Uh Oh: FBI Serves Search Warrant On Senator Richard Burr, Seizes His Phone
from the how-do-you-feel-about-surveillance-now? dept
I'm wondering how Senator Richard Burr feels about phone encryption right about now? As you may recall, the notoriously pro-surveillance Senator has whined about phone encryption at great length and even introduced legislation that would effectively end encryption on phones.
And yet, the FBI just served a search warrant on him and seized his phone as part of its investigation into claims that he engaged in insider trading:
Federal agents seized a cellphone belonging to Sen. Richard Burr on Wednesday night as part of a Justice Department probe into stock transactions he made ahead of the sharp market downturn sparked by concerns over the coronavirus, a law enforcement official told the Los Angeles Times.
The North Carolina Republican turned over his phone after agents served a search warrant at his home in the Washington area, the official told the newspaper.
This likely means that there's even more going on than has been made public so far, and it's unlikely to be good for Senator Burr. As former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti explains, to get that search warrant, it means that a judge was convinced that Burr likely engaged in insider trading and that there was evidence to that effect on his phone:
This means that a federal judge concluded that there is good reason to believe that Senator Burr engaged in insider trading and that evidence of his insider trading is contained on his cell phone. https://t.co/OkWEjyHAJr
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) May 14, 2020
And as others have noted, the FBI -- for whatever faults it might have (and they are many) -- does not just show up at a Senator's home with a warrant on a hunch.
Holy moly. Showing up at the home of a U.S. Senator and executing a warrant is not business as usual and not a step the FBI would take lightly. https://t.co/XKgwP5zj65
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) May 14, 2020
Of course, the bigger issue was that while he was selling all those stocks (including a bunch of hotel stocks), he was claiming publicly that everything was fine and that the US had COVID-19 under control. Frankly, that part should be the bigger scandal, but unfortunately it won't be.
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: doj, encryption, fbi, insider trading, phone, richard burr, warrant
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Revenge
Alexander Hamilton is having his revenge it seems - on the wrong Senator Burr but still!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Insider Trading?
Is it only the staffers that can do this legally?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Insider Trading?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Insider Trading?
Guess who was among the senators who voted against that bill?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Insider Trading?
In February 2012, the STOCK Act passed in the Senate by a 96–3 vote; the only no votes were senators Jeff Bingaman, Richard Burr, and Tom Coburn. Later the House of Representatives passed it by a 417–2 vote.
Oh it's even better, as pointed out in the wikipedia page he was not just one of those that voted against a bill aimed at cracking down on insider trading, he was one of five. In a bill with overwhelming support(in both the senate and house), him and four others total were the only ones to vote against, and given current circumstances it's not hard to suspect why.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could this be retribution for his support of the Russia report?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As a North Carolina native (but not a native of the district Burr represents), I take great pleasure in saying the following: Get fucked, Dick. 😁
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He's a senator. Not a congressman.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You're saying he's a senator in something other than US Congress. I guess that's an opinion you can have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
While the Senate and the Congress make up "Congress" (a full 3rd of the U.S. leadership triad), saying that a U.S. Senator is a "congressman" or that he represents a "district" is incorrect. Senator Burr (along with one additional U.S Senator from North Carolina) represent all of the state in their chamber of Congress (known as the Senate).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"While the Senate and the Congress make up "Congress""
The US has a Senate and a House of Representatives that comprise "Congress".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Let me fix the original reply before this goes further off the rails:
"He's a Senator, not a Representative." [Where Representative refers to a member of the House of Representatives.]
The point is well-made that Senator Burr represents (or represented) the whole state of North Carolina, not just a single district.
Which means Mr. Stone can be even more personal in the "Get fucked, Dick" sentiment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh .... that makes sense after I looked at it again, and again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Senator = Congressman
Representative = Congressmen
Senator =/= Representative
Senate + House of Representatives = Congress
Yes, Burr is a senator and is not specific to any congressional district.
Stephen T. Stone made a simple mistake in terms of Burr having a district since senators are not district specific as are the representatives in the house.
US Government 101 people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh come on.
