|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 12, 2024 14:18:09 GMT -5
It's not going to happen. Cable is already reporting there's movement by the repubs flipping their votes on this. You don't want to be hauled up in a dragnet don't become a Russian useful idiot or worse. Democrats won't control the White House forever. Hope you're happy when a Republican President has the power to spy on political opponents without a warrant. A certain amount of trust is needed that any intelligence gathering done respects the rights of those being surveilled. The alternative is having no intelligence gathering. Anyone who is informed on the ongoing developments between what Putin says and the GOP would be remiss in ignoring the massive overlap between the two. If Putin is triangulating narratives with someone in Congress or Fox wouldn't you think it important to investigate it? The question isn't where surveillance is happening. It's whether its being done lawfully. The lawful part may need work, I dunno. But that's way different from ending this stuff entirely.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 12, 2024 14:31:49 GMT -5
Democrats won't control the White House forever. Hope you're happy when a Republican President has the power to spy on political opponents without a warrant. A certain amount of trust is needed that any intelligence gathering done respects the rights of those being surveilled. The alternative is having no intelligence gathering. Requiring a warrant to spy on Americans who communicate with foreign nationals doesn't obstruct the intelligence community's ability to do their jobs. FISA warrants get approved 90% of the time. History shows that if you give the government an inch, they take a mile. That's why we have the Bill of Rights to protect us from government overreach.
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 12, 2024 14:40:12 GMT -5
A certain amount of trust is needed that any intelligence gathering done respects the rights of those being surveilled. The alternative is having no intelligence gathering. Requiring a warrant to spy on Americans who communicate with foreign nationals doesn't obstruct the intelligence community's ability to do their jobs. FISA warrants get approved 90% of the time. History shows that if you give the government an inch, they take a mile. That's why we have the Bill of Rights to protect us from government overreach. It operates on the basis of trust as FISA has to. The fundamental issue that gets duct taped over is that intelligence only works when it's kept secret. In 33 years only 12 warrants have been denied so this requirement is obviously window dressing dependent on the facts supplied by the intel community. Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests.[4] This does not include the number of warrants that were modified by the FISA court. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court#:~:text=Over%20the%20entire%2033%2Dyear,modified%20by%20the%20FISA%20court.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 12, 2024 15:24:21 GMT -5
Oregon Democrat
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 13, 2024 11:46:55 GMT -5
Bipartisanship!
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 13, 2024 23:21:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 14, 2024 2:00:01 GMT -5
Good explainer: FISA 702 permits the U.S. government to compel communication service providers to disclose for foreign intelligence purposes the communications of persons reasonably believed to be non-U.S. persons abroad. No warrant is required; a belief that the communications relate to U.S. foreign affairs or national security is sufficient. Under current FISA 702, only entities that provide communication services like email, calls, and text messaging can be compelled to disclose these communications.
As FISA Court amicus and longtime practitioner Marc Zwilligener and his colleague Steve Lane have already noted, the HPSCI bill would upend the current system, enabling the government to compel anyone with mere access to the equipment on which such communications are stored or transmitted to disclose those communications. That could include personnel at coffee shops that offer WiFi to their customers, a town library that offers public computer internet services, hotels, shared workspaces, landlords and even AirBNB hosts that offer WiFi to the people who stay there, cloud storage services that host but do not access data, and large data centers that rent out computer server space to their clients.
The provision is intended to reverse a rare decision of the FISA Court of Review (FISCR), which had rejected the government’s claim that a service that a company provided fit within the scope of Section 702. In its effort to override the FISCR ruling, the HPSCI bill has opened Pandora’s Box. cdt.org/insights/a-trojan-horse-in-a-house-intel-committee-bill-massively-expands-fisa-702-surveillance/
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 14, 2024 11:25:04 GMT -5
Good explainer: FISA 702 permits the U.S. government to compel communication service providers to disclose for foreign intelligence purposes the communications of persons reasonably believed to be non-U.S. persons abroad. No warrant is required; a belief that the communications relate to U.S. foreign affairs or national security is sufficient. Under current FISA 702, only entities that provide communication services like email, calls, and text messaging can be compelled to disclose these communications.
As FISA Court amicus and longtime practitioner Marc Zwilligener and his colleague Steve Lane have already noted, the HPSCI bill would upend the current system, enabling the government to compel anyone with mere access to the equipment on which such communications are stored or transmitted to disclose those communications. That could include personnel at coffee shops that offer WiFi to their customers, a town library that offers public computer internet services, hotels, shared workspaces, landlords and even AirBNB hosts that offer WiFi to the people who stay there, cloud storage services that host but do not access data, and large data centers that rent out computer server space to their clients.
The provision is intended to reverse a rare decision of the FISA Court of Review (FISCR), which had rejected the government’s claim that a service that a company provided fit within the scope of Section 702. In its effort to override the FISCR ruling, the HPSCI bill has opened Pandora’s Box. cdt.org/insights/a-trojan-horse-in-a-house-intel-committee-bill-massively-expands-fisa-702-surveillance/Thx
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 14, 2024 11:33:07 GMT -5
Rep. Jaypal is a Democrat. Sen. Wyden is a Democrat. Support for closing the surveillance loophole is bi-partisan. Defending our privacy rights isn’t a partisan issue. It’s about principles… It's not going to happen. Cable is already reporting there's movement by the repubs flipping their votes on this. You don't want to be hauled up in a dragnet don't become a Russian useful idiot or worse. Right, because the police never arrest innocent people.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 18, 2024 20:18:57 GMT -5
Sen. Durbin wants the Feds to get a warrant
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 19, 2024 17:05:12 GMT -5
Will Sen. Schumer allow a vote on an amendment that closes the loophole?
Probably not but I’d love for one of these establishment politicians to surprise me for a change…
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 20, 2024 9:20:17 GMT -5
It's not going to happen. Cable is already reporting there's movement by the repubs flipping their votes on this. You don't want to be hauled up in a dragnet don't become a Russian useful idiot or worse. Right, because the police never arrest innocent people. Like zenwalk's tag line says: everything for the government's friends. For everyone else there is the law.
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 21, 2024 7:29:08 GMT -5
Right, because the police never arrest innocent people. Like zenwalk's tag line says: everything for the government's friends. For everyone else there is the law. Sounds like a Trump and MAGA tagline.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 21, 2024 9:30:13 GMT -5
|
|