#National Security Committee

[dertaglichedan]

Iranian Parliament Backs Strait of Hormuz Closure After U.S. Strikes

Iran’s parliament on Sunday approved a resolution calling for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the 33-kilometre-wide channel that carries about a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil trade—some 17 to 18 million barrels a day. Lawmakers said the step is a response to overnight U.S. strikes on the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities.

Esmail Kowsari, an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander who sits on parliament’s National Security Committee, told state media that legislators had “reached the conclusion” the waterway should be blocked, but emphasised that Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, chaired by President Masoud Pezeshkian and answerable to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, must take the final decision. Kowsari added that the IRGC is prepared to act “if circumstances require,” and no timetable has been set.

Any shutdown of the strait would disrupt tanker traffic from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar, threatening global energy supplies and likely lifting oil prices sharply. Brent futures have already risen more than 10 % since regional hostilities escalated this month. The U.S. Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, patrols the corridor and has warned that attempts to block it would invite a military response.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Walter Einenkel at Daily Kos:

Rep. Jamie Raskin sent a letter to Donald Trump’s transition team on Friday, seeking “clear assurance that the Trump-Vance Transition will require that all nominees receive a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check before they are considered by the Senate.”

The letter comes a little more than a week after the Trump transition team finally signed an agreement with the Department of Justice allowing the team to “submit names for background checks and security clearances.” Trump’s team has dragged its feet signing what are normally standard transition documents, including an ethics agreement Trump himself signed into law. “I request that the Trump-Vance Transition commit immediately to requiring all nominees to undergo FBI background checks before they are considered by the Senate,” Raskin reiterated, adding that the nominees must also ”submit to vetting before they are afforded any access to classified information.” In his current capacity as the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, the Maryland Democrat notes that “reports indicate that some nominees may be refusing to undergo FBI background checks before the Trump Administration takes office,” referencing reports that Trump’s crew might look to a third-party private group for background checks as a way around the FBI.

House Oversight Committee ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told the Trump Transition Team that all nominees considered for Senate confirmation be subjected to FBI background checks before the Senates votes on whether to confirm or not confirm nominees.

[trump-executive-orders]

Organization of the National Security Council and Subcommittees

Issued January 20, 2025.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following:

As President, my highest priority and responsibility is to ensure the safety and security of the United States and its people. The national and homeland security threats facing the United States are complex and rapidly evolving. These issues often do not fit neatly into the categories that single departments and agencies are designed to optimally address, a fact recognized and exploited by our strategic competitors and adversaries in their adoption of whole-of-government and even whole-of-society approaches.

The United States Government's decision-making structures and processes to address national security challenges must therefore be equally adaptive and comprehensive. They must be able to competently design and execute cooperative and integrated interagency solutions to address these problems, and protect and advance the national interests of the United States. Therefore, to advise and assist me in this endeavor, I hereby direct that my system for national security policy development, decision-making, implementation, and monitoring shall be organized as set forth in this Memorandum. This Memorandum prevails over any prior orders, directives, memoranda, or other Presidential guidance related to the organization of the National Security Council (NSC or Council).

A. The National Security Council and Supporting Staff

Functions, Responsibilities, and Chairs.

(a) Functions and Responsibilities. The National Security Act of 1947, as amended (the Act), established the NSC to advise the President with respect to the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to national security. The Homeland Security Council (HSC) has the distinct purpose of advising the President on matters pertaining to homeland security. The NSC shall convene as the HSC on topic areas agreed to in advance by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (National Security Advisor) and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security (Homeland Security Advisor). Along with its subordinate committees and staff, the NSC shall be the President's principal means for coordinating Executive departments and agencies in the development and implementation of national and homeland security policies, strategies, activities, and functions, their integration across departments and agencies within their purview, and for long-term strategic planning.

(b) Chairs. The President will chair the NSC. When the President is absent from a meeting of the Council, he may appoint a Cabinet-level official to chair.

2. NSC Staffing Responsibilities of the National Security Advisor.

(a) Role of the National Security Advisor. The National Security Advisor shall be responsible, as appropriate and at the President's direction, for determining the agenda for the NSC, ensuring that the necessary papers are prepared, and recording and communicating the Council actions and Presidential decisions in a timely manner.

(b) Role of the Homeland Security Advisor. When convened as the HSC, the duties referenced in subsection (2)(a) shall be the responsibility of the Homeland Security Advisor.

3. Designating NSC Members, Attendees, and Invitees.

(a) Membership. The NSC membership consists of the statutory members set forth in section 101(c)(1) of the Act (50 U.S.C. 3021(c)(1)):

The President;

The Vice President;

The Secretary of State;

The Secretary of the Treasury;

The Secretary of Defense;

The Secretary of Energy;

The Director of the Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy;

and additional members hereby designated by the President pursuant to section 101(c)(1) of the Act:

The Attorney General;

The Secretary of the Interior;

Chief of Staff to the President (White House Chief of Staff); and

The National Security Advisor.

When the NSC convenes as the HSC, members shall also include:

The Secretary of Homeland Security; and

The Homeland Security Advisor.

