Executive order created surveillance procedure
By WND News Services January 18, 2024
By Jason Cohen
Daily Caller News Foundation
Joe Biden’s administration established a covert court that safeguards the privacy rights of Europeans under U.S. law, but not those of Americans, Politico reported.
The Biden administration created the Data Protection Review Court (DPRC) at an unspecified time and location after receiving authorization under an October 2022 executive order, which resolved a legal clash between European and American laws that hindered the profitable exchange of consumer data for three years, according to Politico. Europeans, however, have access to the DPRC while Americans do not, even if they think they are subject to inappropriate government surveillance.
Americans have the option to seek recourse for surveillance in federal court, but it is contingent on demonstrating tangible injury or wrongdoing, which is exceedingly difficult to prove, according to Politico.
“We’re in an odd place when non-residents have easier access to a place to raise their concerns about U.S. government surveillance than Americans do,” former chair of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) Adam Klein told Politico.
Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Announces Judges of the Data Protection Review Courthttps://t.co/s9C4ScBdR3 pic.twitter.com/clxiCkCGyK
— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) November 14, 2023
Europeans’ private data can legally be surveilled by United States intelligence agencies, but the DPRC gives them protection, according to Politico. European Commission (EC) officials expressed approval in July.
The DPRC received its panel of eight judges in November, but there is not much else known about the court, according to Politico. Its location is unknown and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has not acknowledged any details about its caseload, nor will the court disclose its decisions.
Plaintiffs are prohibited from showing up to the court in person and, instead, have legal representation through a designated special advocate appointed by the United States attorney general, according to Politico.
Advertisement – story continues below
A DOJ official conceded the secretive nature of the DPRC, but emphasized to Politico the need for tackling government surveillance issues in a covert manner.
“There’s actual honest-to-goodness, something going on behind that, which is the investigation the [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] does and the decision of the court,” the official told Politico.
The PCLOB will conduct oversight of the DPRC in a yearly review under the October executive order, which will lead to its transparency about caseloads, decisions and intelligence agency compliance, officials told Politico. A classified version of the yearly review will go to Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland, congressional intelligence committees and intelligence community leaders, while the public will receive an unclassified version.
“We’re going to try to make as much information public as possible, because the whole point is to inspire confidence that we’re conducting activities appropriately,” the DOJ official told Politico.
Advertisement – story continues below
The White House and DOJ did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Biden Is Ignoring Intelligence Agencies and DHS Reports
By Antonio Graceffo Apr. 4, 2024
White Christians Not a Threat, Border Not Secure
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas claims, “The border is secure,” and President Joe Biden said, “The most dangerous terrorist threat to our homeland is white supremacy.” Not only are they both lying, but they are also ignoring the reports produced by the US Intelligence Community, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense (DoD).
Biden appointees, including the president himself, have claimed that the border is secure and that white Christian nationalists are the greatest threats to national security. These statements weaken our ability to address real threats. If the border is secure, then funding for additional security would be unjustified. And if Biden starts wasting public funds and security resources to hunt down white Christians, he will be leaving the country open to attacks from the real threats: China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and Islamic extremists.
President Trump said he would deport illegal aliens. Kamala Harris went on TV and said that she would “fight for their rights.” This statement presumes that illegal aliens have a right to stay in the United States. DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas actually said, “From day one, this Administration has made clear that a border wall is not the answer.” And certainly, no wall is needed if you do not wish to keep people out.
While the Biden White House and many of his appointees are misrepresenting reality, the intelligence agencies, Department of Defense (DoD), and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), apart from Mayorkas, are doing their duty by identifying the real threats. The Annual Threat Assessment of the United States Intelligence Community identifies the greatest national security threats as China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. The term “white supremacy” is mentioned only once, on page 30. By contrast, the word China appears 91 times and has its own entry in the table of contents. White Supremacy is listed as one of many racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists (RMVE). The report does not say that it is a primary threat. In fact, it reports that, across the entire globe, only 27 people, most of whom were not American, were killed by RMVE since 2022.
The Department of Defense (DoD) National Defense Strategy Report similarly recognizes China and Russia as the two largest threats, followed by North Korea and Iran. The report does not mention white supremacy at all.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recognizes terrorism, both foreign and domestic, as the primary threat. This includes radicalization by foreign entities and the rebuilding of al-Qa’ida and ISIS. After terrorism, DHS expects “illegal drugs produced in Mexico and sold in the United States will continue to kill more Americans than any other threat.” Last year, there was a record number of encounters with migrants at the southern border, including “a growing number of individuals in the Terrorist Screening Data Set (TSDS), also known as the ‘watchlist.’”
This brings us to the false claim that the border is secure.
Trump was attacked for allegedly saying that migrants are not human. What he was actually saying was that with open borders, we are allowing gang members to enter the country, and the gang members have committed such atrocities that they are not human. He was also attacked for saying that Mexico is not sending us their best and their brightest; they are sending us drug dealers and rapists. He did not claim that all migrants were criminals. He said that some were good people. But he was 100% correct in saying that some are gang members, drug dealers, and criminals.
The US permits about 770,000 immigrants to be naturalized each year, which is more than the rest of the world combined. By definition, those who do not qualify to be admitted legally are not the best and the brightest. Trump’s claims are not only supported by logic but also by the reports of U.S. authorities, including DHS, the Intelligence Community, local media along the border, and The Office of Justice Programs, among others.
