Confiscating the Phone Records of US Citizens

[Gaspar]

Don't you know Mrs. Holder is getting tired of saying: "Another rough day at the office, honey?"

I wonder if the president has heard about this scandal yet, or if he will learn about it from the news tonight?

[Gaspar]

[patric]

The U.S. National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation have access to servers at Google, Facebook and other major Internet services, collecting audio, video, email and other content for surveillance, the Washington Post and the Guardian reported on Thursday.
The surveillance is taking place in real time under a classified program called PRISM, which was begun in 2007 to investigate foreign threats to the U.S., the reports said. Most of the major Internet services, including Microsoft, Yahoo, Skype, Apple and AOL as well as Google and Facebook, knowingly participate in PRISM, according to the Post and the Guardian.

"The secrecy surrounding the government's extraordinary surveillance powers has stymied our system of checks and balances," wrote Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "Congress must initiate an investigation to fully uncover the scope of these powers and their constraints, and it must enact reforms that protect Americans' right to privacy and that enable effective public oversight of our government."

Oh thank God, Congress will get right on it.




...but it's not like they didnt already know:

The FBI and telecom companies collaborated to routinely violate federal wiretapping laws for years, as agents got access to reporters' and citizens' phone records using fake emergency declarations or simply asking for them.

The Justice Department Inspector General's internal audit, released Wednesday, harshly criticized how the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Communications Analysis Unit relied on so-called "exigent" letters to get carriers to turn over phone records immediately. The letters were a hangover from the investigation into the 9/11 attacks and promised telecoms, falsely, that subpoenas would follow shortly.

It all started after 9/11 as FBI agents hunting terrorists began relying heavily on call toll records — essentially a person's phone bills — in a frantic effort to find terror plots before they were carried out. The agency even gave AT&T, Verizon and MCI multimillion dollar contracts to keep phone records longer and to answer FBI requests faster.
The companies then set up remote terminals inside the FBI's offices, staffing them with telecom employees who quickly became friendly with the agents requesting phone records. The telecom employees had FBI e-mail addresses, access to shared drives and invitations to happy hours, according to the report.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/fbi-att-verizon-violated-wiretapping-laws/

[Gaspar]

Our credibility as a free country has been seriously compromised.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data

The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top secret document obtained by the Guardian.

The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called PRISM, which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says.

[Gaspar]

BREAKING (not really) : Carney Explains


When this originally crossed his desk, the president simply thought this was part of Verizon's Share Everything Plan, and was very excited about the prospect of "unlimited data."  As you can imagine, he was shocked when he read the article in the Guardian last night, and learned that the government was collecting information on innocent Americans without probable cause.  This is wrong, and the president has ordered the Justice Department to launch an immediate investigation into the allegations.

As a result of this gross abuse of FISA law, the president will be unveiling his new plan titled "Protecting America's Privacy" tomorrow.

Ok, so that's not what Carney said, but I bet it will be just as entertaining.

[Townsend]

It's hard to believe this is a huge surprise to anyone.

People are grabbing it and feigning OUTRAGE.

Shock me, shock me, shock me.

[Red Arrow]

Shock me, shock me, shock me.

Stick your finger in a light socket.

[Gaspar]

It's hard to believe this is a huge surprise to anyone.

People are grabbing it and feigning OUTRAGE.

Shock me, shock me, shock me.

There will always be those who don't find this the least bit concerning.

. . .the frogs in the pot.

I don't believe that there are many Americans, Liberal, Libertarian, Conservative or otherwise who are willing to support the notion of violating the 4th amendment for the sake of security.

Those who trade liberty for security have neither. - Benjamin Franklin

[RecycleMichael]

I always assumed that any phone conversation I ever had could be tapped. I always assumed that any e-mail I sent could be read by others. I always assumed that any website I went to could track me.

I have just watched too many movies about spying or crime-solving by pesky kids who had some nerdy tech-savvy friend with a headset who could do anything on a computer.

Am I sad that my government is doing it? Yes. Am I shocked? No.

[Hoss]

There will always be those who don't find this the least bit concerning.

. . .the frogs in the pot.

I don't believe that there are many Americans, Liberal, Libertarian, Conservative or otherwise who are willing to support the notion of violating the 4th amendment for the sake of security.

Those who trade liberty for security have neither. - Benjamin Franklin

Then why was it allowed to be done with the Patriot Act?  I didn't hear many screaming about that.

[Red Arrow]

Then why was it allowed to be done with the Patriot Act?  I didn't hear many screaming about that.

You were listening to something else.

[Townsend]

There will always be those who don't find this the least bit concerning.

It's concerning, yes.  Will we ever be able to do anything about it?  No.

Even if someone says "We've done something about it.", they've not done anything of consequence.  It'll still happen.

Our government isn't some benevolent organization with kind thoughts at its center.  It's a group of power hungry individuals who wish to remain in power.

If you think something can be done to change this, get on out there and do it.

[Conan71]

Then why was it allowed to be done with the Patriot Act?  I didn't hear many screaming about that.

Well under Bush, I could say: "I'm not engaged in terrorist or illegal activities so it doesn't bother me."

Now under Obama I can say: "This is a vicious over-reach by the Obama Administration."

On a serious note, I sense there is the same amount of outrage as there was about the Patriot Act when more details became known about it.  This does not bode well for the Obama Administration with IRSgate, APgate, Benghazigate, etc. all blowing up at once.  Secondly, for a Constitutional law professor, one would think he would respect the Constitution and would have surrounded himself with a staff which respects the Constitution and the individual liberties protected by it which it now appears they are crapping all over.

For one thing the hypocrisy is stifling:

From 2008 on the campaign trail at Dartmouth College, Presidential Candidate Obama said:

For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html

Senator Obama voted "NO" in 2005 to extend the wiretapping provisions of the Patriot Act.

It was a senate cloture vote on HR 3199, an extension of the Patriot Act which was first passed immediately after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001:

Vote to invoke cloture on a conference report that extends the authority of the FBI to conduct "roving wiretaps" and access business records. Voting YES would recommend, in effect, that the PATRIOT Act be extended through December 31, 2009, and would makes the provisions of the PATRIOT Act permanent. Voting NO would extend debate further, which would have the effect of NOT extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision.

In 2005, Obama voted "No" to extending the wiretap provisions of the Patriot Act. This was months after a series of articles in the New York Times which brought the warrantless wiretaps to light. At the time, the Bush Administration had used the provisions for data mining of calls made to countries such as Pakistan and Yemen.

In 2011, President Obama signed a bill that reauthorized key elements of the Patriot Act.

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/06/06/In-2005-Then-Senator-Obama-Voted-NO-On-Patriot-Act-s-Wiretap-Provision

Regardless of source, his vote is a matter of Senate record.  Just like his promise to close Gitmo, his admin is shaping up more and more like 8 additional years of Bush/Cheney.

[RecycleMichael]

Just like his promise to close Gitmo, his admin is shaping up more and more like 8 additional years of Bush/Cheney.

That is why I am supporting Hillary in 2016.

[Conan71]

That is why I am supporting Hillary in 2016.

I'd love to know how people who supported Hillary in the '08 primaries feel about their eventual support for Obama in the '08 general election and his re-election bid in 2012.

Does anyone think he could have won re-election if all this had been swirling around in June of last year?