Revealed: TSA used loophole to SPY on conservatives
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has announced the end of an Obama-era program that involved spying on U.S. citizens — and cost those citizens hundreds of millions in tax dollars a year.
“Today I’m announcing that TSA is ending the Quiet Skies program, which involved having a federal agent follow U.S. citizens as they traveled by air. It was created by Obama in 2012 to supposedly track dangerous individuals, but instead it was weaponized against political enemies such as Tulsi Gabbard,” Noem said in a video posted to social media.
“Since its existence, it has failed to stop a single terrorist attack, while it cost U.S. taxpayers roughly about $200 million a year,” she added.
Independent journalist Breanna Morello has been on the frontlines of breaking this story and has uncovered just how American citizens would end up on these lists.
“What they used is a program called Evade, which was another Obama program that was started. And what they did is they used Evade to add people to the TSA terror watch list,” Morello tells BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”
“Evade was a private-sector company that was going out there looking at your social media posts,” Morello continues. “The reality of it is everyone I found who’s on these lists are all conservative.”
“So they intentionally went above and beyond to target people. Now, Tulsi Gabbard, the following day after she criticized Kamala Harris, was added to that terror watch list,” she adds.
Morello also explains that hundreds of Americans, including those who attended the January 6 rally, were added to the same watch list.
“For years, they were followed by air marshals, they were stalked by TSA, they went through additional groping that they didn’t have to go through,” she tells Gonzales. “But again, the TSA is not an investigative agency.”
This is why the TSA hired a private-sector company to do the work for them.
“So, chances are if you ever had a little four S’s on the bottom of your boarding pass and then you went through additional screening processes after already going through TSA, you were probably on the list, and you’re probably being followed by air marshals without knowing it,” Morello explains.
“So they’re just intentionally finding a loophole and subverting it,” Gonzales comments.
“And that loophole is a private-sector company, yes,” Morello responds.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Why the right turned anti-war — and should stay that way
After the COVID lockdowns, the Western global leadership class had little credibility left. So it seemed insane when they immediately pivoted to a new crisis — but that’s exactly what they did.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered demands from elites in Europe and America for NATO-aligned nations to involve themselves in the conflict. Many Republicans were initially on board, with Fox News and CNN marching in lockstep behind intervention. But the Republican base quickly soured on the war once it became clear that U.S. involvement didn’t serve American interests.
If the situation really is dire, let the Trump administration make its case to the people. Present the evidence. Debate it in Congress. Vote.
In a strange inversion, the right became anti-war while the left championed military escalation.
That reversal matters now, as some in the GOP look to drag the country into another long conflict. We should remember what Ukraine taught us.
When Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded, many conservatives instinctively aligned with Ukraine. The Soviet Union had been an evil empire and a clear enemy of the United States. It was easy to paint Russia as an extension of that threat. President Biden assured Americans that there would be no boots on the ground and that economic sanctions would cripple Russia quickly.
But the war dragged on. Hundreds of billions of dollars flowed to Ukraine while America entered a painful economic downturn. Conservatives began asking whether this was worth it.
Putin was no friend of the U.S., and conservatives had valid reasons to distrust him. But suddenly, anyone questioning the war effort was smeared as a Russian asset. Opposition to the war became an extension of the left’s deranged Russiagate conspiracy, which painted Donald Trump as a blackmailed Kremlin agent.
Some Republican politicians kept pushing the war. Fox News stayed hawkish. But much of the conservative commentariat broke ranks. They knew that the boys from Appalachia and Texas — exactly the kind of red-state Americans progressives despise — would again be asked to die for a war that served no clear national purpose.
From that disillusionment, conservatives drew hard-earned lessons.
They saw that U.S. leaders lie to sustain foreign conflicts. That politicians in both parties keep wars going because donors profit. That Fox News can become a mouthpiece for military escalation. That you can oppose a war without betraying your country. And that American troops and taxpayer dollars are not playthings for globalist fantasies.