FBI Director Wray confirmed that the border crisis is a national security threat. The DEA reported that “Fentanyl is the greatest threat facing Americans today.” Fentanyl is manufactured in Mexico by cartels, using chemicals from China. It is then smuggled over the border by illegal aliens and distributed through street gangs with ties to the cartel. Often, these gangs have members who are illegal aliens and have been trafficked to the United States to work in illicit businesses such as drug dealing, prostitution, and even murder.
The Annual Threat Assessment of the United States Intelligence Community states that Mexico-based Transnational Crime Organizations (TCOs) “are the dominant producers and suppliers of illicit drugs to the U.S. market, including fentanyl, heroin, methamphetamine, and South American-sourced cocaine.”
The Office of Justice Programs issued a report outlining the danger posed by cross-border gangs operating through the southern border. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement wrote, “Transnational criminal street gangs such as MS-13 represent a significant threat to public safety.” A report by the Air Command and Staff College Air University stated, “Mexican Cartels along our Southern border pose a serious threat to our national safety and public health.” Furthermore, the report explained why the cartel threat is increasing: “As their influence and sophistication grow and the connection between them and terrorist organizations increases, the cartels become a larger threat to our national security.”
In conclusion, apart from Biden, neither the intelligence community, DEA, DHS, FBI, ICE, nor the DoD identified white supremacists as the greatest threat to national security. Additionally, no one other than Mayorkas claimed that the border was secure. By ignoring the reports of our intelligence and security agencies, the administration is increasing the threat to our national security.
https://truthsocial.com/@truethevote/posts/112213554722802354
Jesse Watters Summarizes Judicial Bias/Corruption in the New York ‘Hush Money’ Case
April 3, 2024 | Sundance
Jesse Watters ran a devastating segment last night on radical Judge Juan Merchan who silenced President Donald Trump from talking about his family’s financial ties to the current junk case he is presiding over against Donald Trump in New York City. Judge Merchan should be removed for his conflicts. This is peak corruption and cannot stand.
As Jesse Watters outlined succinctly in his monologue, “Trump is banned from talking about the judge’s family. Why? Because the judge’s family was paid by the Biden campaign. The judge’s family is currently being paid by Adam Schiff over $10 million.”
“The judge is threatening to put Trump in jail for pointing out that his liberal family is getting rich off this trial and richer if he’s convicted.” “The judge’s daughter isn’t seven. She’s 34. He’s not attacking her. He’s just saying what she does for a living. How’s that an attack? He just wants a new judge. One whose family isn’t funded by Democrats.” WATCH:
Jack Smith, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen Are Big Mad at Judge Aileen Cannon Overseeing the Trump Documents Case
April 3, 2024 | Sundance | 219 Comments
Before getting into the weeds, here’s the big picture baseline. All documents and records created within the executive branch are created for the benefit of the head of the Executive Branch, the president.
There is no entity, organization, assembly, institution, person or individual, above the President of the United States. The president holds absolute power and absolute immunity. Everyone within the executive branch works at the pleasure of the president, and all work products are created for his administration. This is the plenary power of the president.
The entire documents case in Florida rests on the principle that another entity supersedes the president within the executive branch. Some unknown, unnamed bureaucracy can override the president and decide for themselves what would be called a “presidential record” and what would be called “classified information.”
Jack Smith, Norm Eisen (pictured left, red tie) and Andrew Weissmann each argue that some other entity rests atop the president and can make this decision.
Judge Aileen Cannon has not determined which constitutional argument is correct, and has told the parties to create jury instructions both ways. The Lawfare crew of Smith, Eisen and Weissmann are going bananas.
[…] Cannon’s first scenario would allow the jury to make a factual determination about whether a former president deemed a record to be personal or official under the PRA. That is nonsensical – presidents are not allowed to designate official records as personal ones, so there is no factual issue for a jury to resolve.
A different set of laws govern the classification process and the rules for handling highly sensitive classified documents — not the PRA. They include Executive Order 13526. One of the authors of this column (Eisen) helped write that executive order. The 11th Circuit has already established that those rules fully apply to former presidents.
Cannon seems to think that the PRA somehow supersedes the executive order and the rest of federal law pertaining to the handling of classified materials. It does not. On the contrary, the PRA defines “personal records” as “all documentary materials … of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.” That cannot possibly include highly classified battle plans, nuclear secrets and the other official documents at issue in this criminal prosecution.
That rules out Cannon’s first hypothetical. But as Smith points out in his filing, the second alternative is just as bad. She made up a legal standard, asking both sides to assume that Trump could have deemed a record personal by simply not including it with the records transmitted to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of his term. If this were true, the mere fact that Trump took the documents with him from the White House would inherently turn them into personal records.
Of course, Trump leaped at this interpretation, fashioning proposed jury instructions that would inevitably result in his acquittal. But, as Smith noted, this approach has no basis in the law — or the facts. Even Trump himself does not seem to have considered classified documents personal after he left the White House, as evidenced in an audio recording CNN obtained last year in which Trump, during a conversation at his Bedminster, New Jersey, estate in 2021, discussed documents remaining classified even though he took them with him upon leaving office. Smith hits this point hard, arguing that Trump’s position that records are personal was “invented” when the controversy over the documents began to emerge in February 2022, over a year after Trump left the White House. (read more)
Related
NarrowPathMinistries 
