Congressional Agency Questions Legality of Wiretaps

[theohall]

Like I hve said countless times you guys would be petrified if you knew how much the NSA knew/knows/will know or at least has the access to know if they could actually analyze everything in real time.

You're not a modern day Nostradamus with that pearl of wisdom. That's like telling everyone that they would be scared if we knew cops could stop you for speeding. Of course most folks know the NSA has a frightening amount of power. It's figuring out how to reign that in without compromising our safety that is the rub.

What is funny is that anyone thinks that access to this info has made us any safer. I would challenge that even a single incident has been detected/stopped by gleaning through these records. Those that have been stopped have been so by entrapment and good old fashion investigating. If they don't even manage to stop an attack from someone the Russians of all people gave us a heads up on, I don't buy that seeing a few calls logs is going to lead to stopping some terrorist attack.

These records certainly did not stop the Boston Marathon incident from happening and these records were being collected BEFORE that incident. Just reinforcing your point.

[theohall]

I'm sure Verizon is just the tip of the iceberg. AT&T (nee Cingular) has toed the line plenty.

CNN

"As far as I know this is the exact three month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years. This renewal is carried out by the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] court under the business records section of the Patriot Act," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the intelligence committee, told reporters in the Senate gallery. "Therefore it is lawful. It has been briefed to Congress."
...
Feinstein, D-California, said the government can only access the metadata, not the actual conversations that take place on the calls. After the information goes into a database, it can only be used if there is "reasonable and articulate suspicion that the records are relevant and related to terrorist activity."
...
Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, the vice chairman and top Republican on the committee, said "this is nothing new." He added it's been "very clear all along through the years of this program" that the information is "simply" metadata and can't be tapped into without approval from the FISA court.

"It has proved meritorious because we have gathered significant information on bad guys and only on bad guys over the years," he said.

I love the "Why should you be outraged just because you just found out? We've been doing this for years and no one has complained until now" argument.

Beware of the Leopard

So when when President Bush was doing this, Democrats were outraged!!!! Now, that Democrats are doing this, "we've been doing it for years." so it is okay, now??? WTF kind of nonsense is this???

[theohall]

I suppose the "only bad guys" line is true by default, if they get to decide who the bad guys are and we're not allowed to know.

I always love the Congress line "what is being done is legal." The law makers seem to always be more concerned with
what it legal than what is right.

Unless you are Eric Holder. Then, you can call someone a criminal, illegally obtain information about him/her, lie about your intent in naming them a criminal, and get away with it as if the AG had never committed perjury.

[theohall]

Amazing to me that one area that there is bipartisan support is in tramplingour rights beyond even what the Patriot Act endorses. Telling.

The time is ripe for an alternative party to restore the freedoms the existing parties seem to not give a crap about. If they want to fight crime by analyzing phone records they should start with collecting phone records on ALL politicians.

Hear! Hear! Including the President!!!

[theohall]

On the AP/NSA stuff, here's my no-bullshit take:

After 9/11 we *massively* empowered the Federal government to take actions designed to prevent another terrorist attack of that scale. We as a nation effectively demanded that the government never allow that sort of thing to happen again. The "War on Terror" laws make the AP snooping and the NSA scanning of emails and phone calls legal. So long as these tools are legal *every* Administration will use them, because *no* President will ever be willing to potentially be the President who has a 9/11-level attack happen on his watch and then have to admit that there were more surveillance tools available to them that they did not use.

If we as a people now think some of these tools go too far, and some of the new legal ways the DOJ can monitor for terrorist activity are too high a price to pay, then the answer is to repeal those laws and take those tools away. So long as they are legal, they will be used.

Today the President said clearly that he welcomes a debate on this issue, and action by Congress. Now's the time for pressure on lawmakers.

The laws are not as broad as you imply.. Look them up. Getting phone records for every phone call,, email, text or photo made via a specific company is NOT covered under these new laws. Yet, that is what is being collected.

[theohall]

From the New York Times:

“What you’ve got is two programs that were originally authorized by Congress, have been repeatedly authorized by Congress,” the president said. “Bipartisan majorities have approved them. Congress is continually briefed on how these are conducted. There are a whole range of safeguards involved. And federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout.”

Mr. Obama suggested that Congressional debate behind closed doors should offer the public some confidence that the surveillance is not being abused. He said that those members of Congress — and the judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court — were watching the process.

“If in fact there were abuses taking place, then presumably, those members of Congress could raise those issues.” Mr. Obama said. “They are empowered to do so.”

