While Congress Looks Set To Push Back On NSA Surveillance, Sen. Feinstein Wants To Codify Current Practices

from the of-course-she-does dept

At this point, it's no secret that Senator Dianne Feinstein is one of the biggest cheerleaders for the NSA -- she exhibits the signs of a co-dependent with the NSA. Now, with a powerful coalition in Congress getting set to introduce meaningful reform to limit the NSA's efforts, Feinstein is going in the other direction, preparing a counter-attack bill that serves to codify current practices:
"I do not want to leave the United States in a position where we are open to another major attack because we can't ferret out who terrorists might be calling in this country to put it together," Feinstein said in an interview.

Her committee is drafting legislation to codify the phone records program, the existence of which was leaked in June by National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. The legislation would grant the agency explicit authority to gather records listing the numbers, duration and time of all U.S. telephone calls, but not their content.
Of course, since the very beginning of this, Feinstein has been insisting at every opportunity that everything done was perfectly legal. If that's truly the case, why would she need to "codify" current practices? The political reality is that she needs to do this to have "something" to push people to support instead of the USA Freedom Act being supported by Senator Patrick Leahy. Basically, these two bills are likely to be a referendum on who believes in the 4th Amendment, and who thinks the US should cower in fear and spy on everyone.

Filed Under: dianne feinstein, nsa, nsa surveillance, pat leahy

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 28 Oct 2013 @ 8:57pm

    Re: Accepting its illegal is a step forward

    You underestimate political doublethink, they are perfectly able to hold two opposing views without believing that they contradict each other in slightest.

    In cases such as this the 'thought' process is likely something along these lines:

    A) Action X is illegal, and therefor wrong.
    B) Retroactively legalizing X, at some point in the future, will likewise retroactively make X not wrong, meaning that just because it's illegal now, doesn't mean you have to consider it as such.

    So just because she may appear to be admitting that the NSA's actions are currently illegal, does in no way mean that she thinks that they are wrong, as evidenced by her attempt to make them legal after the fact.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.