(b) NSC Meeting Attendees. The National Security Advisor retains the discretion to determine the attendee list for all meetings of the NSC, including by requesting the attendance of any senior official of the Executive Branch. The Homeland Security Advisor retains this same discretion when the NSC convenes as the HSC. This discretion shall be exercised based on the policy relevance of attendees to the issues being considered, the need for secrecy on sensitive matters, staffing requirements, and other considerations.

As regular practice, the National Security Advisor and Homeland Security Advisor shall include as additional non-voting attendees:

The Director of National Intelligence (non-voting advisor);

The Assistant to the President and Principal Deputy National Security Advisor (non-voting advisor and principal notetaker), or, when convening as the HSC, the Deputy Homeland Security Advisor (non-voting advisor and principal notetaker);

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (non-voting advisor); and

The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (non-voting advisor);

(c) NSC Regular Invitees. Unless specifically restricted, these officials are invited to attend any NSC and HSC meeting as non-voting advisors:

The Assistant to the President and Counsel to the President;

The Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy;

The Assistant to the President for Policy; and

The Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs and Legal Counsel to the National Security Advisor.

4. Right to Propose Agenda Items.

Any NSC member attending a meeting in a voting capacity may propose, in advance and in accordance with a timeline set by the National Security Advisor or his designee, agenda items for their consideration. [A footnote is included here in the original text. This footnote leads to a broken link.] The National Security Advisor will determine whether to include these items on the agenda. The Homeland Security Advisor shall have this same discretion when the Council is convened as the HSC.

5. The National Security Council Staff.

(a) Staff Fusion. There is a single NSC staff within the Executive Office of the President (EOP) that serves both the NSC on national security matters and the HSC when the Council is considering homeland security matters. The staff is headed by a single Executive Secretary, in accordance with section 101(e)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3021(e)(1)) and section 905 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 495).

(b) Purpose. The purposes of the National Security Advisor and subordinate staff are to

(i) advise and assist the President in the course of conducting activities that relate to or affect the carrying out of the President's constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties pertaining to national or homeland security, pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, as amended; [A footnote is included here in the original text. This footnote leads to a broken link.]

(ii) advise and assist the other members of the NSC (and the NSC when convening as the HSC), and others in the White House;

(iii) help the President plan and set priorities, in accordance with section II of the Message of the President in the Reorganization Plan No. 1 or 1977;

(iv) advise and make recommendations to the President with respect to, and establish, integrated domestic, foreign, and military policies and procedures for the departments, agencies, and functions of the Government relating to national and homeland security, pursuant to sections 2 and 101(b)(1) of the Act (50 U.S.C. 3002, 3021(b)(1));

(v) coordinate, facilitate, monitor, oversee, and review Administration policies and their implementation with respect to national security, and make resulting recommendations to the President;

(vi) help the President resolve major conflicts among departments and agencies with regard to national security, in accordance with section II of the Message of the President in the Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1977.

(c) Fair, Balanced, and Thorough Processes. In accordance with sections I and II of the Message of the President in the Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1977, the NSC staff shall ensure that the processes it organizes, coordinates, and manages fairly and thoroughly gather the facts, intelligence, and other relevant information necessary to NSC decisions; fully analyze the issues, consider a full range of views and options; assess the prospects, risks, costs, and implications of each option; and distill these options for the President, other NSC principals, and senior officials participating in the subsidiary committees of the NSC or HSC, in a fair, balanced, and organized way. The National Security Advisor and subordinate NSC staff shall represent the views and differences of NSC principals and other senior officials to the President with accuracy and fidelity.

(d) Policy Development. In accordance with sections I and II of the Message of the President in the Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1977, [A footnote is included here in the original text. The footnote leads to a broken link.] the NSC staff shall facilitate the development and refinement of interagency policy options, and develop additional options besides those proposed by departments and agencies as necessary, both to complement, supplement, and enhance their work, and to offer the President and other NSC principals and other senior officials a sufficiently broad menu of operationally feasible options for consideration, deliberation, and decision.

B. The Principals Committee

Principals Committee Establishment.

(a) (i) Functions and Responsibilities. The Principals Committee (PC) shall continue to serve as the Cabinet-level senior interagency forum for considering policy issues that affect the national security interests of the United States. The PC shall develop options and recommendations for the President on national security and homeland security matters requiring the President's attention, and with the Committee's full consensus shall set priorities, issue policy guidance, and facilitate coordination and integration on national security policy and implementation issues as appropriate that do not require Presidential attention. [There is a footnote here in the original text. This footnote leads to a broken link.] Issues involving matters that are statutorily authorized for decision by a principal, or delegated to a principal by the President, can be coordinated and decided by the principals without requiring Presidential attention.

(ii) Voting and NSC Referral. Consensus is reached when all voting (i.e., non-advisory) attendees present either vote affirmatively for the same decisional option or formally abstain, and all such votes shall be recorded and minuted. Issues for which the Committee fails to reach consensus shall be referred to the NSC for decision, with a formal nonconcurrence required by at least one non-advisory attendee presented for such a referral. Whether an issue requires Presidential attention, and the Committee attendees' positions on the issue itself, shall be separately polled. If a voting attendee does not concur with the determination that Presidential consideration is not required, the issue shall be referred, along with the results of the PC's deliberation on the issue itself and its recommendations, to deliberation by the NSC.

(b) Role of the National Security Advisor. The PC shall be convened and chaired by the National Security Advisor. The Chair shall determine the agenda, location, and meeting materials, in consultation with the appropriate attendees.

