Whistleblowers from the DOJ claim that Facebook has been monitoring Americans’ private conversations and sending them to the FBI if they contain “anti-government or anti-authority” sentiments, such as those that cast doubt on the validity of the 2020 presidential election.

Miranda Devine claimed in New York Post, “Under the FBI collaboration operation, somebody at Facebook red-flagged these supposedly subversive private messages over the past 19 months and transmitted them in redacted form to the domestic terrorism operational unit at FBI headquarters in Washington, DC, without a subpoena.”

“It was done outside the legal process and without probable cause,” said one of the whistleblowers, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Facebook provides the FBI with private conversations which are protected by the First Amendment without any subpoena.”

According to a source, “They [Facebook and the FBI] were looking for conservative right-wing individuals. None were Antifa types.”

It added, “the Facebook users whose private communications Facebook had red-flagged as domestic terrorism for the FBI were all “conservative right-wing individuals.” It further added that they were gun-toting, red-blooded Americans angry after the election and shooting off their mouths and talking about staging protests. “There was nothing criminal, nothing about violence or massacring or assassinating anyone, “it stated.

Some of the Americans who were being targeted have posted pictures of themselves “shooting firearms together and whining about what’s transpired [after the 2020 election].” A small number were militia members, but they were protected by the Second Amendment, as per the NYC Post.

When the private communications were highlighted, they were distributed as “leads” to FBI field offices around the nation. These offices would then get in touch with the US Attorney’s Office for that region to ask for legal access to the private talks they had already been shown.

“Within an hour of receiving the subpoena, Facebook gave back gigabytes of documents and images. It was prepared to move. All they had to do was wait for the legal process to finish before sending it ” a source stated.

Despite this, the federal government isn’t uncovering many cases to bring charges against. One person with knowledge of the FBI’s 19-month “frenzy” to locate domestic terrorism cases to support the Biden administration’s rhetoric following the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, said, “It was a waste of our time.”

Meanwhile, in two contradictory responses that were released one hour apart, Facebook has refuted the accusations.

A spokesperson at Facebook’s parent company, Meta said, “These claims are false because they reflect a misunderstanding of how our systems protect people from harm and how we engage with law enforcement. We carefully scrutinize all government requests for user information to make sure they’re legally valid and narrowly tailored and we often push back. We respond to legal requests for information in accordance with applicable law and our terms and we provide notice to users whenever permitted.”

Then, in a second “updated statement” sent 64 minutes later, Sackin changed her language to say that the claims were “wrong” and not “false.”

Sackin, a DC-based crisis response expert said, “These claims are just wrong. The suggestion we seek out peoples’ private messages for anti-government language or questions about the validity of past elections and then proactively supply those to the FBI is plainly inaccurate and there is zero evidence to support it.” Sackin had previously worked for Planned Parenthood and “Obama for America and now leads Facebook’s communications on “counterterrorism and dangerous organizations and individuals.”

The FBI would not confirm or reject the claims, but it did admit that it has contacts with social media sites that allow for an “ongoing discussion” and a “rapid interchange” of information.

The agency in its statement said, “The FBI maintains relationships with U.S. private sector entities, including social media providers. The FBI has provided companies with foreign threat indicators to help them protect their platforms and customers from abuse by foreign malign influence actors. U.S. companies have also referred information to the FBI with investigative value relating to foreign malign influence. The FBI works closely with interagency partners, as well as state and local partners, to ensure we’re sharing information as it becomes available. This can include threat information, actionable leads, or indicators. The FBI has also established relationships with a variety of social media and technology companies and maintains an ongoing dialogue to enable a quick exchange of threat information.”

If Facebook’s denial that it proactively gives the FBI access to user data without a subpoena or search warrant is accurate, it would mean that the initial transfer was carried out by a Facebook employee designated by the FBI as a “confidential human source,” who has access to and the power to search users’ private messages.

If concerns arose about the misuse of user data, Facebook would have “plausible deniability” and the FBI would safeguard the privacy of its employees.

One of the DOJ sources said, “They had access to searching and they were able to localize it, to identify these talks among millions of discussions.”

Before the Hunter Biden story broke, the FBI had warned Meta about “Russian propaganda,” which the company then vehemently suppressed, as CEO Mark Zuckerberg said to Joe Rogan in late August.

Pieces of private conversations that had been intentionally modified to accentuate the most insulting emotions were submitted to the FBI in the cases of purportedly monitored DMs, frequently with context deleted and only partially redacted.

According to the NY post, more FBI whistleblowers are reportedly prepared to reveal what is happening within the organization.

According to one source, “the most terrifying thing is the combined power of Big Tech cooperating with the enforcement arm of the FBI.” “Google, Facebook, and Twitter are globalist enterprises. They don’t have our national interest at heart.”

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.