Today, the United States Congress struck a significant blow against the basic human right to read, write, learn, and associate free of government’s prying eyes.
Goaded by those who let fear override democratic principles, some members of Congress shuttered public debate in order to pass a bill that extends the National Security Agency’s unconstitutional Internet surveillance for six years.
The Trump wiretapping scandal is still in the first stages. It has been shown that in fact, the Obama administration did actively wiretap Donald Trump, and has lead to a plethora of “leaks: that the mainstream media has made front and center to attempt to delegitimize the new President. It was operatives of the Obama administration who used these leaks allegedly procured through this illegal wiretapping that have been creating this entire Russian false story in an attempt to turn the American people against Trump. This is the same administration that brought the American people the lies about Fast and Furious, the IRS, and many others. Thi8s is an administration that had one attorney General found in contempt of Congress, and another taking the Fifth Amendment. And now this same administration is asking the American people to believe MORE lies about our present President.
What is even more appalling than the illegal wiretapping that, if not done by Obama, was directed by him to the NSC and FBI is the fact top Republicans and Democrats knew about this surveillance and said nothing. Among those who knew and said nothing was House Speaker Paul Ryan, House minority leader Chuckie Shumer, and Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsay Graham.
In concert with the media it is being claimed that there is no proof that the wiretapping actually occurred. These are the same low lifes that are pushing a false narrative about Trumps Russian connections, even though the FBI has already stated there is no proof. Obama, in refuting this accusation claims that his administration ever ordered the wiretapping or interfered in any investigation being done by the DOJ. He is saying that he did not order it, but does not say that the administration did. This isn’t like the “Russian problem”, this accusation actually has documentation that shows what was done although the MSM will bury it and not let the American people know. It is a concerted effort by all those involved to hide the truth and ignoring the fundamental freedom of the American people to know what traitors to this country are doing.
There were multiple attempts by the FBI to obtain a warrant through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, (FISA) over the summer to monitor four member of the Trump campaign because of what they felt was inappropriate contact between these men and Russian officials. This original attempt to gain a warrant was turned down. Another FBI request was accept by the FISA court in October of last year. The accepted warrant was centered around the possible financial and banking offenses that were3 allegedly found on a server that was possibly related to the Trump campaign. In essence, the Obama administration was monitoring the Trump campaign using the power of the federal governments intelligence services paid for by taxpayers.
The second FISA request, once again done by the FBI on Obamas orders led to the wiretapping of Trump. In the request it clearly states,
“No evidence was found- but the wiretaps continue”
The media, both local and national have already tried to make this story disappear while continuing to push a false “The Russians did it” storyline to do all they can to delegitimize our President. The concluded investigation into the Russians subverting our election has already be made known to the media and everyone in both parties, but the Democrats and the sycophants in the media can’t let go because they don’t have anything else and they are still hoping that the low information voters who barely watch much less comprehend local news will continue to believe it. Stories such as the Russian meddling in our elections has already been refuted, but sycophants such as the New York Times, the Washington Post and the progressive/socialist on the Democrat party refuse to let it go. They have nothing else, no policy, not way forward to bring the American people back to the Utopia that these Marxists and globalists have laid out for the country.
Couple Obamas changing of the rules to allow the NSA to share “evidence” with all other intelligence agencies just before leaving office, and it shows that Obama holdouts in intelligence can put out any false story they want, label it intelligence and not have to divulge where the “information” came from, putting even private citizens under the yoke of Obama infiltrated intelligence agencies.
They used this intel to take down Flynn by making it the lead story for weeks, and intended to do the same to Sessions until it came out that one of the meeting that everyone has been whining about was actually an event arranged by the the Obama administration. And Sessions did answer the question that Franken asked, he did not talk to any Russians about the campaign. The question now is, did the intelligence agencies set up the question to try and catch Sessions in a lie and force Trump to terminate him?
