Feinstein Releases Fake NSA Reform Bill, Actually Tries To Legalize Illegal NSA Bulk Data Collection

from the don't-buy-the-lies dept

Thu, Oct 31st 2013 12:46pm — Mike Masnick

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;

Reading that, you might think it actually banned the bulk data collection that's been reported on, but it does not. That "except under specific procedures and restrictions set forth in the bill" just takes the highly questionable reasoning of the FISA Court in approving the bulk data collection and makes that the "exception." In other words, it does exactly the opposite of what Feinstein claims. Rather than banning bulk data collection, it legalizes it. That third point on the "content" is just a red herring -- the same red herring that Feinstein and others have been waving about wildly for months, pretending people are upset about the collection of actual recordings, rather than the collection of metadata. She's wrong. People are upset about the collection of metadata, which this legalizes.

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.

113fisa Improvements (PDF)113fisa Improvements (Text)

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

51 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 12:57pm

She should be charged with fraud.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Guardian, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:02pm

When does this become TREASON?
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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:07pm

"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;�
I read that as "Prohibits collection unless we collect it; business as usual."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:22pm

How many times I've written here: actual is always opposite of stated.
That goes for politicians, gov't at levels, NSA, Google, Facebook, and nearly every corporation about anything important. They're all lying all the time because have a common agenda to gain more money and power; those are intrinsically corrupting.
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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:23pm

Dianne Feinstein needs to go to prison.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:25pm

Re:
It's only a matter of time until they push so hard they lose the entire Patriot Act.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:27pm

Re: When does this become TREASON?
As awful as it is, it is not treason.

WHAT is the american definition of 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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:28pm

She was outraged earlier, about not knowing what NSA was up to. She wants an investigation to find out why she was not told about what hey were up to. She is fine with what they are doing, so long as they tell her about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:33pm

Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
As awful as it is, it is not treason.
A better question is: "At what point does this violate the oath of office?" Isn't there something in there about defending the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic? Or is that just for the big screen?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rapnel (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:35pm

Oh, I can see that this is getting better already. And so soon.

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 thread ]
sumquy (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:50pm

"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;"

who is this directed at? employees of nsa? journalists?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:52pm

Re:
It seems so much like a theater between Feinstein and the NSA. If it is, we will see NSA starting to shoot at the bill and calling it terrible. Feinstein will use that fake outrage to sell the bill as a far more moderate "compromise" than "the other extremely dangerous bills" getting thrown around and hope that the rest of the congress fall for it.

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 thread ]
Trevor, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:54pm

Oath
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

define "Defend"
define "Constitution"
define "enemies"
define "domestic"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trevor, 31 Oct 2013 @ 1:57pm

Re:
To me it seems to single out people who are not authorized (or exceed authorization) to access it. That would seem to include everyone who accesses the information in a manner the collecting agency doesn't like, such as Manning, Snowden, Greenwald, etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:09pm

Re: When does this become TREASON?
It requires you to directly 'aid or offer comfort to the enemy.' The Founders were paranoid about arbitrary accusations of treason.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:16pm

Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
The question then becomes, how do you define an enemy? It seems to me that any government that

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:16pm

Christ, recall her already.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Real Michael, 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:23pm

Feinstein would've acclimated herself perfectly in Nazi Germany.

Pop Quiz: What does Nazi stand for?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anonymouse (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:26pm

Senators and Congressmen in general,
are more concerned with bolstering their positions and circles of influence than they are with doing the job they were elected to do. it's a natural consequence of the huge benefits (both social and economic) and kickbacks they receive in those elected positions.

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:27pm

Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
I would argue that Sen. Feinstein and Rep. Rogers meet this criterion with their testimonies in The Senate and Congress respectively. AS to how they're giving aid and comfort, well, I'm fairly sure a remotely enterprising attorney could come up with a few reasons - after all, what's good for the goose and all that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:41pm

Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
legal defintion of Enemy: "By this term is understood the whole body of a nation at war with another. It also signifies a citizen or subject of such a nation, as when we say an alien enemy."

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 thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:44pm

Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
You could argue it, but your argument would fail for one simple reason: we are not at war with anyone, and you cannot commit treason outside of context of being at war.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:46pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
Yeah, that's the problem. When you define formal enemies exclusively as other nations, it ignores vast swaths of today's reality. Today, the simple reality is that a lot of companies, and various entities within our own government, are openly at war with the American people. Their weapon of choice, though, is not physical force, but economic force, which is just as harmful but far more insidious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 2:49pm

Re: Re:
Hmm, but the type of information is specifically "data acquired under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act", not information about FISA-authorized data-acquiring activity, which is what Snowden, Greenwald, etc. revealed. This part of the bill seems to be just about the people who looked up their exes in the system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 3:04pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
True, but technically the US has a potent instant-death weapon that can be used against corporations: we can revoke their corporate charter. A corporation is just a kind of license from the government, after all.

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 3:19pm

SMH Fire that evil bitch already... Zero respect for every single value this nation was founded on.

Sad
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trevor, 31 Oct 2013 @ 4:08pm

Re: Re: Re:
It's 10 years for "intentional unauthorized access to data acquired under the FISA Act..."

