Eric Holder Admits That, If It Wanted, NSA Could Collect Internet Searches & Emails Just Like Phone Metadata
from the no-constitutional-issue-at-all dept
During a recent House Judiciary Committee hearing concerning oversight, Rep. Zoe Lofgren decided to quiz Attorney General Eric Holder about the federal government’s surveillance efforts, starting off with a rather simple question. She notes that the bulk phone record collection program is considered to be legal by its supporters, based on Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which allows for the collection of “business records.” So, she wonders, is there any legal distinction between phone records and, say, internet searches or emails? In other words, does the DOJ believe that it would be perfectly legal for the US government to scoop up all your search records and emails without a warrant? Holder clearly does not want to answer the question, and first tries to answer a different question, concerning the bulk phone records program, and how the administration is supposedly committed to ending it. But eventually he’s forced to admit that there’s no legal distinction:
All along, this has been the problem with Section 215. When it first was discussed, it was often called the “library” provision, as the example that people talked about was using Section 215 to collect the records of what books someone checked out of the library. However, as the phone collection program showed, it’s been turned into something much, much broader. Fixing this interpretation is going to take a lot more than just ending one program. It requires changing what is allowed by Section 215.
Filed Under: 4th amendment, business records, emails, eric holder, internet searches, nsa, section 215, surveillance, warrants, zoe lofgren
Comments on “Eric Holder Admits That, If It Wanted, NSA Could Collect Internet Searches & Emails Just Like Phone Metadata”
If It Wanted, NSA Could Collect Internet Searches & Emails Just Like Phone Metadata
So I would assume that means they ARE collecting internet searches and emails – because we can clearly see by now that they want to collect everything they possibly can.
Re: Re:
I would assume that the Atorney General of the United States would, y’know, stand up for the rule of law.
Moral cowardice at its finest.
Re: Re: Re:
Eric has too many ghosts in the closet. The last thing he wants is standing up for the law as that means he would have to respond to the request for a special investigation into Fast and Furious and his part in it.
Re: Re: Re:
He is standing up for the rule of law. In their fantasy world the law says this is all OK and legal.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think he thinks he’s Judge Dredd, and therefore IS the law.
That makes sense of any claim he makes to respect the rule of law – he means, “The rule of Holder.”
Re: It's not an assumption
They are collecting as much internet traffic as they can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
May be targeting e-mails through breaking into providers directly is something else, but wiretapping Internet backbone is going for years already.
Re: Re:
I agree. The Government has been playing word games in not saying we didn’t and not saying we did.
With all that has transpired from the Snowden leaks I assume that they do this already, I certainly wouldn’t believe anything the government has to say considering the way they have let the NSA run amok.
Re: Re:
Agreed. If he says there isn’t any legal distinction (as far as they are concerned) you can bet the bank they are doing it.
Considering, that so far anytime it got revealed they could potentially grab some data, it turned out they DO grab that data, It is fair to assume that they do collect emails and search records.
Re: Re:
That was exactly my first thought after reading this one…
Is there any way to collect all that hot air to heat my house?
Congress seems to be willing to spend countless (at least I’d rather they not spend more of my tax money to count how much it is costing) hours and millions of dollars to keep finding out that these “terrorist” laws are being used to conduct surveillance on EVERYBODY.
Can anybody just tell Congress to shut up, stop holding meetings and repeal these bad laws or pass new ones to put a stop to it.
Can we tell them to create a specific, concrete, court usable test that everyone understands to define a terrorist activity and then make that illegal.
That will stop the “talk only” terrorist traps the FBI seems so fond of spewing PR about.
It will stop whistleblowers from being terrorists.
It will stop a lot of the “made up” criminals law enforcement seems fond of catching.
AND, it will force the NSA to stop the programs that everybody outside of the NSA doesn’t seem to want.
Re: Is there any way to collect all that hot air to heat my house?
The only thing that’s going to stop, even for a little bit, the NSA from continuing their activities, whether they’re considered legal or not, is if someone starts dragging the higher-ups responsible for all this mess to court, prosecutes them, and throws them in prison.
So far, with absolutely none of that happening, they have no incentive not to continue on, business as usual, because hey, it’s not like they face anything more severe than an angry public and blustery, yet ultimately empty threats by a few politicians to ‘do something’, so why should they care whether or not what they’re doing is legal or not?
Let’s start a pool on how long it’ll be before Ed Snowden’s leaked documents shows that, in fact, the NSA already collects this stuff.
Re: Re:
The pattern so far is that once they deny doing something nefarious, the document showing they’re lying comes out a couple of days later. I expect that this pattern will continue.
I have to say, this is a brilliant strategy. MUCH better than a blanket document dump, as this is a constant reminder as to how much we can trust the NSA et al.
Re: Re: Re:
My guess on this one is the Rep. knew the answer to the question before it was asked. If the Rep. asks/gives a chance to clarify or retract then its time to set up the popcorn and watch the fun.
“if”
Russ Was Right
This is the exact thing a certain R Feingold had warned could happen back in 2001
Too bad we ignored him
>Implying they don’t fucking do this already.
Neeg
Neeg
Why should we worry. We all know Holder is a man of enormous integrity and would never abuse this power for partisan gain, right.
Government to read emails
Well, they can read this. Ho Chi Minh is a hero, because he and the North Vietnamese folks united a country where it used to be North Vietnam and South Vietnam. Sadly, France and the United States learned a lesson the hard way. They should have stayed out of the Vietnamese conflict and would have saved thousands of soldier lives (Vietnamese, French and Americans).