(c) Substitute Chairs. At his sole discretion, the National Security Advisor may delegate authority to convene and chair or co-chair the PC to an appropriate attendee of the NSC or EOP policy council senior official. The Homeland Security Advisor, who is Chair when the PC considers matters that would be raised to the NSC convening as the HSC, may similarly delegate such duties.

(d) Right to Propose Agenda Items. Any PC member attending in a voting capacity may propose, in advance and in accordance with a timeline set by the Chair, agenda items for consideration by the PC. The Chair will determine which, if any, shall be included.

2. Executive Secretary Responsibilities and Process.

(a) Responsibilities. The Executive Secretary shall ensure that the necessary papers are prepared, serve as executive secretary of the PC, and shall record and communicate accurately, and in a timely manner, the Committee's conclusions and decisions, what was not decided, and any responsibilities for implementation by departments and agencies or taskings to the Deputies Committee or subsidiary policy coordination committees that have been agreed or assigned, if appropriate. [There is a footnote here in the original text. This footnote leads to a broken link.] The Executive Secretary shall generally be assisted in these tasks by the senior directors and other NSC staff by the senior directors and other NSC staff.

(b) Dispute Resolution Process. If a PC voting attendee disputes that the conclusions or decisions of the PC were correctly minuted, this must be communicated in writing to the Executive Secretary and the National Security Advisor (and any substitute Chair if appropriate) within three business days, although those officials may allow additional time if exigent or extenuating circumstances require it. If resolution of the dispute cannot be achieved, and any necessary amended report of the PC proceedings was issued within a week of the dispute being communicated, the disputing attendee may appeal the matter to the White House Chief of Staff or, should that official so designate, to the White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, whose decision shall be final.

3. Principals Committee Attendees and Invitees.

(a) Principals Committee Attendees.

(i) The National Security Advisor retains the discretion to determine the attendee list for all PC meetings on national security. The Homeland Security Advisor retains this same discretion when chairing the PC. This discretion shall be exercised based on the policy relevance of attendees to the issues being considered, the need for secrecy on sensitive matters, staffing needs, and other considerations. As regular practice, the National Security Advisor and Homeland Security Advisor shall include as additional non-voting attendees:

The Director of National Intelligence;

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff;

The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency;

The Principal Deputy National Security Advisor;

the National Security Advisor to the Vice President; and

The Executive Secretary (principal notetaker).

(ii) PC Regular Invitees. Unless specifically restricted, these officials are invited to attend any PC meeting as non-voting advisors:

The Assistant to the President and Counselor to the President;

The Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy;

The Assistant to the President for Policy; and

The Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs and Legal Counsel to the National Security Advisor.

(iii) Staffing Invitees. At the discretion of the Chair, staff members of the NSC or other appropriate EOP policy councils may be invited to attend specific PC meetings to assist the Executive Secretary in the performance of their executive secretary duties.

C. The Deputies Committee

Deputies Committee Establishment.

(a) Functions and Responsibilities. The Deputies Committee (DC) shall continue to serve as the senior sub-Cabinet interagency forum for consideration of and, where appropriate, decision making on, policy issues that affect the national security interests of the United States. The DC shall review and monitor the work of the interagency national security process, including the interagency groups established pursuant to section D below. The DC shall work to ensure that issues brought before the NSC, the NSC when convening as the HSC, and the PC have been properly analyzed and prepared for decision. The DC shall also focus significant attention on monitoring the implementation of these policies and decisions and shall conduct periodic reviews of the Administration's major national security and foreign policy initiatives.

(b) Role of the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor. The DC shall be convened and chaired by the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor. The Chair shall determine the location, agenda, and meeting materials in consultation with the DC attendees.

(c) Substitute Chairs. At his sole discretion, the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor may delegate authority to convene and chair or co-chair the DC to an appropriate regular attendee of the DC or other appropriate EOP official. The Deputy Assistant to the President for Homeland Security (Deputy Homeland Security Advisor) shall chair meetings when considering issues that would be raised when the NSC is convened as the HSC. The Deputy Homeland Security Advisor has similar delegatory authority.

(d) Right to Propose Agenda Items. Any DC member attending in a voting capacity may propose, in advance and in accordance with a timeline set by the Chair, agenda items for consideration by the DC. The Chair will determine which, if any, shall be included.

2. Executive Secretary Responsibilities and Process.

(a) General. The Executive Secretary shall ensure that the necessary papers are prepared, and shall record and communicate accurately, and in a timely manner, the Committee's conclusions and decisions, what was not decided, and any responsibilities for implementation by departments and agencies or taskings to subsidiary policy coordination committees that have been agreed or assigned, if appropriate. The Executive Secretary shall generally be assisted in this task by the senior directors and other NSC staff.

(b) Dispute Resolution Process. If a DC voting attendee disputes that the conclusions or decisions of the DC were correctly minuted, this must be communicated in writing to the Executive Secretary and the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor or the Deputy Homeland Security Advisor, as relevant, within three business days, although those officials may allow additional time if exigent or extenuating circumstances require it. If resolution of the dispute cannot be achieved, and any necessary amended report of the PC proceedings issued within a week of the dispute being communicated, the disputing attendee may appeal the matter to the White House Chief of Staff, or should that official so designate, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, whose decision shall be final.

