DOJ Admits That NSA Collection Of Phone Records 'Probably' Sweeps Up Congress As Well
from the but-of-course dept
Last month, Senator Bernie Sanders asked a simple question to the NSA: in collecting all those phone records, does that include the phone records of members of Congress (including both their personal and work phones)? The NSA's response was that "Members of Congress have the same privacy protections as all US persons" -- but since the data collection covers all US persons, it was a basic admission that, yes, of course the NSA is sweeping up their phone records as well.That issue came up again during this week's House Judiciary Committee Hearings, in which some members of Congress finally got to ask the question live to Deputy Attorney General James Cole, who more or less admitted that Congress's information is collected as well:
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat, began by asking Peter Swire, a member of the president's handpicked surveillance review board, whether lawmakers' numbers are included in the agency's phone-records sweeps. Swire protested that he was not a government official and couldn't best answer the question, but said he was unaware of any mechanism that "scrubbed out" member phone numbers from the agency's data haul.And while Representatives like Pete King have argued in the past that the NSA should spy on Congress because they might be talking to terrorists, Issa pointed out that he sometimes has perfectly legitimate reasons for talking to those who might be in the NSA's target list:
Lofgren's time expired and Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, then put the question to Cole.
"Mr. Cole, do you collect 202, 225, and four digits afterwards?" Issa asked, referring to the prefixes used to call congressional offices.
"We probably do, Mr. Congressman," Cole responded. "But we're not allowed to look at any of those, however, unless we have reasonable, articulable suspicion that those numbers are related to a known terrorist threat."
Issa rejoindered that he had been in touch with the deputy prime minister of Lebanon after accusations emerged that the official had given money to Hezbollah, warning that a senior member of Congress was only two degrees of separation from terrorists.Slowly, but surely, it appears that more and more people in Congress are recognizing that the NSA's activities are incredibly broad in their overreach.
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: congress, darrell issa, doj, house judiciary committee, james cole, nsa, surveillance, zoe lofgren
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I may have found an error in the stoy
Given all that has come to be done about spying on every American the above quote sould perhaps read as...
"Slowly, and just maybe, but perhaps not, and who knows if they'll do anyhing about it..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
out_of_the_blue: the only commenter mentioned in advance of posting! Thanks for the heads up, kids! It's SWELL!
07:17:23[i-290-5]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
Not true. Plenty of other trolls have had "in before" comments made about them. darryl, Angry Dude and bob are a few that come to mind.
All it means is that your trolling has become predictable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://pando.com/2014/02/04/the-first-congressman-to-battle-the-nsa-is-dead-no-one-noticed-no- one-cares/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Bah, that article was terrible. There was major coverage in nearly every major publication about Pike's death, and because one reporter missed it he thinks everyone else did too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It should have had MORE coverage than it did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
some animals are more equal than others
That is exactly as it ought to be.
On the one hand, I'm annoyed that these Reps would ask such questions, as if the civil rights of members of Congress were different from those of any other citizens.
On the other hand, if this revelation makes Congress sit up and pay attention to these abuses, then I'm for it.
Gripping hand: they'll probably rush some new rules into effect, exempting themselves from such surveillance, then go back to business as usual.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: some animals are more equal than others
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: some animals are more equal than others
...and then they go to the end-around, as with TPP. "It's so transparent you can't see it!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: some animals are more equal than others
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: some animals are more equal than others
If the NSA spies on me (which they probably do), collects compromising information about me (which they might), and uses it against me (which they haven't, as far as I know), it sucks to be me. I could be blackmailed, imprisoned, or in the worst-case scenario I could get black-bagged and taken to Syria to be tortured. While this is a serious problem, and a grotesque abuse of everything our country ought to stand for, it doesn't directly compromise our entire political system.
If the NSA spies on a Congressperson (which they apparently do), and uses the information against that Congressperson, the consequences for the system as a whole are much more severe. What happens if the executive branch starts using the information to blackmail dissenting members of Congress? Or leaking compromising information about opposing candidates to the press? That sort of thing will break the entire democratic system, and destroy our government in a way that screwing me over would not.
A major trigger for the whole Church Committee was when the Watergate scandal broke wide open. On the most fundamental level, a sitting president abused his powers to spy on the members of the opposition. If the Watergate burglaries had been successful, it's pretty clear that the CRP would have taken any intel they gathered and used it against the Democratic party.
