The idea that US officials worked to censor ordinary Americans is a debunked conspiracy theory, say the mainstream media. But it's not. And now, newly released documents reveal a conspiracy not just to violate the First Amendment but also to interfere with the 2020 elections.
New Documents Reveal US Department Of Homeland Security Conspiracy To Violate First Amendment And Interfere In Elections
Emails released by the U.S. House of Representatives, when combined with the Twitter Files, reveal a sweeping and secretive effort by Stanford and DHS officials, two of whom are now business partners
by @galexybrane & @shellenberger
Stanford Internet Observatory’s Alex Stamos (Left) and former DHS-CISA Director Chris Krebs (Right) are now business partners. The current CISA Director is Jen Easterly (Center). [All photos from Getty Images]
The idea that the officials within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security worked with a Stanford think tank to censor ordinary Americans and thus interfere in the 2020 elections is a debunked conspiracy theory, say journalists in the mainstream news media. The Republicans spreading that conspiracy theory, say journalists with the New York Times, Washington Post, and New Yorker, are also waging a witch hunt against university researchers who study misinformation. It is for that reason that the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), which is home to those researchers, had long refused Republican requests for their emails and data.
But newly released documents suggest that SIO may have had a very different motivation for not sharing their files with Congressional investigators: they show that the idea for sweeping government censorship, in which the Stanford think tank played a central role, came from the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Internet Security Agency (CISA). According to one of CISA’s censorship partners, the so-called “Election Integrity Partnership” (EIP), which was ostensibly separate from CISA, was created at its behest.
In an internal Atlantic Council email sent on July 21 2020, Graham Brookie, the senior director of the Council’s “Disinformation Forensic Research Lab,” (DRFLab), wrote to a colleague to say the following: “I know the Council has a number of efforts on broad policy around the elections, but we just set up an election integrity partnership at the request of DHS/CISA and are in weekly comms to debrief about disinfo, IO, etc.” (Emphasis added.)
Brookie’s acknowledgment contradicts the claim made by the EIP that the idea for the project “came from four students that the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) funded to complete volunteer internships at [CISA].” Brookie’s email also contradicts the testimony of the SIO’s Director, Alex Stamos, earlier this year, who told Congressional investigators that the idea for EIP was his.
There is evidence that DHS-CISA had started interfering in elections several months earlier. On April 15, 2020, the DHS-CISA chief of “Countering Foreign Influence Task Force,” Brian Scully, emailed Twitter executives about a “Government-Industry Meeting,” that was held the next day. The issues discussed included election information.
By November, Twitter executives, Scully, and at least one of the Stanford interns were on a Signal text messaging app group together.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is “axiomatic” that the US government “may not induce, encourage or promote private persons to accomplish what it is constitutionally forbidden to accomplish.” Whether it was Stamos or the Director of CISA at the time, Chris Krebs, it’s clear that the U.S. government was directly involved in the Stanford-linked effort to censor Americans.
The documents are revelatory in showing that CISA officials, Stanford officials, and social media executives worked together in secret in ways that not only violated the First Amendment but also interfered in the 2020 elections by attempting to censor protected political speech, particularly that of conservatives and Republicans.
Although we do not know the effects of EIP’s activities on the 2020 election results, and although some of these activities occurred after election day, it’s clear that SIO, EIP, and CISA engaged in viewpoint-based censorship that amounts to attempted interference leading up to the election.
There was virtually no separation between CISA and Stanford employees in 2020. On September 30, 2020, an EIP staffer said that Stamos and Krebs were texting each other “with some regularity.”
Since 2021, former CISA Director Krebs, and Stanford Internet Observatory Director Stamos have owned a consulting firm that works for private equity, aerospace, and satellite companies, among many others.
In 2020, CISA officials and personnel from EIP were often on emails together, and CISA’s personnel had access to EIP’s tickets through an internal messaging system, Jira, which EIP used to flag and report social media posts to Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms.
The Biden administration and journalists have insisted that CISA did not violate the constitution because it was not coercive and merely engaged in “switchboarding” activities, acting as a middleman. But, the new documents reveal that CISA included a threatening disclaimer in its switchboarding communications, which stated that “information may also be shared with law enforcement or intelligence agencies.”
