Controversial Surveillance Law Up for Renewal (Again) in April

Published

10 months 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.

US

YouTuber Jake Paul beats Mike Tyson as boos heard during controversial fight

Published

2 hours ago

November 16, 2024

admin

YouTuber Jake Paul beats Mike Tyson as boos heard during controversial fight

YouTuber-turned-boxer Jake Paul has defeated one of the greatest-ever fighters, former heavyweight world champion Mike Tyson, who is more than twice his age.

Paul, 27, won the bout via a unanimous points decision at the AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas – home of the Dallas Cowboys and the biggest NFL stadium in the US.

The fight was already controversial but then arguably failed to live up to the hype. Boos were heard from the crowd in the final two rounds, after a perceived lack of action.

Afterwards, the pair heaped praise on each other. Paul said: “This man is an icon and it’s just an honour to be able to fight him. And he’s obviously the toughest, baddest man on the planet.”

Tyson, 58, described Paul as a “good fighter” but dismissed the suggestion he was out to prove something.

“I didn’t prove nothing to anybody, only to myself,” he said.

Boxing careers compared

This was not Paul’s first professional fight. The American YouTube star made his debut in 2020, and his most high-profile clash was last year against Tyson Fury’s brother Tommy Fury, which he lost by a split decision.

The so-called “Problem Child” has since defeated former UFC contender Nate Diaz, professional boxer Andre August, former Gold Gloves champion Ryan Bourland and most recently MMA fighter Mike Perry.

In contrast, “Iron Mike” Tyson was ranked among the best heavyweight boxers of all time.

During his career, he knocked out 44 opponents – retiring from professional boxing in 2005 after defeat against Kevin McBride.

He returned to the ring in 2020 for a bout against fellow boxing icon Roy Jones, which ended in an unofficial draw.

‘Someone’s getting put to sleep’

Earlier this week, Paul said he believed the bout would not go the distance. “No, someone’s getting put to sleep,” he said. “It’s going to be a war, and we’re both heavy hitters. It’s not going the full 16 minutes.”

Tyson said: “I’ve been through so many ups and downs since my last fight with Kevin McBride.

“I’ve been in rehab. I’ve been in prison, been locked up. Never in a million years did I believe I’d be doing this.”

Several states would not allow the bout to go ahead, and the Texas Athletic Commission only agreed to the fight if there were changes, due to Tyson’s age.

It limited the contest to eight rounds lasting a maximum of two minutes instead of three. Both boxers were also required to wear heavier gloves, designed to lessen the force of punches.

The fight was initially scheduled for 20 July, but was postponed when Tyson suffered an ulcer flareup.

Taylor defends title

Meanwhile, among the undercard fights, Irish boxer Katie Taylor successfully defended her super lightweight world title against Puerto Rico’s Amanda Serrano.

But it was tight. Taylor claimed the rematch 95-94 for all three judges in an epic battle.

The bout came two and a half years after the pair fought at Madison Square Garden, which Taylor won on a split decision.

Bout suffered from buffering

Earlier in the evening thousands of Netflix users in the US reported problems with the coverage, with some posting on social media about buffering.

At one point, more than 98,000 people had reported issues according to Downdetector, which tracks outages.

US

Matt Gaetz: Speaker Mike Johnson will request report into Trump’s attorney general pick is kept secret

Published

2 hours ago

November 16, 2024

admin

Matt Gaetz: Speaker Mike Johnson will request report into Trump's attorney general pick is kept secret

US House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he will “strongly request” a report into allegations of sex trafficking against Matt Gaetz, who is the president-elect’s choice of attorney general, should not be released.

Mr Johnson said he was against publishing the House Ethics Committee report on Mr Gaetz, 42, who if approved by the Senate will become the nation’s top prosecutor once Donald Trump is sworn in as president on 20 January.

That’s despite Mr Gaetz having previously faced a nearly three-year Justice Department investigation into sex trafficking allegations involving a 17-year-old girl. He denies the allegations and has not faced criminal charges.

