Tag Archives: Ron Wyden

'Explosive' FISA memo: 'Top secret' source document details Obama NSA illegal spying/doxxing of U.S. citizens

Update: Full FISA Memo released!!!
On January 18, 2018, members of the House of Representatives were given a four-page memo, described by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL)and journalist Sara Carter as so “shocking” and “explosive”, it could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ), the end of Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation, and even people going to jail.

See “Tell Congress to release the ‘explosive’ FISA memo that’ll put officials in jail!

House members have been blocked from discussing the memo in detail due to a waiver they signed, according to The Hill. A day later, on January 19, 65 lawmakers signed a letter calling on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif) to publicly release the memo.
On January 20, Rep. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio) tweeted that the process to release the memo has begun, although it may take 19 or more Congressional work days.
On January 21, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said the memo should not be released because the American people simply can’t understand it because we don’t have the classified information that provides the background for the 4-page FISA memo.
Well, the American people’s inability to understand the FISA memo is no longer a concern for Demonrat Schiff because yesterday morning, a National Security Agency (NSA) whistle blower — former NSA tech head William Binneysent InfoWars a link to a 99-page document that’s been “confirmed” by “congressional sources” to be be “a primary source of information” for the 4-page FISA memo.
The classified (“top secret”) document is a 99-page “United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Memorandum Opinion and Order,” dated April 26, 2017. It is a blueprint of how the Obama administration and the Deep State had spied on President Trump, as well as on U.S. citizens.

Note: FISA or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is a federal law that establishes procedures for the U.S. government’s physical and electronic surveillance of foreign powers and domestic (U.S.) agents of foreign powers suspected of espionage or terrorism. The Act created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to oversee requests for surveillance warrants by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

In 2016, the Obama Administration used the “Russian dossier” and its  baseless claim of a Russian-Trump collusion as the pretext for a FISA court-approved surveillance on then-candidate Donald Trump and members of the Trump campaign, including phone- and wire-taps. But as you will see in the 99-page FISC memorandum, the Obama Administration’s surveillance went way beyond Trump and his team to include innocent U.S. citizens, whose personal identities were doxxed and their personal information leaked.


Below is a summary of the main points in the 99-page FISC memorandum:

(1) The NSA, under the Obama Administration, spied on U.S. citizens through something called the “Section 702 upstream collection”:

As explained by Sean D. Carberry of FCW, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorizes the NSA to monitor internet traffic without a warrant and sweep up any communications that simply mention a foreign target, regardless of the sender or receiver of the email, who may be innocent U.S. citizens. That means the NSA has been spying on and intercepting U.S. citizens’ emails.
Page 33 of the 99-page FISC memorandum states:

Information acquired by FISA electronic surveillance and physical search, which often involve targets who are United States persons and typically are directed at persons in the United States.

(2) The NSA, under the Obama Administration, went beyond FISA’s Section 702 to “unmasking” (doxxing) and leaking information about Americans, including associates of Donald Trump:

All this is in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which prohibits the government’s unreasonable searches and seizures and requires governmental searches and seizures to be conducted only upon issuance of a warrant, judicially sanctioned by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
Below are some relevant quotes from the 99-page FISC memorandum:

Page 15 – “…NSA analysts had used US-person identifiers to query the results on Internet ‘upstream’ collection, even though NSA’s Section 702 minimization procedures prohibited such queries.”
Page 19 – “Since 2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of US-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collection under Section 702. The Oct. 26, 2016 Notice informed the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the Court.
Page 21 –The government still had not ascertained the full range of systems that might have been used to conduct improper US-person queries.

Here’s former NSA official William Binney on the FISC memorandum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6fHU6eq5wg
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) must certify each year that the NSA is in compliance with Section 702 provisions.
In March 2017, some members of Congress threatened that they would have a hard time renewing Section 702 before its expiration at the end of 2017 unless the Trump Administration prosecutes those responsible for the leaks.
In a press release on April 28, 2017, the NSA described the changes it will make so that its Section 702 powers could be renewed:

  • The NSA said it would take steps “as soon as practicable” to delete data already collected in the illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens.
  • The NSA would halt “about” collection of U.S. citizens’ personal information. However, due to limitations of its current technology, the NSA “is unable to completely eliminate ‘about’ communications from its upstream 702 collection without also excluding some of the relevant communications directly ‘to or from’ its foreign intelligence targets.”
  • The NSA will still conduct “upstream” and “downstream” surveillance to collect emails sent to or from a foreign target located outside the U.S., for which the agency, under FISA’s Section 702, does not require a warrant.

