Controversial Surveillance Law Up for Renewal (Again) in April

Published

1 year ago

February 1, 2024

admin

Almost lost in recent hubbub over claims that the SwiftKelce romance is a CIA psyop, the likelihood the leading presidential candidates are mental turnips, and the tussle between the federal government and Texas over border control is the fact that the feds are spying on us and want authorization to continue snooping. Debate last year over renewing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act held Congress and the president to a brief extension before the holidays. That leaves legislators arguing the law’s fate before an April deadline, with none of the controversy over spying and privacy yet settled.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you. Email(Required) PhoneThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Submit

Δ Brief Extension for a Bad Law

“I…thank the Congress for its extension of title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” read a White House statement on President Joe Biden’s December 22 signing of the National Defense Authorization Act. “My Administration looks forward to working with the Congress on the reauthorization of this vital national security authority as soon as possible in the new year. While I am pleased to support the critical objectives of the NDAA, I note that certain provisions of the Act raise concerns.”

“Raise concerns” is putting it mildly. Congress did no more than kick the can on extending sunsetting FISA powers to April 19 because the surveillance authorized by the law is deeply intrusive and worries civil libertarians in the ranks of Democrats and Republicans, in both the legislative and executive branches, and among the public at large. Those “concerns” may, if we’re lucky, torpedo the whole law.

Nominally, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) “enables the Intelligence Community (IC) to collect, analyze, and appropriately share foreign intelligence information about national security threats,” according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. But, like so many powers government officials find useful, it’s been applied far beyond its original justification over the years, including to the communications of Americans here at home. “Foreign” Intelligence Looks Awfully Domestic

Last April and July, the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee held hearings to examine “the FBI’s abuses of its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorities, discuss the FBI’s failures to implement meaningful reforms to prevent its abuses, and address the broad issue of warrantless mass surveillance on American citizens.”

A week after the second hearing, declassified documents offered glimpses of how FISA is misused, including improper FBI surveillance of a U.S. senator, a state lawmaker, and a judge.

“The revelation that 702 is used against ‘foreign governments and related entities’ directly impacts Americans’ privacy, as American journalists, businesspeople, students and others all have legitimate reason to communicate with foreign governments,” Sen. Ron Wyden (DOre.) responded. “The fact they can be swept up in 702 collection further highlights the need for reforms to protect their privacy.”

Then, in September, the U.S. government’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) weighed in with a report raising concerns about the use and abuse of FISA’s Section 702.

“The Board finds that Section 702 poses significant privacy and civil liberties risks, most notably from U.S. person queries and batch queries” in which multiple search terms are run through the system as part of a single action, according to the board’s Report on the Surveillance Program Operated Pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. “Section 702’s targeting presents a number of privacy risks and harms by authorizing surveillance of a large number of targets, providing only programmatic review of a surveillance program, allowing extensive incidental collection, and causing inadvertent collection.”

How significant are those risks? The FBI has searched its gathered information millions of times for information on “U.S. persons” including citizens, residents, and businesses. “For example, in the twelve-month period ending November 30, 2021, FBI reported 3,394,053 U.S. person queries consisting of 2,964,643 unique query terms, approximately 1.9 million of which were associated with a single cyber threat,” noted the PCLOB.

While FISA is supposed to be directed at foreign threats and only incidentally implicate Americans, some of the queries found by the report were explicitly domestic in nature, including those “related to instances of civil unrest and protests.” The PCLOB, though divided, called for reforms.

The White House National Security Council promptly rejected suggestions that searches about U.S. persons should require court approval, claiming such a safeguard would be “operationally unworkable.” That just added to concerns. After all, if people repeatedly point out abuses of a foreign intelligence law to conduct domestic snooping, and officials deny that’s a problem worth addressing, then the existence of the law and the powers it authorizes should be reconsidered. Reform or Kill the Law?

“Section 702 is set to expire at the end of 2023. We call on Congress to significantly reform the law, or allow it to sunset,” urged the ACLU.

“Congress must end or radically change the unconstitutional spying program enabled by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA),” agrees the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

Promising vehicles for reforming the surveillance law are found in the Government Surveillance Reform Act and the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, both of which enjoy bipartisan support in Congress.

“The Government Surveillance Reform Act would prohibit warrantless queries of information collected under Section 702 to find communications or certain information of or about U.S. persons,” explains EFF. The group says the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Act does much the same as well as “prohibit law enforcement from purchasing Americans’ data that they would otherwise need a warrant to obtain” and it also limits surveillance authority renewal to three years.

