Posted on 10/09/2019 5:59:47 AM PDT by gattaca
FBI personnel improperly searched an expansive foreign surveillance database for tens of thousands of phone numbers and/or email addresses that included those of Americans—in violation of rules put in place to protect Americans’ constitutional rights, according to a court ruling.
“The FBI procedures, as implemented, have involved a large number of unjustified queries conducted to retrieve information about U.S. persons,” said James Boasberg, judge on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in an Oct. 18, 2018 ruling (pdf) that was released with redactions on Tuesday.
The database aggregates data collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows warrantless surveillance “of persons reasonably believed to be located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information.”
The FBI is allowed to query the database as long as the results are “reasonably likely to return foreign-intelligence information or evidence of crime.”
But, since April 2017, when the Section 702 surveillance was last certified by FISC, “a large number of FBI queries” didn’t comport to the rules.
The government argued that such queries generally resulted from “fundamental misunderstandings by some FBI personnel [about] what the standard ‘reasonably likely to return foreign intelligence information’ means.”
FISC was still holding back on the 2018 certification on July 12 (pdf), saying FBI documentation procedures lack a means to differentiate “whether a particular query term relates to a United States person or a non-United States person.”
The government has since updated the FBI procedures, which the FISC found “sufficient,” according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
What Happened There were multiple instances of improper searches of the surveillance database, FISC learned.
“It appears that many subjects of those queries were U.S. persons,” the judge said, acknowledging it was “difficult on the record before the Court to assess to what extent U.S. person information was returned and examined as a result of those queries.”
“At a minimum, however, the reported querying practices present a serious risk of unwarranted intrusion into the private communications of a large number of U.S. persons,” he said.
In 2017, between March 24 and 27, “the FBI’s [redacted] conducted queries using identifiers for over 70,000 communication facilities ‘associated with’ persons with access to FBI facilities and systems,” the ruling said.
“Communication facilities” are means of communication, such as an email address or a phone number.
“[Redacted] proceeded with those queries notwithstanding advice from the FBI Office of General Counsel (OGC) that they should not be conducted without approval by OGC and the National Security Division (NSD) of the Department of Justice,” the ruling says, also noting, though, that “the FBI did not examine the results of those queries.”
The ruling further says that on Dec. 1, 2017, “the FBI’s [redacted] conducted over 6,800 queries using identifier of persons [redacted].”
Between Dec. 7 and 11, 2017, “[redacted] also conducted over 1,600 queries using identifiers of persons [redacted]. The [redacted] who conducted those queries advised he did not intend to run them against raw FISA information, but nonetheless reviewed raw FISA information returned by them.”
On Feb. 5 and Feb. 23, 2018, “the FBl’s [redacted] conducted approximately 30 queries regarding potential [redacted] sources, e.g., persons who [redacted] where the subject of a [redacted] investigation was [redacted].”
On Feb. 21, 2018, “the FBI’s [redacted] conducted approximately 45 queries to retrieve information on persons [redacted] under consideration as potential sources of information.”
The government also told the FISC that an unspecified FBI unit “conducted what may be considered queries against raw FISA-acquired [metadata] … using what appear to be identifiers of approximately 57,000 individuals who work [redacted].”
The date of the queries wasn’t provided, “though it is reported that the FBI informed NSD of them on April 13, 2018,” the ruling said.
The government also disclosed to FISC several queries that involved queries that were “to return information for just one person,” though the names have been redacted.
“At some time before March 2015, the FBI’s [redacted] conducted a query [redacted].
At some time before May 2016, the FBI’s [redacted] conducted a query on [redacted] before serving a classified order on [redacted].
On October 11, 2017, the FBI’s [redacted] queried [redacted] to identify cleared personnel on whom to serve process.
On November 11, 2017, the FBI’s [redacted] conducted a query on a potential recipient of a FISA order.”
Further “non-compliant queries” included:
“A small number of cases in which FBI personnel apparently conducted queries for improper personal reasons—for example, a contract linguist who ran queries on himself, other FBI employees, and relatives.
A number of instances in which FBI personnel inadvertently ran queries against Section 702 information.
A set of queries (overlapping to some extent with the set of inadvertent queries of Section 702 data) apparently intended to return FBI documents or material.”
In the court’s view, the last three instances “do not present the same level of concern as those that evidence misunderstanding of the querying standard.”
“It would be difficult to completely prevent personnel from querying data for personal reasons,” the judge said.
FBI and CIA should be shut down. All current employees should be put on a list of people who can never again work for the government in any capacity. Dirty, dirty, dirty. All of them. It is a myth that some agents are decent people. If they were decent, they would have quit already.
Every freeper has been on a “list” for 20 years and we have all known it. Just remember, when at home keep a 12 gauge handy with 00 buck in the magazine. Aim for the face, they have plate carriers. Take as many with you as you can. Good luck.
Because they were too busy playing Gestapo Agent while violating the Constitution.
Shouldn’t the list of everyone queried be made PUBLIC so all those injured can SUE THE GOVERNMENT AGENTS/CONTRACTORS PERSONALLY IN FEDERAL COURT???
