Long Time Mass Surveillance Defenders Freak Out Now That Trump Will Have Control

from the shoulda-thought-of-that-before dept

Fri, Nov 11th 2016 9:41am — Mike Masnick

The Lawfare blog, run by the Brookings Institution, has long reliably been a good source to go to for reading what defenders of mass surveillance and the surveillance state are thinking -- in a non-hysterical way. While I disagree with much of what's posted on there, it tends to be thoughtful and interesting reading. Its founder and Editor-in-Chief is Ben Wittes, who's always good for an impassioned defense of the NSA's surveillance on Americans, and was all in on forcing tech companies to break encryption. He wasn't worried, you see, because he was quite sure the NSA would never spy on him. Because, you know, he's a good guy.

And... yet. Something seems to have changed. And that something is who is suddenly about to be in charge of the surveillance state apparatus:

When we founded this site more than six years ago, I never in my wildest dreams imagined myself writing these words about a man who will take the oath of office as President of the United States. We began Lawfare on the assumption that the U.S. federal executive branch was a tool with which to confront national security threats. While I accepted that its manner of doing so might threaten other values—like civil liberties—or prove counterproductive in protecting national security goods, I never imagined I would confront the day when I ranked the President himself among the major threats to the security of the country.

Today, we have to confront that possibility.

Your lack of imagination is really fucking us all over now, isn't it Ben? This is exactly why so many of us -- the people he likes to mock -- have said all along that the concern with the surveillance state is always based on the fact that you have to imagine what will happen when the people you trust the least are in power.

Wittes is suddenly having something of an existential crisis about all of this:

So while I of course hope for a successful Trump presidency, I know of only one way Trump can succeed in the national security arena. And that is by radically changing the reckless persona he embodied during a long campaign—changing how he behaves, changing what he believes, changing what he aspires to do, acquiring a sense of restraint, and changing the way he talks about people and groups. And while I agree with Clinton that we owe Trump a chance to lead, the burden is on him to make these changes, not on us to suspend disbelief and pretend we live in the world he has described.

I will be candid and confess that, Clinton’s admonition notwithstanding, my mind is not entirely open about Trump’s capacity to do this, or even his interest in doing it. I have, in fact, deep doubts. And that leaves me, and I think most of America’s national security community, in a very strange position.

Maybe take the time to explore that strange feeling and you can start to understand why so many of us have been concerned about the entire apparatus that you've been cheering on for years, because, as you once said: "I have a great deal of confidence that the National Security Agency is not spying on me." There are an awful lot of people who haven't had that confidence for a while. And a great many more who won't have that confidence under the next administration. That strange feeling that Wittes has is finally a recognition that maybe he should be concerned about those people too.

This isn't a post to mock Ben, but to highlight why so many of us were so concerned all along, even as he mocked us. This is serious stuff and believing that unconstitutional warrantless mass surveillance is okay because you trust the guy in charge only works if you can always trust the guy in charge. And you can't... as Ben and others are suddenly discovering.

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: ben wittes, donald trump, mass surveillance, national security, nsa, surveillance

44 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 9:47am

Again, I told you so!
I have been saying for a long time now that all parties should fear surveilance. Eventually a party will have the power to shut down opposition with these powers and data on everyone. Now people are starting to understand. I guess they thought "their guy" would be the one in power when it happened. Doesn't say much for that person that they thought "their guy" abusing power would be ok.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 9:49am

Large stores of data
Not to mention that just having giant databases of data on essentially everyone will be abused. It will start out as good intentioned breaks, but eventually local law enforcement will have access to everything down to how many cold meds your household purchased in the last year.... No wait, we are already there. Enjoy the future with the lack of privacy feature.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 9:49am

Pure schadenfreude.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 9:58am

Hillary would have been better? FFS, she wanted to drone Julian Assange. I think we can basically ascertain that literally no one is going to disband the alphabet agencies. A certain Jack Kennedy started getting uppity against the deep state and look what happened to him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:04am

Masnick on a tear today. Maybe time to revist Frank Church's 1975 warning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAG1N4a84Dk
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I.T. Guy, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:06am

"And that is by radically changing the reckless persona he embodied during a long campaign—changing how he behaves, changing what he believes, changing what he aspires to do, acquiring a sense of restraint, and changing the way he talks about people and groups."

So basically asking him to become a different person. Good luck with that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ryunosuke (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:06am

here's the problem, and it highlight Trump's presidency, and Sanders' run. Establishment politics. Legislators in Washington have tribal mentality, on BOTH sides.

But really, this highlights what, at least myself, has been saying for a while now. It's about trust, we don't trust our government. And now the NSA/FBI surveillance defenders are learning that lesson the hard way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:07am

History Comes Alive
Given the long-term records of rulers and ruling elites throughout history, 99.997% of the time you CAN trust the people in charge ... to screw you over.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:21am

Well if I am going to have to live under a fascist ruler, I can take a little comfort that Benny Wittes appears concerned that the sword he has been defending for so long will soon be turned against him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:26am

"This isn't a post to mock Ben...as he mocked us."
Not all of us are as kindly as the good Sir Mikey O'Masnick.

