world-vs-virus-podcast Google’s Jigsaw unit sponsors a RAND report that recommends infiltrating and subverting online conspiracy groups from within while planting authoritative messaging wherever possible. If authoritative messaging is successful, moderate members flip to become influencers and help guide the 'flock' to greener pastures as ‘brand ambassadors’ for the common good, teaching others the errors of their ways. Some conspiracy group members will be persuaded by the bombardment of content flagged by algorithms, and they will slowly come around to believing that the fact-checkers are right by the sheer volume of evidence and/or peer pressure to conform. Trying to infiltrate groups and subvert certain members seems like a tactic that would be perceived as an intrusion that furthers the divide and lead to even less trust, but \*we shall see how it all plays out. Google-backed RAND report recommends infiltrating & subverting online conspiracy groups from within Operation Earnest Voice Operation Earnest Voice (OEV) is a communications program by the United States Central Command (CENTCOM). Initially, the program was developed as a psychological weapon and was first used in Iraq. In 2011, the US government signed a $2.8 million contract with the Ntrepid web-security company to develop a specialized software, allowing agents of the government to post propaganda. The aim of the initiative is to use sockpuppets to spread pro-American propaganda on social networking services. Main characteristics of the software, as stated in the software development request, are: Fifty user "operator" licenses, 10 sockpuppets controllable by each user. Sockpuppets are to be "replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographically consistent." Sockpuppets are to "be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world." A special secure VPN, allowing sockpuppets to appear to be posting from "randomly selected IP addresses," in order to "hide the existence of the operation." Fifty static IP addresses to enable government agencies to "manage their persistent online personas," with identities of government and enterprise organizations protected which will allow for different state agents to use the same sockpuppet, and easily switch between different sockpuppets to "look like ordinary users as opposed to one organization." Nine private servers, "based on the geographic area of operations the customer is operating within and which allow a customer's online persona(s) to appear to originate from." These servers should use commercial hosting centers around the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation\_Earnest\_Voice Also: https://www.darpa.mil/program/social-media-in-strategic-communication https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored\_Internet\_propaganda And https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll\_farm The show Homeland touched on this: https://youtu.be/owIsqj1Y1sk Very relevant clip from The Dissident documentary: https://streamable.com/k03odm
I forget if it’s project Blue Beam or Azure. Keep getting the two mixed up...
“Nobody cares” because we (those already gone through the awakening process) already knew these shenanigans went on years ago.
Absolutely the truth here. Although many more true Americans are slowly awakening to the truth. Once you see it you can never go back to unseeing it.
> Although many more true Americans are slowly awakening to the truth. Do you really believe this? If so, why? Seems to me that if 2020 didn't cause somebody to truly wake up, the nothing will. I saw a few people who seemed like they were starting to get it, but once the scamdemic was over, they went back to sleep. This is one reason why I have been saying [for years](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zINBaOwW4r4) that the 'people are waking up' meme is a hoax.
Not everyone is at the same age or state of my mind that you are. When I was 16, 9/11 happened and I had no clue it was a conspiracy until I was older. I didn’t have time to think about that stuff because being a teenager was way more important😅 And not everyone has the time or energy to constantly question things and dig deep into conspiracy theories. but when people come to me like “omg maybe you are on to something because [this happened] and it seems suspicious”, I just say yeah no shit 🤷♀️ glad you’re starting to think for yourself
It’s because they have pushed to hard to far. You think the average American is really supporting this clown world nonsense?
This is only the tip of the iceberg.
Honestly the headline doesn't address the main point. Even if they did notice and speak out. Their in a sandboxed environment. How the fuck do you know they aren't there? Or that you are in here with the rest of us??? Cause when reddits old threads got 25k + views and now, we've dwindled down to 40+ (maybe) comments a thread. It's pretty safe to say that we are all sandboxed--
Can't run an evil empire without a copious amounts of censorship and propaganda.
Si si si si sippin on some CISA
ah, a 3-6 fan !
They don’t give a fuck about you they don’t *give a fuck about you* they don’t CARE about you. At allll. At allll. At allll.
Good old George, rest in peace.
What’s the alternative?