We've already seen plenty of leaked evidence that the NSA is abusing their power. Thankfully, so far the abuses that we've seen haven't been politically motivated -- they'll happily listen in on phone sex and spy on foreign companies, but they haven't shown any desire to keep the Democrats in power, or to keep minorities from getting civil liberties. If that changes, and the NSA starts trying to use its power politically, we're going to have a problem that makes all the current abuses seem insignificant.
So, really...I'm happy to see increased privacy protections for members of Congress. Also for members of the judiciary and for any and all political or judicial candidates. I'd like increased protection for everybody else, too, but I don't think it's quite as critical to maintaining a functional democracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: some animals are more equal than others
The lesser of two evils is, by definition, still evil. If tight privacy controls are good for congress, there is no reason that we shouldn't get the same levels of protection. So it's somewhat reassuring that congress has not gotten special exemptions and privileges, but it's still outrageous that they only seemed to care when it was demonstrated that it affected them personally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: some animals are more equal than others
What I am trying to say is that allowing the executive branch to spy on the legislative branch is also a violation of the Constitution, in a way that allowing them to spy on private citizens is not. Obviously, spying on Congress will violate their 4th amendment rights, just as it violates yours when the NSA spies on you. But spying on you doesn't break the doctrine of separation of powers, and spying on Congress does. While there's all sorts of reasons why separation of powers is a good idea, one simple reason is that the NSA couldn't get away with this sort of bullshit if the balance hadn't already shifted away from the legislative/judicial branches and towards the executive.
I'm personally outraged by what the NSA has been doing, and it's fairly pathetic that some members of Congress don't seem to care. Lofgren and Issa, though, have both spoken up against the NSA's spying program long before this. Their line of questioning seems designed to raise additional issues with the NSA's programs. For that, I give them credit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: some animals are more equal than others
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
identicon
out_of_the_blue, Feb 5th, 2014 @ 11:18am
Sheesh. Anyone can get the scope of the surveillance in five minutes. All the rest of the time since June -- chosen solely because then no longer publicly deniable -- has been spent in useless political babble diversions like this.
out_of_the_blue: the only commenter mentioned in advance of posting! Thanks for the heads up, kids! It's SWELL!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your headline wait
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And now they are listening to everything they say
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
identicon
out_of_the_blue, Feb 5th, 2014 @ 11:18am
Sheesh. Anyone can get the scope of the surveillance in five minutes. All the rest of the time since June -- chosen solely because then no longer publicly deniable -- has been spent in useless political babble diversions like this.
out_of_the_blue: the only commenter mentioned in advance of posting! Thanks for the heads up, kids! It's SWELL!
Yes, kids, I may keep this up...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
And it will be as pointless as your comments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WOLVERINES!!!
As you seem to be the foremost planner and advocate of the upcoming revolution, I'd be interested in sharing my Ideas with you as to how we could effectively utilize some of the more prominent members of the techdirt community to further our cause of freedom for We The People
Idea #1 begin a psyops campaign to convince OOTB to lead the vanguard of the revolution, to be one of the first droplets of the ever increasing tide to wash over the oppressors' forces.
The revolution could be over before anyone realizes and then everyone here will owe our newly re-gained freedom from tyranny to OOTB, I think it could be a win-win.
Want to know more?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: WOLVERINES!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: WOLVERINES!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I reckon
Government, as we've all come to know and love, is running head to head, both against and with the public. The public, armed with communications, is facing off with a particular and now peculiar branch of government armed with secrecy.
The irony is in the fact that the secrecy is meant to secure money before liberty and justice for all.
I reckon, I reckon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Twats, yeah, TWATS.......STORE THAT!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Slowly, but surely," -- No, Mike it's PR played out SLOWLY as possible. There's NO change now or coming.
out_of_the_blue: the only commenter mentioned in advance of posting! Thanks for the heads up, kids! It's SWELL!
Yes, kids, I may keep this up...
Techdirt fanboys are so feeble they can't stand skipping over a bit of text! -- Are these leaders against the surveillance state? Or just weenies pretending to be pirates?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140204/07522126085/new-zealand-spy-agency-deleted-evidence-about- its-illegal-spying-kim-dotcom.shtml#c341 (197 of 198)
11:24:34[m-577-7]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It only took what, 6 months, for them to figure out they were americans with american phone numbers. Now they are upset since "they" are included with "us," instead of getting their usual exemptions to laws they make that everyone else but them must obey.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]