Yes, Feinstein's a hypocrite, BUT . . .

[markpkessinger]

. . . what is at stake in the allegations concerning the CIA is very different from the issue of the NSA's overreach (of which I am no fan, and Feinstein's defense of which I have been very critical). Look, the issue of the CIA spying on members of Congress and their staffers is NOT the biggest issue here. The biggest issue is the CIA's alleged attempts to interfere with an ongoing investigation into possible misconduct by the CIA itself, an investigation being conducted by the elected body that has lawful oversight authority of the agency, and further, the attempted intimidation of Senate investigators by filing a crimes report with the Justice Department against the very Senate staffers who were working on the investigation and who took steps to protect the integrity of the investigation. If that is true as Feinstein has alleged, then the CIA has gone totally rogue, and the ramifications for a democratically elected government, and about the accountability of government agencies to the electorate, are enormous.

Sure Feinstein is a hypocrite. But, assuming you are really concerned about the burgeoning security state, if you allow this to be turned into a pissing match about who gets to spy on whom, you play right into the CIA's (and by extension, the NSA's) hands, thus making yourself a tool of the very security state you oppose. I would urge folks to set aside their like or dislike of Feinstein, and even their justified disgust at her hypocrisy, and focus instead on the enormously larger issue of government accountability to the elected representatives of the people.

[GeorgeGist]

1. I can do both.

[markpkessinger]

3. Fair enough . . .

. . . I've just been seeing comments and articles all over the web today reducing this issue to one of "Feinstein doesn't like it when the shoe is on the other foot," and failing to grasp the ramifications of what she has alleged.

[Dustlawyer]

5. Same here, ironic though, isn't it?

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Both issues are enormous, but I agree

I'm not sure that the CIA's gone rogue, they might be doing this stuff with their CEO's approval. Which I'm not sure is better.

[sibelian]

4. Well, she can be a unjustly maligned hypocrite, I suppose...

... but the other observation to be made is that if her oversight committee can't protect itself from the thing it's meant to be investigating then that's the last moral justification for allowing this organisation their power in the US as the CIA is clearly either:

1. actually kind of within the necessary margins of what spying organisations ordinarily do all over the world and it's better for is not to know what they do AND this particular iteration of 3 letters is too incompetent to cover itself up and therefore not fit for "purpose"

OR

2. Way out to hell and beyond past their morally justifiable remit and out of fucking control

Either way, they suck.

I favour postion 2, btw.

[The CCC]

6. Yes, Feinstein's a hypocrite, BUT . . .

If proven true. Then the only alternative is abolish the CIA. Then punishing to the fullest extent of the law those responsible for spying/torture.

[cascadiance]

7. Yes, this distinction should be pointed out, but should NOT minimize the issue of NSA spying on us!

[randome]

8. Except the NSA is NOT spying on us.

They do retain copies of phone metadata with legal warrants. That's a far cry from what Feinstein is claiming. And I'm mostly with her on this, although it remains to be seen what actually happened.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers. It's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[cascadiance]

11. Metadata is data on you that can used against you. That should NOT be minimized!

And I'm not comfortable with them saying that they don't keep the bulk data somewhere that this meta data is pointing to for later browsing, even if initially this data is not "looked at" or parsed when collected. There's a reason why that big spy facility in Utah is spending tons of our money to put in massive amounts of data storage and data servers in place, and I and many here don't believe it is just to go after terrorists or lawbreakers. Clapper lied to us once already in front of congress on what the NSA was doing. That clearly shows that you don't KNOW that they aren't spying on us and lying about it. Pols like Feinstein who's served on the intelligence committees and has campaigned for her buddies in congress to get key security cabinet positions probably have MORE knowledge than you do about what has been going on, and she shows clearly that she didn't even know the extent of their spying, or at least has in the past felt the need to keep quiet about if until now if she did.

[riderinthestorm]

9. Its the hypocrisy that DiFi and staffers can't be illegally surveilled but we can?

The government - ALL of the government - is supposed to be accountable to US citizens just as the CIA should be accountable to Congress.

But we don't have that and to a large degree that's Feinstein fault

[Iggo]

10. Yes, Feinstein's a hypocrite, AND . . .

...I can walk and chew gum.