What a bunch of deflecting, weasely bullcrap.

From New York Magazine, a video of the Director of Intelligence lying to congress. When asked, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" He replied, "No sir." He continued, "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not willingly."

How does this man still have a job?

Does the President get a pass, too?? He is just as culpable considering his campaign about "change" specifically addressed not doing things like this.

[theohall]

Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.

Sure. Only the most paranoid black helicopter conspiracy theorists, like the NYT editorial board, would raise any such concerns:

Within hours of the disclosure that federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.

Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.

The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers.

What terrorists? Isn't Al-Qaeda on the run? Terrorists had nothing to do with Benghazi? Fort Hood was work-place violence while the defendant is claiming he was 'protecting the Taliban' as his defense? There is no terrorism - especially from Islamic Fundamentalists if anyone believes our President and those who speak for him today.

[theohall]

And you're comparing Obama to the founders in that he's known government snooping is wrong and said so, but he punted, guessing that the issue of terrorism would fade in the coming decades?

How...unexpected. Unless, of course, you're making excuses for some politicians but not others.

Maybe Obama should only collect data on 3/5 of your phone calls.

When a President refuses to acknowledge acts of terrorism committed by Muslims.... what excuse are you making? Heck, the Fort Hood guy claims he was defending the Taliban, but Obama and Co. are still calling it work-place violence!!!! That is absolutely nuts, since the guys is admitting to to be a terrorist in his defense!!!!

[Zarathud]

Theo, you post but did not read what hepcat and Rip were discussing. Sarcasm detector fail.

So you're saying that Obama should admit the OMG! Terroristz are everywhere because a nuts guy said so and BENHAZI!!, but not do anything about it. Or at least not as much as Bush did? Seriously?

We the People rolled over and took it up the rear on data aggregation and privacy for a decade. It's a little too late for the OUTRAGE! when both sides in Congress have been briefed in full for that long. At least the outcry under Bush might have stopped it cold, but Pandora's Box has been open for too long now to get all butt hurt over it. This is just the scandal of the week to try to embarrass Obama about issues everyone in Washington has known about for years (see the IRS stuff) so he doesn't do anything before the next election.

[theohall]

Theo, you post but did not read what hepcat and Rip were discussing. Sarcasm detector fail.

So you're saying that Obama should admit the OMG! Terroristz are everywhere because a nuts guy said so and BENHAZI!!, but not do anything about it. Or at least not as much as Bush did? Seriously?

We the People rolled over and took it up the rear on data aggregation and privacy for a decade. It's a little too late for the OUTRAGE! when both sides in Congress have been briefed in full for that long. At least the outcry under Bush might have stopped it cold, but Pandora's Box has been open for too long now to get all butt hurt over it. This is just the scandal of the week to try to embarrass Obama about issues everyone in Washington has known about for years (see the IRS stuff) so he doesn't do anything before the next election.

Really??? The Scandal of the week? Heck, Obama's admin seems to create scandals by the week without the help of lowly me.

The argument is about Obama's 2008 campaign, his supposed transparency, his supposed anti-spying on Americans stance compared with his administrations current actions. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election. What is your defense for Obama's flip-flop? Pres Obama might as well be John Kerry right now with his flip-flops on election promises.

[Defiant]

The program's apparent goal is to isolate in domestic traffic information relevant to foreign actors (even if it doesn't originate or terminate outside the US).

Actually, revisiting this, that is the case with PRISM, at least with a 51% likelihood, which strikes me as about as low a threshold as they could have made, given that they're almost as likely to target an American as a non-American.

But the Verizon order does not make any such discrimination

“It is hereby ordered that [Verizon Business Network Services'] Custodian of Records shall produce to the National Security Agency…all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls,” the Guardian’s copy of the order reads. “This Order does not require Verizon to include telephony metadata for communications wholly originating and terminating in foreign countries.”

[Defiant]

We the People rolled over and took it up the rear on data aggregation and privacy for a decade. It's a little too late for the OUTRAGE! when both sides in Congress have been briefed in full for that long.

[cheeba]

Does the President get a pass, too?? He is just as culpable considering his campaign about "change" specifically addressed not doing things like this.

Well, no he doesn't get a pass. I actually called him a weasel who is trying to deflect the scandal .

[hepcat]

Like I hve said countless times you guys would be petrified if you knew how much the NSA knew/knows/will know or at least has the access to know if they could actually analyze everything in real time.

