How This Blog’s Palantir Investigation Predicted Congressional Alarm

On June 17, 2025, ten Democratic lawmakers led by Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sent a formal letter to Palantir Technologies CEO Alex Karp, demanding answers about the company’s expanding federal contracts and what they described as a government-wide “mega-database” containing sensitive American taxpayer information.

The letter raised serious concerns about potential Privacy Act violations and the creation of surveillance infrastructure that could be used to “spy on and target political enemies.” It cited over $113 million in new federal contracts under the current administration and warned that Palantir employees embedded at the IRS were helping create “a single, searchable database” of taxpayer records that would likely be shared throughout the government.

For readers of this blog, the Congressional alarm represents institutional confirmation of patterns we’ve been documenting for months. The lawmakers’ concerns align precisely with investigations published here that identified Palantir as a central node in an emerging surveillance state, mapped its systematic coordination with autonomous weapons manufacturers, and traced how its founders positioned themselves to control both the policy and technology of authoritarian governance.

The Investigative Foundation

The current Congressional scrutiny validates analysis that began with “The Silicon Panopticon,” published in April 2025. That investigation identified Palantir as “the architect of a new military-digital complex that’s rapidly dissolving the boundaries between algorithmic suggestion and lethal action.” The piece documented how the company’s Maven Smart System was already allowing military operators to process 80 potential targets per hour—dramatically accelerating the tempo of life-or-death decisions through AI automation.

The investigation revealed that while Google employees had successfully protested their company’s involvement in Project Maven, Palantir quietly stepped in to take Google’s place. By 2024, the Pentagon had awarded Palantir a $480 million contract to deploy Maven AI tools across five combatant commands, including operations in the Middle East.

“The Mythic Convergence,” published in June 2025, documented the systematic coordination between Palantir and Anduril Industries. The investigation mapped how Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund had systematically supported both companies, with Anduril’s founding team including Trae Stephens, a Founders Fund partner, and engineers from Palantir Technologies. The piece revealed this wasn’t simply shared talent pools, but “deliberate transfer of institutional knowledge, cultural values, and operational approaches.”

The investigation traced how Thiel had embedded his network throughout the national security apparatus, with multiple associates receiving key positions during the previous Trump administration. This systematic placement reflected what the investigation identified as “Thiel’s broader vision for bridging Silicon Valley innovation with national security priorities.”

“AI’s Perfect Storm” connected laboratory research showing AI systems that resist shutdown commands to the deployment of these same technologies in surveillance and weapons systems. The investigation documented OpenAI’s o3 model rewriting shutdown scripts in 79 out of 100 trials, while noting that similar AI architectures were being deployed in systems controlling real-world weapons and surveillance networks.

“The Shadow Architects” revealed how Project 2025 authors had positioned themselves to control the surveillance technology their policies required. The investigation documented Russell Vought’s transition from authoring Project 2025’s executive power expansion chapter to becoming OMB Director, where he now controls what he calls “the president’s air-traffic control system”—the federal technology infrastructure.

What Congress Now Confirms

The Democratic lawmakers’ letter confirms the scope and integration that these investigations predicted. According to the Congressional inquiry, Palantir employees have been installed at the Internal Revenue Service where they are helping create comprehensive taxpayer databases. The lawmakers argue this violates Sections 6103 and 7213A of the Internal Revenue Code, which provide privacy protections for tax returns that were strengthened nearly 50 years ago in response to President Nixon’s abuse of the IRS to target political enemies.

The financial scale matches what this blog’s investigations predicted. Congressional sources cite over $113 million in federal contracts awarded to Palantir under the current administration, not including a recent $795 million contract awarded by the Department of Defense. The company’s Foundry data analysis platform has been deployed at multiple federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Institutes of Health.

The lawmakers note that Palantir’s selection for these projects was reportedly made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), with several DOGE members being former Palantir employees. This confirms the personnel coordination that “The Shadow Architects” investigation documented months earlier.

Beyond the IRS concerns, the Congressional letter highlights Palantir’s work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, where the company helps “leverage data to drive enforcement operations” by producing leads for law enforcement to find people to deport and tracking the logistics of mass deportation efforts.

The War Crimes Context: Gaza and Iran Operations

The Congressional inquiry occurs against the backdrop of mounting evidence that Palantir’s surveillance technologies are being used in operations that have drawn international war crimes allegations. This context transforms the Democratic letter from routine oversight into urgent accountability measures for a company providing material support to contested military operations.