“America First” began to mean something real: Peace through strength didn’t require constant intervention.
Unfortunately, many of those lessons evaporated after the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7.
That attack was horrific. No serious person denies the brutality of Hamas or questions Israel’s right to defend itself. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has treated the attack as a green light to target longtime adversaries, including Iran. As a sovereign nation, Israel can pursue its own foreign policy. But it cannot dictate foreign policy for the United States.
In 2002, Netanyahu testified before Congress that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons. He said toppling both the Iraqi and Iranian regimes would bring peace and stability. He was wrong.
He wasn’t alone, of course. Many were wrong about weapons of mass destruction and the Iraq War. But Netanyahu’s track record is highly relevant now. While conservatives once fervently supported the Iraq invasion after 9/11, many — including Tucker Carlson and Dinesh D’Souza — have since apologized. They admit they got it wrong.
RELATED: The culture war isn’t a distraction — it’s the main front
Blaze Media Illustration
Afghanistan, while flawed, had clearer justification. The Taliban had harbored Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. But the lies about weapons of mass destruction and failed nation-building in Iraq turned that war into a conservative regret.
In March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified that Iran had not resumed efforts to build a nuclear weapon. Gabbard, like Trump allies Robert Kennedy Jr., Kash Patel, and Pete Hegseth, was chosen precisely for her skepticism of the intelligence bureaucracy. Trump remembers how his first term was sabotaged by insiders loyal to the status quo. This time, he selected appointees loyal to the voters.
Gabbard’s assessment contradicts Netanyahu, who claims Iran is months away from having a bomb. That’s a massive discrepancy. Either Iran hasn’t restarted its program, or it’s on the brink of building a nuke.
So which is it?
Did U.S. intelligence fail again? Did Gabbard lie to Congress and the public? Or did she simply say something the ruling class didn’t want to hear?
Trump, Gabbard, and Vice President JD Vance understand how Iraq went wrong. They know Americans deserve evidence before another war — especially one that risks dragging us into a region we’ve already failed to remake at great cost.
Yet the war hawks keep repeating the same lie: This time, it’ll be quick. The United States is too powerful, too advanced, too economically dominant. The enemy will fold by Christmas.
Biden said the same about Ukraine. And hundreds of billions later, we remain in a grinding proxy war with Russia.
Now, while still financing that war, Americans are told they must back a new war — this one initiated unilaterally by Israel. The U.S. faces domestic strife, crippling debt, and an ongoing open-border crisis. Involvement in yet another conflict makes no sense.
Israel may be right about Iran. Tehran may indeed have developed a nuclear program behind the world’s back. But if Israel wants to wage a war, it must do so on its own.
The Trump administration has made clear that it wasn’t involved in Israel’s pre-emptive strikes and didn’t approve them. If Israel starts a war, it should fight and win that war on its own. America should not be expected to absorb retaliation or commit troops to another Middle Eastern project.
These wars are never short, and they are always expensive.
Even if Iran’s regime collapses quickly, the aftermath would require a long, brutal occupation to prevent it from descending into chaos. Israel doesn’t have the capacity — let alone the political will — for that task. That burden would fall, again, to America.
So before conservatives fall for another round of WMD hysteria, they should recall what the last two wars taught them.
If the situation really is dire, let the Trump administration make its case to the people. Present the evidence. Debate it in Congress. Vote.
But don’t sleepwalk into another forever war.
If ‘Quiet Skies’ Surveillance Was Abuse, So Is The Rest Of The Surveillance State
Dem Sen Lobbied Biden Admin to Remove Husband from Watchlist That Also Targeted Tulsi Gabbard
'Surveilled by the TSA's Quiet Skies program'
Gabbard Reaffirms America’s Commitment To Protecting ‘Individual Liberty’ On The World Stage
Deep State Intel Staffers Are Once Again Leaking Classified Info To Stop Trump’s Agenda
'The Wall Street Journal should be ashamed'
Declassified memo reveals how Biden admin set stage for feds to hound Americans over 'non-criminal behavior'
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard announced last month the formation of the Director's Initiatives Group, a new task force dedicated to ending the weaponization of the federal government.
