LIT COMMENTARY
When LIT compared Ron Paul’s energetic email against the fear-mongering Restrict Act flyer we’ve included from Sen. Mark Warner’s website;
“The RESTRICT Act comprehensively addresses the ongoing threat posed by technology from foreign adversaries…”
The flyer repeatedly mentions the word foreign, yet Ron Paul’s email blast questions the integrity on that specific play of words.
“Note that “foreign interference in American elections” was the tagline for the fraudulent campaign, perpetrated by the Washington establishment and its cronies in mass media, to delegitimize the Trump presidency.”
And we know which committee Warner is on alongside Sen. Marco Rubio… The Intelligence Committee
“The Patriot Act on Steroids”… Is an Understatement!
MAR 31, 2023 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: MAR 31, 2023
How to Kill a Journalist; a Guide Available from the FBI. pic.twitter.com/DEpEYUWsMl
— lawsinusa (@lawsinusa) March 22, 2023
This week, something incredible happened.
A bill called the “RESTRICT Act” was set to sail through Congress, innocuously referred to as a bill to “ban TikTok,” the Chinese-owned social network which is now the most popular in the world.
The moment seemed perfect for consensus in Washington. . .
. . . Against the backdrop of growing concern about social media in general and TikTok in particular, a visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Moscow kicked the entire political and media establishment into overdrive to punish China in any way possible.
But then, people discovered what the bill would actually do . . . and the truth spread like wildfire.
What is the RESTRICT Act?
. . . It’s the most terrifying piece of legislation in years, if not the most terrifying piece of legislation ever introduced in American history.
It would give the government the ability to target anyone they deem as a national security risk – regular people like you and me – and allow them to remotely access every piece of electronics we own, from our computers and cell phones to the camera on the front porch.
And if they find you in violation, they can seize your property, fine you one million dollars, and imprison you for 20 years.
Don’t expect a fair trial, either. The RESTRICT Act limits judicial review to the notoriously corrupt and partisan D.C. Circuit Court.
And you couldn’t raise a defense for the rules being issued in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.
Relevant agency actions are exempt from review.
In other words, they can write the rules and hold them against you before you could have even heard of them.
Oh – and everything they do is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, so they will do it all in secret.
On a recent episode of The Liberty Report, I agreed the RESTRICT Act is “the Patriot Act on Steroids.”
This is not hyperbole. If anything, it exaggerates the power of steroids.
The RESTRICT Act would allow the Biden administration to control speech on the Internet, under threat of being federally prosecuted for a 20-year felony.
The government would be allowed to ban apps if any of its users were believed to have conducted “foreign interference in American elections.”
Note that “foreign interference in American elections” was the tagline for the fraudulent campaign, perpetrated by the Washington establishment and its cronies in mass media, to delegitimize the Trump presidency.
But in case that wasn’t sufficiently vague and overbroad, the bill even says it can force social media companies to censor their users if their speech appeared to be “trying to steer policy in a foreign government’s favor.”
So, if you’re using Facebook, Twitter, or ANY platform to speak in a manner the government deems “steering policy decisions in a foreign government’s favor” – like, say, opposing the U.S. proxy war against Russia in Ukraine – the government could force these platforms to ban you. . . and much, much worse!
Because you might be opposed to U.S. involvement in the war in Ukraine, the United States government can seize your property, fine you one million dollars, and imprison you for 20 years.
This is nothing less than the complete destruction of the First Amendment. This bill would give the government express power to control public speech.
I may not be a fan of TikTok, much less a user of the platform, but banning it takes us down a very, very dangerous path.
And given everything we have seen from the government recently – banning the sitting president from Twitter, censoring the truth about Covid, vaccines, the Biden family’s corrupt dealings, and on and on – you can be absolutely CERTAIN this unconstitutional and authoritarian power will be abused with you and me as the clear targets.
It truly is heartening to see how rapidly huge numbers of the American people, from all parts of the political spectrum, discovered the truth about this most dangerous piece of legislation and are speaking out against it.
But politicians, not public opinion, make policy, and that’s why it’s absolutely critical you contact Congress RIGHT NOW and DEMAND they vote NO on the RESTRICT Act, which would utterly eviscerate the First Amendment.
Think of it! Ordinarily, they give the most pernicious, most dangerous bills misleading names.
• Spy on Americans? Call it the “PATRIOT” Act!
• Tax, spend, and inflate? Call it the “Inflation Reduction” Act!
• Universal Gun Registration? Call it the “SAFE” Act! (New York did.)This time, they just came out and said it: The RESTRICT Act would close your airway and STRANGLE free speech in America.
The “RESTRICT” Act would not just destroy free speech on social media. . .
It would destroy Free Speech in America – period.
It’s our patriotic duty to speak out . . . while we still CAN.