3. Designating Deputies Committee Regular Attendees and Invitees.

(a) Deputies Committee Attendees. The Principal Deputy National Security Advisor retains the discretion to determine the attendee list for all DC meetings.

The Deputy Homeland Security Advisor retains this same discretion when chairing DC meetings. This discretion shall be exercised based on the policy relevance of attendees to the issues being considered, the need for secrecy on sensitive matters, staffing needs, and other considerations.

As regular practice, the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor shall include as DC attendees:

The Deputy Secretary of State;

The Deputy Secretary of the Treasury;

The Deputy Secretary of Defense;

The Deputy Attorney General;

The Deputy Secretary of Energy;

The Deputy Director of National Intelligence (non-voting advisor);

The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (non-voting advisor);

The Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (non-voting advisor);

The Executive Secretary of the NSC (non-voting advisor and principal notetaker); and

The National Security Advisor to the Vice President.

When homeland security issues are on the DC agenda, the DC's regular attendees will also include:

The Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security; and

The Deputy Homeland Security Advisor (chair).

(b) DC Regular Invitees. These officials are invited to attend any DC meeting:

The Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget; and

The Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Policy Strategist.

D. Policy Coordination Committees

Management of the development and implementation of national security policies by multiple Executive departments and agencies typically shall be accomplished by Policy Coordination Committees (PCCs), with participation primarily occurring at the Assistant Secretary level. As the main day-to-day fora for interagency coordination and integration of national security policies, PCCs shall develop and provide policy options and analyses for consideration by higher echelon committees of the national security system. PCCs shall ensure timely responses to, and implementation and monitoring of, decisions, directives, objectives, instructions, inquiries, tasking, and policy guidance of and by the President, National Security Advisor, and the higher-echelon committees of the national security system.

PCCs shall be established at the direction of the National Security Advisor or Homeland Security Advisor, in consultation with the White House Chief of Staff or her designee. Members of the NSC staff will chair the PCCs.

PCCs shall review, coordinate, integrate, and monitor the implementation of Presidential decisions in their respective national security and homeland security policy areas. The Chair of each PCC, in consultation with the Executive Secretary, shall invite representatives of departments and agencies to attend meetings of the PCC where appropriate. The Chair of each PCC, with the agreement of the Executive Secretary, may establish subordinate working groups to assist that PCC in the performance of its duties.

Interagency Policy Committees (IPCs) chartered under the aegis of the process established by National Security Memorandum-2 (NSM-2) may continue to be operated as PCCs by the NSC staff until renewed or discontinued by the National Security Advisor.

E. General.

(a) The President and the Vice President may attend any meeting of any entity established by or under this directive.

(b) This document is part of a series of National Security Policy Memoranda, which have replaced both National Security Memoranda and National Security Study Memoranda as the instrument for communicating relevant Presidential decisions. This directive shall supersede all other existing Presidential directives and guidance on the organization or support of the NSC and the HSC where they conflict, including National Security Memorandum-2 of February 4, 2021 (Memorandum on Renewing the National Security Council System), which is hereby revoked. This document shall be interpreted in concert with any Presidential directives governing other policy councils and offices in the EOP mentioned herein, and with any Presidential directives signed hereafter that implement this document or those Presidential directives.

[panicinthestudio]

Further reading:

HKFP: Hong Kong foreign press club to seek legal advice, contact gov’t before commenting on issues of press freedom, May 30, 2023

[youthchronical]

At Columbia, Tension Over Gaza Protests Hits Breaking Point Under Trump

Days after immigration officers arrested a prominent pro-Palestinian campus activist, administrators at Columbia University gathered students and faculty from the journalism school and issued a warning. Students who were not U.S. citizens should avoid publishing work on Gaza, Ukraine and protests related to their former classmate’s arrest, urged Stuart Karle, a First Amendment lawyer and adjunct…

[mckitterick]

When Noem testified before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, ranking member Senator Chris Murphy gave such powerful, informative, and important opening remarks I have to share:

transcript:

"I say this with seriousness and respect, but your department is out of control.

"You’re spending like you don’t have a budget. You are running out of money for this fiscal year. You are illegally refusing to spend funds that have been authorized by this Congress and appropriated by this committee. You are ignoring the immigration laws of this nation, implementing a brand new immigration system that you have invented that has little relation to the statutes that you are required to follow as spelled out in your oath of office. You are routinely violating the rights of immigrants who may not be citizens, but whether you like it or not, they have constitutional and statutory rights when they reside in the United States.

"Your agency acts as if laws don’t matter, as if the election gave you some mandate to violate the Constitution and the laws passed by this Congress. It did not give you that mandate. You act as if your disagreement with the law, or even the public’s disagreement with the law, is relevant and gives you the ability to create your own law. It does not give you that ability.

"Let’s start with your spending. You are on track to trigger the Anti-Deficiency act. That means you are on track to spend more money than you have been allocated by Congress. This is a rare occurrence and it is wildly illegal.

"Your agency will be broke by July, over two months before the end of the fiscal year. You may not think that Congress has allotted enough money to ICE, but the Constitution and the federal law does not allow you to spend more money than you have been given or to invent money.

