House Weaponization Committee Finds: Feds Label Conservative Views as ‘Violent Extremism’ in Financial Surveillance

A Disturbing Report Reveals⁤ Federal⁣ Law Enforcement’s Surveillance of Americans’ Financial Activities

A ⁤ new report from⁢ the Select Subcommittee on⁢ the Weaponization of the Federal Government has uncovered alarming findings. It reveals that federal law enforcement agencies have enlisted major ‍banks ⁣to monitor customers⁣ who oppose gun control⁤ and support strong​ border policies, equating these conservative views ‍with potential “violent extremism.”

The investigation into ⁢the surveillance of Americans’ financial activities began ⁢in ⁢May 2023, following the revelation that Bank of America had voluntarily ⁢handed over customer‌ data to the feds in connection with ‍the January 6, 2021 ‌Capitol protests.

FBI whistleblowers alleged ⁢that Bank of​ America ‌provided ‌the‍ agency​ with records from a “huge​ list” of customers who were in Washington D.C. on or around that ⁤date or who ‍made firearm ⁣purchases during that time. These actions were taken without warrants, probable cause, or constitutional protections.

After a year-long investigation,⁣ the committee discovered ⁤that ⁣the FBI collaborated not only with Bank of America but also⁣ with other financial institutions like Barclays, U.S. Bank, Charles Schwab, ‍HSBC,​ and PayPal.⁢ These​ institutions voluntarily shared private customer banking records​ “with federal law enforcement ⁣outside of normal‍ legal process.” The agencies were particularly interested in purchases from sporting goods stores that sell ‍firearms. Shockingly, the investigation also found that the FBI⁣ and other agencies‍ flagged terms like “Trump,” “MAGA,” and “Bible” ⁢for ‍banks to search in the transactions of‌ customers who were not‍ suspected of any crime.​ The agency even suggested that buying‍ “religious texts” could ‍be an indication of “extremism.”

One ​of the most explosive revelations is an intelligence document titled “Domestic Violent Extremists ​Likely Emboldened in Aftermath ​of Capitol ⁣Breach,” which the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National‌ Counterterrorism Center shared‍ with approximately 650 private financial institutions. ‌This ⁢document identifies certain viewpoints, such as opposition to gun control legislation, support for border control, opposition to COVID-19 lockdowns‍ and vaccine mandates, and ⁢belief⁤ in a deep state, as potential indicators of being a⁣ violent extremist. The⁢ financial‍ institutions ​were asked to search ‍customer​ transaction ​records​ for ⁤evidence of these beliefs and share⁢ the⁢ data with the agencies. Additionally, a ‍secret‌ portal was created⁢ for a select group of major banking institutions to facilitate ongoing backchannel‍ information sharing.

The‌ Weaponization‌ of Financial Institutions Against⁣ Conservatives

The‍ subcommittee’s report concludes⁣ that⁣ federal law enforcement agencies have weaponized‌ financial institutions against conservatives. According to the report, “support for ‍typical conservative policies…may result in⁢ an individual being labeled ⁤by the FBI as [domestic violence extremist] ‘Likely to Pose [an] Increasing Threat at Lawful Protests, Rallies,⁢ [and] Demonstrations.'”

During a⁢ hearing related to these findings, subcommittee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) ‌expressed concern⁢ over the message being​ sent by federal ⁤authorities, stating that ‌”if you’ve⁢ got the wrong political beliefs, you’re potentially a domestic violent extremist.”

Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) ‍has responded to these‍ revelations by introducing the “Protecting⁣ Privacy in Purchases Act,” which aims to ban banks and credit card companies from using ⁢codes to track gun purchases. However, this bill does not address the broader terms that the FBI and other agencies were asking banks⁣ to⁢ search.

Brian Knight, Senior Research ⁢Fellow⁣ at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, testified during the hearing that ⁣efforts should be ​made to protect Americans from unconstitutional financial data collection⁤ at the‍ bank level. He emphasized the importance of preventing the collection‍ of ⁢data at the bank level, as current laws allow‌ the government access⁢ to that data once ⁣the⁣ bank possesses ‍it.

Notably,‌ Jordan Peterson, a Daily Wire personality, also testified at the hearing, ⁢warning that​ the practices employed by the FBI and other ⁣federal agencies could lead ⁢to a Chinese-style social credit‌ system, where individuals with disfavored⁣ views face significant ‌obstacles in conducting financial transactions.

These revelations highlight the concerning ​collaboration between ‍big government and big banks to target Americans based on ⁤their legal and constitutional behavior.⁤ It ⁢is crucial ​to address these issues legislatively and protect⁣ Americans’ privacy and‌ constitutional ⁢rights.

Listen ‍to‍ the full report on Morning Wire.

How ⁣does the collaboration between federal‍ law enforcement agencies and financial institutions in monitoring individuals ⁣based on their political beliefs ​potentially violate constitutional protections?

Ing ​flagged as a⁤ potential violent extremist.”‍ This raises serious concerns about​ the erosion of civil liberties and ​the targeting of individuals based on their ​political beliefs. It is a clear violation of ‍the principles of freedom of⁢ speech and association that are enshrined in the Constitution.

The report highlights the case of a Nevada man who had his bank account closed and​ his ⁤funds frozen ‍simply because he ‌expressed support for border control and ⁤opposed gun‌ control. This individual was not involved ‌in any criminal activity and there⁣ was no legitimate reason for his financial ​transactions to be scrutinized. It is deeply troubling ‍that expressing ​conservative views and engaging in lawful activities can now be grounds for suspicion and surveillance by federal law⁤ enforcement agencies.

The collaboration between federal law enforcement agencies and financial institutions ​to monitor individuals based ‌on their political beliefs sets a⁣ dangerous precedent. It undermines the fundamental principles of democracy‍ and threatens the rights of​ Americans to express their opinions freely without fear of retribution.

The‌ ramifications‌ of this surveillance extend beyond the realm of financial activities. If‍ individuals are ‍targeted and flagged as potential violent extremists ⁢based on their political beliefs, it could have a chilling effect on political discourse and discourage individuals from exercising their right to free speech.‌ It creates an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, where individuals may self-censor out of concern that their financial transactions will ⁢be ​monitored and used against them.

Moreover, the broad use of terms like “Trump,” “MAGA,” and “Bible” as indicators of potential extremism not only unfairly ⁤targets conservatives, ‍but also highlights a troubling bias ⁤within federal law enforcement⁢ agencies. Such keyword surveillance undermines⁣ the principles of equality and fairness that ​should guide ‍our justice system.

The report concludes with a series of recommendations ⁤to address these alarming​ findings.⁣ It calls for stricter oversight and accountability of federal law enforcement ⁣agencies to ‌ensure that ⁤their actions ​adhere to constitutional ⁣protections. It also emphasizes the need for clear guidelines and limitations on the collection and ⁢use of financial data by these⁤ agencies.

In a democratic‌ society, it is essential that citizens can express their opinions and engage in political activities free from unwarranted surveillance and discrimination. The revelations in this report raise serious ‌questions about the balance between security ⁣and civil liberties. It⁣ is crucial that ‌steps are‍ taken to restore trust and protect the⁣ rights of ⁣all Americans, ⁢irrespective of their⁣ political‌ beliefs.