Like it or not Donald Trump is still popular…
The 2024 Republican frontrunner recently attended a UFC fight and the night’s events were interesting, to say the least.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
INVESTIGATION – As I noted in my late January PDB, a ‘Democrat Colluded With Air Force Against Black Female GOP Candidate.’
In that case, the Air Force took the fall for the release of the congressional candidate’s military record, blaming “a junior individual [who] didn’t follow proper procedures.”
However, Jennifer-Ruth Green, a Republican, continues to blame U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for illegally obtaining and releasing the information through corrupt Air Force personnel to damage her campaign in the weeks leading up to the November election.
The release despicably included information about a sexual assault Green had suffered while serving in Iraq.
But, it seems there is much more to the story.
We now learn she wasn’t the only target of the corrupt DCCC.
We also learn that a Democrat-linked consulting and research firm called ‘Due Diligence Group’ (DDG) has been at the center of a partisan effort to improperly, and likely illegally, obtain the service records of at least 11 service members via fraudulent SF-180 requests.
According to data from OpenSecrets.org, the DCCC has paid more than $100,000 to DDG since 2021.
SF-180s are used by veterans, authorized legal recipients and next of kin to legally obtain information from military personnel records.
Third-party requests require the service member to authorize their request with their signature.
In these 11 cases, it is clear the service members did not provide their authorization.
Just the News reports:
In an unprecedented breach, the Air Force improperly released to a research firm tied to Democrats’ congressional campaign arm the confidential personnel files of eleven members of the military, including one involving a retired lieutenant colonel running for office as a Republican that detailed how she had been sexually assaulted in the Air Force, Congress has been told.
And the House Armed Services and Oversight committee are demanding answers. The news outlet continues:
[In a February 13 letter], House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer are demanding that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin explain how he will prevent future breaches of military members’ private information while pressing to know if there will be criminal prosecutions.
Just the News further reports on the letter:
“The Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (OSAF) has informed the Committee that it released 11 individuals’ records over a 14-month period from October 2021-December 2022 to a private research firm which allegedly misrepresented itself in order to obtain access to the personnel records without authorization or consent.”
Rogers and Comer wrote that the release of other service members’ personal information highlights “not only the inadequacy of procedures to secure military personnel files, but also raises concerning questions of possible illicit motive or political partisanship.”
“This conduct by the Air Force is, at a minimum, unacceptable,” they added, “The conduct by the research firm is quite possibly criminal.”
Just the News reported that Rogers told the outlet that much more needs to be investigated.
Rogers stated:“It’s abhorrent that a Democrat-aligned firm would do something so despicable as fraudulently obtaining service records. Chairman James Comer and I pressed the Department of Defense for answers on this egregious breach.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A novel legal theory from two conservative legal scholars published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review that a section of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for president may be getting a court hearing in Florida.
As Ballot Access news editor emeritus Richard Winger notes:
On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618.
Caplan, who appears to be representing himself in the case, writes:
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which provides for the disqualification of an individual who commits insurrection against our government has remained on the books for some one hundred and fifty plus years without ever facing question as to its legitimacy. While one can certainly argue that it has not been thoroughly tested, that fact is only because we have not faced an insurrection against our federal government such as the one while we faced on January 6, 2021. It should also be noted that President Trump has since made statements to the effect that should he be elected, he would advocate the total elimination of the US Constitution and the creation of a new charter more in line with his personal values.
Winger believes Caplan’s suit is “misguided:”
The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate.
Caplan appears to be taking the law review article’s authors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulson, at their word:
“No official should shrink from these duties. It would be wrong — indeed, arguably itself a breach of one’s constitutional oath of office — to abandon one’s responsibilities of faithful interpretation, application, and enforcement of Section Three,” Bode and Paulsen write.
Alternatively, ordinary citizens could file challenges on the same grounds with state election officials themselves.
And other such suits may emerge over the coming weeks. I’m not convinced any federal judge will be willing to read Section 3 like Baude and Paulson say it should be. It’s not because the Section’s words aren’t clear – they are.