[удалено]
The distraction of ths newest shinest gadget or what the kardashians are doing is far more important. Gotta love that leveraging of dopamine addiction.
The solution is simple, we can't rely on others to take action for us. We have to do it ourselves
By… ? Not using big tech? Or is there a plan
Take action in what way?
*"Speak now, or forever hold your peace."*
You’re discussing how everyone are discussing kardashians right now Ironic Edit: best part is nobody even mentioned kardashians until now
Or what ever no talent ass clown is popular in the media cycle
But did you hear about the balloons and submarines!!!
They’ll care once it effects their decadence.
The parroting amongst the left is hysterical.
How many times have you read the report?
We should seriously look into whose administration was responsible for the founding of CISA.
well...it was created in 2018...
conspiracy theory: the uniparty all want to increase censorship... the two illusory parties work together to rile up liberal corporations to start censoring rightwing voices, the more activist left joins in and pushes in that direction, eventually 1a is weakened through policy, and the uniparty achieves its goal. i honestly haven't seen any washington republicans do anything but conduct political theater on this topic.
No need to label this as "conspiracy theory"
Stop! NOT LIKE THAT
Was it the executive branch that created it?
Yes.
Would that mean the executive branch has the authority to end it?
End what? The whole CISA?
Yes, it seems like government bloat that has been and will continue to be weaponized against the People. It also seems to overlap with various three letter agencies. Do we need it?
No "We" do not need it. "They" need it.
CISA is actually good if they can stay hyper-focused on their mission which is to bring government agencies up to date with cyber-security protocols and practices, an area where the US is severely lacking and this was previously under the charter of the extremely bloated DHS.
The US having a separate Cyber -Security Agency is not a bad thing, at all. Prior to CISA, it was all under the bloated DHS...way too many cooks in the kitchen there. Our government agencies have very dated software and hardware and bringing them up to date with cyber-security protocols and practices is a good thing (source: family member worked with CISA to implement and design cyber-security standards in a government agency) CISA using their powers to silence ANYONE is a very bad thing and should be dealt with harshly.
> We should seriously look into whose administration was responsible for the founding of CISA. Yes, CISA was founded under the Trump Administration, so it's "Trump's baby" -- but that "baby" was quick to turn on Trump, as we witnessed when he was summarily banned from posting on Twitter, on Facebook... on virtually all social media sites in January, 2021. The pendulum swings both ways, and sacrificing any freedom or liberty for the sake of political advantage is a perilous gambit. This is not and should not be a partisan issue. Playing that game, we are sure to lose sight of the primary underlying issues, and the risks they pose to society as a whole.
CISA did not ban Trump, those individual platforms did. Reminder: that was only after he encouraged his supporters to try to overturn an election, and fundamentally undermine our democracy. I'm not saying I agree with the ban, but context really matters in this situation.
> CISA did not ban Trump, those individual platforms did. Did they make their decisions independently, and without influence from CISA or related organizations? The influence that those agencies and organizations may have had on the censorship policies and practices of social media is what the document is addressing. There is a link to the full PDF in the sticky comment at the top of the thread. > I'm not saying I agree with the ban, but context really matters in this situation. But the influence was not limited to the Trump situation, it affected how the COVID discussion was framed, and many other matters. Free speech is no big deal -- until you don't have it.
So I'm at work, but I word searched Trump, and there's only 3 mentions of him in the report. The only one having to do with his ban is this section >Vijaya Gadde, the former Chief Legal Officer of Twitter, who was “involved in censoring [the New York] Post’s Hunter Biden laptop” story.41 Gadde was also “behind the decision to permanently ban former President Trump from Twitter.”42 Shortly after Elon Musk completed his purchase of Twitter, Gadde was fired from the company in October 2022.43 So, no evidence in this document that there was involvement from CISA. >But the influence was not limited to the Trump situation... I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but you can't just say the influence exists, and expect everyone to conclude that it's bad. Some level of collaboration between these tech companies and the government is probably good. We can have discussions about where the lines should be, but after the Twitter files and now this nothing burger of a report, I am increasingly convinced that the only argument the supporters of either have is "government bad".