“A warrant requirement would amount to a de facto ban, because query applications either would not meet the legal standard to win court approval; or because, when the standard could be met, it would be so only after the expenditure of scarce resources,” objected FBI Director Christopher Wray when he addressed the Senate Intelligence Committee in December.

Wray may not have made quite the point that he intended. A de facto ban on abusive domestic surveillance? That sounds like a good start for reforming a law that’s been put to bad use.

Politics

Chancellor Rachel Reeves dodges wealth tax calls from predecessor

Published

8 mins ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Chancellor Rachel Reeves dodges wealth tax calls from predecessor

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has dodged calls from her predecessor Anneliese Dodds for a wealth tax to be considered ahead of this autumn’s budget.

When Sir Keir Starmer became Labour leader in 2020, Ms Dodds was his first pick for shadow chancellor. However, she did not last long and was replaced by Ms Reeves, who then got the government job after last year’s election win.

Speaking to the Sky News political editor Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Ms Dodds said she had examined wealth taxes when she was briefly in the shadow chancellor job and how one could be implemented.

She said: “I would hope the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence, as well as other changes that have been put forward.”

Asked today if about Ms Dodds’ intervention, Ms Reeves said: “Decisions around tax are decisions that are made at a budget and we’ll make those decisions in the appropriate way, but the number-one priority of this government is to grow the economy.

“And that means bringing more investment into Britain, creating more good jobs paying decent wages here in Britain.

Listen here to hear Ms Dodds’ full comments:

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

“We’ve got to get the balance right on taxation because we want that investment, we want those jobs to come here.

“That’s why we’re reforming the planning system, secured three trade deals in the first year of this Labour government, cutting back on unnecessary regulation, and reforming our pension system to unlock money for businesses to be able to invest here in the UK.”

The government’s financial position is stretched ahead of the next budget, due at the end of autumn.

Ms Reeves has committed herself to not changing her fiscal rules, leaving little wiggle room to avoid tax rises or spending cuts.

This is due to the government’s inability to save money through policies like welfare reform, which were gutted due to a rebellion of backbench Labour MPs.

Last week, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds branded the suggestion of a wealth tax “daft” – but he has less influence over the writing of the budget than the chancellor.

Politics live: Tory MP calls for more deportations

Meanwhile, reports from the Daily Telegraph suggested that Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner backed increasing taxes, including reinstating the pensions lifetime allowance and a higher corporation tax level for banks.

Ms Dodds also wants to see those considered.

World

Cambodian soldiers returned by Thailand after ceasefire deal

Published

8 mins ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Cambodian soldiers returned by Thailand after ceasefire deal

Two Cambodian soldiers have been returned by Thailand ahead of a key meeting aimed at maintaining a ceasefire between the countries.

In Bangkok, Thai government spokesperson Jirayu Houngsub said on Friday that two Cambodian soldiers had been sent back, and the remaining 18 were being processed for violating immigration law.

“The Cambodian soldiers intruded on Thai territory and the army took them into custody, treating them based on humanitarian principles,” he said.

In a statement, the Cambodian defence ministry asked Thailand to return all the detained soldiers.

“Cambodia is actively engaging in negotiations to secure their release, and reiterates its firm call for their immediate
and unconditional release in accordance with the international humanitarian law,” a ministry spokesperson said.

It follows days of deadly fighting along the Thai-Cambodian border which saw at least 43 people killed and left over 300,000 people displaced.

The violence – the worst fighting between the neighbours in over a decade – ended with a truce reached on Monday following a push from Malaysia and calls from US President Donald Trump who threatened to hold off tariff negotiations with both countries until fighting ceased.

Thailand and Cambodia previously faced tariffs of 36% for sending goods to the US, their largest export markets.

Following further negotiations, they will now pay a 19% tariff, the White House announced on Friday.

Cambodia said Friday it plans to nominate Mr Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize over his intervention, according to its deputy prime minister.

Pakistan said in June it would recommend Trump for the prize for his work in helping resolve a conflict with India.

Officials from both Thailand and Cambodia will be meeting in Malaysia next week for talks aimed at maintaining the ceasefire along the disputed border.

The two nations have been at loggerheads over border areas for decades, and simmering tensions escalated into an exchange of gunfire, shelling and rockets on last week, with both sides accusing one another of initiating the violence.

Both countries recalled their ambassadors, and Thailand closed its border crossings with Cambodia.

Relations between the pair deteriorated sharply after an armed confrontation in May that killed a Cambodian soldier. Nationalist passions on both sides have further inflamed the situation.