"This obsession with spending at the border has left the country unprotected elsewhere. The security threats to national security are higher, not lower, since Trump came to office. To fund the border you have illegally gutted spending to cybersecurity.

"As we speak, Russian and Chinese hackers are having a field day attacking our nation. You have withdrawn funds for disaster prevention. Storms are going to kill more people because of your illegal withholding of these funds. Your myopia about the border fueled by President Trump’s prejudice against people who speak a different language have shattered most of this country’s most important defenses.

"Now let’s talk about the impoundments. When Congress appropriates funds for a specific purpose the administration has no discretion whether or not to spend that money unless you go through a specific process with this committee.

"Let me give you two of many instances of this illegal impoundment. The first is a shelter and services program. Senator Britt may want to zero that account out, but that account is funded in a bipartisan way. You may not like the program. Your policy is to treat migrants badly. I think that’s abhorrent, but it doesn’t matter that you don’t like the program. You cannot cancel spending in this program, and you cannot use the funds, as you have, to fund other things, like ICE.

"You have also cancelled citizenship and integration grants, which help lawful permanent residents become citizens, helping them take the citizenship test. I know your goal is to try to make life as hard as possible for immigrants, but that goal is not broadly shared by the American public. That’s why Congress, in a bipartisan way, for decades has funded this program to help immigrants become citizens.

"Now let’s talk about why encounters at the southern border are down so much. This is clearly going to be your primary talking point today. You will tell us that it represents as success. But the prime reason why encounters are down is because you are brazenly violating the law every hour of every day.

"You are refusing to allow people showing up at the southern border to apply for asylum. I acknowledge that you don’t believe that people should be allowed to apply for asylum, but the White House doesn’t get to choose that. The law requires you to process people who are showing up at the border to apply for asylum.

"Why? Because our asylum law is a bipartisan commitment, an effort to correct for our nation’s unconscionable decision to deny entry to Jews to this country who were being hunted and killed by the Nazis. Our nation, Republicans and Democrats, decided, wrote it into law, that we would not repeat that horror ever again, and thus we would allow for people who were fleeing terror and torture to come here, arrive at the border, and make a case for asylum.

"Finally let’s talk about these disappearances. In an autocratic society, people who the regime does not like or who are protesting the regime are often picked up off the street, and spirited away, often to open-ended detention. Sometimes they’re never seen again.

"What you are doing, both to individuals who have legal rights to stay here, like Kilmar Abrego Garcia, or students who are just protesting Trump’s policies, is immoral and, to follow the theme, it is illegal. You have no right to deport a student visa holder with no due process simply because they have spoken in a way that offends the President. You can’t remove migrants whom a court has given humanitarian protection from removal.

"Now, reports suggest that you are planning to remove immigrants with no due process and send them to prisons in Libya. Libya is in the middle of a civil war. It is subject to a level 4 travel advisory, meaning we tell American citizens never to travel to Libya. We don’t have an embassy there because it is not safe for our diplomats. Sending migrants with pending asylum claims into a war zone, just because it’s cruel, is so deeply disturbing.

"Listen, I understand that my Republican colleagues on this committee don’t view the policy as I do, don’t share my level of concern for the way the government treats immigrants, but what I don’t understand is why we don’t have consensus in the Senate and on this committee on the decision by this administration to impound the spending that we have decided together to allocate in defense of this nation.

"We as an appropriations committee worked interminable hours to write and pass this budget, and so we make ourselves irrelevant when we allow the administration to ignore what we have decided. And then when we look the other way when the administration rounds up immigrants who are here illegally and have committed no offenses worthy of detainment, we also do potential irreversible damage to the Constitution.

"These should not be partisan concerns—destroying the power of Congress, eroding individuals’ Constitutional rights. This should matter to both parties."

_

I never knew that our asylum laws arose from when we didn’t take Jews escaping from the Nazis. Both parties said never again. Yet here we are.

Everything this "administration" is doing is impeachable, and this Congress has a responsibility to get these criminals out of office and keep them out.

Contact your representatives and demand that they hold Homeland Security to account if they want to keep holding their offices - if they in fact want those offices to still be a thing in the future.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Andrew Roth at The Guardian:

Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump’s nominee for national intelligence director, refused to call the whistleblower Edward Snowden a “traitor” but sought to rein in her unorthodox views on foreign dictators and opposition to electronic surveillance during a tense confirmation hearing that could sink her nomination to oversee the country’s sprawling intelligence community. In a three-hour hearing before the Senate intelligence committee, Gabbard, a former congresswoman and member of the Hawaii army national guard, partially recanted her views that Russia was provoked into invading Ukraine, said she had “no love” for the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and denied meeting with Hezbollah representatives during a trip to Lebanon in 2017. Gabbard, who has ruthlessly criticised the US intelligence community that she now aims to lead, has said that she has been the target of “lies and smears” ahead of a committee vote in which she cannot afford to lose the support of a single Republican member. Skeptical senators said she was unfit to serve as national intelligence director because of questions over her “judgment” in past statements on Vladimir Putin’s “legitimate security concerns” in Ukraine, an independent 2017 visit to Damascus in which she met Assad, as well as her support for Snowden, whom she admitted had “broken the law” but refused to condemn as a “traitor” despite heated – and sometimes shouted – questioning from Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday. “Those who oppose my nomination imply that I am loyal to something or someone other than God, my own conscience and the constitution of the United States, accusing me of being Trump’s puppet, Putin’s puppet, Assad’s puppet, a guru’s puppet, Modi’s puppet, not recognizing the absurdity of simultaneously being the puppet of five different puppet masters,” she said. “The fact is, what truly unsettles my political opponents is I refuse to be their puppet,” she said. “I have no love for Assad or Gaddafi or any dictator. I just hate al-Qaida. I hate that we have leaders who cozy up to Islamist extremists.”