You're not a modern day Nostradamus with that pearl of wisdom. That's like telling everyone that they would be scared if we knew cops could stop you for speeding. Of course most folks know the NSA has a frightening amount of power. It's figuring out how to reign that in without compromising our safety that is the rub.

What is funny is that anyone thinks that access to this info has made us any safer. I would challenge that even a single incident has been detected/stopped by gleaning through these records. Those that have been stopped have been so by entrapment and good old fashion investigating. If they don't even manage to stop an attack from someone the Russians of all people gave us a heads up on, I don't buy that seeing a few calls logs is going to lead to stopping some terrorist attack.

These records certainly did not stop the Boston Marathon incident from happening and these records were being collected BEFORE that incident. Just reinforcing your point.

Usually it's best to reinforce a point with more than one incident...and one that's being brought up repeatedly by others.

[hepcat]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

[theohall]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

Sadly. Our President chose to disappear for hours and play Ostrich sticking his head into a pillow, instead of going to the Situation Room - like every President prior - and actually acting like a damn President.

A United States Embassy was under attack for the first time in 43 years. Can you tell me where the President was after being informed of the attack? AFAIK, no one can... That is inexcusable. The Commander-in-Chief is nowhere to be found when an Embassy is under attack?????

Oh,,,,, Allah forbid he would have to admit the "on-the-run" Al-Qaeda killed a US Ambassador during a US Presidential election.

The transparent, honest, non-spying, open presidency is a bald-faced lie. Those of you continue to believe Obama is the paragon of transparency..... Then why does he know NOTHING about the things he has appointed folks to accomplish?


Heck.... None of you would buy Bush saying "I did not know"

So why are you buying it from this hypocrite?

[hepcat]

A United States Embassy was under attack for the first time in 43 years. Can you tell me where the President was after being informed of the attack?

Maybe he was reading to children and couldn't be bothered to stop when told there was a national emergency?

p.s. did you know that Obama wears a black cape and often ties female Tea Party members to train tracks if they refuse to love him back?

[Grundbegriff]

Actually, revisiting this, that is the case with PRISM, at least with a 51% likelihood

A coin flip, in effect.

But the Verizon order does not make any such discrimination

The collection and transfer of the data are comprehensive and non-discriminating. But how about the use of the data? Do you suppose that no threshold-- however pro forma-- applies?

Precollection is total. Use of what's precollection-- that's where the threshold-based petitioning occurs.

[theohall]

A United States Embassy was under attack for the first time in 43 years. Can you tell me where the President was after being informed of the attack?

????
Maybe he was reading to children and couldn't be bothered to stop when told there was a national emergency?

p.s. did you know that Obama wears a black cape and often ties female Tea Party members to train tracks if they refuse to love him back?

Big difference. A) Did you read his book? B) He chose not to alarm the children. C) Immediately after he was done, got on Air Force One and went to the best Sit Room location based on what was happening.

Where the F was Obama for HOURS?????? Yes, HOURS????????? While a US Embassy was being attacked - especially on 9/11 by a Al-Qaeda backed terrorist group. Should not the President have been prepared for Al-Qaeda backed assaults on US embassies on that specific day???? NO ONE can seemingly account for the President's whereabouts on the very same day a US Ambassador was killed for the first time since 1979. Doesn't this mean anything at all to anyone? It sure doesn't seem to mean a damn thing to the liberals who look at Obama as the damn savior. He was certainly no savior for Ambassador Stevens and it seems no one gives a damn. It is perfectly okay for Islamists to kill US Ambassador, but holy crap - a white guy should never kill a black guy ever - even in self defense. That is the message the US President is selling to America.

I hope to heck Christians wake up and realize Muslims do not believe in forgiveness. Islam is the most intolerant religion in the world. Unfortunately,we are being taught to accept their intolerance. They can burn crosses, Bibles, flags, whatever religious symbol they want - because we forgive - as good Christians.

If you make a caricature of Allah, deface the Koran, disrespect a niquab.... in the Muslim faith - if you are non-Muslim and perpertrated this act - the punishment is death....

So why should not Muslim's be treated the same for making caricatures of God, burning bibles, crushing rosaries, anything disrespecting the faith of Christians? I know, the answer is Christians forgive and it will supposedly matter in the end. The problem - when Muslim terrorists are killing children (Boston most recent) and the actually believe they go to their heaven for killing innocent (non-Muslims) Christians.