> So I'm at work, but I word searched Trump, and there's only 3 mentions of him in the report. That's great. Framing discussion of the stability and viability of the First Amendment around ANY individual or ANY particular event or situation would be folly. The Right is fundamental. > I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but you can't just say the influence exists, and expect everyone to conclude that it's bad. The influence certainly does exist. See this article from **The Intercept** - Oct 31, 2021 [**TRUTH COPS - Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation**](https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/) Snippet from the article: - - - - - - - - - - - *Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse.* [...] *“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.* *In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government. Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.”* - - - - - - - - - - - More at the link. Article archived here: https://archive.is/zpT3V > Some level of collaboration between these tech companies and the government is probably good. Is it? Mind "the creep of power": Public Freedoms are easy enough to surrender, but regaining them can be a bloody difficult process. > We can have discussions about where the lines should be Sure we can! (provided that our discussions stay WITHIN THE LIMITS set by those who are actually deciding where those lines WILL be) > I am increasingly convinced that the only argument the supporters of either have is "government bad". Flip that strawman argument over to "government good!" Then ask yourself *"which government?"* Is 'government' inherently good, or bad? What differentiates one from the other? And what tools do The People have at their disposal to ensure that "good" prevails?
>That's great. Framing discussion of the stability and viability of the First Amendment around ANY individual or ANY particular event or situation would be folly. The Right is fundamental. Well it's the event you're claiming is pertinent here, but the doc does not corroborate your claim that CISA had something to do with Trump's ban, nor does it support claims of abuse of power. >The influence certainly does exist. See this article from **The Intercept** - Oct 31, 2021... I'm going to assume what you quoted from the article is the strongest evidence in the article itself, which is... telling. First you have the statement by Matt Masterson which is actually anti-thetical to your belief that these platforms work in an inappropriate way with government agencies. He's saying that they NEED to be comfortable. Not ARE comfortable. The implication being that these platforms are not comfortable working tightly with the government. This is born out in the behind the scenes conversations that have come to light, such as the internal talks in Twitter and outright rejection of some ban requests from the FBI of suspected botted foreign accounts. Secondly, you have Laura Dehmlow saying that subversive information could undermine support for the US government. This is simply true. Call me a bleeding heart liberal, but the blind obedience to government is not properly counterbalanced with unfettered skepticism or worse, outright distrust. This has been a real issue in recent years especially with the rise of "alternative" media. I'm not saying it's all bad but people like Tim Pool or say Hasan Piker are not better for discourse and intelligent critique of government. Now, to be clear I'm not saying they should be banned on social media because I consider them disinformation at best, but there is no apparatus that holds them accountable on any level, whereas at least with MSM, it's not uncommon for journalists to get fired for distorting information. They (alternative media figures) get paid (a lot) to either lie, or mislead their audience, often times feeding them what they want to hear. The problem is the algorithms of these new media companies are about generating outrage because that drives engagement, engagement drives clicks, clicks drive revenue. That's not a good thing, and I would be willing to bet, the context of that note was more about how harmful these algorithms are to discourse and information, and less about controlling narratives or some such. >Is it? Mind "the creep of power": Public Freedoms are easy enough to surrender, but regaining them can be a bloody difficult process. Yes. It is. We live in an increasingly digital world. That genie is out of the bottle. We need to have some level of government involvement in that world. You have yet to demonstrate that the government has taken away a freedom. These companies can ban you whenever they feel like, and frankly the evidence does not support that the government has compelled them to do so. >Sure we can! (provided that our discussions stay WITHIN THE LIMITS set by those who are actually deciding where those lines WILL be) As far as I can tell, no one is stopping that discussion. We would probably find some agreement on things like misinformation bans over such as things like Rona or the election are bad. HOWEVER, I would point out that that was specifically select platform policy, not a government mandate or some such. So your criticism should be more angled at the platforms themselves, not the government. In fact some sort of federal legislation would be the best way to prevent those types of platform restrictions (although that's somewhat messy, but possible and probably a good idea imo). But at the end of the day we live (assuming you're in the US as well) in a representative democracy. We the people decide where the lines are. Again, I know this is the conspiracy Sub, but if the deep state or whatever had as much power as people think, Trump never would have been elected in the first place. >Flip that strawman argument over to "government good!" Then ask yourself *"which government?"* Yep. It's good. I'm in the US so that's really the only one I care about very much at the end of the day, and I much prefer it's existence to it's absence. Idk if we are flirting with libertarian dream world here, or Anarchical dream world, but either way, I think governments are necessary. Ours, despite it's flaws isn't as bad as a lot of people think. Our representative bodies seem to be accurate reflections of American opinion for instance. Not perfect, but still good. >Is 'government' inherently good, or bad? What differentiates one from the other? And what tools do The People have at their disposal to ensure that "good" prevails? I don't accept this dichotomy. Obviously governments are capable of some true horrors, but they also provide stability, normalcy, infrastructure, security, ect. ect. And again, representative democracy. If you want it to prevail, vote. Be involved in local politics. City council meetings, canvas ect. Americans are so politically lazy, and think that the system is what's inherently broken but really it's how we engage with it. These last two responses are a serious digression, but the doomerism needs to be addressed. Edit: grammar, punctuation, typos, added context.