To Ben:

Hoist on your damnéd petard.
We offer no pity to you.
Roister no more, you retard,
But tremble at what we all knew.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Personanongrata, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:28am

Not Me, Couldn't be, then Who?
"I have a great deal of confidence that the National Security Agency is not spying on me."

Ignorance is bliss.

Have Ben Wittes and his US government total surveillance state cohorts been living in a vacuum chamber under a rock in a deep dark cave these past 15 years?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
art guerrilla (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:38am

Re: "This isn't a post to mock Ben...as he mocked us."
cavil alert !
actually, petard would technically not be pronounced with a hard 'd' unless there was an 'e' after the 'd'...
but the point is still valid, if not the rhyme...
i would further mention he IS a fucking tard if he doesnt realize that WE ALL are being spied on, only he is a suckup to Empire, so saurons evil eye will not be trained on him...
they are still slurping up all his info, just The They wont do a ything about it unless he steps out of line...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
OldMugwump (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:42am

That can never happen here.
Famous last words.

Saying "we told you so" is little comfort.

Those in power always seem to have very little imagination regarding how power might be abused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JustShutUpAndObey, 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:44am

Trust considered harmful
I have usually been mocked whenever I point out that security based on trust is never trustworthy. Most people claim that there is no alternative: that all security ultimately relies on trust.
My claim: We better find one that doesn't.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 10:52am

Here's a link to the piece, in case anyone's Google is broken:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/burden-donald-trump

One of his colleagues, Susan Hennessey, more or less says it's no big deal, all the robust legal and procedural will stop him if he tries. She must be new to government.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/duty-serve-trumps-america
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 11:08am

Trump provides motive & opportunity to restore Constitutional checks & balances
(This just in: Repubs control House, Senate, Supremes.)

Oops!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 11:47am

Government mass surveillance would be a lot more difficult if it weren't for the assistance of Facebook, Google, and the rest of Surveillance Valley.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Annonymouse, 11 Nov 2016 @ 11:50am

Re: Trump provides motive & opportunity to restore Constitutional checks & balances
But what is the impact on our listening pleasure?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SpaceLifeForm, 11 Nov 2016 @ 11:57am

Turtles all the way down
You can not fix stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 12:02pm

somehow we have some of the stupidest people on earth in some of the most key positions. what a bunch of boneheads we are. those people can't see the ends of their noses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stosh, 11 Nov 2016 @ 12:07pm

What's the big deal...always heard if you're not doing anything illegal, you don't have anything to worry about.

Chickens meet Roost
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 12:33pm

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

...It'll be a hell of a ride to the bottom. :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 12:59pm

Re: "This isn't a post to mock Ben...as he mocked us."
Ha!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RR, 11 Nov 2016 @ 2:25pm

Future elections
Trump will have the power to sink any competitors in future elections - presidential and congress. Everyone has something embarrassing in their past. Maybe not "pussy grabbing" bad, but it's there, already stored away. It would take a "flawless" person or another Trump who doesn't give a shit to survive the kind of info "unknown sources have revealed".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 2:50pm

They aren't freaking out, just being hypocrites.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2016 @ 4:39pm

BTW, I would be all in favor of getting rid of Donald Trump as president and signing that petition ... if Hillary Clinton is not his replacement. She is a liar and I do not care for her at all.

As much as I'm not a democrat I'd vote Bernie Sanders over Trump. But between Hillary and Trump, for me that's a very tough decision.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 6:39pm

"Now you know how it feels"
This isn't a post to mock Ben, but to highlight why so many of us were so concerned all along, even as he mocked us.

In which case you would seem to be a more generous person than I, as I certainly would take the opportunity to return the favor. He brushed aside concerns because 'his' guy would never abuse that power, and now that someone from the other tribe is in power, only now does he become worried, despite people trying to explain all along why the powers themselves were problematic and it was only a matter of time until someone he didn't like got them?

He's not wrong is believing that Trump having access to such powers is a problem, he was wrong in believing that Obama having such access wasn't a problem, or that the powers themselves aren't a problem and mocking those that tried to point this out, as well as point out that so long as the powers existed it wasn't 'if' someone he didn't like would get them but 'when'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 6:49pm

Re:
One of his colleagues, Susan Hennessey, more or less says it's no big deal, all the robust legal and procedural will stop him if he tries. She must be new to government.