Environment

Tesla (TSLA) is not paying its bills and it is destroying small American businesses

Published

17 mins ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Tesla (TSLA) is not paying its bills and it is destroying small American businesses

Tesla (TSLA) is not paying its bills, and this has led to at least two small American businesses going bankrupt. The automaker had over $110 million in liens with contractors over the last 5 years.

CNN released a new report that examines lien claims from contractors hired by Elon Musk’s companies in Texas, particularly Tesla.

In Texas, contractors have filed liens for more than $110 million against Tesla in the last five years. Over $24 million is still allegedly owed to dozens of businesses, according to the report.

In two cases, contractors, most often small American businesses, had to file for bankruptcy due to the unpaid bills.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The report highlights the example of a small pipe welding business that landed a multi-million-dollar contract with Tesla to build the Gigafactory Texas in Austin in 2022.

The owner, Jennifer Meissner, dedicated her whole crew to the project for a year, hired more people, and bought new equipment for the project, including some with loans she guaranteed herself:

For the first seven years Meissner’s company was in business, she prided herself on not once being late to pay her workers, she told CNN. After securing the business deal with Tesla in 2022, she said her company’s annual revenue grew exponentially, and she hired even more employees. With business booming, she was also hopeful that she would finally be able to start setting aside money for her special needs daughter, whom she adopted at the age of seven.

Her dream quickly turned into a nightmare when Tesla stopped paying its bills. It started putting incredible pressure on Meissner’s company, leading her to take more loans, thinking that Tesla would eventually pay.

Eventually, it led to her inability to pay her own employees and subcontractors, and ultimately, it contributed to her own bankruptcy.

Tesla ultimately paid $650,000 to cover her subcontractors, but claimed it was “overbilled.”

Another local small business, Full Circle Technologies, found itself in a similar situation after Tesla didn’t pay them $600,000 for installing security systems at the factory:

In bankruptcy filings, Full Circle Technologies said Tesla owed it nearly $600,000 and that it was “forced to take on short term high interest loans to bridge the gap between performing the work for Tesla and the payment for its services.” When a creditor began to levy the company’s bank accounts, the company said it had no option but to file for bankruptcy. Tesla then made its own claim in the bankruptcy hearings, stating Full Circle actually owed the carmaker money for allegedly breaching its contract. The two companies ultimately settled, but Full Circle CEO Abheeshek Sharma told CNN that Tesla was released from its obligation without paying a cent.

Another case involved Sun Coast Resources, a company that delivered fuel to Tesla’s factory, claiming that the automaker wasn’t paying millions in bills.

In this case, Tesla never denied receiving the fuel or subpar service, but it provided a myriad of procedural reasons to explain why it did not pay.

The case was publicized a bit earlier this year, and it was reportedly solved following the publicity.

All these cases are linked to Tesla, but some are pointing out that it is Elon Musk’s modus operandi, as his other companies also have a lot of lien claims against them.

The report found seven companies that filed for bankruptcy after Twitter simply stopped paying their bills after Musk acquired the company.

One of Tesla’s subcontractors said about Musk:

“His goal is to run through everything now – he doesn’t care what or who that impacts – to save the future of the world,” said one entrepreneur about his impression of Musk. He spoke with CNN anonymously and said he remains a fan of Musk but that Tesla has a reputation in Austin of leaving contractors desperate to get paid – noting that his company had to take out extra lines of credit while awaiting payment from Tesla. “Tesla was probably one of the only companies we did business with where it just felt like they absolutely did not care about putting a company out of business.”

In one of the lien cases, Tesla’s own outside counsel agreed that Tesla is not great at paying on time. He said: “I don’t disagree that it does take Tesla some time to pay, that goes for legal bills, too … I know it full well.”

Electrek’s Take

It’s quite something for someone to say that a company “doesn’t care about putting another company out of business by not paying what you owe them” and “I’m still a fan” in the same breath.

The excuse of “saving the future of the world” doesn’t make sense if it also happens to “coincidentally” result in Musk becoming extremely wealthy while his contractors go bankrupt.

If that’s the case, the goal is not saving the future; it’s getting rich.

Regarding the claims in the report, Tesla has a reputation for poor payments. That much is clear when its own outside counsel complains about it in the middle of defending Tesla against claims of not paying its bills.

Some of that is simply due to things slipping between the seat cushions. At any given time, Tesla has about $13 billion in accounts payable.

But it seems to be its way of doing business also because over $100 million in liens in Texas alone is concerning and that’s just for Tesla. Musk has employed a similar approach at other companies, including telling Twitter contractors that they will only pay when forced to.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.