In 2017, after an extensive review, the FISC approved changes made by the NSA “to fix the problems” before the government submitted a new application for the agency’s continued Section 702 certification.
Reactions from members of Congress (FCW):

  • Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has long accused the government of using Section 702 as an end run around warrant requirements to collect the communications of Americans, and he has been calling on the NSA to release data on the number of Americans who have had their communications “incidentally collected.” Wyden said after the NSA’s April press release: “This transparency should be commended. To permanently protect Americans’ rights, I intend to introduce legislation banning this kind of collection in the future.”
  • Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Ca.), a ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, called Section 702 a vital collection tool and commended the NSA for self-reporting the issues and discontinuing “about” collection. Schiff said: “I will continue to expect strict compliance with the FISA Court orders and will push for Section 702’s reauthorization along with any additional reforms needed to further strengthen and institutionalize protections for privacy and transparency.”
  • Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), a ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said: “This development represents the due diligence and extensive review applied across the United States Government pertaining to the Section 702 collection activities. I believe we can now look forward to Congress and, in particular, the Senate Intelligence Committee…quickly turning to the consideration and debate of this critical authority prior to its expiration set for December 31, 2017.”

Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander and Admiral Michael Rogers headed the National Security Agency under the Obama Administration. Rogers is still the NSA Director. Alexander, Rogers, NSA agents, and Barack Obama should be indicted and arrested for violating the Fourth Amendment rights of U.S. citizens.

Here’s what you can do:

(1) Tell the Department of Justice to arrest the above criminals:

  • Phones: 202-353-1555 (comment);  202-514-2000 (main switchboard)
  • Online form: https://www.justice.gov/doj/webform/your-message-department-justice

(2) Tweet President Trump: https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump
(3) Tell your Congress critter(s): https://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
This is the message I wrote on the DOJ’s onine Contact Form (feel free to copy and paste as yours):

To Attorney General Jeff Sessions:
The 99-page April 2017 “U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Memorandum Opinion and Order” shows that the NSA’s spying and doxxing egregiously violated the Fourth Amendment rights of U.S. citizens. Why haven’t you arrest NSA Directors Michael Rogers and Keith Alexander, NSA agents who conducted the spying and doxxing, and former President Barack Obama? Are they above the law?

#ArrestNSA
#ArrestKeithAlexander
#ArrestMichaelRogers
#ArrestBarackObama

H/t John Molloy and FOTM‘s greenworxx

Update (Jan. 26, 2018):

Too-stupid-to-understand-FISA-memo Americans inundate Rep. Adam Schiff’s office with ‘I’m not a Russian bot’ phone calls
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Obama regime is spying on every phonecall, email, bank transfer, travel record of every American

Obama Sauron
You know that saying that even the paranoid sometimes are right?
14 months ago, on March 19, 2012, I wrote a post “2013: The end of privacy in America,” about the construction of a heavily fortified $2 billion Data Center in Utah, by the National Security Agency, in which the federal government will store (and analyze) your every email, cell phone call, Google search, parking receipt, credit card purchases, and more. The construction was expected to be completed by September of this year, but it looks like the Data Center is already up and running.

APTOPIX NSA Phone RecordsNSA Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah

For several years, two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, have been cryptically warning that the Obama regime was interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming to the public if we knew about it.
Last year in a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., Wyden and Udall wrote: “We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted Section 215 of the Patriot Act. As we see it, there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows. This is a problem, because it is impossible to have an informed public debate about what the law should say when the public doesn’t know what its government thinks the law says.”

The American people are now finding out to what the two senators were cryptically referring.