In addition to declassifying and releasing the John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. assassination files, Gabbard indicated that the DIG had set about reviewing other documents for potential declassification, including information related to "the Biden administration's domestic surveillance and censorship actions against Americans."
One of the documents declassified under this initiative has provided critical insights into how the stage was set in 2021 for the Biden administration's subsequent treatment of traditional Catholics and concerned parents who spoke out at school board meetings as potential terrorists.
A memo titled "Strategic Implementation Plan for Countering Domestic Terrorism" assigned the FBI, the Department of Justice, and other agencies various tasks with the overarching aim of countering perceived domestic terrorism and violent extremism. The memo was reportedly developed by the FBI, the DOJ, and Biden's National Security Council.
The FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Counterterrorism Center were directed, for example, to provide state and local law enforcement agencies with resources "that cover relevant iconography, symbology, and phraseology used by many domestic terrorists, as well as data-driven guidance on how to recognize potential indicators of DT-related mobilization."
One such "resource" appears to have been the FBI's "Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide," which associated the Betsy Ross flag, the Gadsden flag, the Gonzales cannon with accompanying "Come and Take It" caption, Revolutionary War imagery, and Second Amendment-related imagery with "Militia Violent Extremism."
'A broad brush to start spying on Americans.'
The declassified memo also tasked the Domestic Policy Council with driving "executive and legislative action, including banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines"; reining in the "proliferation of 'ghost guns'"; mitigating "xenophobia and bias" in COVID-19 responses; and supporting "interventions to foster resiliency to disinformation."
Lawmakers and legal experts suggested to Just the News that the more concerning element of the memo was its apparent loosening of the requirements for opening criminal and national security investigations — a drop in standards that may have helped pave the way for fishing expeditions into groups disfavored and/or critical of the Biden administration.
Whereas for decades FBI agents needed "an articulable factual basis" that "reasonably indicates" a crime or a threat has or will occur in order to launch an investigation, experts told Just the News that the memo substantially lowered that standard such that behavior deemed "concerning" was sufficient to begin probing.
The memo tasked the DOJ and the FBI with DHS to "enhance public understanding of the role of federal law enforcement in responding to incidents of concerning non-criminal behavior."
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) told Just the News that the memo amounted to "merely a broad brush to start spying on Americans."
'The types of tools and responses that they have been making for people who are engaged in some type of violence actually applied to non-violent individuals.'
"It doesn't have to be criminal, for sure. But it doesn't have to be heterodox," said Biggs. "It just has to be something that some agent, or some local agent, says, 'Oh, we got a beef about this. We're going to check it out.'"
"It's spying on Americans," added Biggs, "violating the Fourth Amendment."
John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, told "John Solomon Reports" that "back in June 2021, the Biden administration put out its plan for dealing with domestic terrorists. The one that they put out at that time talked about how they were going after criminal activity. And of course, everybody, anybody who's espousing violence or trying to or committing violence, one wants the government to get a handle on that."
"What Tulsi Gabbard declassified was the rest of the document that was there," continued Lott. "What was shocking to me is that the types of tools and responses that they have been making for people who are engaged in some type of violence actually applied to non-violent individuals, non-criminal activity."
The FBI's scrutiny of conservative Catholics appears to have been prompted not by past or anticipated crimes but by "concerns" regarding "non-criminal behavior."
The House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government revealed in a 2023 report titled "The FBI's Breach of Religious Freedom: The Weaponization of Law Enforcement Against Catholic Americans" that the FBI field office circulated an internal memo in January 2023 warning that violent extremists are attracted to "radical traditionalist Catholic ideology."
The committee report stated, "Under the guise of tackling the threat of domestic terrorism, the memorandum painted certain 'radical-traditionalist Catholics' (RTCs) as violent extremists and proposed opportunities for the FBI to infiltrate Catholic churches as a form of 'threat mitigation.'"