Mr Gaetz has also never worked as a prosecutor and has only worked in law for a few years at a local level.

He stepped down from Congress after Mr Trump announced him as his attorney general pick.

His resignation brought the investigation by the House Ethics Committee to an end – two days before it had been expected to release its report into the trafficking claims.

House Speaker Mr Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said of the probe: “I’m going to strongly request that the Ethics Committee not issue the report, because that is not the way we do things in the House.”

Politicians of both parties on the Senate Judiciary Committee have said they want to see the report on Mr Gaetz, as part of a Senate confirmation process for cabinet nominees that would start next year with public hearings.

Democrats have described the MAGA loyalist as “a gonzo agent of chaos” and his appointment a “red alert moment for our democracy”, while some Republican senators have also raised doubts about his suitability for the role.

Mr Johnson said he planned to urge House Ethics Committee chairman Michael Guest not to provide the report to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“The rules of the House have always been that a former member is beyond the jurisdiction of the Ethics Committee,” said Mr Johnson, who returned on Friday morning from meeting Mr Trump at the president-elect’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

“I think it’s a terrible breach of protocol and tradition and the spirit of the rule,” he added. “I think that would be a terrible precedent to set.”

Mr Johnson had said on Wednesday that as Speaker he could not be involved in deciding whether or not to release the report.

US

Malcolm X family brings $100m lawsuit against FBI, CIA and NYPD over ‘conspiracy to assassinate’ civil rights leader

Published

2 hours ago

November 16, 2024

admin

Malcolm X family brings 0m lawsuit against FBI, CIA and NYPD over 'conspiracy to assassinate' civil rights leader

A $100m (£79m) lawsuit has been brought against the CIA, FBI and New York Police Department (NYPD) who are accused of being involved in the 1965 assassination of civil rights leader Malcolm X.

The case, which has been filed in a federal court in Manhattan, New York, alleges that the agencies were aware of the assassination, they were involved in the plot and failed to stop the killing.

The legal action has been brought by Malcolm X’s three daughters along with his estate.

The NYPD and CIA have not yet responded to the claims while the FBI said it was “standard practice” not to comment on litigation.

Nicholas Biase, a spokesperson for the US Department of Justice, which is also included in the lawsuit, declined to respond.

Malcolm X was 39 when he was shot dead on 21 February 1965 on stage by three gunmen as he prepared to speak at the Audubon Ballroom in Manhattan.

At a news conference in New York on Friday, to announce the details of the lawsuit, attorney Benjamin Crump said: “The government fingerprints are all over the assassination of Malcolm X.

“We believe we have the evidence to prove it.”

For decades, questions have arisen over who was behind his murder.

Malcolm X rose to prominence as the national spokesman of the Nation of Islam, an African-American Muslim group which supported black separatism.

He broke away from the group in 1964 and moderated some of his earlier views on racial separation, which angered Nation of Islam members and resulted in death threats.

Three men were convicted of his murder but two of them were cleared in 2021 after investigators took a fresh look at the case. They concluded some evidence was shaky and authorities had held back some information.

In the lawsuit, which began its process in 2023, it is alleged the NYPD coordinated with federal law enforcement agencies to arrest the activist’s security guards days before the assassination.

It also claims police were intentionally removed from inside the ballroom where Malcolm X was killed and that federal agencies had personnel, including undercover agents, at the site but failed to protect him.

The lawsuit goes on to allege a “corrupt, unlawful, and unconstitutional” relationship between law enforcement and “ruthless killers… which was actively concealed, condoned, protected, and facilitated by government agents”.

Referring to Malcolm X’s family, the lawsuit states: “They did not know who murdered Malcolm X, why he was murdered, the level of NYPD, FBI and CIA orchestration, the identity of the governmental agents who conspired to ensure his demise, or who fraudulently covered up their role.”