Hearings to examine the weaponization of the Quiet Skies Program.

Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments

2025-09-30

Summary

This meeting addresses the weaponization of watchlists and surveillance programs by federal agencies against American citizens, examining past abuses, current impacts, and the need for reform to protect constitutional rights and ensure government accountability [ 00:21:38-00:23:24 ]

. Speakers detail instances of targeted surveillance and discuss the broader implications for civil liberties and due process . The session also highlights the crucial role of whistleblowers in exposing these practices and calls for greater transparency and legislative safeguards .

Themes

Abuses of the Quiet Skies Program and Watchlisting

The "Quiet Skies" program was used to surveil individuals, including former Congresswoman and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who was targeted after criticizing the Biden administration [ 00:22:05-00:22:18 ]

. Internal records show officials knew exactly who she was, despite concerns raised internally [ 00:23:32-00:24:13 ] . Mark Crowder, a federal air marshal, testified that his wife was falsely flagged as a domestic terrorist and surveilled on approximately 13 flights for two years, along with her family, after attending a rally for President Trump on January 6th . The program also targeted skeptics of COVID mandates, with records showing 12 Americans were watchlisted simply for removing a mask on an aircraft .

Weaponization of Government Agencies Against Political Opponents

The federal government, through agencies like the TSA and FBI, weaponized watchlists by using First Amendment-protected activity as a predicate for surveillance [ 00:26:38 ]

. This included tracking individuals who attended the same Trump rally and COVID mandate skeptics, often without evidence of criminal activity [ 00:27:04 ] . Documents reveal that the TSA relied on data collected by the DHS-funded George Washington University Project on Extremism, an external partner, to identify supposed domestic threats, sometimes as the sole evidence for watchlisting . Critics argue that this intentionally obscured process created plausible deniability for targeting political opponents .

Lack of Transparency and Inadequate Redress Processes

The existing watchlisting system is described as a complex and opaque maze, with individuals having no clear explanation for their travel delays or disruptions and no real opportunity to redress their situation . Oversight mechanisms, largely internal to the executive branch, have been "gutted," further compromising checks and balances . The DHS TRIP redress program is criticized for not providing reasons for watchlisting, final decisions, or effective removal options [ 01:07:05-01:07:23 ]

. Speakers emphasized the need for comprehensive data collection on screening practices to identify biases and systemic failures .

Whistleblowers and Oversight

Whistleblowers played a critical role in exposing the abuses of the "Quiet Skies" program and other surveillance practices . Air marshals, including Mark Crowder, came forward despite risks of retaliation, highlighting the agency's internal concerns about the weaponization of its mission . Empower Oversight, representing these whistleblowers, pointed out the failure of internal DHS Inspector General investigations and the importance of independent oversight to prevent abuses from festering .

Calls for Reform and Constitutional Protections

Several calls for reform were made, including strengthening First Amendment protections, clarifying travel as a constitutional right, and ending programs that allow for anonymous accusations [ 01:23:42 ]

. Suggestions included de-delegating broad powers from agencies like DHS, requiring full transparency of programs, and removing officials who directed or approved surveillance of Americans for protected speech . There was also a push for mandatory timelines and independent review for watchlisting decisions, and a systematic way to purge erroneous entries [ 01:08:47-01:09:27 ] .

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely one of outrage, deep concern, and urgency regarding the severe overreach and weaponization of government power [ 00:22:52-00:22:57 ]

. Speakers expressed dismay at the erosion of civil liberties and constitutional rights, particularly the First and Fourth Amendments [ 01:12:18 ] . While there was bipartisan agreement on the problems with watchlisting, there were contentious exchanges over the handling of related legislative authorities and perceived political motivations behind current oversight efforts . The overall sentiment was a strong demand for accountability, transparency, and robust reforms to prevent future abuses .

Participants

Transcript

Rand Paul

Welcome. Thanks, everybody, for coming today. In mid-2024, as she grew increasingly critical of the Biden administration and increasingly involved with the Trump campaign, Tulsi Gabbard noticed changes as she went to the airport. She had more screening, federal agents with dogs showing up for flights. Other federal agents followed her on the plane and reported back on her activity. When I learned of this, I launched an investigation into the TSA's Quiet Skies program and the Biden administration's weaponization of watch lists against everyday Americans. Under public scrutiny, the Biden administration removed now Director of National Intelligence Gabbard from the program, but they spent the remainder of their time in office stonewalling any investigation. Thankfully, that era is over. President Trump himself, a victim of government weaponization, set out to reverse the previous administration's targeting of the very citizens it has sworn to protect. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has taken decisive action to eliminate bureaucratic obstacles, resisting transparency. We are finally getting answers. And now we know exactly why the previous administration fought so hard to keep us in the dark. Director Gabbard was surveilled on at least five domestic flights by federal air marshals under quiet skies. Internal records for her targeting show her congressional portrait and that she was a former congresswoman from Hawaii. So there was no doubt they knew who they were monitoring. Multiple concerns were raised internally, and one Air Marshal asked a colleague, why the heck is she a Quiet Skies suspect? If this can happen to a combat veteran, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Reserve, and now Director of National Intelligence, it can happen to anyone. And it did. Today, for the first time, you will hear directly from a Federal Air Marshal whose wife was labeled a domestic terrorist simply for engaging in protected First Amendment activity.

Rand Paul

Records show the FBI labeled her as a domestic terrorist for unlawful entry into the Capitol on January 6th, but she didn't enter the Capitol. She came for a public support of the president, and they knew it. Her phone location data did not put her inside the Capitol. Facial recognition did not identify her inside. She had no criminal record and no history of extremist views. What they did know is that this Catholic school teacher from Texas supported President Trump and went to Washington to attend his rally at the Ellipse. That was not enough for the government. That was not enough to label her a suspected domestic terrorist. For two years, her family was surveilled when they flew. This was not an isolated case. It happened to hundreds of Americans. It happened because the TSA used First Amendment protected activity as a predicate for watch-listing Americans. That's unconstitutional, of course. First Amendment activity cannot be the sole basis for watch-listing someone, but sole basis is an important caveat, and it's an opening the TSA exploited. Today we will release internal TSA records that reveal how the agency authorized First Amendment activity to be used to justify the surveillance of Americans with no evidence and no recourse. Using broad and vague authorities, TSA deemed hundreds of Americans as threats to national security simply for holding opposing political views. The federal government used its investigative authorities, anonymous tips, and university research institutions to build a flimsy case to put them on the watch list. They didn't just coincidentally watch list hundreds of people who attended the same Trump rally. They did it intentionally and obscured the process to create plausible deniability. For example, documents obtained in my investigation reveal that TSA relied on data collected by the George Washington University Project on Extremism.

Rand Paul

Consider this. First, DHS funds the Project on Extremism, an external partner not bound by the same laws and regulations as federal agencies. Then, the Project on Extremism identifies supposed domestic threats by meticulously tracking January 6th defendants. DHS then uses the Project on Extremism reporting as evidence, sometimes the only evidence for putting someone on a watch list. But the abuses weren't limited to January 6th. The TSA also viewed skeptics of COVID mandates as threats. Simply removing a mask on an aircraft got 12 Americans watchlisted. Records also show three current members of Congress, all Republicans, were included in the companion silent partner program, either as a sitting member or while seeking elected office. A cursory review would have revealed them to be either a member of Congress or decorated active or former U.S. military members.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.