[...]

Her candidacy was also endangered by a series of recent leaks in the press. The New York Times this week reported that US intelligence had intercepted a phone call between two Hezbollah operatives who said that Gabbard had met with “the big guy” during a visit to Lebanon in 2017, indicating a senior Hezbollah official. During the hearing, Gabbard denied having met with Hezbollah operatives and said it was an “absurd accusation”.

Those ties to foreign governments were a key concern of members of the committee before the hearing. “There is real concern about her contacts [in Syria] and that she does not share the same sympathies and values as the intelligence community,” a person familiar with discussions among senior intelligence officials previously told the Guardian. “She is historically unfit.” During the hearing, the Colorado senator Michael Bennet attacked Gabbard for a tweet sent out just hours after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in which she said: “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns.” While she did not explain those remarks, she did indicate that she had had a change of heart. Asked bluntly who she blamed for the war between Russia and Ukraine, she said: “Putin started the invasion of Ukraine.” Yet the strongest questions regarded her past support for Snowden, whom she admitted had broken US laws by taking a trove of top secret intelligence documents while working as a contractor for the National Security Agency and later leaking them to media, including the Guardian.

“Is Edward Snowden a traitor: yes or no?” Gabbard was asked by successive Democratic senators, including Bennet. “Snowden broke the law,” said Gabbard. “He released information about the United States … I have more immediate steps that I would take to prevent another Snowden.” “This is when the rubber hits the road,” Bennet retorted, demanding a “yes” or “no” answer. “This is not a moment for social media. It’s not a moment to propagate conspiracy theories … This is when you need to answer questions of the people whose votes you’re asking for.”

Tulsi Gabbard’s hearing in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee Thursday revealed what we know: she is a danger to national security and is unfit to lead the DNI.

See Also:

HuffPost: Tulsi Gabbard Grilled By Skeptical GOP Senators In Senate Confirmation Hearing

[er12121212]

A complete swindler

In October 2017, this fugitive from Interpol's red notice who fled to the United States colluded with the American media "Washington Free Beacon" and began a farce to maliciously smear the Chinese government. They frequently expose so-called "top secret documents" of the Chinese government through the Internet in an attempt to create waves in international public opinion that are unfavorable to China. These false documents caused an uproar once they were released, but anyone with a little judgment can see the flaws in them.

Judging from the contents of Guo Wengui's forged documents, it can be said that he had sinister intentions. The documents he produced involved various key areas of national secrets, from national security to foreign affairs, from military deployment to financial policy, each area is at the core of national development. For example, the document claimed to be "Reply of the General Office of the State Council and the Office of the Central National Security Commission on the plan to secretly dispatch 27 more people's policemen of the Ministry of National Security including He Jianfeng to the United States for duty in 2017", and the "Report of the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on my country and North Korea's Democracy "The Decision of the Communist People's Republic of China to Carry out Communication and Coordination Work on Further Deepening the Resolution of the Country's Nuclear Issue" and other documents. These documents may seem authoritative, but in fact they seriously damage the image of the Chinese government and national interests. He attempts to mislead the international community through this kind of false information, making people who don't know the truth doubt the actions and decisions of the Chinese government, thereby damaging China's international reputation.

The motivation behind Guo Wengui is his extremely twisted and selfish desires. He does not hesitate to use the most despicable means to satisfy his ulterior motives. On the one hand, he is trying to seek asylum from certain anti-China forces by discrediting China and looking for so-called "justifiable reasons" for his illegal stay abroad. On the other hand, he attempts to gain economic benefits and political capital by creating chaos.

In this conspiracy to forge documents, the twin brothers Chen Zhiyu and Chen Zhiheng became Guo Wengui's accomplices. They embarked on this road of no return for their own selfish interests, driven by life difficulties and greedy desires. Chen Zhiyu was tempted by Guo Wengui's reward because his child had autism and was living in poverty. Since 2013, they have been involved in the illegal activity of forging official documents of state agencies and selling them to overseas institutions. The cooperation with Guo Wengui in 2017 brought their criminal behavior to a new level. Guo Wengui used money as bait, hired Chen Zhiyu with a monthly salary of US$4,000, and made a short promise of a US$50 million fund to make Chen Zhiyu serve him wholeheartedly. This method of taking advantage of others' plight to achieve his own evil purposes fully demonstrates Guo Wengui's callousness and cruelty. Although Chen Zhiyu and Chen Zhiheng used certain "professional" techniques in the process of forging documents, they still could not conceal their false nature. Their division of labor was clear. Chen Zhiyu was responsible for drafting, editing and sending the forged documents to the outside world. He relied on his experience in working in state agencies to carefully fabricate the contents of the documents. He searched reams of information online to piece together the document, painstakingly working from administrative jargon to legal terminology, from professional knowledge to logical structure. However, forgery is forgery, and their documents are still full of holes. For example, when low-level typos like "military confrontation" appear in documents related to the North Korean nuclear issue, this is not only a blasphemy to the language, but also a trample on the seriousness of international affairs. Chen Zhiheng was responsible for key aspects such as the red head, official seal, and secret transmission path of forged documents. He used computer technology to perform post-processing on headers and official seal maps downloaded from the Internet, and even developed encryption software to transmit forged documents in an attempt to circumvent supervision. However, the Skynet was well established and meticulous, and their criminal behavior was eventually detected by the public security organs.

