But who defines what "harming national security" means? For example, were Trump's actions on Jan 6th those of a "nefarious entity harming national security"?

The term "national security" is very tortured and has a rich history of being defined to overlap with the political agenda of the government/ the dominant political and ideological zeitgeist. Dismissing these concerns by saying that this is only intended to "defang Russian/Chinese propaganda" is like someone in 2001 claiming that the Patriot Act will only be used against islamists.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 29 2022 03:45pm

No because he was the President...meaning that DHS ultimately reports into him. In addition, I don't think domestic election interference would necessarily fall under this program (probably more of a DOJ thing).

You might not be familiar with the scope of this program but this is mainly to target Russian disinformation (which there is a lot of) and human traffickers who are lying about immigration law to encourage people to come to America. Republicans are against this because they want more illegal immigrants to come here when there is a Democratic administration (no different than liberals who wanted a recession under Trump).

This post was edited by thundercock on Apr 29 2022 03:38pm

You might have a point but the definition isnt as grey as you think. And are we supposed to have some clear cut boundaries for the general population as to what is, and isnt a threat to national security? Thats just fucking asking for trouble.

Wait, are the scope and powers of this program already defined? Or is this just what this program is supposed to be?




Of course we need a functioning legal definition of what national security threats are. That's a task for Congress and the federal courts. But once this legal definition is fleshed out (or, in the present case, once it has been expanded to encompass foreign misinformation/propaganda campaigns), enforcing these laws is a job that existing law enforcement and intelligence agencies can carry out perfectly fine. I really don't see why a new government board/agency/initiative should be necessary for this task, except if the current admin wants to create new, additional censorship capacities which are more closely controlled by the government.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 29 2022 03:57pm

You can intern the Japanese citizens for national security, but to exterminate all the Jews out of Europe it has to be public safety. Look at what China's citizens are putting up with from their government in the spirit of public safety. People are just being locked into their homes.

This post was edited by Skinned on Apr 29 2022 03:59pm

We only have what's come out of Congressional hearings and various statements made by officials. It seems to be more of a reorganization of existing resources for better communication within DHS. There appears to be a substantial amount of resources devoted to Spanish only speakers since they are the primary victims of trafficking misinformation.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-immigration-media-europe-misinformation-4e873389889bb1d9e2ad8659d9975e9d

Like I said, Republicans are against this because it will reduce the flow of illegal immigrants under the Biden administration and then they'll be for it once they are in power. To me, this is a good political strategy.

absolute clown world where such a retarded woman gets any kind of government post at all

I would pretty much ignore anything Tim Pool says. That would be akin to listening to AOC lol

Sorry, but the claim of connections to Russia has been weaponized too many times in domestic political struggles over the past years. For example, the unverified claim that Trump was compromised by Russia, as well as the ultimately disproven suggestion that he was an outright Russian asset, were deliberately played up (way past the level that the facts and evidence justified) in order to derail Trump's presidency and to constrain his wiggle room on foreign policy. Similarly, evidence for the involvement of the Bidens in shady business dealings in Ukraine was systematically downplayed during the 2020 campaign. So if you ask me, bringing up "muh Russia" as a justification for this new board is a big red flag. Likewise, focusing on the idea that the "counter-disinformation" this board will engage with would reduce the influx of illegal immigrants to the southern border sounds too good to be true. To me, this sounds more like an attempt at sugarcoating a new institution for government propaganda & censorship to the Republican base.



Imho, they are trying to seize an opportunity (Russia's war in Ukraine, R's not wanting to be seen as blocking a measure to curtail illegal immigration ahead of the midterms) to sneak through an expansion of government censorship powers without stirring a public outcry. And like you said, the Republicans are of course pearl clutching hypocrites who would love to (ab)use these powers once they are back in charge.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 29 2022 04:29pm

This dude was right.