Feinstein Releases Fake NSA Reform Bill, Actually Tries To Legalize Illegal NSA Bulk Data Collection
from the don't-buy-the-lies dept
Despite Dianne Feinstein's supposed "conversion" earlier this week about the NSA being out of control with its spying, and the associated performance of NSA folks claiming that they were screwed, it's quickly become apparent that this was all pure theater to make people think that real reform might be coming. Feinstein claimed she was shocked about this and called for a full investigation... and yet, just two days later, she held a markup of her planned "reform" bill for the collection of intelligence by the NSA (and held the markup in secret -- because nothing says "let's increase transparency of the NSA" like keeping the debates and votes secret). That bill was moved out of committee today by a vote of 11 to 4, leading Feinstein to release the bill with a bunch of misleading claptrap designed to make people think it's real reform. It even confused some folks who know this stuff into thinking, after a quick first pass, that it "banned" the bulk data collection. And you might think that's the case because her description says:- Prohibits the collection of bulk communication records under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act except under specific procedures and restrictions set forth in the bill;
- Establishes criminal penalties of up to 10 years in prison for intentional unauthorized access to data acquired under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by the United States;
- Prohibits the bulk collection of the content of communications under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act;
Even more ridiculous, the focus (both in the marketing and the bill itself) on collection of content "under Section 215" is another red herring, since it appears that much of that collection actually happens under other programs anyway. So this doesn't change a damn thing.
Other supposed "changes" in the bill -- including limiting who can perform queries on the data, how many "hops" they can analyze and how long they can retain the data, all match with current practice and don't change a thing. Even though James Clapper and Keith Alexander more or less seemed to concede at yesterday's House hearing that they'd be okay with cutting back on the data retention from five to three years, this bill keeps it at five. There are a few other minor changes, but this bill is almost entirely as expected, simply codifying the status quo, even though Feinstein has insisted that it was legal all along. The one minor "concession" which many had expected -- having a third party at the FISA Court who could fight for civil liberties -- is watered down. Rather than an actual adversarial setup, with this person representing civil liberties, it's set up as an appointed "amicus cureia" or "friend of the court," where they basically just advise the court on the issue.
This bill is a farce, and made even more farcical by the misleading way in which Feinstein has presented it, pretending it bans bulk data collection when it actually legalizes it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bulk data collection, dianne feinstein, fisa, fisa court, fisa improvements act, fisc, lies, nsa, nsa surveillance, section 215
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When does this become TREASON?
When does all this anti rights taking get to a point where its treason agaisnt the very people they are supposed to protect...
WHAT is the american definition of treason? Is it the guy that tells you your all being fucked ? Or is it the people that are fucking everyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When does this become TREASON?
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
(US Constitution, Article 3, section 3)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
Surely it could easily be argued that it's computing hardware and software? Weren't corporate strength cryptosystems declared munitions in the past? Surely malware and viruses would be considered munitions too?
So does the 2nd explicitly allow a US citizens to hack into government systems in order to defend the constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
1) takes money out of my pocket to bail out fraudsters and criminals instead of spending (a much smaller amount of) my money to prosecute them and lock them up
2) speaks of strong values of transparency but persecutes whistleblowers instead of honoring them
3) seeks to illegally sign treaties that are opposed by its people and against their interest
4) actively works to undermine and remove legal protections for the traditional moral values that have made our country strong
5) notices fights between predatory banks and common people, and intervenes on the side of the banks
6) prints money at hyperinflationary rates
7) spies on its own people and then lies about it
...is an enemy of its people, and thus of the country, which is defined by the canonical document establishing this country as being comprised of "We The People".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
And another term...
Aid and comfort: "Any act that deliberately strengthens or tends to strengthen enemies of the United States, or that weakens or tends to weaken the power of the United States to resist and attack such enemies is characterized as aid and comfort."
In the latter, the key word is "deliberately". It's possible for far a given act to meet this definition when one person does it, and not when another does it, depending on their intention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
In the olden days, this power was used to stop companies that were acting against the public interest. That fell out of favor over the years, and is almost never done nowadays.
I think it should be brought back with a vengeance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
Open your eyes. It's physical force too; and becoming more forceful daily. It's unbearable already, which you can find out for yourself by checking many news accounts over the past three years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When does this become TREASON?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I read that as "Prohibits collection unless we collect it; business as usual."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How many times I've written here: actual is always opposite of stated.
The Rich will always seize more power until stopped. The only non-violent way to stop them is with steeply progressive tax rates, especially on unearned income.
09:21:47[k-442-2]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In reality the bill seems to be exactly what Mike claims here: A further extention of NSAs powers under a guise of strenghtening overview and weakening the most problematic parts of NSAs authorisation. In reality the law has become so complex that nobody understands it. How it is used is only for NSA to know and it is getting retold through several pieces of "command" before it reach a politicians ear. By that time, everyone relies on the papers from the immediate level below and with the caution on not being too specific towards FISA, it doesn't take much of a leap to assume the same covers every aspect of the information chain. The greatest problems are the bad politicians in the committees and their lacking ability or willingness to strenghten communication through other channels and their acceptance of the extreme complexity obscurring reality!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't want that aged and tired mind, to even talk anymore much less offer up fucking bills on the very topic she's failed at.
Congress - The Intel Chair - Oversight like a demented energizer rabbit dressed in black skins of other rabbits and a crushed in pumpkin head swinging a razor blade tambourine. Happy Halloween. TRICK! beeyotch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
who is this directed at? employees of nsa? journalists?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
the kicker is "unauthorized access," because "data acquired under FISA" would cover everything the NSA is storing/collecting.
Therefore, if this is passed and the NYT gets a hold of a document summarizing metadata of someone (or just a general group of people) they would technically be breaking this law (unauthorized access if leaked) and subject to 10 years.
And so would the person who leaked it. They constantly argue that "unauthorized access" includes going beyond your access level, even if you are authorized to search for, download, and print out information. That's how they got Manning, and how they will try to get Snowden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seriously any data, WTF, they can basically criminalise you having information just by their act of storing it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oath
define "Defend"
define "Constitution"
define "enemies"
define "domestic"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pop Quiz: What does Nazi stand for?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Senators and Congressmen in general,
the current trend is not good at all, but shouldn't be surprising, considering that our populace (in general) becomes increasingly self-serving and insular with each generation. remember, these elected positions are filled from our own populace. they are a true representation of our integrity and willingness to serve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
we should, um, make, like, a declaration, er sumpin...
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
...
these traitorous scum go on for many more pages spewing revolting crap like this...
who would ever believe such tripe ? ? ?
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
how can we recall this tainted senator?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: how can we recall this tainted senator?
Yet another thing that needs to be fixed in this nation. No money? No voice.
Recall? Please California, lets get one going for the sake of our freedom and nation.
That plus the rest of the nation demanding her resignation for dereliction of duty (failure to uphold her Oath of Office) can remove this stain on our nation.
THEN we can discuss a trial.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We are out of our collective minds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
plus an anti-Snowden provision
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Feinstein Farce
Her proposed law is a farce and swindle. The lobby is simply, again, legalizing all the illegal stuff they did in the name of ensuring our rights and to provide security.
There are a dozen other bills floating around most with written the same way: Legalizing crime and Constitutional rape.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Feinstein
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Diane Feinstein
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]