This discovery was disclosed yesterday by the UK paper, The Guardian, contained in a highly classified court order, signed in April by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Vinson’s order directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, VBNS, to turn over “on an ongoing daily basis” to the National Security Agency (NSA) all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”
The FBI had asked for the court order under a section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that regulates domestic surveillance for national security purposes, allowing the government to secretly obtain “tangible things” like a business’s customer records. The provision was expanded by Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which makes it easier to get an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain business records so long as they were merely deemed “relevant” to a national-security investigation.
The order was marked “TOP SECRET//SI//NOFORN,” referring to communications-related intelligence information that may not be released to noncitizens. That would make it among the most closely held secrets in the federal government. The collection of call logs is set to expire in July unless the court extends it.
Judge Vinson’s order does not apply to the content of the communications, which means it’s a blanket order, instead of one that specifically targets only communications containing Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) “trigger words“. (For a list of those words, see our LTG’s post of May 27, 2012, “DHS Trigger Words?“.)
It is not clear whether similar orders have gone to other parts of Verizon, like its residential or cellphone services, or to other telecommunications carriers. The order prohibits its recipient from discussing its existence, and representatives of both Verizon and AT&T declined to comment Wednesday evening.
Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. “We will respond as soon as we can,” said NSA spokeswoman Marci Green Miller in an e-mail.
Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies, a civil liberties advocacy group, said that “absent some explanation I haven’t thought of, this looks like the largest assault on privacy since the N.S.A. wiretapped Americans in clear violation of the law [under the Bush administration]. On what possible basis has the government refused to tell us that it believes that the law authorizes this kind of request?”
Even more alarming, Andy Greenberg reports for Forbes, June 5, 2013, that although the NSA has long justified its spying powers by arguing that its charter allows surveillance on those outside of the United States, while avoiding intrusions into the private communications of American citizens, the Obama regime’s spying order to Verizon specifically targets Americans, instead of foreigners.
It gets worse.
Elspeth Reeve reports for the Atlantic Wire that the NSA’s surveillance of our communications is most likely much, much bigger than that. Technology has made it possible for the American government to spy on citizens to an extent East Germany could only dream of. Basically everything we say that can be traced digitally is being collected by the NSA.
Previous reporting from many outlets suggests that’s true. In 2006, USA Today‘s Leslie Cauley reported the NSA was secretly collecting call records with data from AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth. A source told Cauley, “It’s the largest database ever assembled in the world” and that the NSA wanted “to create a database of every call ever made” within U.S. territory. Likewise, in 2011, The New Yorker‘s Jane Mayer spoke to former NSA crypto-mathematician Bill Binney, who “believes that the agency now stores copies of all e-mails transmitted in America, in case the government wants to retrieve the details later.” He thinks the NSA wants all emails to be searchable, the same way we search with Google. “The agency reportedly has the capacity to intercept and download, every six hours, electronic communications equivalent to the contents of the Library of Congress,” Mayer said.
And the NSA isn’t just collecting the things we say. It’s also tracking what we buy and where we go. In 2008, The Wall Street Journal‘s Siobhan Gorman reported that the NSA’s domestic data collection “have evolved to reach more broadly into data about people’s communications, travel and finances in the U.S. than the domestic surveillance programs brought to light since the 2001 terrorist attacks.” That means emails records, bank transfers, phone records, travel records.
See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Beware of the Senate's and House's Internet Censorship Bills

The United States Senate is shaping up to be a killer of freedom.
On December 1, 2011, by a bipartisan 93:7 vote, the Senate passed a bill — S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012 — that, in Sec. 1301, gives the President of the United States the authority to have the military arrest and detain U.S. citizens without charge or trial. All in the name of combating “terrorism.”
Now, the Senate is considering a bill — S. 968, the Protect IP Act (PIPA) (sponsored by Patrick Leahy, D-Vt) — that, in the name of combating Internet theft of intellectual property, can be misused by government to censor us. The House version — HR 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) — is similarly flawed.

Jennifer Rubin writes for the Washington Post, Dec. 12, 2011, that PIPA and SOPA are unnecessarily overbroad and a formula for a host of undesirable and unintended consequences, including:

  • Give copyright holders and government the power to cut off Web sites unreasonably. They could be shut down, and search engines such as Google, Bing and Yahoo could be stopped from linking to them. Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google, said PIPA “would require ISPs [Internet service providers] to remove URLs from the Web, which is also known as censorship last time I checked.” [Source: ABC News] r
  • Harvard law professor and Supreme Court advocate Laurence Tribe has submitted a memo detailing the multiple ways in which SOPA runs afoul of the First Amendment. For example, “SOPA provides that a complaining party can file a notice alleging that it is harmed by the activities occurring on the site ‘or portion thereof .’ Conceivably, an entire website containing tens of thousands of pages could be targeted if only a single page were accused of infringement. Such an approach would create severe practical problems for sites with substantial user-generated content, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, and for blogs that allow users to post videos, photos, and other materials.”
  • Tribe also points out that “The notice-and-termination procedure of Section 103(a) runs afoul of the ‘prior restraint’ doctrine, because it delegates to a private party the power to suppress speech without prior notice and a judicial hearing. This provision of the bill would give complaining parties the power to stop online advertisers and credit card processors from doing business with a website, merely by filing a unilateral notice accusing the site of being ‘dedicated to theft of U.S. property’ — even if no court has actually found any infringement. The immunity provisions in the bill create an overwhelming incentive for advertisers and payment processors to comply with such a request immediately upon receipt.”

