Creating Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” …
As an American citizen, I am deeply disturbed by the Department of Homeland Security’s creation of a secret group known as the Disinformation Governance Board, whose existence was revealed only in response to a question about what Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ department is doing to help minority communities combat election disinformation.
The Board is patently illegal under the First Amendment's speech protections, which begs the question, why is the federal government further inserting itself into election politics when it might be illegal?
18 U.S. Code § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States, or by any department or agency thereof, or by the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or any political subdivision, municipality, or agency thereof, or agency of such political subdivision or municipality (including any corporation owned or controlled by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States or by any such political subdivision, municipality, or agency), in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States, or any department or agency thereof, uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
And why the Disinformation Governance Board is being led by a rabid progressive communist democrat partisan hack, Nina Jankowicz, who has criticized First Amendment rights and dismissed troubling reports of Hunter Biden’s laptop as a “Trump campaign” ploy?
Alejandro Mayorkas should be in prison…
It is my personal opinion that Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas should be investigated, impeached, and criminally prosecuted for willfully violating federal immigration laws and failing to uphold the constitutional sovereignty of the United States. It now appears he is preparing to interfere with a presidential election on behalf of the Obama/Biden Administration.
The last thing the Biden and Clinton crime families and the Obama Administration, under which crimes were committed, want is the truth. Hence, you find the future head of the DHS “Disinformation Governance Board,” Nina Jankowicz, creating a “narrative” about Hunter Biden’s laptop on October 22, 2020.
(1) Don’t believe what you are reading because it could still be part of an “influence campaign.” The same might be said about every piece of literature coming from a political campaign or press release from the regime’s official press office.
(2) “Context” is shorthand for “let me create a narrative” that explains what you see in the most favorable light to my cause or agenda.
(3) “Fairy tale,” a manipulative term suggesting that the information is false or a fable. Unfortunately, there is a verifiable chain of custody concerning Hunter Biden’s laptop, from Biden’s signature on the repair order to its transfer to FBI agents. Hunter Biden, the Biden family, and government officials have never challenged the ownership of the laptop and its data or the authenticity of the information – some of which have been independently corroborated by email recipients.
Who is Nina Jankowicz?
From her Amazon page, we learn…
Nina Jankowicz is an internationally-recognized expert on disinformation and democratization. Her debut book was How to Lose the Information War, is described as “a persuasive new book on disinformation as a geopolitical strategy.”
Since the start of the Trump era, the United States and the Western world has finally begun to wake up to the threat of online warfare and the attacks from Russia, who flood social media with disinformation, and circulate false and misleading information to fuel fake narratives and make the case for illegal warfare. The question no one seems to be able to answer is: what can the West do about it?
[OCS: The very same thing about could be said about the United States government under the Obama regime and its continuance under the Biden regime where it was not uncommon to “flood social media with disinformation and circulate false and misleading information to fuel fake narratives.”]
Central and Eastern European states, including Ukraine and Poland, however, have been aware of the threat for years. Nina Jankowicz has advised these governments on the front lines of the information war. The lessons she learnt from that fight, and from her attempts to get US congress to act, make for essential reading.
[OCS: I find it deeply troubling that almost all of the Obama players appear to have some involvement with Russia and the generally corrupt Ukraine. One might ask, was Jankowicz a registered lobbyist working on behalf of a foreign regime?]
How to Lose the Information War takes the reader on a journey through five Western governments' responses to Russian information warfare tactics - all of which have failed. She journeys into the campaigns the Russian operatives run, and shows how we can better understand the motivations behind these attacks and how to beat them. Above all, this book shows what is at stake: the future of civil discourse and democracy, and the value of truth itself.
And from her own page…
Jankowicz has extensive media experience, with writing published in many major American newspapers and magazines, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Atlantic. She is a regular guest on major radio and television programs such as the PBS Newshour, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS and Amanpour, the BBC World Service, and NPR’s All Things Considered.
[OCS: Does anyone notice that all of the media outlets and individuals cited here openly support progressive communist democrat causes and individuals.]
Since 2017, Jankowicz has held fellowships at the Wilson Center, where she has been affiliated with the Kennan Institute and the Science and Technology Innovation Program. In 2016-17, she advised the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry on disinformation and strategic communications under the auspices of a Fulbright-Clinton Public Policy Fellowship. Prior to her Fulbright grant, she managed democracy assistance programs to Russia and Belarus at the National Democratic Institute.