Look, delaying that sort of information that he was privy of in pursuance of his job catering for the common good cannot have caused more than a few thousand deaths while saving himself millions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Encryption
He promptly unlocked his phone and removed the passcode upon upon being asked for it by law enforcement I trust?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, and his brother-in-law, who also works for the White House, coincidentally, ALSO unloaded loads of stock around the same time as Burr did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Annnnnnd, he's gone!
He has resigned. That suggests he is guilty. To hell with him!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Nope, at this point he has just stepped down as chairman of the Senate Intelligence committee. (https://www.wral.com/coronavirus/burr-leaves-top-senate-intelligence-post-amid-probe-of-stock-sales /19098180/)
He is, unfortunately, still a senator. Hopefully that too changes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Reports indicate that it was Mitch McConnell that announced Burr would be stepping down from the committee.
"Senator Burr contacted me this morning to inform me of his decision to step aside as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee during the pendency of the investigation," McConnell said in a written statement. "We agreed that this decision would be in the best interests of the committee and will be effective at the end of the day tomorrow."
That suggests that McConnell told Burr that he was off of the committee, and Burr didn't go along with the plan enough to announce it himself. A resignation doesn't seem likely at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Huh. McConnell finally has a moment of integrity, and it's over this? I wonder what Burr got stuck up McConnell's ass that finally drove him over the edge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
McConnnell and integrity? Not a chance, I imagine Burr simply made too big of a target of himself and McConnell threw him under the bus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
soooo, forgive my ignorance of the legal system, but, resigning makes breaking the law all better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Er... what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
No it does not, but that is a matter for the DOJ, lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
The guy who performed no meaningful oversight of the FBI, resigned his position of overseeing the FBI. We can rest assured someone else will take his place and shill hard for the agency.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
That's the accepted political wisdom, yes. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Be careful, Senator Stevens from Alaska went through a similar thing in 2008. He was even convicted and lost his Senate seat before evidence of FBI corruption was uncovered and the verdict overturned. All I'm saying is: never trust an FBI agent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
That might be a good rule of thumb in general, but when the publicly available information is so damning(told the public not to worry while selling stocks) in this case I'd lean towards there probably being something worth digging in to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Not to get off on a stupid tangent, but ....
Verdict was overturned because of prosecutorial misconduct, not because Ted was innocent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Sorry to be that guy, but the case against Stevens went tits up because the guy who allegedly filed invoices for payment by Stevens with an understanding that they were just a cover story got caught lying to the FBI and the prosecutor didn't disclose it to the defense and actively covered up for years. It wasn't just a "procedural error".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
I meant to type "misconduct".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
Yes, but that does not mean that Ted did nothing wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Annnnnnd, he's gone!
No, but at the same time the government committed so many crimes and errors that nobody can factually say that he is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It was good for the public, so it's good for him right?
As someone is vehemently anti-encryption I'm sure he either didn't encrypt his phone, or will be happy to provide the password so as to ensure a quick and speedy investigation of course.
Doing otherwise would reveal him to be a raging hypocrite after all, not to mention utterly destroy any 'encryption is only for criminals, only the guilty have things to hide' arguments he might make, and I'm sure he'd never do something like that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It was good for the public, so it's good for him right?
That's only hypocritical if he's not guilty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see a new ad campaign for strong encryption singing "How do you like me now?" as Sen. Burr does the perp walk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That...would be a pretty mixed signal for a campaign ad.
While I wholeheartedly agree that, innocent or guilty, Burr should have access to strong encryption to protect his data, that's generally not a position that plays very well in 30-second TV spot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Staving off the Burrdome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Staving off the Burrdome
Comment fail. Scroll on by.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Retribution
This is absolutely retribution for correctly submitting a report that Russia interfered in the election for the benefit of Trump.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Retribution
That's what I thought also, donald cares not about the transgressions of side kicks. He probably thought it was a smart move.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Retribution
Given that he and the FBI are on the same page on that particular subject, I kinda doubt it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also worth noting...
That the FBI served a search warrant on a sitting US senator means that A.G. Bill Barr was certainly involved in the process—in all likelihood, directly involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If he hasn't destroyed any compromising data 2 months ...
... after being found out, he deserves whatever the Feds throw at him. And yes, a new phone would have been a good investment, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]