The FISA court has a very rigid set of rules that must be followed. The only valid reason for the court to approve surveillance is only foreign intelligence information is the information necessary to protect the United States against a potential or actual hostile attack, sabotage or international terror. It would be interesting to see which of these the MSM will pick to attempt to convince the American People that there was nothing criminal here.
Looking at the FISA court and why the warrant was ever issued in a challenge for the past administration, the courts, and is just another reason why the American people do not trust government. FISA should have had no part in this debacle as there was no relevant purpose to even issue the warrant, especially when based on the Obama administration withholding information that the court needed to make a determination. An affidavit was required by the FISA court to apply for the warrant. That affidavit was written and attested to by the Obama administration. If that affidavit concealed information from the court, which it apparently did, that affidavit must be made available to the Congress and the American people. It has been proven that although the main target was Donald Trump, his name in never mentioned in the warrant that FISA allowed. That is perjury and a serious violation, along with the dissemination of information on an American citizen from an investigation that in all instances should remain confidential.
It can’t be denied that the Obama administration used surveillance information and sent it to the mainstream media in leaks that are prosecutable. The investigation into this illegal process will continue. The American people will no longer turn a blind eye to the socialists, globalists and media that continue to feel we must follow what they feel is best for us. Obama and the members of his administration need to go to jail, Those Obama holdovers in this administration need to be gone, and those reporters who willingly spout lies and fake news need to find that the American people will no longer follow and will in the long term run them out of town on a rail as it should be.
By: Kevin Gosztola Saturday December 29, 2012 11:22 am |
As rare as it is for the Senate to have anything resembling a debate on a civil liberties issue such as privacy and government surveillance, there was a minimal amount of coverage in the establishment press of the reauthorization of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA). The law, which allows warrantless surveillance, was reauthorized for five more years on December 28.
Minimal coverage of a topic often means that a wire service’s report becomes one of the more widely circulated accounts of what transpired. (That is how it often goes with coverage of the court martial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, the soldier the military is prosecuting for allegedly providing classified information to WikiLeaks.)
Larry Margasak did the wire story for the Associated Press. It deserves to be deconstructed because it is misleading in ways that benefit the government.
First, Margasak writes, “The Senate gave final congressional approval Friday to a bill renewing the government’s authority to monitor overseas phone calls and emails of suspected foreign spies and terrorists – but not Americans -without obtaining a court order for each intercept.” The “not Americans” is emphasized in such a way that would leave one thinking any suggestion that Americans could be swept up in surveillance is simply wrong or the talk of a conspiracy theorist. The reality is some of the more significant abuses of power in the history of surveillance in America have occurred under the guise of targeting only foreign targets.
In 1975, the Church Committee reviewed the surveillance operations of intelligence agencies and concluded there had been widespread abuse of Americans’ civil liberties. It led to the establishment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to prevent intelligence agencies from committing abuses like the ones discovered by the Committee. According to former members, the FAA “enables the government to circumvent entirely the original FISA protections deemed essential to the protection of Americans’ basic rights.” They add, “Some of the most serious abuses discovered by the Church Committee involved the warrantless surveillance of American citizens under the pretext of targeting foreigners.”
From an amicus brief filed in support of a lawsuit challenging the warrantless surveillance law, which the Supreme Court is hearing:
The FAA abandons FISA’s requirement that an individualized order issue after meaningful judicial review of the basis for the government’s request. And it circumvents the FISC’s power to engage in continued oversight of ongoing surveillance. Instead, the FAA permits the executive branch to initiate a generalized, mass surveillance program for up to one year, encompassing any communications entering or leaving the United States in which one or more unspecified targets arebelieved to be non-United States persons located outside the United States. In place of the detailed judicial review of the claimed justifications of individual surveillance activities, the FAA limits the FISC to a review that is perfunctory…
It is not as evident as Margasak makes it seem that Americans are not being caught up in surveillance. The point of the “debate” on Thursday and Friday was that senators do not know. Intelligence agencies refuse to provide information so they can tell if privacy safeguards are working or not. And, as far as some senators are concerned, there is nothing stopping employees or agents from sifting through a pile of communications for information on a person in the US without probable cause.
