A chilling appointment has been made within the highly secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). Jennifer Daskal, a central figure in the creation of the Biden administration’s controversial “Disinformation Governance Board,” now serves as a legal advisor to the very judges who authorize secret surveillance warrants.
This isn’t a peripheral role. Daskal was instrumental in designing the framework for what critics have dubbed a “Ministry of Truth,” directly shaping the policies intended to influence public perception on critical issues.
While at the Department of Homeland Security, Daskal didn’t simply contribute to the Disinformation Governance Board – she spearheaded its formation. She authored the board’s foundational charter and personally selected Nina Jankowicz to lead the initiative.
The board’s focus was pointed: controlling the narrative surrounding the 2020 election, the origins of COVID-19, and border security. These were areas where the administration faced intense scrutiny and sought to manage public discourse.
On February 1st, the presiding judges of the FISC and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review quietly appointed Daskal as an *amicus curiae* – a trusted advisor on complex legal matters related to foreign surveillance.
This position grants Daskal privileged access to the most sensitive legal arguments underpinning U.S. intelligence operations. These operations, conducted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, largely unfold beyond public view.
The appointment has ignited concern among Republicans, who view Daskal’s history with the Disinformation Governance Board as deeply problematic. They question whether someone who attempted to monitor and shape public speech can impartially advise on surveillance authorities.
Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emphasized the need for public trust in those advising the FISC. He stated that the American people must have confidence in the individuals serving in this critical role.
Senator Eric Schmitt, who previously confronted Daskal about her involvement with the Disinformation Governance Board, publicly condemned the appointment. He characterized it as “insane” and a further justification for sweeping reforms to the FISA process.
The implications are stark. The woman who helped build a system designed to police speech now has the ear of judges authorizing secret surveillance. This raises fundamental questions about the balance between national security and civil liberties, and the potential for abuse of power.