It is friggin' insane that our current President refuses to acknowledge Fundamentalist Islamic Terrorist perpetrated acts within the United States!!!!! IMO, it is because after 9/11 NOT ONE happened until Pres Obama took office and there have been 4 within US borders since - in spite of his spying. IMO, it is due to blindness to the idea that Muslims are safe until they actually commit a crime. Ask any ICE Agent how they are supposed to talk to Muslims. They could be illegal aliens and get treated better than a US citizen under current ICE regulations - note - regulations - not laws passed down by Congress.

All this wire typing and monitoring of supposed terrorists - how in the hell did someone clearly promoting Al-Qaeda propanda on youtube get missed? How did someone - with next no income - fly to Chechnya - a known Al-Qaeda area - and back without getting flagged. Where in the heck are the phone records from this guy who blew up the Boston Marathon? If this
Admin were not so Islamaphobic, IMO, the Boston Marathon bombing would not have happened. Instead, we have an Admin that stops anything Islamic related from even being investigated even though the worst US bombing in history was committed by Islamic Fundamentalists, and the three biggest potential bombings over the past four years were all Islamic Fundamentalists. These last three mentioned - caught in the act. Question: Why not sooner? If all this surveillance is in place, the govt knows what they are doing. Why wait? The materials have to be with them somewhere. The surveillance saying when and where has to be somewhere - so why wait until the last minute????? Prior to current admin - I would say the law required it. Under Eric Holder, who breaks the law to get what he want when he wants, why aren't they stopping these incidents sooner?

[hepcat]

Wow Chief, you're in full on rage mode, ain't ya? You managed to lump all Muslims into one group, paint all Christians as saints, while at the same time both condemning the current privacy breach issue and endorsing it.

You have raised the rant to an art form, my dear sir.

P.S. Did you know Obama is after your Lucky Charms?

[Smoove_B]

I hope to heck Christians wake up and realize Muslims do not believe in forgiveness. Islam is the most intolerant religion in the world. Unfortunately,we are being taught to accept their intolerance. They can burn crosses, Bibles, flags, whatever religious symbol they want - because we forgive - as good Christians.

Ahh...now I see.

[theohall]

Wow Chief, you're in full on rage mode, ain't ya? You managed to lump all Muslims into one group, paint all Christians as saints, while at the same time both condemning the current privacy breach issue and endorsing it.

You have raised the rant to an art form, my dear sir.

P.S. Did you know Obama is after your Lucky Charms?

Have you read the Koran and the supporting fatwas?

I would he happy to discuss... Because there is zero tolerance when the fatwas are included. Ask any non-Muslim in Egypt right now.

[Defiant]

The collection and transfer of the data are comprehensive and non-discriminating. But how about the use of the data? Do you suppose that no threshold-- however pro forma-- applies?

I have no idea, given that there's been no transparency, no verifiable safeguards and, as was shown previously, the Director of Intelligence lying to congress.

So no, I'm not going to take the claim for granted.

There's also no guarantee that either the current use or terms of use will remain consistent in the future

[hepcat]

Have you read the Koran and the supporting fatwas?

I would he happy to discuss... Because there is zero tolerance when the fatwas are included. Ask any non-Muslim in Egypt right now.

Have you ever read the Bible?

It's like Zekester and Daehawk got married and adopted a child.

p.s. Did you know Obama grew a mustache just so he could twirl it in an evil manner during meetings?

[theohall]

Have you read the Koran and the supporting fatwas?

I would he happy to discuss... Because there is zero tolerance when the fatwas are included. Ask any non-Muslim in Egypt right now.

Have you ever read the Bible?

It's like Zekester and Daehawk got married and adopted a child.

p.s. Did you know Obama grew a mustache just so he could twirl it in an evil manner during meetings?

I have actually read both. One, the tone changes to one of tolerance and forgiveness. The other, starts reaching that point, but fatwas by Imams turn it into intolerance.

No. You did not answer my simple yes or no question. A typical tactic of the unread.

[hepcat]

Ah, you read the abridged Bible available to all bigots.

Using your logic, Westboro represents all of Christiandom.

P.S. Obama has 665 on the back of his neck...SO CLOSE!

[theohall]

Ah, you read the abridged Bible available to all bigots.

Using your logic, Westboro represents all of Christiandom.

P.S. Obama has 665 on the back of his neck...SO CLOSE!

You still have not answered my question. Do you have a reading comprehension disorder?

Have you read the Koran and the fatwas supporting the Koran?

I know. Those are two questions which might cause you significant difficutly in your reply since you seem incapable of simple yes or no answers. Are you actually a woman irl?