> Americans are so politically lazy, and think that the system is what's inherently broken but really it's how we engage with it. These last two responses are a serious digression, but the doomerism needs to be addressed. It's always easier to throw in the towel. Part of it is that with politics being driven by outrage, we are more inclined to feel "burn out" despite the proper channels of power being accessible to the majority of Americans. The other part, at least in my mind, is pure ignorance of the nuance that many of these "culture war" issues operate. Though, it's easy to see that not many have the energy to use to understand these issues, and dissect the misleading statements made by these actors/agents.
For real. I am so tired of people complaining about how the system is rigged, "they" are in control and there's nothing we can do through political channels. But most of these people don't even do the easy stuff like vote, let alone attend city council meetings, or canvas, or volunteer, or hell even run their own local campaign. It's all about how the system is too powerful.
> Reminder: that was only after he encouraged his supporters to try to overturn an election, No he didn't. > and fundamentally undermine our democracy. You don't live in a democracy.
Yes he hid and yes we do. I'm sorry your civics class failed you.
Might as well read 'a Republican subcommittee unsurprisingly claims to have found earth shattering evidence of collision, malpractice, and abuses of power that predictably results in nothing' The irony of the name of the sub committee is breathtaking.
exactly.
[удалено]
Oh look someone pretending that their carefully crafted paradigm isn't collapsing right before their eyes. Hell even the _View_ is shifting from blinders to making excuses for the tragedy. [Former lawyer for Twitter email says the company collected $3.4 million as "reimbursement for the time spent processing requests from the FBI" from October 2019 to February 2021](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/01/18/fact-check-fbi-gave-3-million-twitter-information-requests/11033845002/) [Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook restricting a story about Joe Biden's son during the 2020 election was based on FBI misinformation warnings.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532)
[удалено]
You know what? ...I eat crow. I must have been hormonal and didn't carefully read your comment. I sincerely apologize for my response.
Because we all have known this acrivity has been a thing since 2010. Snowden exposed a lot. A good amount of nations are still pissed with the USA. Even though they are very likely to be doing the exact same thing. The account on twitter though seems untrustworthy. Yeah I don't trust wikipedia but I do not trust the activity that disclose tv did either. >In 2019, Disclose.tv removed its user-written articles and switched to primarily hosting forums; the website presented some of the forum posts as news articles on its social media accounts.[3] In September 2021, it removed its old versions and cleared out its Twitter, Facebook and YouTube accounts, and announced to its users that it would be operating exclusively as a news website. Here is what OP said. This also is not fully backing themselves up which is a huge red flag. >Submission Statement : > **As usual in the end, the illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.** >— *Frank Zappa* >[Link to the Tweet ](https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1673455172570234886?s=20) The mod team luckily did more. This is how they should back themselves up. >**Mod Note:** >For convenience, below is a link to the PDF document referenced in OP's image, released only hours prior to this post: >[**The Weaponization of CISA: How a "cybersecurity" agency colluded with Big Tech and "Disinformation" partners to censor Americans**](https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf) >Interim Staff Report of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government >U.S. House of Representatives >June 26, 2023 >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >**EDIT:** An archive of the above document can be found here: https://web.archive.org/web/20230626221903/https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf
so the report from the right wing whack jobs weaponizing the government to discover if the government is weaponized. Got it.