"There was no legitimate basis for the memorandum to insert federal law enforcement into Catholic houses of worship," said the committee's report. Nevertheless, "this single investigation became the basis for an FBI-wide memorandum warning about the dangers of 'radical' Catholics."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
America needs prudent power, not globalist delusions
In the first major shake-up of Trump’s second term, Michael Waltz has been removed as national security adviser. The White House gave no explanation, but sources say Waltz drew fire for adding Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of the Atlantic, to a Signal chat with other national security officials about a recent U.S. strike on Houthi targets in Yemen.
But Waltz’s ouster likely runs deeper. It reflects a growing internal struggle over the direction of national security policy — a familiar pattern in American politics. From Hamilton’s Federalists to Jefferson’s Old Republicans, the fight over foreign policy priorities has shaped administrations since the founding.
Good strategy requires focus and discipline. The United States must prioritize its goals, not squander its power on open-ended crusades.
In a recent American Enterprise Institute essay, Hal Brands identified five competing foreign policy factions jockeying for influence under Trump. The two most influential camps are the “global hawks” and the “come home, America” bloc.
The Global Hawks — often dismissed as neocons — include Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. They insist on maintaining U.S. primacy to preserve global security and stability. This faction champions aggressive containment of adversaries like Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea. It also defends long-standing U.S. alliances, though now under pressure to renegotiate the terms.
The other faction, often called the “disengagers,” frames U.S. strategy through the lens of “forever wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their primary goal is to avoid further entanglements in the Middle East by scaling back U.S. military involvement. They also oppose military aid to Ukraine, citing the risk of escalation with Russia. Vice President JD Vance and Tulsi Gabbard stand out as leading figures in this camp.
Brands identifies three additional factions: the “Asia firsters,” the “economic nationalists,” and the “MAGA hardliners.” The most consequential alliance may be the one forming between the “come home, America” bloc and the “MAGA hardliners.” That coalition threatens to upend decades of Republican foreign policy — to the country’s detriment.
Force without strategy
Since the Vietnam War, the GOP has generally stood for national security: strong defense, reliable alliances, and a forward-leaning military posture. President Trump largely embraced that tradition during his first term. His national security strategy took a clear stance, particularly on South Asia, replacing President Obama’s unfocused approach to Afghanistan with a more coherent plan.
Yet, as H.R. McMaster notes in his memoir “At War with Ourselves,” Trump often strayed from those principles. While many of his instincts were sound, he frequently abandoned them when challenged — or simply deferred to whoever had his ear last.
Some observers see Waltz’s ouster as a sign that the “come home, America” faction is gaining influence within the White House. That remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: Abandoning the traditional Republican defense posture would be a mistake.
The core issue isn’t military force itself — it’s the use of force without a coherent strategy rooted in defending U.S. interests. Too many in Washington treat national security as a tool for serving some imagined “international community.” That’s how the Obama-Biden team, and even George W. Bush, stumbled: They lacked prudence.
Prudence, as Aristotle defined it, is the political virtue essential to statesmanship. It’s the ability to match means to ends — to pursue what’s right with what works. In foreign policy, that means setting clear objectives and taking deliberate action to apply power, influence, and, when needed, force.
Return to what works
Since the 1990s, U.S. foreign policy has often shown hubris rather than prudence. Clinton, Obama, and now Biden have placed their faith in global institutions, believing U.S. power exists to uphold abstract international norms. Their goal has been to build a “global good” — a corporatist globalism detached from national interest and patriotism.
These Democratic administrations have repeatedly failed to distinguish allies from adversaries. Nowhere was this clearer than in Obama’s tilt toward Iran, which came at the expense of both Israel and Sunni Arab states. Biden has doubled down with his disgraceful treatment of Israel, undermining one of our closest allies while appeasing their enemies.
