/1🚨LITIGATION BOMBSHELL — we sued the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the censorship arm of DHS.
Our lawsuit unearthed new docs showing that the deep state knew the risks of mass mail voting in 2020 but censored these criticisms as “disinformation.”
THREAD:
/2 By September 2020, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) was aware that the evidence established that in-person voting did not increase the spread of COVID-19.
CISA was also aware that mass “vote-by-mail” schemes posed “major challenges,” including “the process of mailing and returning ballots,” the “high numbers of improperly completed ballots (figures not yet released),” and “the shortage of personnel to process ballots in a prompt manner.”
/3 Despite its awareness of mail-in voting risks, absentee voting challenges, and the harmlessness of in-person voting, CISA continued supporting the unprecedented voting policy changes implemented across the states in 2020.
/4 By October 2020, CISA had created a chart specifying six significant fraud risks presented by mail-in voting:
1. Implementation of mail-in voting infrastructure and processes within a compressed timeline may also introduce new risk.” 2. “For mail-in voting, some of the risk under the control of election officials during in-person voting shifts to outside entities, such as ballot printers, mail processing facilities, and the United States Postal Service.”
3 “Integrity attacks on voter registration data and systems represent a comparatively higher risk in a mail-in voting environment when compared to an in-person voting environment.” 4. “The outbound and inbound processing of mail-in ballots introduces additional infrastructure and technology, increasing potential scalability of cyber attacks.” 5. “Inbound mail-in ballot processes and tabulation take longer than in-person processing, causing tabulation of results to occur more slowly and resulting in more ballots to tabulate following election night.” 6. “Disinformation risk to mail-in voting infrastructure and processes is similar to that of in-person voting while utilizing different content. Threat actors may leverage limited understanding regarding mail-in voting processes to mislead and confuse the public.”
/5 While CISA saw the “Implementation of mail-in voting” in “a compressed timeline” as a top risk, it was also aware that last-minute “Mail-in Voting 2020 Policy Changes” were being implemented across the states.
/6 CISA shared these findings in an “unclassified media tour” on the Friday before Election Tuesday.
/7 Yet, The Washington Post and other similar outlets covered up the evidence and focused on CISA’s “independence from Trump” and CISA Director Chris Kreb’s “statements about the security of mail-in ballots” that “directly contradict” Trump.
/8 Of all the risks it identified, CISA appeared to focus by far the most on monitoring and censoring the mail-in voting risk “narrative.”
Keep reading…
/9 CISA apparently contracted Deloitte to report on “Daily Social Media Trends” relating to the U.S. Election — including narratives relating to “Vote-By-Mail” — and to flag specific social media posts for CISA’s awareness and attention.
/10 For example, Deloitte reported to CISA that:
1) Twitter flagged President Trump’s post that there are “big problems and discrepancies with Mail-in Ballots.”
/11 2) “A conservative online activist claimed that Twitter is censoring his tweets about voter fraud to help the Democratic presidential nominee.”
/12 3) President Trump “retweeted a political pundit who accused a Democratic Congressional candidate of ‘election fraud’ after thousands of ballots were mistakenly sent to his district.”
/13 4) “The Governor of Texas quoted an article from a local news outlet on the state’s recent history of voter fraud convictions and claimed that it reveals “Mail ballot vote fraud in Texas.”
/14 5) “A conservative pundit accused Twitter of ‘SUPPRESSING’ a story about the Democratic presidential nominee’s son to help the nominee win the election.”
/15 and 6) “A conservative online activist accused Twitter of censoring her posts about voter fraud she is ‘witnessing here in Nevada,’ and expressed her frustration with Twitter’s disclaimers stating that mail-in ballots are secure.”
/16 See Deloitte’s “Elections Daily Digest” from October 27, 2020, which include examples as listed above.
/17 Even more examples here from the day prior (October 26, 2020):
/18 Deloitte’s reports provided CISA with confirmation that its social media monitoring and censorship apparatus was working.
In Missouri v. Biden, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that “the platforms’ censorship decisions were made under policies that CISA has pressured them into adopting and based on CISA’s determination of the veracity of the flagged information.”
/19 CISA formed the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to censor Americans’ speech, as @JudiciaryGOP and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government @Weaponization has found.
Director Krebs testified to Congress that “narratives are narratives,” so CISA didn’t differentiate between domestic and foreign activity on social media.
@JudiciaryGOP @Weaponization /20 According to congressional investigators, CISA targeted entire “narratives” for censorship.
/21 In the EIP’s report touting the scope of its efforts, the EIP found that “[i]n the lead-up to the 2020 election, misinformation centered on mail-in voting.” Accordingly, EIP collaborators—including CISA—submitted “tickets” to flag social media posts relating to mail-in voting.
More on this “ticketing” process from @MikeBenzCyber below:
/21 More critical explanation from @MikeBenzCyber on how these “tickets” were implemented:
/22 The evidence is that:
🚨CISA knew that in-person voting did not increase the spread of COVID.