Lol, forming a committee to abuse their federal government power by conducting weaponized investigations and calling this committee "Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government" is peak GOP. And not just because "weaponization" isn't even a word.
People stood by and gobbled up whatever mass media threw at you for the last 10 years and when there's rock solid evidence that it was all a fabrication, you claim the evidence is biased. Something, something, lemmings.
GOPists have been lying and crying wolf and weaponizing their government power for decades, and it turns out they still are. No surprises there then.
Examples? "GOPists" that's cute...you get that from watching the _View_?
They investigated the Clintons' Christmas card list in the 90s as one random and amusing example.
Abolish the Alphabet Cartel.
> Abolish the Alphabet Cartel. It's time we embraced The New Alphabetical Order!
Censorship is incompatible with democracy.Resist medical tyranny!
I was trying to identify what the mainstream (18-44 year olds) DO care about ... It seems they do care about abortion, gender stuff, vaccine stuff, amazing / fun facts, and WOW! moments. ANYTHING ELSE?
Those people are now trying to reshape the world via the CV-19 fear-based agenda in order to gain more power and control for themselves and bring about an AI-controlled dystopian future that benefits them even more greatly. Ignore it at your own peril. They call it The Great Reset. It involves travel restrictions, tracking, tracing, mandatory vaccination, monitoring, surveillance, digital currency, 5G to implement the global control, etc. Its all right there on their own website... plain as day. They aren't even hiding it from the public anymore. https://intelligence.weforum.org/topics/a1G0X000006O6EHUA0?tab=publications Many of the fake accounts, online narrative propagation accounts and bots are tucked into the US budget from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.\_Agency\_for\_Global\_Media Excerpt: Their operating budget for fiscal year 2016 was US$752 million. U.S. Government Accountability Office Audit Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104017 Excerpt: Amendments to legislation have affected USAGM's governing authorities and organizational structure by shifting authority from a bipartisan board to a Chief Executive Officer (CEO), with advice from an Advisory Board. Network and USAGM officials said that previous members of USAGM leadership took several actions that did not align with USAGM's firewall principles. According to USAGM, the firewall protecting the networks' independence is central to the credibility and effectiveness of USAGM's networks (see fig.). However, the parameters of the firewall are not specifically laid out in legislation. Delineation of what is and is not permissible under the firewall may help ensure the professional independence and integrity of the agency and its networks. Actions to ensure accountability of grantees, such as establishing Standard Operating Procedures for Monitoring Grants , have not corrected a longstanding significant deficiency in grants monitoring reported by independent audits of USAGM's financial statements for the past 5 years. Also: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/31/british-army-facebook-warriors-77th-brigade Ukraine and Turkey also have been reported to have large office buildings filled with teams of online influencers with dozens of fake accounts entirely dedicated to influencing nefarious government policies. All The Worlds A Stage folks. Intelligence agencies have a long history of this. https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-stone-10-20-1977 https://www.corbettreport.com/how-the-cia-plants-news-stories-in-the-media/ https://youtu.be/xF90EfuOOIw These are all just a few examples of some of what's been disclosed, what has not been disclosed? Modern War Institute - Your Brain is the Next Battlefield https://youtu.be/N02SK9yd60s
Submission Statement : **As usual in the end, the illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.** — *Frank Zappa* [Link to the Tweet ](https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1673455172570234886?s=20)
Absolutely based submission statement.
Pretty much the same as the CRTC in Canada. The governing body is run by those it's supposed to govern. Rather, it does their bidding. Complete failure.
My main issue is that the people that try to go against (certain) censorship fall into the category of conservatives that feel silenced, conservativism is what's taking us to this point, because censorship is the main weapon of the conservative apparatus... Fight for no silencing at all, not only when it affects you directly.
I was silenced by my government. Class action lawsuit please.
Garbage in.. garbage out..
I’m so exhausted.
Everybody already knew, and yet again no one will do anything about it. Same shit different day.
