Tag Archives: NDAA

This Sounds Innocuous, But It Is Frightening

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Conservative Treehouse reported the following:

Inside the construct of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Congress has agreed to extend the current FISA-702 authorization through April 19. 2024.  Why April 19th?  I believe, based on DOJ/FBI history, there is a very nefarious intent. 

The article goes on to explain that April 19th is the end of the primary election season. The deep state will be free to abuse FISA during the primary elections in an attempt to skew the election results. This is another tool the deep state is going to use in their war against President Trump.

The article notes:

On/around April 19, 2024, the GOP nominee will likely have locked down the nomination.  The nominee is likely to be Donald Trump.

Beyond the extension motive, the previous counterintelligence investigation by the FBI never stopped.  Crossfire Hurricane evolved into the Mueller special counsel investigation.  The same investigative units from the FBI then transferred into the Jack Smith special counsel.  There is no reason to believe a counterintelligence investigation does not underpin the legal authorities by which the current DOJ is keeping candidate Donald Trump under surveillance today.

Using the wording within the criminal indictment, the DOJ-NSD could -likely is- considering Donald Trump a national security threat.  All indications from the Jack Smith prosecution point in this direction.  There is no countervailing data that would suggest the DOJ is not considering Donald Trump a national security threat.  As a result, it is very likely candidate Trump is once again under a FISA authorized Title-1 surveillance warrant….. and everyone within two hops of him would be under the same.

On/around April 19, 2024, if Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee, the FISA court might look at any renewal authorities differently.  It’s one thing to have American citizen Donald Trump under title-1 surveillance, it is another thing entirely to have the opposing candidate to the current administration under legally authorized surveillance by the DOJ-NSD.

The end date of April 19, 2024, would align with a need to have more than reasonable suspicion to retain the surveillance. At least, that’s the way the FISC would likely look at it.

If Occam’s razor is applied to the current datapoints, the most likely scenario for the DOJ-NSD, FBI and Jack Smith special counsel investigative units, is that Donald Trump is currently under FISC authorized title-1 surveillance.

It’s where we are, folks. The only solution is an overwhelming victory for President Trump in 2024. Otherwise, we will have morphed into a police state.

The Fight For Freedom Continues

Posted on by

On Monday, Just the News posted an article about the continuing fight against vaccine mandates by several marines [in spite of the fact that the DOD rescinded the mandate in compliance with the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act)].

The article reports:

Several members of the U.S. Marines are still fighting the U.S. Department of Defense in a lawsuit they filed over its August 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

The DOD asked the court to dismiss the case after Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was forced to drop the mandate by Congress. President Joe Biden, who strongly opposed repealing the mandate, agreed to repealing it when he signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law in December.

Liberty Counsel, the Orlando-based religious freedom legal advocacy organization representing Navy and Marine Corps service members, filed a motion with the court on Wednesday asking the court to continue the case. It pointed to statements made in the Defense secretary’s latest guidance that indicate he would enact another COVID-vaccine mandate in the future and to the administration’s argument that the district court has no jurisdiction over military matters, a claim the presiding judge refutes.

The article concludes:

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Repealing the COVID shot mandate for military members does not moot this case. Joe Biden and the Department of Defense continue to argue courts have no jurisdiction over the military, an argument that the courts have soundly rejected. The history of this case clearly demonstrates the open violation of the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This lawlessness must end. Our military members who love God and America have been horribly abused and they must be honored again.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and U.S. Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., filed companion bills that would require the DOD to reinstate any service member separated solely for COVID-19 vaccine status who wants to return to service, to credit all service members with the time of involuntary separation for retirement pay calculations, restore their rank if they were demoted, and compensate them for any pay and benefits lost due to demotions.

The bills also would prohibit the Defense secretary from issuing any replacement COVID-19 vaccine mandates without Congressional approval, require “general” discharges to be changed to “honorable” and require any records with adverse actions based solely on COVID-19 vaccine status to be expunged.

The vaccine has not been around long enough for us to evaluate its long-term effects. Why are we demanding that young people who are not at risk from Covid take an unproven vaccine?

It’s About Time

Posted on by

The only good thing that I can find in the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) is the fact that soldiers killed in the ‘workplace violence’ at Fort Hood may actually receive Purple Hearts and have the events of November 5, 2009, actually regarded as the act of domestic terrorism that they actually were.

Yesterday the Military Times reported:

Victims of the 2009 Fort Hood shootings will be eligible to receive Purple Hearts and combat injury benefits under a provision included in the latest defense authorization deal.

The measure is expected to be approved by Congress next week, and would end a five-year quest by Texas lawmakers to get battlefield recognition for the soldiers killed in the deadliest attack on a domestic military installation in U.S. history.

It could also be a financial windfall for the families of the 13 people killed and 32 wounded in the attack.

The latest authorization draft stipulates that Purple Heart medals will be awarded to “members of the armed forces killed or wounded in domestic attacks inspired by foreign terrorist organizations.”

The article points out that decisions on awarding the Purple Heart within the United States after a terrorist attack have not been consistent.

The article reports:

Troops injured at the Pentagon in the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001, received it. Two Army recruiters shot by a radicalized Muslim outside of a recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas, in June 2009 did not.

Generally speaking, the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) is a bad bill–it cuts military benefits at a time when we are making a lot of demands on our volunteer military (see rightwinggranny). President Obama is threatening to veto the NDAA, and frankly that would not break my heart. This bill needs to be redone after the new Congress is sworn in in 2015. If there is a week gap in funding, we can pay some things late–other than fixing the Purple Heart situation for Fort Hood victims, the bill needs to be changed. Also, if this bill is what the Republican leadership is going to give us, we need new Republican leadership.