Please subscribe now to support our award-winning reporting and to read the rest of the article!
Zelensky says he wants the war to end, but he’s not acting like it. Friday he dismissed the US ceasefire as unworkable. Saturday he had European leaders affirm his position. And now he says the end of the war is “very, very far away.” Feels like we’re being played.
If Zelensky’s strategy is to alienate the American people, and the president they just elected, one day before he addresses Congress, it’s working.
Even The Guardian now gets it:
“On Friday, in the Oval Office, Zelenskyy contested Trump’s stance. The Ukrainian president stated flatly: “We will never accept just [a] ceasefire. It will not work without security guarantees.” Zelenskyy maintained that strong security guarantees had to come from the US, not just Europe. A European military force, he said, would not work unless the US provided a significant backstop: ‘They need USA.’
“In short, Zelenskyy insisted he would not agree to a ceasefire, because Russia would not honor it, unless the US provided precisely what Trump had seemingly already ruled out.
Zelenskyy says he’s grateful for US support but he acts entitled to it. He still hasn’t apologized for his behavior. And now he’s demanding the US do more. Zelensky, like Europe, doesn’t respect us. And relationships without mutual respect can’t last.
People say The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances in 1994 provided security assurances, but it did not include a binding defense commitment. Even pro-war voices admit the US is not legally obligated to defend Ukraine militarily under the Budapest Memorandum.
To the people defending Zelenskyy: watch the full video. His behavior perfectly encapsulates the disrespect, dislike, and even contempt the majority of Europeans hold toward Americans.
Healthy relationships depend on mutual respect. Ukraine and Europe don't respect us; they look down on us. America never had any obligation to protect Ukraine. And now we're asking why we should continue to spend our money, and put our lives on the line, to protect Europe.
The elites who want to continue an endless war in Ukraine benefit directly from it and few of them care at all about the American people.
The behavior of Zelenskyy is typical of Europe as a whole. Entitled. In denial of reality. Narcissistic. Unconcerned with our need to deal with many massive internal problems. Such juvenile & entitled behavior makes us less not more desirous of helping Ukraine and Europe.
Do Europeans think we don’t know they disrespect us? Look down on us? Think they’re better for us? I love Europe, but it is run by snotty children. This kind of behavior makes us want to get us the hell out of NATO. Go defend yourself, Europe. We’re sick of you ingrates.
Oh look, European leaders are all rallying behind @ZelenskyyUa
Zelensky says he wants peace but he just rudely dismissed the Trump administration's diplomacy as pointless. That angered Trump and @JDVance and now Zelensky has fled the White House. This should be the wake-up call that global elites & Europe desperately need.
Trump to Zelenskyy: " I've empowered you to be a tough guy. And I don't think you'd be a tough guy without the United States. And your people are very brave. But you're either gonna make a deal, or we're out. And if we're out, you'll fight it out. I don't think it's going to be pretty, but you'll fight it out. But you don't have the cards. But once we sign that deal, you're in a much better position. But you're not acting at all thankful, and that's not a nice thing. I'll be honest, that's not a nice thing. Alright, uh, I think we've seen enough."
I love Europe. I care about Europe. As such, I feel an obligation to warn Europe that we Americans are tired. It's been 25 years of unnecessary Middle East wars and 80 years of playing global policeman. Things are changing fast. Get ready.
I thought the LA fires would wake California up. I was wrong. *Half* of LA fires are started by ~50k meth/fentanyl addicts/mentally ill homeless. LA has half the firefighters it needs. There's not enough hydrant water. And Gavin Newsom is focused like a laser on his podcast.
Everyone talks about the coming disastrous fires and "Big One" earthquake, so you'd think Gavin Newsom would be taking urgent action. He's not. Instead, he's attacking Trump and demanding $40 billion to pay for the LA fires that his leadership failures created.
Fire fighters and many others warned Gavin and LA's mayor that catastrophic fires were coming.
In response, they cut funding for fire prevention and fire fighters.
Why? Because they were focused on promoting DEI, transgenderism, and climate apocalypse