FeaturedFISM News

Tales from the Cryptic: What to make of sudden, vague national security warning

by Will Tubbs

Willie R. Tubbs, FISM News

Earlier this week, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, briefly captivated and alarmed the American populace with a vague reference to a national security matter and a call for President Joe Biden to declassify information about the same. 

In the intervening days, ranking Republicans and Democrats have sought to calm American nerves while simultaneously underscoring the point Turner made. Concurrently, Americans and media observers have been left to dissect what Turner and his bipartisan colleagues meant in their series of vague comments. 

The episode began Wednesday when Turner, using the committee’s X account, warned  that information had been “made available to all members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat.” 

“I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,” Turner said.

The immediate, and logical question, was what specific threat? Sadly, in a broken world, there are too many potential threats to allow for cryptic tweets. 

Journalists from the likes of CBS and Associated Press have reported that the information to which Turner referred had to do with Russia and that nation’s apparent effort to develop and launch anti-satellite weaponry into space. 

If true, this warning would seem oddly timed. News of Russia developing this type of technology has circulated for some time.  Thus far, no one in Congress has been willing to confirm or deny this theory. 

Democrats and Republicans alike have maintained a stance that this information is important, but not enough so for Americans to lose their composure. 

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), another member of the committee, described the still-sealed information as “something that requires our attention, there’s no doubt. It’s not an immediate crisis but certainly something we have to be very serious about.”

Connecticut Rep. Jim Hines (D), who also serves on the committee, was more direct, saying “people should not panic.” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) similarly urged calm. 

But this brings the curious mind to a natural follow-up question. If the data is not serious enough to warrant panic, why the sudden urge to mention it? 

Two factors, both of which connect to pending legislation, bear consideration in considering this question.

First, Congress and the White House continue to be at loggerheads over additional foreign aid to Ukraine. Indeed, Turner has only just returned from a visit to that nation and is a vocal supporter of sending more money Ukraine’s way via the passage of a $95 billion foreign aid package. 

Upon Turner’s return from Ukraine, the House Intelligence Committee posted on X that the congressman and several House colleagues “met with President @ZelenskyyUa and @USAmbKyiv Brink and discussed the importance of giving Ukraine the resources it needs to protect its people.”

It’s worth considering that Turner could be using vague suggestions of a national security threat to force concessions on both sides of the aisle and get the foreign aid bill across the line. 

However, there is a second and related factor that could also explain the sudden renewed interest in emerging, if still theoretical, Russian space weaponry. 

The House was set this week to vote on a bill that would recertify and reform Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(FISA). 

FISA first emerged as a George W. Bush-era response to September 11th, and Section 702 fast-tracks the federal government’s ability to circumvent traditional Constitutional protections as they seek to spy on people. 

FISM has reported often on allegations and confirmations of misuse and abuse of FISA and Section 702 by the Biden Administration, and hard-line conservatives have panned 702. However, many Democrats, and especially moderates from either major party, have been keen to maintain 702. 

Last year, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) both stressed the importance of 702 in maintaining American security. 

Even the new bill, which is a reform bill purely in the semantic sense, has proven contentious as Freedom Caucus representatives have criticized the compromise bill for continuing the practice of warrantless surveillance. The bill would only impose new restrictions on the warrantless surveillance.

Whether intentional or by happenstance, Turner’s comments resulted in Speaker Johnson delaying the vote that would have advanced the FISA recertification. 

“In order to allow Congress more time to reach consensus on how best to reform FISA and Section 702 while maintaining the integrity of our critical national security programs, the House will consider the reform and reauthorization bill at a later date,” Raj Shah, Johnson’s deputy chief of communications, posted on X. 

The prevailing thought underpinning the postponement is that, if the still-classified information is sufficiently serious, one presumes, it might necessitate a rethinking of FISA and Section 702. 

It’s unlikely any scenario exists under which the Freedom Caucusers might soften their stance on warrantless surveillance, which makes it worth wondering if the postponement wasn’t an effort to solidify the status quo while a true compromise is sought. 

DONATE NOW