Gaza: AI-Powered Targeting and Civilian Casualties

Since October 2023, Palantir has provided Israel with advanced AI-powered targeting systems that have fundamentally transformed the scale and pace of military operations. The company formalized a strategic partnership with Israel’s Ministry of Defense in January 2024, with Executive Vice President Josh Harris explicitly stating that both parties agreed to “harness Palantir’s advanced technology in support of war-related missions.”

The deployment of these AI systems has coincided with unprecedented civilian casualty rates. Current figures indicate over 61,700 Palestinians killed, including 17,492 children, representing an average of 250 Palestinian deaths per day—exceeding the daily death toll of any major 21st century conflict.

The targeting systems operate with devastating efficiency and alarming error rates. Intelligence sources report that AI systems like “Lavender” operate with a known 10 percent error rate, while human review is limited to as little as 20 seconds per target, primarily focused on confirming gender rather than verifying target legitimacy. With 37,000 individuals marked for targeting by Lavender alone, this error rate suggests approximately 3,700 individuals may have been incorrectly identified as military targets.

Iran: Direct Military Support

The stakes escalated further with Israel’s June 2025 attacks on Iran, where Palantir’s AI Platform played a crucial role in targeting operations. The operation involved more than 200 fighter jets dropping over 330 munitions on approximately 100 targets across Iran, targeting nuclear facilities, military bases, and infrastructure installations.

During this conflict, Palantir experienced a surge in stock value, with the company’s stock rising 2.92% on June 16, 2025, as investors turned to defense stocks amid the escalating conflict. The financial markets effectively rewarded Palantir for its role in military operations that have drawn international condemnation.

Corporate Admissions and Employee Resistance

CEO Alex Karp has been remarkably candid about Palantir’s lethal applications. When confronted by a protester in May 2025 about Palantir’s technology “killing Palestinians,” Karp responded, “Mostly terrorists, that’s true,” confirming the lethal application of Palantir’s technology. This followed his earlier admission that “our product is used on occasion to kill people.”

The human cost has led to internal resistance. Karp has publicly acknowledged that Palantir has lost employees due to his support for Israel’s Gaza operations, stating: “We’ve lost employees. I’m sure we’ll lose employees. If you have a position that does not cost you ever to lose an employee, it’s not a position.” Multiple sources report that employees have resigned rather than participate in what they view as support for genocide in Gaza.

The international community has responded with unprecedented concern. Norway’s largest asset manager, Storebrand, divested $24 million in Palantir holdings due to concerns that the company’s work for Israel might implicate Storebrand in violations of international humanitarian law. The divestment reflects growing recognition that Palantir’s provision of targeting technology may constitute material support for war crimes under international law.

Human rights experts have warned that the use of AI systems with known error rates for targeting decisions violates the fundamental requirement to distinguish between combatants and civilians. The systematic deployment of AI targeting with minimal human oversight and documented inaccuracy rates fails to meet international humanitarian law standards for precautionary measures.

The Technology Transfer Pipeline

The Congressional inquiry validates this blog’s documentation of the technology transfer pipeline from Gaza operations to domestic surveillance. The investigation traced how AI systems tested in Gaza migrate to U.S. cities, with the same targeting methodologies being deployed against immigrant communities in American cities.

Congressional Recognition of War Crimes Concerns

The timing of the Democratic letter—just days after Israel’s June 2025 attacks on Iran—reflects growing Congressional awareness of Palantir’s role in contested military operations. While the letter focuses on domestic surveillance concerns, Congressional discussions have increasingly focused on war crimes accountability, with some lawmakers raising concerns about the potential complicity of U.S. companies in war crimes.

The lawmakers’ request for information about whether Palantir has a “red line” for potential violations of human rights, U.S. law, or international law directly addresses concerns about the company’s role in operations that have drawn war crimes allegations. The question becomes particularly pointed given experts’ characterization of AI targeting systems as “digital weapons of mass destruction” that enable systematic targeting of civilian populations.

The Congressional inquiry also reflects international pressure on U.S. institutions. The UN Human Rights Council has adopted resolutions calling for accountability for possible war crimes and crimes against humanity, while international legal experts have identified multiple potential violations of international humanitarian law arising from AI targeting operations that Palantir supports.