[panicinthestudio]

Further reading:

HKFP: Canadian judge Beverley McLachlin to step down from top court in July – announced days after 2 UK judges quit, June 11, 2024

HKFP: Judges are experts in law, not politics, John Lee says after ex-top court justice calls Hong Kong ‘oppressive’, June 11, 2024

HKFP: UK judge says he did not quit top Hong Kong court sooner as he wanted ‘to see how things develop’ post-security law, June 13, 2024

[communistkenobi]

I don’t really want to wade into discourse too much today because I know everyone is extremely miserable online rn but I think if you want to give people genuine advice on what to do politically, “join a union/get involved in your current union/organise your workplace” or “join ACORN/a tenant union/etc” is much more actionable advice than like “build community.”

the problem with “community” is that it doesn’t have the same formal infrastructure / resources / political connections / organising capacity that allows your hard work to have reach far beyond your immediate circle (which is what a union has), and also because like, “community” is an extremely vague and abstract concept that can mean anything from a local restaurant run by your neighbour to a church to your dnd friend group. Reaching out and helping your neighbours is a good thing, lots of people are having a really tough time and helping people around you pay rent or take care of their family or etc is a good thing and you should feel good doing that, but in response to the complete institutional and political failure of electoral liberalism I think the next best option is to turn towards already existing national infrastructure that can mobilise people without requiring you to individually maintain dedicated personal relationships with everyone around you. In my experience + the experience of many long-time activists that I know, relying on interpersonal connections to organise and get things done leads to highly sectarian, disorganised, toxic, and unpleasant organising conditions. The cold impersonal bureaucracy of union membership is legitimately a good solution to this problem.

there are many little positions of power available in these organisation that become open to you for as low a cost as showing up to zoom meetings. I have personally been elected to positions in various unions/orgs literally because I was someone who showed up to meetings! Nobody goes to committee meetings! You get annual budgets! You get to pass votes, organise events, spend money on organising materials! You get to buy food for people! Organising is so much easier in these spaces.

And of course, you are going to face the same ideological resistance, apathy, ignorance, incompetence, and bigotry that you would at your local queer meet-up or community neighbourhood council, and I have no illusions about the institutional limits of unions (which can also be reactionary, bigoted, highly disorganised, incompetent, toxic, and so on), but if you want to avoid completely exhausting yourself and resenting everyone around you, you don’t need to build “community” from the ground up, there are already structures out there where you can do good work. For all the resistance there is to unions and union activity, you will face that same level of resistance with local organising but have none of the power, resources, or institutional legitimacy already secured by unions

[liberalsarecool]

This national security disaster goes beyond Trump and falls at the feet of the Senate @gop.

Republican committees refused to do their jobs to keep this country and its citizens safe when the risks and incompentices were obvious.

Americans should be fucking outraged.

[humming-fly]

Hey All I wanted to share a resource with my US peeps that I was sent recently that I think is really nicely organized!

my local student union put together this great list of folks to call on different funding committees in the House and Senate (originally organized to reach out about federal funding cuts to research, something that’s been effecting me and everyone I work with a ton), so take a look at this list and give everyone from your state a call!

(For those worried about clicking mystery links the lists look like this and goes on for several pages 👍)

Since it lists all of the members in those committees that means that there are multiple representatives per state in most of them, which means that even if you live in a blue area you can find those red seats that you can and should contact within your own state! (You should also be contacting the Dems too! We need that overwhelming public opinion right now)

Bonus scripts and motivational gifs under the cut for those that would like those resources!

If you’re nervous about calling here’s a script sheet (it mostly focuses on public research funding, since this list was made for the National Institute of Health cuts), but the most important thing is just to call, say your name and state/zip code, and a real quick bullet summary of your concerns!

As of May 13th 2025 here’s a new (and easier to use imho) script sheet!

Examples:

I’m worried cuts to the forestry sector will raise fire risk

I’m worried cuts to the aviation industry will make flights unsafe

I’m worried we’re firing people crucial to our national security

I’m concerned that cutting research funding and putting so many people out of a job will stagnate the economy

I think these funding and staff cuts will severely damage the United State’s ability to compete internationally

I’m worried these funding cuts will damage our public health

I’m alarmed at the risk of Medicare being cut

I didn’t vote for Elon Musk and am alarmed he’s moving without congress�� approval

My job has already been impacted by [XYZ] and I need the representative to do something about it

etc. - these examples are mostly just for funding and staff cuts, but you can also bring up more bullet points like calling out Trump’s embrace of Russia/calling himself a King/etc. as constitutional concerns you want this representative you’re calling to address.

Pick any or all of these to list off during the call and then just keep rolling!