About her testimony before Congress…
Statement of NINA JANKOWICZ, Disinformation Fellow, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Science and Technology Innovation Program BEFORE THE UNITED STATES HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE Concerning “ Misinformation, Conspiracy Theories, and ‘Infodemics’: Stopping the Spread Online” (October 15, 2020)
[OCS: Note the date of her testimony, one week before the tweet on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Note also, that her “testimony” was before the corrupt Intelligence Committee chaired by Representative Adam Schiff, the notorious progressive communist democrat liar-leaker that falsified evidence and was one of the greatest sources of disinformation related to Russia and Ukraine.]
Chairman Schiff and distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor to testify before you today on the degradation of our information ecosystem and its exploitation by malign actors, both foreign and domestic. This is a threat that is dismantling our democracy. As Americans exercise their democratic rights during this election season, it is critical the nation is informed about how this phenomenon works and how it might blunt their voice and their vote.
… not only have the U.S. Government and social media platforms all but abdicated their responsibility to stop the threat of foreign disinformation over the past four years, domestic disinformation now runs rampant. It is amplified in the media, online, in the halls of Congress, and from the White House itself. It does our adversaries’ work for them, leaving us vulnerable to continued manipulation and leaving our democracy imperiled.
Today I will outline several examples that exemplify the trends in the information space since 2016. They hold several important morals for policymakers. First, disinformation is a threat to democracy, no matter where it comes from or who it benefits, and until our government recognizes this, we cannot hope to counter it. Second, social media platforms’ structures and business models incentivize the spread of disinformation; until these business models change, we will continue to play a never-ending game of Whack-a-Troll. Third, these campaigns have stark implications for women and minorities’ participation in democracy. Finally, I will discuss what I view as the most urgent -- and undervalued -- policies necessary to improve the health of our online information ecosystem.
[OCS: (1) Disinformation may be a threat to democracy when it is not challenged in an open, vigorous debate and no individual or agency purports to hold a monopoly on the truth. In fact, depending on your perspective, there can be many persuasive truths that are equally as valid.
(2) This is a blatant call for centralized information monitoring and censorship which is a violation of our First Amendment freedoms when it is done by the government or independent third party actors acting voluntarily or involuntarily on behalf of the government.
(3) Notice her injection of Marxist class identities when she specifically refers to women and minorities as if they are less intelligent, less discerning, and more easily fooled by disinformation?
(4) We cannot allow the elites, like Jankowicz to control information policies or the narrative.]
The White House Spin...
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, April 28, 2022
Q And then on this new report that the Department of Homeland Security is setting up a Disinformation Governance Board to tackle misinformation ahead of the midterms: Secretary Mayorkas said that part of its intention was to tackle misinformation in Hispanic communities especially. Can you give us an idea of what this board is going to be doing, what their authority would look like?
MS. PSAKI: Sure, Jacqui. I really haven’t dug into this exactly. I mean, we, of course, support this effort, but let me see if I can get more specifics. We know that there has been a range of disinfo out there about a range of topics — I mean, including COVID, for example, and also elections and eligibility. But I will — I will check and see if there’s more specifics.
Q There’s been some criticism of the person who’s been chosen to oversee this board. She had previously called the Hunter Biden laptop a “Trump campaign product,” seeming to discredit its validity — or validity of reporting surrounding that.
How can you assuage concerns of people who are looking at this person who’s been appointed to this position and wondering if she’s going to be able to accurately judge misinformation now that a lot of that reporting has been proven to be factual in some ways?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I don’t have any comments on the laptop.
But what I can tell you is that it sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities. I’m not sure who opposes that effort, and I don’t know who this individual is, so I have no comments on it specifically.
Q Her name is Nina Jankowicz. She also just recently made some polarizing comments about the Twitter — Elon Musk’s Twitter purchase. It’s just getting some pushback from critics who are saying this person may not be the right choice for a board that is run by the Department of Homeland Security. Can you speak to that at all?
MS. PSAKI: I don’t have any information about this individual. I can check on more information about the board.
The progressive communist democrats are in a panic, desperate to control the media and the narrative that could expose their criminality and treasonous actions. And as proof, I offer you Elon Musk and his bid to acquire Twitter and take it private. Why would anybody be opposed to Musk’s desire to open-source Twitter’s content selection and moderation algorithm and ensure free and open speech on a platform that purports to be founded on free speech and has become a de facto public platform?
Keep up the pressure and preserve your freedom; else, we are screwed.