General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenior Justice Dept Official: NSA ‘Probably’ Spies on Members of Congress
The National Security Agency "probably" collects phone records of members of Congress and their staffs, a senior Justice Department official conceded Tuesday.
Deputy Attorney General James Cole buckled under questioning from multiple lawmakers during a House Judiciary Committee hearing reviewing proposals to reform the NSA's surveillance activity.
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.
Lofgren's time expired and Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, then put the question to Cole.
<snip>
http://www.nationaljournal.com/technology/feds-nsa-probably-spies-on-members-of-congress-20140204
but but but, it's just metadata!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)If they store copies of all the metadata, then, duh, they no doubt have the metadata of Congressional reps, as well. No one used the word 'spying' except the headline writer.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
neverforget
(9,436 posts)Is it only spying if they look at it?
randome
(34,845 posts)The metadata -supposedly- is kept in a locked box requiring multiple levels of approval to view. So is that spying?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
neverforget
(9,436 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)...they could quickly look up the phone numbers of collaborators. It makes sense -from an efficiency standpoint- to have the metadata on hand. Otherwise, they would need to go hat-in-hand to every telecom in the country to hand search their records.
I understand that some are worried this could somehow be abused but there is no evidence that it is and even Carl Bernstein said it seemed to him there were sufficient safeguards in place to prevent abuse.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
neverforget
(9,436 posts)identified.
randome
(34,845 posts)Because as of today there are hundreds of telecoms in the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_telephone_companies
Taking weeks (months?) to go to all these companies would effectively nullify the intent.
This is the 21st century. The Information Age. We need to adapt to the changes. That doesn't mean we give up our Constitutional liberties. It means exactly what I said...we adapt.
Searches of the metadata cannot be undertaken unless with a warrant or an identifiable national emergency. With multiple levels of approval needed to run queries on the metadata, this seems to be the kind of fine line we always walk between freedom and security. The line we will walk into the future, as well.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
neverforget
(9,436 posts)the 4th Amendment doesn't apply. The companies hold onto this "metadata" and the police or intelligence agencies can submit a warrant for that information. WTF is hard to understand about that? Why are you so willing to let the NSA hold onto this metadata?
BTW I never said that the police should not search for phone numbers. You said that. If they need a specific phone number they can get a warrant. It seems to have worked fine up until now.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Anyone who would believe that nonsense would buy the Brooklyn Bridge from a cab driver on the make.
randome
(34,845 posts)But even if you think he is, there is no evidence the NSA is using this metadata to blackmail the world or whatever other nefarious schemes are bandied about.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)You surely know the rest.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)You seem so much better than that.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)seems to me to be extremely probable.
There are few politicians with scruples - the more powerful they are, the more corrupt they are.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Would you believe it's all a matter of protecting the national interests and stuff?
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Frankly, I do not agree with your logic on that point at all, Donald.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)is how Ray McGovern puts it.
I know everything.
Everything you do.
Everywhere you go,
Everyone you know.
is how Jim Morrison put it.