My concerns are akin to those of Cato’s Walter Olsen, who writes:
…no one should assume that just because Baude and Paulsen have made a powerful intellectual case for their originalist reading, that the Supreme Court will declare itself convinced and disqualify Trump. Justice Antonin Scalia memorably described himself as a “faint‐hearted originalist,” which captures something important about the thinking of almost every Justice—if overruling a wrongly decided old case threatens to disrupt settled expectations to the point of spreading chaos and grief through society, most of them will refrain. Stare decisis, and a general preference for continuity in law, still matters.
Exactly. While some judges may nurse images of themselves as bold crusaders for justice, most jurists aren’t eager to upset established practice and precedent on a whim. Though, to be fair to the times when such upsets have occurred – Brown v. Board of Education, for example, or Griswold v. Connecticut – have been warranted, necessary, and beneficial.
Does that apply in the Caplan case? A court will decide. But as I’ve long said about Trump, the only court he cares about is public opinion. If voters reject him, that will carry more weight and sanction than any court could ever deliver.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News. Republished with permission.
Popular shoe brand Crocs is siding with the woke gender mob…
Watch Amanda fill you in on the latest controversy:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A Michigan Democrat congresswoman, now running for a seat in the U.S. Senate, is refusing to explain why she signed a non-disclosure agreement with a Communist Chinese “green energy” company.
Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin has refused to answer questions from the media as to why she signed a hush agreement with the Chinese corporation Gotion to hold closed-door meetings about a proposed electric vehicle battery plant the company is building in Big Rapids.
The plant is not located in her district, and it would appear there would be no sensitive information or corporate trade secrets that could be gleaned from a public tour, drawing speculation from some as to why she was there and what was discussed.
“When it was time for a Michigan voice to speak on the national security threats from the CCP emanating from companies based in the PRC and protect the State of Michigan, Congresswoman Slotkin, and her staff needed to ask for an NDA, never took a position, and said nothing,” former Michigan congressman and U.S. Ambassador Peter Hoekstra tells Fox News Digital.
Fox News reports Hoekstra and fellow former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Cella have raised the alarm on Gotion’s proposed facility and similar projects involving other Communist Chinese companies across Michigan and the United States.
“Congresswoman Slotkin is a former CIA analyst and Defense Department official who knows that state and local officials were warned by our intelligence agencies not to sign deals with PRC-based companies with ties to the CCP,” Cella tells Fox News.
Fox News reports that according to its parent company’s corporate bylaws, Gotion is required to “carry out Party activities in accordance with the Constitution of the Communist Party of China.”
The pair are asking the Justice Department to investigate whether Gotion is engaging in illegal foreign lobbying of U.S. officials. Under federal law, anyone lobbying a member of Congress on behalf of a foreign government or company must register with the Justice Department as a foreign agent. It does not appear Gotion has filed such a registration.
Despite the jobs it brings to an economically-stressed area, many local residents oppose the plant, citing the company’s demand officials sign non-disclosure agreements to meet with what is essentially a Communist Chinese government agent.
“The township’s concerns have all been surrounded by the lack of information given to them to make an educated decision surrounded by NDAs signed by multiple different organizations including the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and our local economic development corporation and The Right Place which is working for Gotion to bring it here,” Penny Currie, the treasurer of Big Rapids Charter Township, tells Fox News.
“That is one of our main concerns and is why we haven’t been able to move forward with a decision of any kind,” she says.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – As if we need any more evidence, testimony from former Obama-era CIA director and part-time partisan hack John Brennan confirms the letter smearing Hunter Biden’s bombshell laptop story as ‘Russian disinformation’ was a purely political move to help Joe Biden beat Donald Trump.
I’ve repeatedly referred to this outrageous and unprecedented letter, signed by 51 senior former intelligence community officials, as Democrat domestic disinformation and election interference.
The New York Post calls the entire charade – “the spies who lie.”
While all the officials who signed the letter saying the laptop appeared to have earmarks of a “Russian information operation” were private citizens at the time, they all signed with their government titles prominently listed below their names.
Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., a member of the investigating House subcommittee, told the Post that what is already known about the letter points to federal agencies clearly being weaponized to help Biden win the 2020 presidential election.
