🧵 1. Those who enter the U.S. without papers and apply for asylum are supposed to be detained until their claims can be adjudicated. That doesn’t happen under Biden.
2. Biden gives them a plane ticket, a work permit, and a mild suggestion that they show up for their immigration hearing, which might take place sometime in the mid-2030s.
3. This works out nicely for the drug cartels, who make billions of dollars smuggling millions humans into the United States, turning them into indentured servants and in some cases subjecting them to sex slavery. It’s really bad for everyone outside the drug-cartel world.
4. Biden speaks as though he’s the victim of our asylum laws—suggesting that he has no choice but to handle asylum applications this way, and that he has no power to restrict the flow of illegal immigrants without a change in law. That’s simply not true.
5. The president and DHS secretary have full discretion to stop processing asylum applications whenever they choose, as the asylum laws say they “may” grant asylum applications when the conditions are met. There is no “shall” language.
6. They should certainly stop processing those applications whenever they run out of bed space or timely processing capacity.
7. Asylum laws are not a border-specific suicide pact. We should stop thinking of them as if they were.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 1. By not including @SpeakerJohnson in these border-security negotiations to give him what he needs, Senate Rs are setting up the GOP to get blamed on the border. Why exclude the Republican House Speaker?
2. This gives Biden and the Dems a massive win as soon as it gets out of the Senate (CYA on border and opportunity to hammer House Rs for not passing it) in exchange for marginal gains for Rs and the border.
3. Biden will never enforce the law and Dem AGs will litigate it to death and ensure none of it takes effect.
🧵 1. We never needed this FISA 702 extension—either in the NDAA or otherwise.
Laws passed by Congress at the end of 2017 would allow 702 collection to continue, at least through April 11th, 2024, even if 702 lapsed at the end of 2023.
2. So why did the FISA Cult and its congressional acolytes demand this?
They’re delaying the day of reckoning.
They’re trying to avoid an angry electorate until a more convenient time.
And it’s making Americans mad.
Really mad.
With good reason.
3. Under the same provisions mentioned above—those passed by Congress at the end of 2017—the extension airdropped into the NDAA could easily be used to extend FISA 702 collection well into 2025, months after the November 2024 election.
🧵 1. If at least 41 senators *oppose* The Firm’s™️ motion to waive @RandPaul’s Rule 28 point of order tomorrow, FISA 702 will be stricken from the NDAA.
The Firm™️ will try to scare senators, warning of inevitable catastrophe if FISA 702 expires at midnight on New Year’s Eve.
2. This line of reasoning is misplaced. In the first place, it’s not at all clear that the government’s electronic-surveillance program operating under 702 will “go dark” if this provision doesn’t stay in the NDAA, even if Congress doesn’t pass a free-standing extension.
3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) issued a “702 certification” in April 2023, authorizing operations for 365 days. The “intelligence community” agencies (IC) have long read those certifications as operating for an entire year, even if 702 expires sooner.
🧵 1. The House Intelligence Committee (“HPSCI”) is advancing a bill purporting to reform FISA 702.
That bill’s actual reforms are at best illusory.
But it’s worse than that.
The HPSCI bill would actually make it easier for the FBI to spy on Americans without a warrant.
2. HPSCI’s FISA 702 bill has some serious, glaring problems. Most obviously, it lacks a warrant requirement for all “backdoor” searches directed at American citizens whose communications have been “incidentally collected.”
3. But there are other, less-obvious—and more troubling—problems that can be found in section 504 of the HPSCI bill. Sec. 504 expands the scope of FISA 702, in a way that would make 702 applicable to hotels, restaurants, department stores, or anyone else offering public wifi.
🧵 CONGRESS AS A LAW FIRM: 1. “Welcome to the law firm of Schumer, McConnell, Johnson, and Jeffries (‘The Firm™️’). You should know how things work around here. You know those people you think you represent? They really need Firm Security to spy on them, even if they deny it.”
2. “Remember, you’re here to do whatever we tell you to do—regardless of what those you represent think. And by ‘we,’ we mean the four of us—the four named partners of The Firm.”
3. “To be clear, Mr. Johnson is new, and we’re not yet sure whether he’ll agree with our approach to managing The Firm. In fact, we’re afraid he might not. But we hope he will, and are doing our best to convince him that he has no choice but to agree with the other three of us.”
1. FBI Director Christopher Wray just told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Congress (1) MUST reauthorize FISA 702, and (2) MUST NOT impose a requirement that FBI obtain a search warrant before conducting “backdoor searches” of American citizens through the 702 database.
2. I asked Wray about specific instances in which FBI personnel have abused the rights of Americans under FISA 702.
He insisted that those things are in the past and won’t happen again now that FBI has adopted new procedures.
3. The claim that FBI has fixed this—by changing its own internal procedures and adopted new policies—is completely unpersuasive.
I’ve heard the same thing from FBI directors in three different presidential administrations. This has not changed in the 13 years I’ve been on this.