Certainly, that means spreading the word.
It’s absolutely critical you voice your opposition to the RESTRICT Act, and DEMAND your senators vote NO.
Right now, your legislators in D.C. are wondering: How many of them know what this is really about?
We need to prove to them that this tyrannical scheme has been exposed.
This is a fast-moving event in Washington right now.
Please send your directive to Congress immediately.
It’s not enough to know the truth: we must act to defeat this dangerous legislation, right now. And the more people we can reach with your support, the more we can bring this tyrannical power grab to a crashing halt!
Thanks for all you do for Liberty,
Ron Paul
P.S. This dangerous bill is moving through Congress RIGHT NOW, just as the people are discovering what it’s really about.
Don’t hesitate – Send your directive RIGHT NOW!
Vendors from the U.S. and allied countries have supplied the world’s information commu-
nications and technology (ICT) for decades. In recent years, the global ICT supply chain has
changed dramatically; a number of prominent foreign vendors – many subject to the control
of autocratic and illiberal governments – have gained significant market share in a variety of
internet infrastructure, online communications, and networked software markets. The growth
and prevalence of these untrusted vendors pose serious risks to the nation’s economic and
national security.
The RESTRICT Act comprehensively addresses the ongoing threat posed by technology from
foreign adversaries by better empowering the Department of Commerce to review, prevent,
and mitigate ICT transactions that pose undue risk, protecting the US supply chain now and
into the future.
THE CHALLENGE:
Over the past years, foreign technology, including telecommunications equipment, social media appli-
cations, security software, and e-commerce platforms, have entered the U.S. market and become in-
creasingly embedded within our information and communications networks, posing novel threats to U.S.
citizens’ data, U.S. critical infrastructure, the privacy of Americans’ and businesses’ communications, our
information ecosystem, and security of everyday products.
Notable ICT products – such as Kaspersky antivirus software, telecommunications equipment supplied
by Huawei, and software products from firms based in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) – gained
traction while the United States government struggled to identify and respond to threats posed by these
products in a timely manner.
Growing concerns with consumer software from vendors in the PRC – such
as ByteDance’s TikTok, Tencent’s WeChat, and Alibaba’s Alipay – have raised serious concerns about a lack
of consistent policies to identify threats posed by foreign ICT products and insufficient authorities to act
decisively and comprehensively to address them.
Further illuminating these concerns, the top two apps
by absolute downloads in the United States from January 15, 2023 to February 13, 2023 were from PRC
vendors Temu and ByteDance.
Individual agencies have attempted to utilize their various authorities to address foreign ICT threats
within their own jurisdictions, but efforts have often been disjointed, failed to comprehensively address
identified risks, or, simply proved slow and under-suited to the complexity and interconnectedness of
the global ICT supply chain.
Further, these efforts often rely on antiquated authorities delegated to the
President by Congress in a pre-digital age.
A new approach is needed to systemically review and address the challenges posed by technology from
foreign adversaries.
Both the current and previous Administrations have rallied around a more holistic
solution: granting the Department of Commerce authority to review, block, and mitigate a range of trans-
actions involving foreign information and communications technology that pose undue risk.
Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology (RESTRICT) Act
THE SOLUTION:
The RESTRICT Act establishes a risk-based process, tailored to the rapidly changing technology and
threat environment, by directing the Department of Commerce to identify and mitigate foreign threats
to information and communications technology products and services.
This measured, risk-based approach is especially vital in the context of personal communications ser-
vices, where federal courts have blocked prior efforts to take remedial steps against foreign software
vendors as insufficiently tailored and based on insufficiently-substantiated risks.
The Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technol-
ogy (RESTRICT) Act would:
• Require the Secretary of Commerce to establish procedures to identify, deter, disrupt, prevent,
prohibit, and mitigate transactions involving information and communications technology products
in which any foreign adversary has any interest and poses undue or unacceptable risk to
national security.
• Prioritize evaluation of ICT products used in critical infrastructure, integral to telecommunications
products, or pertaining to a range of defined emerging, foundational, and disruptive technologies
with serious national security implications.
• Ensure comprehensive actions to address risks of untrusted foreign ICT by requiring the Secretary to
take up consideration of concerning activity identified by other USG entities.
• Educate the public and business community about the threat by requiring the Secretary of Com-
merce to coordinate with the Director of National Intelligence to provide declassified information on
how transactions denied or otherwise mitigated posed undue or unacceptable risk.
National Security Agency (NSA) Warrantless Wiretapping
Did you know: For over 2 decades every American Citizen has been subjected to illegal wiretapping and much more by the U.S. Government?
Shell Companies Have New Transparency Laws to Follow
The new legislation quietly passed by Congress last month after a decade-long fight is the most sweeping banking reform of its kind since passage of the Patriot Act.