According to Cammack, Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper and others helped get the letter quickly through the CIA’s pre-publication classification review board.
“To me, that is absolutely crazy. If that’s not weaponization of our federal government, I don’t know what is,” she added.
Cammack is confirming what I’ve noted previously – that the unprecedented letter by dozens of supposedly nonpartisan spooks was used by the Biden campaign and its allies in the media to discredit, and help suppress, the mounds of incriminating emails, photos and other materials found on Hunter’s forgotten laptop.
The election-eve laptop story was first reported by the New York Post, but after this letter was published and widely disseminated by the establishment media, the story was crushed. Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn went so far as disabling links to the story and censoring or removing posts about it.
Big Tech and Big Media labeled the story ‘disinformation’ – first based on their own bias, then justified by this Democrat disinformation.
The laptop and most of its contents have since been independently verified as real and proven legitimate. But when Trump brought up the laptop report during their debate, Biden cited the letter as proof that the story was Russian disinformation.
Had the story not been suppressed it could have swayed the election in favor of Trump.
And it was all a Democrat con job.
According to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan R-Ohio, appearing on Fox News, R-Ohio “[Brennan] sat for a four-hour interview, and he further confirmed that this thing was all political.”
Brennan was seemingly eager to add his name to the letter. Responding to former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell’s request (Morell testified before the Judiciary Committee earlier in May), Brennan said:
“Ok, Michael, add my name to the list. Good initiative. Thanks for asking me to sign on.”
Jordan also recounted what I have previously written, the fact that then-Biden 2020 campaign adviser Antony Blinken, now Biden’s Secretary of State, was the “impetus” behind the letter, and it didn’t come organically from anyone inside the community of intelligence veterans.
As I noted then, at Blinken’s behest, the letter was drafted and organized in part by Morell who had also served as acting CIA director. At the time he was drafting the letter and seeking approval from the CIA, Morell was considered a front-runner to lead the agency if Biden were elected.
It appears Morell thought that putting out a false letter to help Team Biden might cinch him the job. It didn’t.
In his testimony, Morell referred to the letter as a “talking point” to help Team Biden against Trump during their debate. On Fox News, Jordan mused why Biden, or the Democrats, believed they needed a “talking point” if they truly believed Hunter’s laptop was not real.
Morell also reportedly told the CIA’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) which approves all public information released by former agency employees, that he needed the letter approved as a “rush job.”
The board approved the letter in a record five and a half hours.
An active CIA employee working for the same board then solicited a signature for the same letter from former CIA analyst David Cariens, according to a written statement by Cariens.
Yes, this is what some call the leftist ‘Deep State.’ Others simply know it as ‘the Swamp.’ But most dangerously, it is part of our federal government and intelligence agencies being weaponized for partisan and ideological goals.
Next week, another partisan intelligence hack, and ‘Spy Who Lied,’ the Obama-era Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, will appear before the committee. Let’s see what he will be forced to admit.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – In the immediate wake of one of the most horrifying terror attacks ever filmed, a coalition of 34 leftist Harvard student groups stupidly and offensively circulated a letter that stated that they “hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.”
This, as stomach-churning images, and reports surfaced hourly of the vile murders and atrocities committed by the Hamas jihadists against over 1,000 Israeli civilians, entire families, children, even babies.
Not to mention over 25 Americans were killed and scores kidnapped.
Well, this time, things didn’t go as planned for the lefty Ivy League students accustomed to being coddled by woke corporate executives.
The response from Wall Street leaders, and soon other titans of corporate America was swift.
Bill Ackman the billionaire founder and CEO of hedge fund giant Pershing Square Capital Management, wrote on his X social media account on Tuesday:
I have been asked by a number of CEOs if Harvard would release a list of the members of each of the Harvard organizations that have issued the letter assigning sole responsibility for Hamas’ heinous acts to Israel, so as to insure [sic] that none of us inadvertently hire any of their members.
“If, in fact, their members support the letter they have released, the names of the signatories should be made public so their views are publicly known.”