This is what Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) says about PIPA:

“I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective. […] By ceding control of the Internet to corporations through a private right of action, and to government agencies that do not sufficiently understand and value the Internet, PIPA represents a threat our economic future and to our international objectives. Until the many issues that I and others have raised with this legislation are addressed, I will object to a unanimous consent request to proceed to the legislation.”

There is an alternative to PIPA and SOPA.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have introduced a competing bill, the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (the “Open Act”), which seeks to address legitimate concerns about SOPA/PIPA and focus more specifically on the real problem without knocking down robust, protected speech in an indiscriminate fashion. Google, AOL, eBay, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Mozilla, Yahoo!, and Zynga have signed on to support this alternative to SOPA/PIPA.
The Hill recently reported on OPEN: “The draft proposal would instead authorize the International Trade Commission to investigate and issue cease-and-desist orders against foreign websites that provide pirated content or sell counterfeit goods. The ITC would have to find that the site is ‘primarily’ and ‘willfully’ engaged in copyright infringement to issue the order.” Rather than take down entire websites and potentially interfere with perfectly legitimate and protected speech OPEN, would, after a court order, “compel payment providers and online advertising services to cease providing services to the offending website. The approach comports with current copyright law and hews to the ‘follow the money’ approach favored by Google and other tech companies.”
Jennifer Rubin concludes:

“In short, this is not a fight between protectors of copyrights and Internet anarchists. Rather, there is a legitimate policy dispute about how broad and how disruptive government enforcement powers should be when core First Amendment rights are at issue. No doubt the Motion Picture Association of America, headed by disgraced former Connecticut senator Chris Dodd, has spread plenty of money around Congress to try to give the government the bluntest, heaviest weapon to fight piracy. But that doesn’t make it good policy. And it sure doesn’t make for constitutional legislation.”

So, tell your senators and representative that you want the Issa-Wyden Open Act, instead of the Senate’s PIPA and the House’s SOPA!
UPDATE: Wikipedia’s founder Jimmy Wales is threatening to turn off the site to protest against PIPA and SOPA.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

S1867's Bad vs. Good Senators

Last Thursday, December 1, 2011, by an overwhelming majority and bipartisan vote of 93 vs. 7, the U.S. Senate passed S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.
In so doing, the Senate gives authority to the President to have the military arrest and detain U.S. citizens deemed to be enemy combatants (called “covered persons” in Sec. 1031 of S.1867) without charge or trial.
In so doing, the Senate also legalizes sodomy and bestiality in the U.S. military, by repealing the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s Art. 125 (see S1867’s Sec. 551(d)).

These are the senators who are mainly responsible for S1867:

1. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Michigan), who is the sponsor of S. 1867 and the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The committee had approved and recommended S. 1867 to the rest of the Senate.
2. Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona), who is the minority leader of the Armed Services Committee.
3. The other members of the Armed Services Committee:

  • Democrats:

Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut)
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
Ben Nelson (Nebraska)
Jim Webb (Virginia)
Claire McCaskill (Missouri)
Mark Udall (Colorado)
Kay R. Hagan (North Carolina)
Mark Begich (Alaska)
Joe Manchin III (West Virginia)
Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire)
Kirsten E. Gillibrand (New York)
Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut)

  • Republicans:

James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma)
Jeff Sessions (Alabama)
Saxby Chambliss (Georgia)
Roger F. Wicker (Mississippi)
Scott P. Brown (Massachusetts)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire)
Susan M. Collins (Maine)
Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
John Cornyn (Texas)
David Vitter (Louisiana)

These are the seven senators who voted against S1867:

Here’s Sen. Jeff Merkley explaining why he voted against S1867:
[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dKhjw7ZT7pU]
H/t beloved fellow Tina.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0