Phone intercept confirms subject has exited Gas 'N Sip, heading to Flea Market..!
Local units to tail.
Posted on 03/24/2016 7:26:22 PM PDT by DeathBeforeDishonor1
A bipartisan pair of lawmakers is expressing alarm at reported changes at the National Security Agency that would allow the intelligence service’s information to be used for policing efforts in the United States.
“If media accounts are true, this radical policy shift by the NSA would be unconstitutional, and dangerous,” Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) wrote in a letter to the spy agency this week. “The proposed shift in the relationship between our intelligence agencies and the American people should not be done in secret.
“NSA’s mission has never been, and should never be, domestic policing or domestic spying.” The NSA has yet to publicly announce the change, but The New York Times reported last month that the administration was poised to expand the agency's ability to share information that it picks up about people’s communications with other intelligence agencies.
The modification would open the door for the NSA to give the FBI and other federal agencies uncensored communications of foreigners and Americans picked up incidentally — but without a warrant — during sweeps.
Robert Litt, the general counsel at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told the Times that it was finalizing a 21-page draft of procedures to allow the expanded sharing.
Separately, the Guardian reported earlier this month that the FBI had quietly changed its internal privacy rules to allow direct access to the NSA’s massive storehouse of communication data picked up on Internet service providers and websites.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Anyone who couldn’t see this coming probably thought the Patriot Act would have limits, too.
I can’t see much, if any, of this ‘evidence’ getting through the courts’ ‘expectation of privacy’ doctrine.
As they have in the past they Willie about where they got their lead or tip
If someone calls another country where they have no reason to expect that country won’t spy on their call, maybe.
Or a conversation in another country about someone here.
Someone who calls in the US to a number in the US, even if the call is routed outside the country, would be protected though.
Making their lists, checking them twice since 2002. With NSA data, they will be able to label anyone they wish as a domestic terrorist. Like the IRS, many of the LEO agencies can be wielded as a very effective tool focused on intimidating enough opposition as to silence the rest. If we peasants don’t like it, tough. If either Hilary or Bernie becomes Potus, the public will never hear another word about this, but there will be plenty of Americans silently victimized by it, who will have no recourse. Freedom? What’s that ?
Before Bush, NSA was a DOD agency forbidden to spy domestically. After Bush they were a domestic spy agency that would make the Stasi blush.
After Bush AND Obama, now they spy domestically, and call the cops on you for regular crimes.
Shameful. And utterly UnAmerican.
I seem to remember Obama’s primary impact in the eyes of his fellow Democrats, was to be a very large database.
So what is this database being used for as we read about the present election?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3029205/posts
“I can’t see much, if any, of this ‘evidence’ getting through the courts’ ‘expectation of privacy’ doctrine.”
I can. They contact the FBI or cops, and the cops find another way to “discover” the evidence. Think in terms of driving some dope and they know you are from snooping. They call the Highway Patrol who stops you for going 73 in a 70 zone. Then his dog farts and that means it senses drugs. He searches your car and “finds” the dope.
You’ll have no clue the NSA intercepted your text message or read your email. Stasi...
I expect these rules to just allow some- legally actionable- info collected overseas to be accessed by domestic police.
Which wouldn’t fit your scenario.
We’ll see.
And, of course, the ‘slippery slope’ factor will have to be considered.
You obviously are not aware of FISA judges? There is no expectation of any digital privacy whatsoever. That’s why any decent lawyer doesn’t use a computer for communication or recording of conversations with clients. A yellow notepad with cryptic references is all they use. All computer or messaging data is sent by low level staffers for filing briefs, court filings, and so on.
Think of 100 Lois Lerners at the DMV, traffic court, city council, county sheriffs, local zoning board, etc..... who one day have a reason to go after you?
FISA judges are not boogiemen.
No one with a lick of sense sends anything they want secret over the internet without outrageous encryption. And even then they’re just kidding themselves.
Phone intercept confirms subject has exited Gas 'N Sip, heading to Flea Market..!
Local units to tail.
You think this is a GOOD thing?
I don’t believe that to be true.
My understanding is that if 50% of your household is not a US citizen, you will still be monitored. That means US Permanent Residents will be included, even if that is your husband or wife, which means you as a US citizen will be continually monitored, too.
She's a stickler for fact. She wouldn't have said it if she had not thoroughly made herself aware of the facts up to that point in time.
If it’s the Constitution-obeying rules I expect: of course.
Legal evidence is legal evidence.
Meeting up to transfer, using caution in travel with them, and final placement where they would go unobserved in my urban location. I can just imagine how many lists I populated at the NSA on that email.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.