Ackman, a Harvard grad worth $3.5 billion, added: “One should not be able to hide behind a corporate shield when issuing statements supporting the actions of terrorists, who, we now learn, have beheaded babies, among other inconceivably despicable acts.”
Soon, other CEOs were joining him.
Jonathan Newman, CEO of salad chain Sweetgreen, quickly seconded Ackman in urging that the signatories of the letter be banned from future employment.
“I would like to know so I know never to hire these people,” Newman wrote in response to Ackman’s post on X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday.
“Same,” David Duel, CEO of health care services firm EasyHealth, wrote in response to Newman.
Many other executives posted agreement with Ackman, such as Stephen Ready, CEO of marketing firm Inspired who posted “this is a must” and Michael Broukhim, CEO of FabFitFun, who said to Ackman: “We are in as well.”
Meanwhile, as The New York Post reported, others signaled their approval of his post with a supportive emoji or a gesture of agreement. These included: Hu Montague, founder, and vice president of construction company Diligent; Art Levy, head of strategy at payments platform Brex; and Jake Wurzak, the CEO of hospitality group Dovehill Capital Management.
The Post added that after the online fusillade from so many potential future employers, many of the spineless lefties responsible for the letter quickly ran for the hills.
“The backlash and possible blacklisting has led to a flurry of backpedaling by four of the initial student organizations attached to the inflammatory statement — while board members of other groups have quit in an effort to distance themselves.”
Amnesty International at Harvard, Harvard College Act on a Dream, the Harvard Undergraduate Nepali Student Association, the Harvard Islamic Society, and Harvard Undergraduate Ghungroo, are among the groups that have since recanted according to the Harvard Crimson.
In fairness, many organizations didn’t know one of their representatives had signed on the group’s behalf.
To Harvard’s credit, many other student groups and faculty expressed outrage at the letter, and their fellow students and colleagues.
According to the campus paper, at least 17 other Harvard groups have joined 500 faculty and staff and 3,000 others in signing a counterstatement attacking the other groups’ letter as “completely wrong and deeply offensive.”
This was followed by 160 faculty members bashing Harvard’s response to the scandal, writing in their own separate letter that it “can be seen as nothing less than condoning the mass murder of civilians based only on their nationality.”
Its good to see that some at Harvard still have common sense as well as decency and humanity. Its also good to see corporate America responding in the way it has to these snively terror enabling leftist college students and staff.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Are Democrats wetting their beds about Joe Biden? As I wrote about earlier, even the New York Times (NYT) is admitting Biden is losing in the polls to Donald Trump in five key electoral states.
And David Axelrod, chief strategist for Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns, and a senior advisor to the former president Obama, is sending a message to the elderly Biden – “this is your last chance – get out now.”
This is one of Obama’s top advisors, so it seems like a veiled message from the ex-president himself to Biden that it’s time to quit. We will likely hear this chorus to grow among Democrat movers and shakers.
As reported by The Hill:
When questioned about his comments Monday, Axelrod told CNN that it’s a good time for Biden to check if he should keep up his campaign. Sunday marked one year before the election.
“As I’ve said for like a couple years now, the issue’s not — for him, is not political, it’s actuarial. You can see that in this poll and there’s just a lot of concern about the age issue, and that is something I think he needs to ponder. Just do a check and say, ‘Is this the right thing to do?’” Axelrod said.
“Is this the best path? I suspect that he will say yes, but time is fleeting here, and this is probably the last moment for him to do that check, and it’s probably good if he does,” the Obama alum added.
By ‘actuarial,’ Axelrod was referring to Biden’s age, calling it is “his biggest liability” and something he cannot change.
“Among all the unpredictables there is one thing that is sure: the age arrow only points in one direction,” Axelrod wrote on X. Meaning, Biden is only going downhill from here.
The NYT poll found Biden being trounced by Trump in five out of six battleground states including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania by margins of 3 to 10 points.
The poll also found that 71 percent of registered voters said they agree to some degree that Biden is “just too old to be an effective president.” 62 percent of participants said Biden did not have the “mental sharpness to be an effective president.”
The Hill added: “Axelrod told CNN that he’s not reacting to one poll with his comments but has had conversations with people and finds 2024 a unique year considering the threat of Trump — who is leading the GOP primary race — on the other side of the aisle.”