🚨CISA knew mail-in voting was less secure.
🚨CISA nevertheless supported policy changes to encourage unprecedented widespread mail-in voting.
🚨CISA formed the EIP to censor narratives relating to mail-in voting.
🚨CISA broadly monitored social media to detect unapproved “narratives” relating to mail-in voting and to confirm that platforms were adequately censoring them.
@MikeBenzCyber /23 CISA, and its media allies, interfered with and undermined the integrity of the 2020 Presidential election.
@MikeBenzCyber /24 This evidence has been obtained through AFL’s ongoing lawsuit against CISA to expose the activities of CISA’s Mis-, Dis-, and Mal-information (MDM) team leading up to the 2020 election. aflegal.org/afl-sues-two-f…
/25 AFL has previously exposed CISA’s partnerships with private sector tech companies to “pre-bunk,” “fact-check,” and remove speech and flag accounts, CISA’s use of the self-deleting messaging app “Signal” for “official” business, and CISA’s October 2020 false characterization of the Hunter Biden laptop story as a “QAnon Conspiracy Theory” linked to the 2016 “Pizzagate conspiracy.” aflegal.org/america-first-…
@MikeBenzCyber /27 AFL will keep fighting to expose the truth about 2020 election interference by CISA and other Deep State actors to protect our citizens’ rights and fortify our election integrity.
/1🚨HUGE — The University of Virginia has agreed to DISMANTLE its illegal DEI infrastructure following a months-long federal civil rights investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice and a federal civil rights complaint from America First Legal.
/2 The agreement requires UVA to end race-, sex-, and identity-based discrimination across its operations, report compliance data through 2028, and certify in writing quarterly that every department is in full compliance with federal civil rights laws.
/3 This action follows AFL’s extensive investigation and subsequent federal civil rights complaint calling for enforcement against UVA’s discriminatory practices.
AFL exposed UVA’s unlawful attempts to preserve and rebrand DEI under euphemisms, proving the university’s so-called “reforms” were cosmetic.
Texas just discovered THOUSANDS of potential noncitizens on its voter rolls and launched a statewide verification process to remove ineligible voters.
This is exactly what AFL’s Election Integrity Action Plan urged states to do last year.
🧵👇
/2 Last year, AFL sent an Election Integrity Action Plan to all 50 states — a roadmap explaining how to use existing federal law to verify citizenship.
Under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644, states can work with the Department of Homeland Security to confirm a voter’s citizenship.
/3 Using tools outlined in AFL’s Election Integrity Action Plan, Texas cross-checked state voter data against federal immigration records — and found over 2,700 potential noncitizens registered to vote.
AFL filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule Humphrey’s Executor and uphold President Trump’s constitutional authority to direct and remove executive officials.
/2 AFL, in partnership with Mitchell Law PLLC, filed a brief in Trump v. Slaughter, asking the Court to restore the President’s constitutional control of the Executive Branch.
/3 For nearly ninety years, the Court’s 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (Humphrey’s Executor) has stripped presidents of control over so-called “independent” agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) — allowing unelected bureaucrats to wield executive power without accountability to the American people.
/1🚨VICTORY — AFL just DEFEATED the @ACLU in a landmark immigration enforcement case.
A Pennsylvania court THREW OUT the ACLU’s lawsuit attacking a local sheriff for working with ICE.
Major victory for the rule of law and public safety.
/2 The ACLU and its activist allies sued Bucks County Sheriff Fred Harran for partnering with ICE under the 287(g) Program, which allows trained state and local law enforcement officers to assist federal immigration enforcement efforts.
/3 The ACLU’s lawsuit sought to block local law enforcement from helping federal agents remove criminal illegal aliens and keep Americans safe.
AFL and @WallyZimolong defended Sheriff Harran and fought back against the ACLU’s attack on the rule of law.
AFL filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Chairman @Jim_Jordan and 17 members of @JudiciaryGOP.
The brief urges SCOTUS to RESTORE the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment and its limits on U.S. citizenship.
/2 The Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship only to those born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction — meaning total, exclusive allegiance and lawful presence.
Simply living within our borders is not enough.
/3 Allegiance isn’t geography — it’s a bond.
It requires loyalty from the individual and consent from the nation.
When that consent is broken, citizenship cannot be claimed.
AFL has uncovered that MULTIPLE states suing President Trump over his Executive Order on birthright citizenship appear to have NO EVIDENCE to support their claims.
/2 On January 21, 2025, the states of Washington, Oregon, Illinois, and Arizona sued the Trump Administration over Executive Order 14160, which ends birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens.
The states allege the order will cost them money in programs like Medicaid, CHIP, and adoption assistance.
/3 There’s just one problem.
When AFL filed public records requests seeking clarity from these states on their claims — to show ANY DATA linking the order to actual costs — they came up empty-handed.