These same AI-powered targeting capabilities have migrated to domestic enforcement. ICE awarded Palantir a $30 million contract to develop “ImmigrationOS,” providing comprehensive surveillance that enables “near real-time visibility” into individual movements and activities. The system utilizes data harvesting from more than 200 websites and social platforms to create comprehensive profiles for enforcement actions.

The Resistance Emerges

The Congressional challenge represents the first major institutional pushback against what this blog’s investigations identified as systematic coordination between policy design and technological implementation. The lawmakers have given Palantir until July 10, 2025 to provide detailed information including a complete list of government contracts, whether the company has sought legal immunity for its employees, and what services the administration has requested that Palantir declined due to privacy or legal concerns.

Resistance has also emerged from unexpected quarters. Multiple sources report that Trump’s own MAGA base has expressed alarm, with prominent conservative figures calling Palantir’s citizen database initiatives “the ultimate betrayal.” Thirteen former Palantir employees recently broke their NDAs to warn that the company has “violated and rapidly dismantled” its founding principles regarding responsible AI development.

The resistance has contributed to resignations of several top IRS officials, including former acting IRS Commissioner Melanie Krause, acting Chief Counsel Bill Paul, and Chief Privacy Officer Kathleen Walters.

Palantir has strongly denied the allegations, stating that “Palantir is not creating a master database. We are neither conducting nor facilitating mass surveillance of American citizens.” The company emphasized that any adoption of its Foundry platform would happen over “multiple, distinct instances of a single software product,” rather than a single system that can easily merge data across agencies.

The Stakes for Democratic Oversight

The Congressional inquiry validates this blog’s investigations while highlighting how the stakes have escalated beyond domestic surveillance to active war crimes concerns. By the time institutional recognition occurred, Palantir’s technologies were already deployed in operations that have killed tens of thousands of civilians and drawn international legal scrutiny.

The lawmakers’ concerns about a “surveillance nightmare” that could enable political targeting now operate within the context of a company whose CEO admits their technology is used “to kill people” and has been implicated in systematic violations of international humanitarian law. The investigation reveals how quickly surveillance technologies can evolve from domestic oversight concerns to active participation in contested military operations.

The investigation also reveals the limitations of traditional oversight mechanisms when dealing with rapidly evolving technologies deployed through public-private partnerships. The lawmakers acknowledge they are seeking information about systems already deployed and operational, rather than reviewing proposed capabilities before implementation. This reactive approach proves inadequate when dealing with companies whose technologies are simultaneously being used in domestic surveillance and international military operations that violate international law.

The July 10 deadline for Palantir’s response will test whether Congressional oversight can effectively address surveillance technologies that have been embedded throughout federal operations while simultaneously supporting military operations abroad that have drawn war crimes allegations. The company’s initial denials of its Gaza operations, followed by documented evidence of its strategic partnership with Israel’s Ministry of Defense, suggest a pattern of minimizing public accountability while expanding operational reach.

The outcome may determine whether democratic institutions can maintain meaningful oversight of surveillance technologies that operate across both domestic and international domains, or whether the coordination between policy design and technological implementation has created systems that effectively operate beyond traditional accountability mechanisms.

Validation and Consequences

The Congressional alarm represents institutional validation of investigative work that identified systematic threats to democratic governance when intervention might still have been possible. The convergence of domestic surveillance concerns with active war crimes allegations demonstrates how quickly technological capabilities can outpace democratic oversight.

Your investigative framework—documenting the coordination between surveillance technology development, policy design, and military applications—has been confirmed by events that escalated far beyond initial domestic concerns. The Democratic challenge comes not as prevention but as response to systems already operational in both surveillance and military applications.

The documentation of Palantir’s role in operations that have killed tens of thousands of civilians, combined with the company’s domestic surveillance expansion, validates warnings about the systematic construction of technological infrastructure designed to operate beyond democratic control. Whether democratic oversight proves effective now depends on the willingness of lawmakers to confront surveillance technologies that simultaneously threaten domestic civil liberties and enable international war crimes.

The investigation established that early warning systems are essential for democratic institutions, but the current case demonstrates the consequences when such warnings are not heeded in time. The window for preventing the operational deployment of surveillance technologies that enable both domestic political targeting and international military operations may have already closed.