The Hill continued:
“Trump is a dangerous, unhinged demagogue whose brazen disdain for the rules, [norms], laws and institutions or democracy should be disqualifying,” Axelrod wrote in a separate post. “But the stakes of miscalculation here are too dramatic to ignore.”
I would add that maybe the growing GOP impeachment inquiry into the Biden family business – ‘influence peddling’ – and the tax fraud and gun indictments against Hunter Biden, are also worrying Democrats.
Echoing the growing talking points about Biden quitting while he still can, a separate Hill piece reported:
Arguing Biden is “justly proud of his accomplishments,” Axelrod said Biden’s poll numbers will “send tremors of doubt” through the Democratic Party.
“Not ‘bed-wetting,’” but legitimate concern, Axelrod wrote…
“Only @JoeBiden can make this decision,” he continued. “If he continues to run, he will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. What he needs to decide is whether that is wise; whether it’s in HIS best interest or the country’s?”
I don’t know about you, but I sense there is a lot of Democrat bed-wetting about Biden going around right now.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Totally tone deaf. Just a little reminder of how ridiculously biased, partisan and idiotic our mainstream media has become, including the fluffy fashion forums.
First Lady Jill Biden, the incredibly unstylish, power-hungry, social climbing, faux intellectual with an unserious Doctor of Education (EdD), has again graced the cover of Vogue magazine.
This, her third time, right before the upcoming election. (RELATED: Poor Sign Placement Haunts Jill Biden At Hunter High School)
The New York Post noted how remarkably out of touch the Biden White House is:
After Biden’s horrific debate performance on Thursday, much of the media world reluctantly conceded that our 46th president looks like a lost toddler.
And then there’s Vogue — which literally couldn’t stop the presses. The fashion-bible-turned-Dem-PR-machine was already rolling out its July issue, with cover model Jill Biden in a silk cream Ralph Lauren dress that retails for $4,990.
The magazine landed on the internet Monday morning with a resounding, wincing thud.
It was tone deaf. It was tacky — but this shoot and interview, conducted months ago, would have been messy even if the debate disaster had never happened.
Fox News host Jimmy Failla on X had this to say about the horrible caregiver of the elderly and frail Joe Biden:
Melania Trump is an actual super model who speaks 5 languages but she’s NEVER been on the cover of Vogue. Jill Biden commits vicious elder abuse on the world stage and now has two Vogue covers to show for it. Congrats Jill, you’ll be great in “The Devil Wears Depends.”
Newsweek noted the backlash:
Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”
C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”
Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”
Dr. Jill, as she insists on being called, first appeared on a Vogue cover in 2021 right after Joe Biden was inaugurated. She later appeared on the cover of the digital Winter 2023 issue.
Meanwhile, Melania Trump, an actual former supermodel who speaks several languages, and was exemplary, and always stylish and immaculately attired, as first lady is still shunned by the fashion world.
Back in 2005, when she was getting married to The Donald, and well before Trump became president, Melania did get her own Vogue cover as Trump’s new bride. But oddly, she never again got a cover for Vogue or any other fashion, or mainstream magazine. (RELATED: Melania Trump Addresses Jan. 6 for First Time)
Newsweek noted the backlash:
Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”
C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”
Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”
The fact that she never landed a Vogue cover in her White House years was such a point of consternation that the former First Lady Trump criticized Wintour, who also serves as Condé Nast’s chief content officer, for it during a 2022 Fox News interview.
WWD reported:
As Jill Biden‘s role in encouraging President Joe Biden to stay in the presidential race — despite his lackluster performance in Thursday night’s debate with Donald Trump — continues to be hashed over in the media and around the globe, Vogue debuted its August issue with the first lady on its cover.
In this already deeply divided country, the Condé Nast fashion magazine — intentionally or not — has ratcheted up the public dispute about Biden’s full-steam-ahead plans. As of Monday afternoon, Vogue‘s post of the first lady’s cover had 51,960 likes and 5,286 comments. The first lady donned an ivory Ralph Lauren Collection dress for the Norman Jean Roy-shot cover that accompanied Maya Singer’s interview.