Someone get me the name of whoever's selling her such effective rose-tinted glasses, those things have got to be wicked powerful for her to make such a blindingly naive statement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 11 Nov 2016 @ 11:08pm

Re: Re:
To be fair, on Twitter, she seems a bit more worried about the Trump Presidency:

https://twitter.com/Susan_Hennessey/status/796853376197730304
https://twitter.com/Susan_He nnessey/status/796855511291428864
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2016 @ 2:02am

Re:
Government surveillance would be a lot less pervasiveness if people restricted their conversation to actually talking to people in their physical presence, and didn't try us to use the Internet to solve their problems. That would also make it much easier for the politicians to rule the country for their own benefit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coyne Tibbets (profile), 12 Nov 2016 @ 4:39am

Re: Re: "This isn't a post to mock Ben...as he mocked us."
Ummm...[confused]..."petard" and "retard" both follow the same pronunciation rule?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2016 @ 6:28am

Re: "Now you know how it feels"
Maybe the spy agencies are upset because you can't blackmail Trump by trying to shame him with secret information that you may threaten to release since he essentially has no shame ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Giles Byles, 12 Nov 2016 @ 11:26am

Oops, there was a headline fail: longtime as a modifier (adjective) is one word.

The time to de-fund the NSA was September of 2013 when our esteemed Congress came back from vacation. We'd had all summer to digest the Snowden revelations. But what happened on that day? Nothing. Deafening silence happened.

Since then, thousands of photon splitters have been purchased by our esteemed government & Bluffdale is chugging away.

The only upside is that the spooks' "collect it all" mentality has neutered their whole system. They have too much data & no way to make sense of it. They didn't listen to their pal Binney & instead made his life miserable for a time for being a "whistle-blower."

Here's another grammar gotcha from a comment above: "You can not fix stupid." Cannot is (usually) one word.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eldakka (profile), 13 Nov 2016 @ 6:37am

Re: Re:
This is true...well except for the remote phone exploits that allow phones (both mobile and landline) mic's to be surreptitiously turned on to turn the phone into a bug even tho it's not being actively used.

Or maybe you've got Siri or hello google on, which means the mic's has to always be on (to detect the spoken keywords) therefore available for eavesdropping.

Or smart TV's or games consoles with embedded cameras and mic's also potentially always on by design listening in (or watching) any conversation in their pickup range. Tablets and laptops the same.

Or hell, maybe they'll start putting mic's into smart light bulbs or toasters so you can voice control even more.

Unless you consciously take steps to ensure there are no mic's in the vicinity, it can be pretty hard to actually have a completely private conversation these days even if you aren't specifically under surveillance (in which case there are bugs and shotgun/laser mic's to also content with...tho the latter are pretty easy to defeat if you are paranoid to be concerned about them).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 14 Nov 2016 @ 7:02am

Re:

BTW, I would be all in favor of getting rid of Donald Trump as president and signing that petition ... if Hillary Clinton is not his replacement.

It would be Mike Pence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sigalrm (profile), 14 Nov 2016 @ 9:14am

Re: Not Me, Couldn't be, then Who?
No, they haven't been living in a vacuum.

Ben Wittes has (had?) a blind faith in the inherent "goodness" of the US Government, based on a vastly different set of starting assumptions.

Now, he's being forced to revisit some of his first principles. This is a good thing, because he's respected in his communities in ways that groups like this one are not, which means in theory he has an ability to influences said communities.

Expect some fairly sharp changes in mentality from pundits in the next couple of years. Hopefully they don't come too late to make a difference, although I expect that they have.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2016 @ 10:01am

Re: Again, I told you so!
Wait until people start freeking out when Trump starts using Executive Power!!! Just doing the SAME THING as OBAMA which they didn't have a problem with. Even with Obama saying he has a Pen and a Phone, meaning he can pretty much do what he wants and who cares about congress. Sounds like a Dictator, but the Democrats were all for it. It's their guy!!! Like what, a Republican President was never going to get elected ever again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 14 Nov 2016 @ 10:26am

Re: Re: Again, I told you so!

Even with Obama saying he has a Pen and a Phone, meaning he can pretty much do what he wants and who cares about congress.

No, meaning he would do what was within his power since he couldn't get anything through Congress.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wendy Cockcroft (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 2:25am

Re: Re: Re: Again, I told you so!
Executive order =/= Royal Perogative.

He can't act like a king, okay? Settle down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wendy Cockcroft (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 2:28am

Re: Future elections
You're assuming Team Blue won't just rationalise their guy's faults away like the Trumpkins did.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 10:51am

Re:
No. Schadenfreude is pleasure at someone else's suffering.

Masnick is not even slightly immune from the suffering of the surveillance apparatus.

This is more of an "I told you so. PS. Thanks for f-ing us over."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 10:55am

Re: Re: Re: "This isn't a post to mock Ben...as he mocked us."
Coyne, you're right, if said in English, which this is, since the "hoisted..." quote is not part of the English lexicon. Petard is also now a fully English word, pronounced in a way that rhymes with...um...retard.

Art G's point (irrelevant in this case) is that in French pétard has a silent "d" at the end.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 12:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Again, I told you so!
"He can't act like a king, okay? Settle down."

Actually he can, or haven't you been watching for the past 8 years. Once the laws are written it is up to the agencies to implement them.

Who, by the way, can order the agencies to do things?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 15 Nov 2016 @ 1:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Again, I told you so!

Actually he can, or haven't you been watching for the past 8 years.

If he thought he could do whatever he wanted, why did he even bother with Congress at all? Just to keep up appearances?
[ link to this | view in thread ]