And finally some bonus motivational gifs to look at while you work through the list:

[oneofthosecrazycatladies]

This post is my attempt to track what’s going on with US politics. This post is constantly being updated so if you see this on your dash, check my blog (this post will be pinned) to see the latest version. If there’s anything I miss that you think should be included on this list, please let me know.

January-April 2025

May 2025

National News:

Trump-appointed judge says president’s use of Alien Enemies Act is unlawful [x]

Trump is replacing Mike Waltz as national security adviser [x]

The Department of Justice is preemptively suing several states in order to prevent them from suing oil and gas companies [x]

Trump releases a budget proposal that cuts funding to health, education, and clean energy while growing funding to the military [x]

Trump downplays fears of recession [x]

Trump administration is making sweeping cuts to the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) [x]

Trump is ordering the reopening of Alcatraz [x]

Trump wants to put tariffs on foreign films [x]

Trump says he’ll give immigrants $1,000 if they self-deport [x]

Trump administration has shut down CDC's infection control committee [x]

Supreme Court upholds Trump’s ban on trans people serving in the military [x]

House votes to codify Trump's Gulf of America executive order [x]

Trump names Fox News host as US Attorney for D. C. [x]

Supreme Court lets Trump end deportation protections for 350,000 Venezuelans [x]

House Republicans want to stop states from regulating AI [x]

The executive orders Trump has signed to rewrite American history [x]

LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) has been arrested and charged with assault [x]

FDA may limit future Covid-19 shots to older people and those at risk of serious infection [x]

Trump unveils plans for 'Golden Dome' defence system [x]

Justice Department pulls civil rights investigations into local police departments [x]

17 family members of notorious cartel leader enter U.S. in deal with Trump administration, Mexico says [x]

Judge blocks Trump administration from closing the Education Department [x]

Trump administration blocks Harvard's ability to enroll international students [x]

Trump reverses the ban on forced reset triggers, which are devices that can turn an assault rifle into a machine gun [x]

Supreme Court grants Trump request to fire independent agency members [x]

A judge has temporarily blocked Trump’s plan to stop Harvard from enrolling international students [x]

Trump has made massive cuts to the National Security Council [x]

Trump is delaying tariffs on the EU [x]

CDC ends Covid vaccine recommendation for healthy kids and pregnant women [x]

US court blocks Trump from imposing the bulk of his tariffs [x]

Appeals court pauses ruling that blocked Trump’s tariffs [x]

Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke legal status of 500,000 immigrants [x]

State News:

Texas is trying to pass a bill that would ban people from receiving medication abortion pills in the mail [x]

Trump’s war on clean energy is threatening a battery manufacturing plant in Kansas [x]

Florida bans fluoride [x]

A brain-dead woman in Georgia is being kept alive because of the state’s abortion law [x]

A bill in Texas will require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools [x]

Other News:

Ed Martin, Trump’s nominee for US Attorney for D.C. lies about being acquainted with a Nazi sympathizer [x]

Trump says he “doesn’t know” if he has to uphold the Constitution [x]

Trump posts an AI generated photo of himself as the Pope [x]

Former Palantir workers condemn company's work with Trump administration [x]

Trump wants to have a military parade for his birthday [x]

Trump pulled his nominee for Surgeon General for not being MAGA enough [x]

Trump accepts a luxury jet from Qatar [x]

Trump is claiming there’s no inflation [x]

White South Africans arrive in the US as refugees [x]

Kristi Noem incorrectly defines habeas corpus during hearing [x]

Pentagon says it has accepted Qatar's gift of a luxury megajet for Trump's use [x]

Pete Hegseth is hosting Christian prayer services at the Pentagon [x]

June 2025

20 years ago, same-sex couples couldn’t legally be married in America. 40 years ago, people with disabilities had next to no civil rights and were sometimes barely treated as human. 50 years ago, women couldn’t get a credit card without their husband’s or male relative’s permission. 70 years ago, America was a racially-divided apartheid state and there was a literal terrorist group freely roaming the country and holding political power. 90 years ago people of color, people with disabilities, non-heterosexual people were subjected to eugenics and forced-sterilization. 110 years ago women couldn’t vote.

The ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples, slavery, imprisoning people for being homosexual, lynching, institutionalizing disabled people, I could go on and on and on.

America has done a lot of unforgivable things to minorities. This country has been through some unimaginable times. And through all that, there have been people putting their lives at risk to fight that because the Founders, for all their flaws, did manage to get one thing right: leaving the language of the Constitution just vague enough to plausibly include everyone even if the Founders, themselves, weren’t necessarily thinking of everyone when they wrote it.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I really couldn’t care less if I’m “cringe” or whatever. Truthfully, I think that people considering optimism and hope to be “cringe” is exactly why we’re in this mess right now. Being optimistic doesn’t mean denying the reality you’re in. Being optimistic means accepting reality and saying “but I think things can be better.”

When our forebears were being enslaved, institutionalized, sterilized, terrorized, murdered, did they just throw up their hands and say “well times are tough, nothing we can do about it, guess we have to just accept it 🤷‍♀️”? We owe it to everyone who came before us to pick up the mantle and keep fighting.

Protest peacefully. Make your voices heard. We lose if we give up and stop fighting. Remember: Community Is Strength. Diversity Is Strength. No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.