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 thread ]
art guerrilla (profile), 31 Oct 2013 @ 4:38pm

we should, um, make, like, a declaration, er sumpin...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

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 thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 4:38pm

I said at the time she was reining it, gonna be working from the inside out! I wonder what idiots is cosponsoring it? Hayden, I suppose, backed up by Clapper and Alexander! I hope that it's brought to light what she's up to and she is challenged over it. The excuses should make interesting reading. Mind you, who honestly thought all this shit would go away without a fight from the lying fuckers who have been carrying it out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 8:08pm

Re:
There is no recall of senators. It was debated but never made it into the Constitution. Maybe we should amend it so we can recall these losers. Recall has a long history in this country, going back to the Massachusetts colony in 1631.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2013 @ 8:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
At this point the government is clearly at war with the people. To them we are the enemy and they are to us. Feinstein is easily violating her oath and she is aiding the portion of the government that constitutes a domestic enemy in overthrowing our laws. This is why she has wanted the second amendment destroyed for so long, so that our other rights are easy pickings.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 1 Nov 2013 @ 3:07am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
I think it should be brought back with a vengeance.
I'd 100% agree with you... if the power to do so was in the hands of a body with some sort of track record nodding towards judgement, impartiality, objectiveness and due process. Unfortunately, if I read you right, it would be the US government... which is rather the opposite.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert, 1 Nov 2013 @ 4:18am

Re:
Why the end user of course, you. if you find out you are being spied on by the NSA and try to sue them, they can send you to prison for finding out that your are being spied on.
Seriously any data, WTF, they can basically criminalise you having information just by their act of storing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Donglebert the Needlessly Obtuse, 1 Nov 2013 @ 5:21am

Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
In that (in my interpretation) the Second Amendment is there to allow people to bear arms to defend their freedom against the state, I was wondering the other day what the modern day version of arms would be.

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 thread ]
bloodnok, 1 Nov 2013 @ 5:38am

how can we recall this tainted senator?
this senator is a stain on the state of california and must be recalled. why is there no movement to do so?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2013 @ 5:52am

I knew the other shoe would drop eventually.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2013 @ 5:56am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
Why? What do you think that would accomplish?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bwana, 1 Nov 2013 @ 6:04am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
"is not physical force, but economic force"
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 thread ]
Pragmatic, 1 Nov 2013 @ 6:27am

Re:
Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and state as well as other related far-right groups. Usually characterised as a form of fascism that incorporates biological racism and antisemitism, Nazism originally developed from the influences of pan-Germanism, the V�lkisch German nationalist movement and the anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture in post-First World War Germany, which many Germans felt had been left humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles. Prior to the emergence of the Nazi Party, other right-wing figures had argued for a nationalist recasting of �socialism�, as a reactionary alternative to both internationalist Marxist socialism and capitalism.

- Wikipedia

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2013 @ 7:04am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
"foreign and domestic"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 1 Nov 2013 @ 7:23am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
It would get rid of the worst companies, and would encourage other companies to behave better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Real Michael, 1 Nov 2013 @ 8:04am

Re: Re:
Oh, it means exactly what I think it means: national socialism.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 1 Nov 2013 @ 8:46am

Re: Re: Re:
Regardless of what it literally means, the Nazi party was fascist, not socialist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason, 1 Nov 2013 @ 8:48am

Re: how can we recall this tainted senator?
There are website petitions, but no money backing up door to door recall efforts. So most of Californian are in the dark about what she is really doing.

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 thread ]
Marsha, 1 Nov 2013 @ 11:40am

We are out of our collective minds.
I read about this at breakfast this morning and almost spit my food clear across the table. Basically, forget the Constitution and its provisions about privacy. Nothing to see there, keep on walking. So let's start from a massively illegal operation, make it legal and then move on from there. Oh, and let's add in a 10 year prison sentence for anyone who tries to learn/understand the illegalities that we're doing. Have we lost our collective minds?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
blackrabbit, 1 Nov 2013 @ 3:16pm

plus an anti-Snowden provision
Who do you think they'll use that "10 years for intentional unauthorized access to data" provision against?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin Schmidt, 2 Nov 2013 @ 11:14am

Re: Re: When does this become TREASON?
Since the false flag 9/11 operation conducted by dick Cheney, the Carlyle Group and Saudi nationals, both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress have been waging a war against the Constitution, along with their masters, the global corporate elite sociopaths, who are our enemies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Nov 2013 @ 12:17pm

Feinstein Farce
The Senator is a clueless shill for the defense lobby and in particular the NSA.

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 thread ]
Dorothy, 3 Nov 2013 @ 9:14pm

Feinstein
Bagman with lady parts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ImagineNation, 4 Nov 2013 @ 1:34pm

Diane Feinstein
She disgusts me. For her to label herself as a Democrat is ludicrous and in itself is a crime, IMHO. She is also helping facilitate the privatization of the post office so that her husband can sell the properties in the PO's extensive real estate portfolio for pennies on the dollar to their friends and campaign contributors via CBRE Richard Ellis Real Estate broker and make a boatload of cash. What is even more sad is that some of the properties are beautiful historic buildings that are irreplaceable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2013 @ 6:32pm

stop the nsa!!! HAVE THEY found and foiled even one terrorist attack!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]