Mission creep is a serious problem in the federal government, and ongoing investigations by House Republicans into the “weaponization” of government misdeeds show how pervasive and serious the problem is.
The FBI, the Department of Justice, the CIA, and even the Internal Revenue Service, as we have seen, appear to lure operatives to use against political opponents or to interfere with allies.But what about the government agencies that are supposed to protect us from cyberthreats? Interim report From the House Judiciary Committee highlight A politically motivated mission sneaks up where we least expected it: the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). (Related: Left-Wing Billionaire Nonprofit-Funded DHS-Linked ‘Portal’ Used to Censor Social Media Platforms)
An agency of the Department of Homeland Security, CISA was founded in 2018 with a simple, non-political mission statement: “Prepare for, respond to, and mitigate cyberattacks.”As report here BeforeCISA works to prevent state-sanctioned hackers from attacking and compromising America’s digital infrastructure.
This agency exists to alert businesses and government agencies to unresolved computer vulnerabilities. It also works to thwart ransomware attacks against U.S. companies and their computer networks, and to minimize damage from cyberattacks from domestic and foreign sources. So CISA’s mission statement was to monitor attacks against digital “boxes and wires.”
Instead, according to a report from the House Judiciary Committee, document, CISA “has facilitated censorship of Americans both directly and through third-party intermediaries.” Under President Joe Biden, the agency, under the leadership of Jen Easterly, stepped up efforts to flag “misinformation and disinformation” on social media.
According to documents obtained by the commission only through a subpoena, CISA was considering creating a counter-misinformation “rapid response team” that could be physically deployed across the United States to root out what it determined to be such “misinformation.” For example, the agency has done everything from ensuring the digital security of America’s voting systems to censoring criticism of those systems. (Related: Exclusive: DHS ‘Misinformation’ Commission Dismisses Speech Suppression Concern as ‘Malicious’)
internal communication The proportion of agency staff and members of their external advisory groups indicates that they knew their legal base was weak. Members of the CISA Advisory Board are distressed that “it is only a matter of time before someone notices us and starts asking about our work,” the report said.
After the Biden administration was sued in federal court, CISA outsourced censorship duties to a nonprofit funded by CISA itself. The Judiciary Commission report accuses the outsourcing of implied admission that CISA knew its censorship activities were unconstitutional. Meanwhile, CISA said it had entrusted the material to another agency to “avoid the appearance of government propaganda.”
Let’s take a look at the agency today website and twitter account shows legal activity only, issuing warnings about ransomware attacks and “zero-day” exploits, warnings about hardware vulnerabilities, and educational advice for ordinary Americans to stay safe while they’re online. This is an important effort because the United States is constantly under attack from state-sanctioned and state-sanctioned hackers based in Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.
These hackers extort millions of dollars from companies and institutions through outright attacks that can cripple networks and computers. Cybercriminals enter eagerly for cash, while cyberespionage attacks enter silently, trying to gather secrets without being detected. Blocking them with a firewall is a matter of national security.
Diluting that mission by diving into politically motivated censorship is therefore unconscionable and dangerous. The Judiciary Commission, as a pledge of its mandate, deserves to pursue this investigation to prevent CISA from going off track again.
But there is more to see, and more to eradicate, than just a thwarted attempt by government officials to crack down on the political discourse of Americans in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The use of non-profits funded or affiliated with politics to do the government’s dirty work. for it.
Note that CISA, when faced with a pending lawsuit over its conduct, has entrusted its “election misinformation” activity to a non-profit organization called the Center for Internet Security (CIS). The CIS was the sole conduit for election officials to report what they independently determined to be false or misleading election claims to large social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, according to the report.
this is, action During the Barack Obama administration, he served as Director of the Justice Department under then-Attorney General Eric Holder. The Government Accountability Institute research It is part of the DOJ’s pattern of using “consent decrees” to compel private companies threatened with antidiscrimination lawsuits to contribute funds to one or more designated nonprofits on a DOJ-provided list.
These groups are primarily “social justice warriors” who use their funds to wield political pressure. The practice was banned as soon as the Trump administration took office in 2017, but the ban was quietly revoked by Biden four years later.
The CIS enjoys government funding for its activities, much of which is understandably focused on cyberattack countermeasures. But the company’s move to step up censorship of “election misinformation” came to light in the now-famous dump of internal chatter known as the “Twitter file.”
Not only that, but the woman whose posts Twitter made the fateful decision to censor in October 2020. new york postVijaya Gade, who gave the 2020 scoop on Hunter Biden’s laptop, became a member of the CISA’s “Protecting Critical Infrastructure Against Misinformation and Disinformation” subcommittee since the Biden administration took office. As you may remember, Gadde was rudely fired by Elon Musk on his first day owning Twitter.
Gadde was a member of this subcommittee, known as the “MDM Subcommittee,” which also included Dr. Kate Starbird of the University of Washington and former CIA Counsel Suzanne Spalding. according to In response to The Intercept’s report, the commission recommended in 2022 that CISA closely monitor “social media platforms of all sizes, mainstream media, cable news, bipartisan media, talk radio, and other online resources.” (Related: Exclusive: DHS panel courts left-wing agents to help crack down on ‘misinformation’)
The MDM Commission’s report called on government agencies to take steps to curb the “spreading of false and misleading information” and recommended that CISA keep up-to-date with ongoing research on “deception and criminal activity.” pre-bankingInformation that the Commission defines as either unknowingly false (disinformation), intentionally planted by hostile foreign actors (disinformation), or information that the Commission calls “malicious information.” report as “information that may be factual but is used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”
The Judiciary Commission’s efforts to date have highlighted the construction of a “feedback loop.” This means that government agencies can set up and use advisory committees far beyond their statutory mandates, and use them as a cover to exercise powers that Congress did not originally intend.
How many more federal agencies are there doing something similar?
Peter Schweitzer, Director of the Government Accountability Institute, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute and author of the new book. Red-handed: How America’s elite contributed to China’s victory.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
This article was originally published on the Gatestone Institute website and can be found here. here.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, non-partisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers capable of serving large audiences. All reissues must include our company logo, press byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