Of course, Vogue’s editorial direction is strongly liberal. WWD added:
Requests for comment from Vogue’s global editorial director Anna Wintour and Singer through a Vogue spokesperson were declined. The company spokesperson said, “It’s no secret that Anna has been a supporter of Democratic campaigns for decades. Our August cover story is a look at the tremendous work Dr. Biden has done, and the most urgent issues in 2024 and beyond.”
Meanwhile, a parting comment: Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt wrote, “Nice puff piece on the most valueless person in America and her bid to keep her corpse-like husband into the White House to stay relevant.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Americans who purchased Bibles, sporting goods or products associated with former President Donald Trump were flagged for surveillance by a federal government spy program, U.S. House investigators reveal.
After the January 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, FBI officials told banks that Americans who support President Trump or express religious views may be suspected terrorists, and demanded banks report customers whose transactions indicated they may be political conservatives.
Such blanket surveillance is prohibited by the United States Constitution, which requires the federal government to secure a warrant, based on probable cause, specifically naming the person targeted.
“New documents obtained by the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government reveal that the federal government flagged terms like “MAGA” and “TRUMP” for financial institutions if Americans used those phrases when completing transactions,” the U.S. House Judiciary Committee revealed in a statement.
“Individuals who shopped at stores like Cabela’s or Dick’s Sporting Goods, or purchased religious texts like a bible, may also have had their transactions flagged. This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious concerns about the FBI’s respect for fundamental civil liberties,” the Committee stated.
In response, the Committee is demanding senior government officials appear for questioning.
“In light of these revelations, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has requested transcribed interviews from Peter Sullivan, Senior Private Sector Partner for Outreach in the Strategic Partner Engagement Section of the FBI, and Noah Bishoff, former Director of the Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations Division of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN),” the Committee reveals.
Jordan’s letter to Noah Bishoff reads, in part:
“The Committee and Select Subcommittee have obtained documents indicating that following January 6, 2021, FinCEN distributed materials to financial institutions that, among other things, outline the ‘typologies’ of various persons of interest and provide financial institutions with suggested search terms and Merchant Category Codes (MCCs) for identifying transactions on behalf of federal law enforcement. These materials included a document recommending the use of generic terms like ‘TRUMP’ and ‘MAGA’ to ‘search Zelle payment messages’ as well as a ‘prior FinCEN analysis’ of ‘Lone Actor/Homegrown Violent Extremism Indicators.’ According to this analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of ‘extremism’ indicators that include ‘transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets, for travel to areas with no apparent purpose,’ or ‘the purchase of books (including religious texts) and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views.’ In other words, FinCEN urged large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression.
“In addition, the Committee and Select Subcommittee have obtained documents showing that FinCEN distributed slides, prepared by a financial institution, explaining how other financial institutions can use MCC codes to detect customers whose transactions may reflect ‘potential active shooters, [and] who may include dangerous International Terrorists / Domestic Terrorists / Homegrown Violent Extremists (“Lone Wolves”).’ For example, the slides instruct financial institutions to query for transactions using certain MCC codes such as ‘3484: Small Arms,’ ‘5091: Sporting and Recreational Goods and Supplies,’ and the keywords ‘Cabela’s,’ and ‘Dick’s Sporting Goods,’ among several others. Despite these transactions having no apparent criminal nexus—and, in fact, relate to Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights—FinCEN seems to have adopted a characterization of these Americans as potential threat actors. This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious doubts about FinCEN’s respect for fundamental civil liberties.
“As the former Director of the Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations Division, you engaged regularly with financial institutions following the events of January 6, 2021, including the distribution of material about how financial institutions could use private customer information to assist federal law enforcement. As such, your testimony will aid our oversight. In particular, your testimony will help to inform the Committee and Select Subcommittee about federal law enforcement’s mass accumulation and use of Americans’ private information without legal process; FinCEN’s protocols, if any, to safeguard Americans’ privacy and constitutional rights in the receipt and use of such information; and FinCEN’s general engagement with the private sector on law-enforcement matters.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