Meanwhile, George W. Bush pursued his own misguided vision — an effort to remake the Middle East in America’s liberal image through force. That project collapsed under the weight of religious conflict and tribalism in Iraq and Afghanistan. And while Washington obsessed over exporting democracy, China quietly rose — unfazed, unchecked, and happy to let us believe it would someday play by our rules.
The best way to secure America’s liberty, safety, and prosperity is to return to a strategy that resembles the one that won the Cold War — one that brought the Soviet Union to collapse and elevated the United States to unmatched global power.
Ronald Reagan summed it up in three words: peace through strength.
I call it prudent American realism. This approach blends principle with power. It recognizes that the internal nature of regimes matters. Thucydides understood this over 2,000 years ago. In “The Peloponnesian War,” he noted that both Athens and Sparta sought to promote regimes that mirrored their own values — democracies for Athens, oligarchies for Sparta.
The lesson? A nation is safer and more stable when it is surrounded by allies that share its principles and interests.
Two sides of the same coin
Prudence also demands restraint. While regime type matters, trying to spread democracy everywhere is a fool’s errand — one the Bush administration disastrously pursued after 9/11.
Resources are limited. Good strategy requires focus and discipline. The United States must prioritize its goals, not squander its power on open-ended crusades abroad.
Reagan’s foreign policy understood a timeless truth: Diplomacy and force go hand in hand. Too often, American policymakers — steeped in the fantasies of liberal internationalism — act as if diplomacy alone can achieve strategic goals. But as Frederick the Great put it, “Diplomacy without force is like music without instruments.”
A sound U.S. strategy treats diplomacy and force as two sides of the same coin.
President Trump should follow Reagan’s lead. That means maintaining a forward defense posture with the support of reliable allies, projecting strength through presence, and defending freedom of navigation around the globe.
Strategically, the goal must be clear: Preserve the U.S. maritime alliance that defends the “rimlands” of Eurasia — a term coined by Nicholas Spykman. This system exists to contain any aspiring hegemon, whether it’s Russia or China.
This approach has served the nation well before. Trump should carry its lessons forward.
'Deep-state criminals' who leaked classified secrets to the press face DOJ referral: Gabbard
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard announced Wednesday that she referred two "deep-state criminals" to the Department of Justice.
She noted that a third criminal referral is "on its way."
The accused individuals allegedly leaked sensitive information to the press, including the Washington Post and the New York Times. It is unclear at this time what specific materials were turned over to the news outlets.
'These deep-state criminals leaked classified information for partisan political purposes to undermine POTUS' agenda.'
Gabbard stated that the individuals are within the intelligence community and are accused of sharing classified information.
She wrote in a post on social media, "Politicization of our intelligence and leaking classified information puts our nation's security at risk and must end. Those who leak classified information will be found and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law."
"Today, I referred two intelligence community LEAKS to the Department of Justice for criminal referral, with a third criminal referral on its way, which includes the recent illegal leak to the Washington Post," Gabbard continued. "These deep-state criminals leaked classified information for partisan political purposes to undermine POTUS' agenda."
She added that she plans to partner with the DOJ and the FBI "to investigate, terminate and prosecute these criminals."
The Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security have also opened similar internal investigations to clamp down on leaks to the press.
An official with the Office of DNI told Fox News Digital that Gabbard's referrals should serve "as a warning" to the intelligence community. The official noted that the recent actions were only the first step in "holding these individuals accountable."
"We are aggressively investigating other leaks and will pursue further criminal referrals as warranted," the official told the news outlet. "Any intelligence community bureaucrat who is considering leaking to the media should take this as a warning."
Last month, Gabbard stated that the Trump administration planned to "aggressively" pursue any leakers within the intelligence community. She also provided a list of recent examples of information that had been shared with the press.
"A leaker who has been sharing classified information with the Huffington Post," she said. "A leaker within the IC sharing information on Israel / Iran with the Washington Post."
Gabbard noted that an intelligence community leaker also provided information to NBC News about foreign relations with Russia.
"Any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such," Gabbard remarked.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories