Wyden: NSA violations are more serious than they stated

[Luminous Animal]

Last edited Tue Jul 30, 2013, 08:11 PM - Edit history (1)

Sen. Ron Wyden said Tuesday that U.S. intelligence agencies’ violations of court orders on surveillance of Americans is worse than the government is letting on.

Wyden (D-Ore.), as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is privy to classified briefings on the government’s surveillance. On Tuesday, he told Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC that all he could say is that the violations are worse than being made public.
Continue Reading

“We had a big development last Friday when Gen. [James] Clapper, the head of the intelligence agencies, admitted that the community had violated these court orders on phone record collection, and I’ll tell your viewers that those violations are significantly more troubling than the government has stated,” Wyden said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/ron-wyden-intelligence-violations-troubling-94928.html#ixzz2aYg3m1Bw

[LondonReign2]

1. K&R

[Scuba]

2. But, but, but Greenwald's gay and Snowden was dating a pole dancer. Who can trust Wyden ...

... in view of these "facts"?

[Luminous Animal]

3. Greenwald has a new article coming out this week. I hope tomorrow.

[East Coast Pirate]

16. They're gonna need a bigger bus.

[wtmusic]

52. Shhh...for a moment, I thought I heard a Snowden hata.

Nah, just the wind.

[woo me with science]

4. K&R

[reformist2]

5. I bet you it's secret info being sold to companies and private individuals.

[hootinholler]

6. I doubt the hearing would have gone there

My guess is that the content of calls is being stored by claiming they are not 'collected' until they are actually listened to.

[leveymg]

8. That looks like the right ticket. Please see my comment below.

[Th1onein]

40. Thaaaaaaat's right!

Can I say I told you so, when it comes out? Huh? Can I? Can I? Please, please please please please?

[bobduca]

53. where meta-data

can be defined as text transcripts with 99% accuracy

[RC]

62. How is anyone going to collect the metadata, without collecting the data contained inside?

You know packets and all that?

[JDPriestly]

25. A previous whistleblower said they call up records of lots of lawyers in law firms.

That would be really, really bad. It could violate our constitutional protections for fair trials, juries of our peers, advice of counsel, self-incrimination and a whole row of constitutional protections. But I am just guessing.

When I first heard about Bush's program, way back when, my first thought was that the private communications between lawyers and clients would be breached in this way. That is totally unacceptable. There are arguments opposing my view that some would espouse, but in my opinion, the attorney-client confidentiality should be respected by the government except when wrongdoing is evident on the part of the attorney, and that is not that often.

[OnyxCollie]

43. Do you remember Thomas Nelson

and the Al Haramain Islamic charity?


February 28, 2006: Saudi Charitable Organization Sues Bush Administration Over Alleged Illegal Wiretapping
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=thomas_nelson_1

The Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, a now-defunct Saudi Arabian charitable organization that once operated in Oregon, sues the Bush administration [ASSOCIATED PRESS, 2/28/2006] over what it calls illegal surveillance of its telephone and e-mail communications by the National Security Agency, the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program. The lawsuit may provide the first direct evidence of US residents and citizens being spied upon by the Bush administration’s secret eavesdropping program, according to the lawsuit (see December 15, 2005). According to a source familiar with the case, the NSA monitored telephone conversations between Al Haramain’s director, then in Saudi Arabia, and two US citizens working as lawyers for the organization and operating out of Washington, DC. The lawsuit alleges that the NSA violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (see 1978), the US citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights, and the attorney-client privilege. FISA experts say that while they are unfamiliar with the specifics of this lawsuit, they question whether a FISA judge would have allowed surveillance of conversations between US lawyers and their client under the circumstances described in the lawsuit. Other lawsuits have been filed against the Bush administration over suspicions of illegal government wiretapping, but this is the first lawsuit to present classified government documents as evidence to support its contentions. The lawsuit alleges that the NSA illegally intercepted communications between Al Haramain officer Suliman al-Buthe in Saudi Arabia, and its lawyers Wendell Belew and Asim Ghafoor in Washington. One of its most effective pieces of evidence is a document accidentally turned over to the group by the Treasury Department, dated May 24, 2004, that shows the NSA did indeed monitor conversations between Al Haramain officials and lawyers. When Al Haramain officials received the document in late May, 2004, they gave a copy to the Washington Post, whose editors and lawyers decided, under threat of government prosecution, to return the document to the government rather than report on it (see Late May, 2004). [WASHINGTON POST, 3/2/2006; WASHINGTON POST, 3/3/2006] Lawyer Thomas Nelson, who represents Al Haramain and Belew, later recalls he didn’t realize what the organization had until he read the New York Times’s December 2005 story of the NSA’s secret wiretapping program (see December 15, 2005). “I got up in the morning and read the story, and I thought, ‘My god, we had a log of a wiretap and it may or may not have been the NSA and on further reflection it was NSA,’” Nelson will recall. “So we decided to file a lawsuit.” Nelson and other lawyers were able to retrieve one of the remaining copies of the document, most likely from Saudi Arabia, and turned it over to the court as part of their lawsuit. [WIRED NEWS, 3/5/2007]

[JDPriestly]

50. An attorney has a duty to keep the confidential information of the client.

Scalia wrote a Supreme Court decision affirming that fundamental principle of justice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swidler_%26_Berlin_v._United_States

Like habeas corpus, this is one of the fundamental rights of Americans. An attorney can face serious problems if he or she violates that right. If the NSA is violating that right, it is destroying centuries of important tradition.

[leveymg]

7. "Violations of those court orders with respect to the bulk phone record collection" So, NSA is

either doing something with the phone metadata that's a violation of the FISA court orders, or collecting, processing and storing more than phone metadata.

In other words, the very things the Administration and NSA have been denying they've been doing.

[hootinholler]

13. We know Alexander is of the scoop and poop mentality

As in scoop everything up so it can be digested and pooped back out later.

[leveymg]

21. To be kind, more like dining out at Golden Corral - eat all the starch your belly can hold.

NSA probably will welcome not having to hold onto and deal with all that vast wasteland of US person content, and will be delighted if Congress shifts that burden to the private service providers (the telcos, Google, etc. will be happy with that arrangement, for generous federal contract terms or or user fees, of course).

Maybe, that's what this is all about? Do you thunk?

[Vanje]

9. Wyden is one of the last of the real Democrats.

One of very few people keeping me from leaving the party all together.

[bvar22]

10. "The TIP of the Iceberg."

Snowden and Greeneald have proven top be more credible than the US Government in this controversy.

Gen Clapper openly LIED in a Senate Investigation,
and was later forced to crawfish away from his testimony.

The NSA was forced to delete their original Talking Points "enhancing" the protections of the FISA Warrants from its own Website,
though that doesn't stop some here from still insisting that FISA Protects American citizens, and the NSA doesn't spy on Americans.

[G_j]

11. K&R

[forestpath]

12. K&R

[Luminous Animal]

14. Kick.

[snappyturtle]

15. K&R nt

[Arctic Dave]

17. Well, well, well.

Let the sun shine in.

[snot]

18. K&R'd. The more resources devoted to attacking the messenger,

the more sure we can be of the importance of their message.

[RC]

63. +10

[hueymahl]

65. Nailed it.

[Luminous Animal]

19. Here's why 'trust us' isn's working fpr the NSA any more... (WaPo)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/07/30/heres-why-trust-us-isnt-working-for-the-nsa-any-more/

But the movement to rein in the NSA is getting a second wind. Last week, the Obama administration barely defeated a House proposal, sponsored by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), to defund the NSA’s phone records program. While technically a defeat for NSA critics, Pema Levy notes that the surprisingly close result has emboldened opponents, who have vowed to bring the issue up again after Congress returns from its August recess.

“This debate is definitely going to continue,” said Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), one of the Senate’s leading NSA critics, on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” program. He said that discussions in the Senate “accelerated since that extraordinary House vote.”

Shifting public opinion has put the wind at the back of Wyden and his allies. A Pew poll released on Friday found a majority of Americans believe there are not “adequate limits” on the NSA’s spying activities.

Wyden began raising the alarm about domestic surveillance long before Ed Snowden began leaking classified NSA documents last month. But Wyden has a lot more allies now than he did a few months ago. The most surprising new ally might be Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), the author of the Patriot Act.

[WillyT]

20. K & R !!!

[leftstreet]

22. DURec

[Rex]

23. But but but...

Butttttt....

[Luminous Animal]

24. Wyden: Why I voted "present" on James Comey's nomination...

(Comey would not answer Wyden's questions regarding surveillance - basically the DOJ told Wyden to get lost)

http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-statement-on-voting-present-on-the-nomination-of-james-comey-to-be-fbi-director

After reviewing the record of Mr. Comey’s confirmation hearing and meeting with him in person, his views on surveillance policy and law remain unclear to me. I sent Mr. Comey a letter asking for written responses to several important questions on surveillance, including whether he believes warrantless wire tapping is legal, and whether he would commit to explain how much evidence the FBI needs to track Americans using their cell phone location data. Mr. Comey could have answered most or all of these questions without disclosing any properly classified information, but the Justice Department informed me today that he will not be responding to any of them. I hope that Mr. Comey will turn out to be a wise and appropriate choice to head the FBI but without more information about his views on these important questions, I cannot vote to approve his nomination at this time.”

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130730/01093423997/doj-tells-senator-wyden-that-incoming-fbi-director-james-comey-has-no-intention-answering-his-questions.shtml

Remember, Wyden serves on the Intelligence Committee, which is in charge of oversight of the intelligence community. One would think that flat out refusing to answer his questions is not the best way to respond to a member of the committee in charge of your oversight. In the end, Wyden voted "present" rather than "no," but stated that he could not vote in favor of Comey.

[think]

26. k&R

[neverforget]

27. So happy he's my Senator regardless of

what some on here say to slime him.

[NealK]

28. K&R

It's getting creepier each day.

[ram2008]

29. How soon before we see multiple threads attacking Wydens character and past?

While ignoring the issue at hand? I give it a few hours

[dkf]

30. Look at the blanket of attacks on Howard Dean.

The attack pack is certainly motivated.

[NoOneMan]

32. Why waste time attacking the Greenwald Left like Wyden

We have Patriot Act like legislation to promote along with shitty trade deals and new exciting wars!

[reformist2]

34. Inquiring minds want to know, how many boxes does he have in his garage???

[Aerows]

70. Does he stop to pet the neighbor's dog? n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

31. knr

[Enthusiast]

33. Wyden's a racist!

[GoneFishin]

35. I heard he stores a garage in his boxers.

[Aerows]

71. And dogs the neighbor's pets. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

36. The Atlantic: Why NSA Surveillance Will Be More Damaging Than You Think

James Fallows Jul 30 2013, 4:39 AM ET

In short: because of what the U.S. government assumed it could do with information it had the technological ability to intercept, American companies and American interests are sure to suffer in their efforts to shape and benefit from the Internet's continued growth.

American companies, because no foreigners will believe these firms can guarantee security from U.S. government surveillance;
American interests, because the United States has gravely compromised its plausibility as world-wide administrator of the Internet's standards and advocate for its open, above-politics goals.

Why were U.S. authorities in a position to get at so much of the world's digital data in the first place? Because so many of the world's customers have trusted* U.S.-based firms like Google, Yahoo, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, etc with their data; and because so many of the world's nations have tolerated an info-infrastructure in which an outsized share of data flows at some point through U.S. systems. Those are the conditions of trust and toleration that likely will change.

The problem for the companies, it's worth emphasizing, is not that they were so unduly eager to cooperate with U.S. government surveillance. Many seem to have done what they could to resist. The problem is what the U.S. government -- first under Bush and Cheney, now under Obama and Biden -- asked them to do. As long as they operate in U.S. territory and under U.S. laws, companies like Google or Facebook had no choice but to comply. But people around the world who have a choice about where to store their data, may understandably choose to avoid leaving it with companies subject to the way America now defines its security interests.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/why-nsa-surveillance-will-be-more-damaging-than-you-think/278181/

[grasswire]

58. Is this an OP somewhere?

If not, it should be.

[Luminous Animal]

60. Be my guest!

[nashville_brook]

37. not a plot to bring down POTUS...just an effective means of dismantling democracy.