Damn...That is a third question.

[hepcat]

Ah, you read the abridged Bible available to all bigots.

Using your logic, Westboro represents all of Christiandom.

P.S. Obama has 665 on the back of his neck...SO CLOSE!

You still have not answered my question. Do you have a reading comprehension disorder?

You honestly haven't read the Bible, nor do you actually understand the relationship the majority of Muslims in the world have with Fatwas. Debating this with you is like talking to an angry child. You're going to rant, you're going to rave, you're going to ignore anything that doesn't tell you what you want to hear, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it.

The only good that comes from your childish diatribes is a better understanding of what's wrong with republican extremists (and, to be fair, extremists in all groups). They're not interested in fixing things, they simply want people to tell them everyone else is evil.

So keep it up. You're one of the voices that may eventually change things...but probably not in the way you want.

[silverjon]

Are you actually a woman irl?

Oh fuck off.

[Combustible Lemur]

Ah, you read the abridged Bible available to all bigots.

Using your logic, Westboro represents all of Christiandom.

P.S. Obama has 665 on the back of his neck...SO CLOSE!

You still have not answered my question. Do you have a reading comprehension disorder?

Have you read the Koran and the fatwas supporting the Koran?

I know. Those are two questions which might cause you significant difficutly in your reply since you seem incapable of simple yes or no answers. Are you actually a woman irl?

Damn...That is a third question.

So I don't have a stake in this quarrel, as I find the current admin both admirable and despicable and better than the alternative. But adding mysogyny to your vitriol does not help your very persuasive Beckian style.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

[Exodor]

A United States Embassy was under attack for the first time in 43 years.

You got a source for that claim?

[hepcat]

<insert sound of crickets>

[Rip]

Theo, you post but did not read what hepcat and Rip were discussing. Sarcasm detector fail.

So you're saying that Obama should admit the OMG! Terroristz are everywhere because a nuts guy said so and BENHAZI!!, but not do anything about it. Or at least not as much as Bush did? Seriously?

We the People rolled over and took it up the rear on data aggregation and privacy for a decade. It's a little too late for the OUTRAGE! when both sides in Congress have been briefed in full for that long. At least the outcry under Bush might have stopped it cold, but Pandora's Box has been open for too long now to get all butt hurt over it. This is just the scandal of the week to try to embarrass Obama about issues everyone in Washington has known about for years (see the IRS stuff) so he doesn't do anything before the next election.

So the NYT has known all these things for years and only now decided to write an editorial lambasting Obama?

[Rip]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

He might as well have, I can't think of any way he could have supported their attack any more without doing so.

[hepcat]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

He might as well have, I can't think of any way he could have supported their attack any more without doing so.

Of course you can't. That's like telling me water is wet at this point.

It's also been proven that Obama's the number one cause of cancer in the handbook you get your facts from.

[Rip]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

He might as well have, I can't think of any way he could have supported their attack any more without doing so.

Of course you can't. That's like telling me water is wet at this point.

It's also been proven that Obama's the number one cause of cancer in the handbook you get your facts from.

I am not the one that prevented a FEST response.

[Zarathud]

Someone got bored of calling Obama the Most Socialist President EVAR, so now he's supporting terrorism by listening too much to our phones in trying to stop the terrorists but not personally overseeing our response at all times.

It's not that people think water isn't wet that's the problem -- it's that they also think water is also too dry at the same time. Seriously, WTF. Do you ever think about more than 1 post at a time?

I can't even blame the media for selling entertainment instead of news anymore. Recycling stories is much more cost effective.

[hepcat]

. Heck, at least Bush did not have to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents to win an election.

And don't forget that Obama personally flew to Benghazi to work with the terrorists!

He might as well have, I can't think of any way he could have supported their attack any more without doing so.

Of course you can't. That's like telling me water is wet at this point.

It's also been proven that Obama's the number one cause of cancer in the handbook you get your facts from.

I am not the one that prevented a FEST response.

State Department did that by all accounts. And the official report indicated that initial reports showed they wouldn't have arrived in time to do anything anyway. In any case, hindsight is always 20/20. Perhaps we should also blame Bush for 9/11?

Were mistakes made by Obama and his administration during his presidency? Of course there were. Just as there have been mistakes made by every administration. The outrage didn't help when Bush embarked on a war, it's not helping now that we need to fix the policies started during that time.

The problem is with both parties, not just one.

[Defiant]

Sigh.

[hepcat]

Benghazi will ALWAYS come up when RIP enters a discussion.