Not a single [redacted] person will [redacted] be held accountable for any of this [redacted] abuse.
So who is going to prison?
L
Every freeper has been on a “list” for 20 years and we have all known it.
***********
The probability of that is close to 100%.
By exercising our freedom of speech and asking legitimate questions about the direction of this country we are perceived as “dissidents” — if not worse.
Declassified Docs Show UN Amb Samantha Power’s monstrous 300 Unmaskings
Were Related to Obama’s surveillance of candidate Trump’s 2016 campaign
pjmedia.com ^ | 5/24/2019 | Debra Heine
FR Posted on 5/25/2019, 6:26:27 PM by bitt
Government documents that will soon be made public will reveal stunning information about former U.N. ambassador Samantha Power’s voluminous unmasking efforts in 2016, according to multiple sources.
On Thursday, President Trump gave Attorney General William Barr the authority to declassify documents from multiple agencies related to surveillance of the Trump campaign in 2016.
According to investigative journalist Sara Carter on Fox News’ Hannity, last night, some of the documents will reveal that FBI “informant” (spy) Stefan Halper recorded both George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, and there is exculpatory evidence on those tapes. In addition to that, according to Carter, one of the biggest revelations will pertain to Power’s unmasking efforts.
As PJ Media reported in September of 2017, Power was unmasking people at a “freakishly rapid rate.”
The former U.S. ambassador moved at such a rapid pace that she ended up “averaging more than one request for every working day in 2016,” multiple sources told Fox News at the time. And she continued to seek identifying information about Americans caught up in incidental surveillance right up to President Trump’s inauguration.
“That’s unheard of,” Carter said.
“Put it this way — when John Bolton was the at the U.N., he unmasked three people. Three people. She unmasked close to 300. —SNIP—
If you acquiesce to go to prison expect the Whitey Bulger treatment.
So who is going to prison?
***************
Not a single person. Nor will there be any punishment of any sort for anyone.
Lady Justice does not reside in DC.
“Government documents that will soon be made public...”
**************
In what century?
A sitting Federal FISC Judge has just ruled that the FBI routinely violated the Civil Rights of tens of thousands of US citizens in blatant disregard of established rules and procedures. I have no doubt that Federal statutes were violated as well.
So I’ll ask again. Who is going to prison for this?
L
You and I. If we acquiesce.
Obama Powers and Rice.
The attack on Trump was not individuals acting alone.
The sinister plot was orchestrated by a sitting president with plenty to hide.
The Halfrican desperately needed Hillary to win......to sweep the wrongdoing under the rug. US intel was used for sinister purposes.
REMINDER US intel is there to protect the safety and security of Americans. It is not a political tool.
===================================
The vindictive Samantha Powers Unmasked Over 260 Americans During 2016
Red State ^ | 9:00 pm on May 25, 2019 | Elizabeth Vaughn / FR Posted by E. Pluribus Unum
When U.S. intelligence agencies gather information on foreigners, often the name of a U.S. citizen or entity will be collected. Under current U.S. law, information about innocent citizens gathered in this way is referred to as incidental collection. Their names and data must be masked to protect their privacy.
Authorized government officials, under certain conditions, may “unmask” the identity of an individual. In October 2017, Powers testified before a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee. Then Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) spoke to Fox News’ Brett Baier afterward and said:
Her testimony is "they [the unmasking requests] may be under my name, but I did not make those requests."
.....she's saying requests to unmask may have been attributed to her, but they greatly exceed by an exponential factor the requests she actually made….....So, that’s her testimony, and she was pretty emphatic about it.
So, we’ve got to get to the bottom of that. If there is someone else making requests on behalf of a principal in the intelligence community, we need to know that because we’re getting ready to reauthorize a program that’s really important to the country, but also has a masking component to it. When John Bolton served at the United Nations, he “unmasked” the identities of three individuals. In the year leading up to the 2016 presidential election, then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Powers unmasked over 260 Americans.
On September 20, 2017, Fox News reported that the remarkable number of Americans who had been unmasked at Powers’ request “was an attempt to uncover associates of President Trump. She was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day....... (Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
All but one (of those listed) happened AFTER Trump was elected.
I wonder what the Obama years would show?
The Epoch Times is a Chinese paper?
I’m sorry, but I don’t trust ANY media any longer.
I look for what gets omitted, overly emphasized, and plain out lied about. “According to sources”, “sources say”, “officials said”, all such wording make me VERY suspicious.
Criminal, Bob Barr had better prosecute.
The salt of the earth “Rank and File Agents” that Sean Hannity drones on about while kissing their a$$es?
*************
Too many of those agents have remained silent. In any bureaucracy there are always staff people who know or figure out what’s going on. Many knew; many said nothing.
Silence is consent.
Criminal, Bob Barr had better prosecute.
**************
If he doesn’t the abuses will only worse over time. No punishment, no reason to stop doing it.
And we probably won’t be as lucky next time.
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.