Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private parties

[Dashinka 25,866]

Just now, smilesammich said:

smh. active investigations, ongoing. sit tight.

For a year.  I would have thought they might have had something so far, or is the FBI incompetent?

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

For a year.  I would have thought they might have had something so far, or is the FBI incompetent?

not just the fbi - not all of them have been ongoing for a year. and lots has happened within the past year. not sure you're aware of what all is going on in that arena since i'm not sure what media you will consider.

[Dashinka 25,866]

Just now, smilesammich said:

not just the fbi - not all of them have been ongoing for a year. and lots has happened within the past year. not sure you're aware of what all is going on in that arena since i'm not sure what media you will consider.

I read as much from as many sources as possible, and none of them have shown us anything other than conjecture and opinion based on agenda driven unnamed sources.  

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

I read as much from as many sources as possible, and none of them have shown us anything other than conjecture and opinion based on agenda driven unnamed sources.  

then i don't know what in the world you're reading.

[Dashinka 25,866]

Just now, smilesammich said:

then i don't know what in the world you're reading.

Educate me with facts and not made up supposition.

[yuna628 9,873]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So you are fine with any Administration using this for potentially political reasons?  I wasn't for the Patriot Act then, and not for it now. I would hope, although I have no faith, that the Congress would reign in the Section 702 program, but most likely they won't change it and it will just get worse.

There's no claim in the article of an administration using it for potential political reasons, but I'm not fine with any administration spying on their citizens for any reason unless it is gone through the proper investigative and legal process. A process which is often slow, tedious, and takes a lot of effort and time. But that's not good enough for many people. They'll say were under threat from terrorism and all sorts of wrong-doing and stuff like this 'keeps us safe'. The fact is the American people put the officials in there to allow this to happen in the past, did not speak up when it continued (and indeed convinced themselves it was a good thing), do not much care about it enough to even understand it, nor do the current officials, and most do not care about how it impacts their civil liberties now. How many times do people say ''oh I don't mind, if I'm not doing anything wrong, what's the harm?"

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

Educate me with facts and not made up supposition.

i'm not naive enough to waste my time in such a manner but this is the most concise list i found and i spent less than a minute looking. i suppose you believe all of the below is occurring because the dnc blew an election, that doesn't make logical sense to me but whatever..

 

• First, the intertwined Justice Department investigation, now led by a special counsel, into the ties between the Trump campaign and Russia and, reportedly, the possible cover-up.
• Second, the investigations led by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, which are broadly looking at Russian intervention in the 2016 election.
• Third, the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have been looking into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s conduct specifically — and have recently expanded their inquiry to the circumstances surrounding former FBI Director James Comey’s firing.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/19/15658246/trump-russia-fbi-investigation

[Dashinka 25,866]

3 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i'm not naive enough to waste my time in such a manner but this is the most concise list i found and i spent less than a minute looking. i suppose you believe all of the below is occurring because the dnc blew an election, that doesn't make logical sense to me but whatever..

 

• First, the intertwined Justice Department investigation, now led by a special counsel, into the ties between the Trump campaign and Russia and, reportedly, the possible cover-up.
• Second, the investigations led by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, which are broadly looking at Russian intervention in the 2016 election.
• Third, the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have been looking into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s conduct specifically — and have recently expanded their inquiry to the circumstances surrounding former FBI Director James Comey’s firing.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/19/15658246/trump-russia-fbi-investigation

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the basis for all of what you listed is all based on a media narrative that has transformed since the day Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Of course the whole Flynn thing was based on potentially illegally unmasking the name of an American citizen by either the NSA or FBI.  If he was some sort of traitor to our Republic, then let's hear the conversations.  Now it did reveal that he may have had some issues with his disclosures of foreign sources of income, but he was fired because of that.  Regardless, the whole basis for the above is still weak and without substance at this time.