[Luminous Animal]

38. DOJ Responds to Non-Intell Committee Member Rand Paul but not to Intel Committe Wyden

http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/07/30/doj-responds-to-non-intell-committee-member-of-opposition-party-but-not-intell-committee-member-of-presidents-party/#sthash.OAezPmNF.dpuf

On June 20, Rand Paul started seeking more information about how the FBI used drones. On July 9, he sent a second letter to find out about the FBI’s use of drones. After placing a hold on Jim Comey’s nomination to be FBI Director, Paul got results, with an unclassified letter admitting FBI had used drones 10 times, and a classified letter that presumably provided more detail. While Paul wasn’t satisfied with that information — he sent a follow-up asking when the FBI considers drones to impinge on reasonable expectations of privacy — he at least did get a letter. He released his hold and voted against Comey’s nomination.

Compare that to Ron Wyden, a member of the Intelligence Committee and of the President’s own party.

After meeting with Comey on July 18, Wyden sent Comey (care of DOJ’s Legislative Affairs Office) a letter on July 22
....
DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs wrote Wyden back on July 29, basically saying, “Mr. Comey is not in a position to respond to the additional questions in your letter” in part because he “is not able to determine whether your questions implicate information that remains classified.”

[upi402]

39. Well I'm significantly more troubled now

I think Wyden is honest and fights FOR us.
He will get hammered by the hammer owners. I hope we all support him and others like him.

Starting to see opposition to spying on innocent Americans on the media!!!!!

[woo me with science]

41. kick

[Th1onein]

42. It's going to be bad. Count on it.

[Autumn]

44. I have a lot of respect for this man.

I really wish he would just say fuck it and come right out and tell the American people the truth and let the chips fall where they may.

[mrdmk]

46. Unfortunately for him and us as a whole

his chips will fall into the hole if he does, you follow my drift...

[winter is coming]

45. K&R. We need more like him in the Senate. n/t

[cantbeserious]

47. Thank You For Sharing

eom

[Dustlawyer]

48. Be curious to see what would happen if Senator Wyden became a whistle blower!

[Fumesucker]

55. He needs to go to his Senator with this info...

[Zorra]

49. Give cops new toys to play with, and if they are not competently supervised,

they will play with them almost 100% of the time, whether it is legal or not.

Doesn't matter if it's a deputy sheriff in Burrito Fold, Texas, or the head of the NSA.

[Coyotl]

51. Dianne Feinstein is Chair of Senate Intelligence. Hold hearings!

Give Wyden a chance to bring more out and delineate what is going on in secret.

[rhett o rick]

54. k&r thanks for posting.

[DeSwiss]

56. I hope he has excellent security.

- K&R

[Arctic Dave]

57. I think we are going to see that they have set up a file

For every living person in the US and abroad. If not all, a huge amount.

Total Information Awareness was put into service.

[grasswire]

59. well, they can't ruin him in Oregon

He has widespread support at home, and I believe that any attempts to slime him would backfire.

I am more worried about the Wellstone precedent.

[avaistheone1]

61. k&r #100

[Harmony Blue]

64. Keep the pressure on!

[hueymahl]

66. Wyden is a Hero

One of the few left.

But can someone explain to me why the fuck he cannot come out and say what is wrong? I have heard the secrecy argument, national security, blah blah blah. But he takes an oath just like every other elected official to protect the constitution. How can he, or any senator, protect the constitution by following an unconstitutional law? I'm certainly no expert in the area, but it seems he would have some type of privilege or immunity in the performance of his official duties, which necessarily include communicating with his constituents.

Any constitutional scholars out there have an idea or opinion?

[libdude]

67. Let's see

the NSA and possibly other government agencies and personnel violated the FISA court orders, violated the Patriot Act, and the whole operation appears to be an infringement on Article 4, of the Bill of Rights? Clapper lies to Congress, President Obama has no issues, but suggests there be a conversation, on what? A series of program that are secret, that warrants lying and disregarding the Constitutional Rights of Americans?
What should happen is a appointment of an independent counsel to fully investigate these alleged violations, if evidence is found, then anyone involved should be prosecuted and if found guilty, imprisoned. Republicans attempted to create Watergate like scandals over Benghazi, IRS, etc. This is really an issue equal or more potentially damaging to the very basis of this Democracy, in my opinion.

[LondonReign2]

68. Kick

[secondvariety]

69. That's some scary shit.

Stay safe, Sen. Wyden.

[blkmusclmachine]

72. .

.

[Uncle Joe]

73. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Luminous Animal.

[Luminous Animal]

74. You are most welcome Uncle Joe.