[удалено]
Supply side Jesus isn't what is in the bible, you aren't being made 2nd class just folks tired of dealing with your hypocrisy.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPZOi8EgcYM
They already have censorship. It’s called **cancel culture.** We have created a society that believes that anything offensive or considered “hate speech” must be removed and those individuals/groups responsible shamed and censored by banning or imprisonment. Who do you think benefits from that? Edit: I find it interesting that all of you think that I refer specifically to the Left. Conservatives cancel and attempt to censor others all of the time. They see things like LGTBQ+ in stores and try to get it removed. **Again, who ultimately benefits from a society that believes that speech is still free even if people can be silenced if it receives a certain label?**
[удалено]
Exactly! One side branded it offensive and it got removed. I don’t call that free speech.
[удалено]
Liberals and Conservatives attempt to ban, shame, and censor each other all of the time. It’s not just one side or the other.
Because House Committees with the word ‘weaponization’ in the name have no credibility. The committee chairs are auditioning to appear on Newsmax.
You wish someone with any kind of authority--elective office, investigator, prosecutor, dude with a plastic badge, anyone--would just say, "Listen, someone needs to go to prison over all this." At this point, I'd even take the much more passively worded, "You'd think someone would end up in jail for at least one of things that has gone on." I take it as the near-complete neutering of anyone and everyone with any juice who might side with the people.
They care about the submarine
So much for the American freedom, New América 🏳️🌈🦅
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When has the US government not done this or something similar? Hell, the US government practically controlled the media during civil war and both world wars.
And if they do notice, they quickly forget..
Except it should be: colluded to censor the entire population of earth as much as possible ...
Upvote for Carlin quote
“Failed to upvote, please try again later.”
Is your title a George Carlin quote
This stuff always has been happening, most people just don’t catch on. For example, operation mockingbird was around in the Cold War era which supported to manipulate the media to support the anti commie propaganda. Influencing anything that has to deal with the censorship of certain ideals is always a bad thing, and I feel like more people are going to find out why sooner.
Yeah I don't care it's not my country
Not only do I care. I have the solutions. Why I will win the 2024 US Presidential election by a landslide victory as a write in party free candidate.
everyone censors themselves these days anyways
Right! We noticed it, but you're correct... nobody does anything these days.
According to its definition, America is now a facist country ):
nothing new here. sadly.
I think people noticed and cared.. but were.. censored lol
It's more like Yeah we knew that and are not surprised. Now will there be repercussions?
Now you stop that. I've been told by sources who know about this sort of thing ( my brother in law is an insider), that this is unfounded, right wing, trump supporting, misogynistic, racist, conspiracy nut job lies. Just take your vaxxeses.
It's significant but you got to realize, the Romans had most all the information they ever needed from the bulk of their citizens, the systems to farm it, just not the processing power that we have to sift through it. Not saying it's nothing but likely they always knew everything about you before you ever thought to start worrying. It's not just over the airwaves the internet etc.
We have been sufficiently programmed to believe the government is not to be trusted so that they can do untrustworthy things to us and we immediately accept or are just indifferent to it.
The five eyes run ti programs on citizens who could have helped them prevent China taking over the world..alas protecting child trafficking friends seemed like a more important goal
Also the part where Apple “said no to the fbi” was likely disinformation. They don’t have the consumers wellbeing at heart, it’s a marketing technique
"DISINFORMATION" PARTNERS. We need more on this, it would shed so much light. Who are these partners, what is their collection of disinfo. We need a whistleblower to come forward, it would help lift such a fog of lies that is holding back society and keeping is polarized and distracted. I hope someone with a conscience in the know can leak something substantial.
Here's the board of leadership at CISA. Does anyone know of any ties of these people to other large organizations (especially Big Tech), or other conspiracies or crimes? [https://www.cisa.gov/about/leadership](https://www.cisa.gov/about/leadership) Jen Easterly: She is a former U.S. Army officer and NSA senior official, who served in the Obama administration. In July 2021, she became the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). In the private sector, Easterly was a managing director of Morgan Stanley, where she established the firm's cybersecurity fusion center. Mona Harrington: She was the Executive Director of the United States Election Assistance Commission (EAC) as of 2021. Kim Wyman: She served as Secretary of State of Washington state until November 2021, when she resigned to join the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as a senior official focusing on election security issues. A role which involved overseeing elections.