[Dashinka 25,866]

12 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

There's no claim in the article of an administration using it for potential political reasons, but I'm not fine with any administration spying on their citizens for any reason unless it is gone through the proper investigative and legal process. A process which is often slow, tedious, and takes a lot of effort and time. But that's not good enough for many people. They'll say were under threat from terrorism and all sorts of wrong-doing and stuff like this 'keeps us safe'. The fact is the American people put the officials in there to allow this to happen in the past, did not speak up when it continued (and indeed convinced themselves it was a good thing), do not much care about it enough to even understand it, nor do the current officials, and most do not care about how it impacts their civil liberties now. How many times do people say ''oh I don't mind, if I'm not doing anything wrong, what's the harm?"

 

No the article does not claim political actions, but we do have the revelations by Evelyn Farkas and Susan Rice that bring that potential.

[smilesammich 10,727]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the basis for all of what you listed is all based on a media narrative that has transformed since the day Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Of course the whole Flynn thing was based on potentially illegally unmasking the name of an American citizen by either the NSA or FBI.  If he was some sort of traitor to our Republic, then let's hear the conversations.  Now it did reveal that he may have had some issues with his disclosures of foreign sources of income, but he was fired because of that.  Regardless, the whole basis for the above is still weak and without substance at this time.

i'm not ignoring anything. i do not agree with you that this is all based on a media narrative and political blah blah - not at all.

[Dashinka 25,866]

8 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i'm not ignoring anything. i do not agree with you that this is all based on a media narrative and political blah blah - not at all.

So what is the underlying crime being investigated for the past year?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Where is everyone getting 90+ pages?  It is like 33 and they are all one or two paragraphs.  Took me about five minutes to read.

 

Here is another excerpt.

 

"But a respected former Justice Department national security prosecutor questions if the searching has gotten too cavalier. AmyJeffress, the former top security adviser to former Attorney General Eric Holder, was appointed by the intelligence court in 2015 to give anindependent assessmentof the FBI’s record of compliance.

 

Jeffress concluded agents’ searches of NSA data now extend far beyond national security issues and thus were “overstepping” the constitutional protections designed to ensure the bureau isn’t violating Americans’ 4th Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure.

“The FBI procedures allow for really virtually unrestricted querying of the Section 702 data in a way the NSA and CIA have restrained it through their procedures,” she argued before the court in a sealed 2015 proceeding."

 

 

So  revoke the FISA court.  That is the root cause, none of this would be an issue where a normal warrant was involved.  We knew the FISA warrants were risky.

Edited May 26, 2017 by ccneat

[yuna628 9,873]

48 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

For a year.  I would have thought they might have had something so far, or is the FBI incompetent?

Investigations take time, and most of the details the public seek are details that may be compromising to the investigation. I always get amused when congress-people yell on tv that they want answers right now, or get frustrated with the lack of answers in briefings - they know the process, and they also know what the FBI can and cannot say. Do you want a sloppy not conclusive one, or a long, deliberative, and factual one? The findings may or may not end up being what you want in the end - but at least you'll know either way.

25 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

No the article does not claim political actions, but we do have the revelations by Evelyn Farkas and Susan Rice that bring that potential.

What you're talking about though is entirely different from the basis of this article and many of the articles that talk about extensive NSA spying on citizens. Speculative potential does not mean it happened, that's what the investigative process is for.

[yuna628 9,873]

2 minutes ago, ccneat said:

So  revoke the FISA court.  That is the root cause, non of this would be an issue where a normal warrant was involved.  We knew the FISA warrants were risky.

Yep. Revoke it. I triple dog dare 'em.

 

But we both know that will never happen.

 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

9 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Yep. Revoke it. I triple dog dare 'em.

 

But we both know that will never happen.

 

 

I know a secret court issuing secret warrants about topics and subjects no one can discuss and no serious advocate to stand up for the constitution, what could go wrong?

The surprise is that we have not had more problems.  The FBI and FISA court should be commended if this is the worst.  Still the risk to civil liberties with that system is high.