Second, one must take issue with this sentence, “The Senate majority rejected arguments from an unusual combination of Democratic liberals and ideological Republican conservatives, who sought to amend the bill to require the government to reveal statistics showing whether any Americans were swept up in the foreign intercepts.” Is it unusual for these people to come together? Margasak should look at previous votes on civil liberties issues. He might find that there is often bipartisan support for protecting civil liberties and upholding the Constitution and the rule of law between factions of both parties.
Furthermore, why are the Democrats who supported amendments “liberals” and the Republican conservatives that supported the amendments “ideological”? Might the Democrats be just as “liberal” as the ones who voted for reauthorization? And might the Republican conservatives, who dutifully served the intelligence community and the Obama administration, be just as “ideological” in their devotion to so-called national security? These words seem extraneous, there to marginalize the people who chose to take a stand and engage in a day of debate on December 27.
Margasak quotes Justice Department spokesperson Dean Boyd who said ”communications collected under the program ‘have provided the intelligence community insight into terrorist networks and plans’ and have ‘directly and significantly contributed to successful operations to impede the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and related technologies.’” He also claimed, “Intercepted communications also revealed potential cyber threats against the United States, including specific potential computer network attacks.”
That is all well and good except it is mostly irrelevant to the debate that occurred in the Senate. No US senator stood on the floor suggesting the FAA needed to be done away with and allowed to expire. Each spoke about what they believed to be the very real threat of terrorism to America and was more than willing to show extreme deference to the intelligence community if only to get a modicum of oversight. So, a relevant quote to what transpired would have specifically addressed why the oversight being requested by senators like Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon was unreasonable.
Margasak writes that Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia sparred repeatedly with Wyden, “who held the bill up for months until he was allowed to argue on the Senate floor that Americans’ civil liberties were in danger under the law.” Why did he have to place a hold on the bill to get one day of debate? Why didn’t Margasak or anyone else from AP get this question answered? It would seem relevant to the fact that this debate was happening four days before the law was set to expire.
The recounting of Wyden’s statements are appropriate. However, some of them are cast as being directed at Feinstein from a “fellow liberal.”
Finally, there is no problem with quoting Feinstein or Chambliss and repeating regulations in the law like, for example, the fact that the “surveillance court approves annual certifications submitted by the attorney general and the director of national Intelligence that identify certain categories of foreign intelligence targets,” however, at no point in the story does he highlight the fact that the rulings by the FISC are secret. Though Margasak does describe the FAA program as “classified,” there is no attention paid to how the court is making secret interpretations of surveillance law that are kept secret from Americans and the American people are not being allowed to see how a secret court is interpreting the law in relation to the Constitution.
Also, the notation on Feinstein speaking about the number of terrorists arrested between 2009 and 2012 says “some of them” were arrested because of the “surveillance program.” Feinstein never said whether these people were caught because the government has surveillance capabilities or because the government has expanded warrantless surveillance powers under the law. She simply spoke about the law and arrests in the same breath creating the illusion that this was the case.
It is classified so no person in the public can really know if the program’s warrantless surveillance is benefiting national security specifically. No senator is likely to talk about methods used to catch specific individuals under the purview of the program, but Margasak should be more careful in his characterization of the benefits of this program to protecting so-called national security. And, again, this talk about how it had helped intelligence agencies uncover terrorists was a distraction because no senator was calling for the abolition of the program built under the law.
***
Techdirt posted leaked Obama administration talking points on amendments to the FISA reauthorization bill yesterday. Many of them were parroted by Feinstein on the Senate floor during debate.
Julian Sanchez of the Cato Institute appeared on “The Rachel Maddow Show” to talk with Ezra Klein, who was filling in for Maddow. It is worth viewing since it was virtually the only news segment on broadcast television on the law’s reauthorization.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
