N.S.A.’s Intercepts Exceed Limits Set by Congress (N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress)

[kpete]

Source: New York Times

N.S.A.’s Intercepts Exceed Limits Set by Congress

By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN
Published: April 15, 2009

WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year, government officials said in recent interviews.

Several intelligence officials, as well as lawyers briefed about the matter, said the N.S.A. had been engaged in “overcollection” of domestic communications of Americans. They described the practice as significant and systemic, although one official said it was believed to have been unintentional.

The legal and operational problems surrounding the N.S.A.’s surveillance activities have come under scrutiny from the Obama administration, Congressional intelligence committees and a secret national security court, said the intelligence officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because N.S.A. activities are classified. Classified government briefings have been held in recent weeks in response to a brewing controversy that some officials worry could damage the credibility of legitimate intelligence-gathering efforts.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/16nsa.html?_r=1&hp

---

NYT report: National Security Agency spied on a member of Congress.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/15/nsa-congress-spying/

The New York Times’ Eric Lichtblau and James Risen report that the National Security Agency engaged in “overcollection” of e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans last year. The legal authority given to the NSA authorizes the surveillance of targets “reasonably believed” to be outside the United States. The Obama Justice Department said it “detected issues that raised concerns,” but claims that the problems have now been resolved. “(T)he issue appears focused in part on technical problems in the N.S.A.’s ability at times to distinguish between communications inside the United States and those overseas.” Lichtblau and Risen document one particular instance of misconduct involving the (wiretapping of a member of Congress):


---And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.

The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact — as part of a Congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 — with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman’s conversations, the official said.

The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.

[Muttocracy]

1. technical difficulties.. yuh huh... nt

[jwirr]

2. Given that the NSA was appointed by *ss & co. this should not surprise

us.

[Demeter]

3. Only ONE Congressman?

or only one they will admit to?

[OwnedByFerrets]

4. The secrets they know are ONE HUGE reason our

congress critters have no guts. And maybe even our president.

[Downwinder]

11. If they were as good as they claim

They would be able to stop spam, Nigerian scams, and credit care theft and find the missing WH e-mails.

[cliffordu]

14. Well....

:rofl:

Yep, you're right....

[boppers]

20. "Can't" and "Won't" are two different things.

If the missing WH emails crossed the proper perimeters, yes, they were logged and scanned, but ppossibly not archived.

WRT spam, scams, phishing (etc.), false positive rates are a serious problem.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. There Are No Consequences For Warrentless Wiretapping And Torture

Possessing marijuana, however - now that's a serious threat that should have serious consequences.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wuvuj]

28. Stealing a 6 pack of beer....

...can get you several years in some places...but if you are the CEO of a major bank and help destroy an economy...you get a BIG BONUS and protection.

So I'd guess...it IS who you know? Or maybe WHAT you know?

[FiveGoodMen]

68. Sick goddamn world we live in, isn't it?

Most of my family and acquaintances have no problem with this.

For which reason I utterly hate them.

[many a good man]

6. This is an OUTRAGE!

Surely there will be hell to pay.

[rhett o rick]

62. Your outrage is so noted. Now sit down.

:sarcasm:

[Wizard777]

7. Let me guess. Opps! Sorry.......

[chill_wind]

8. Makes the recent injection of the "sovereign immunity" claim by Holder DOJ rather interesting

Did Holder Know About the “Significant Misconduct” When DOJ Claimed Sovereign Immunity?
By: emptywheel Wednesday April 15, 2009 8:19 pm

(...)

Today, just 11 days later, we learn that,

As part of that investigation, a senior F.B.I. agent recently came forward with what the inspector general’s office described as allegations of “significant misconduct” in the surveillance program, people with knowledge of the investigation said. Those allegations are said to involve the question of whether the N.S.A. targeted Americans in eavesdropping operations based on insufficient evidence tying them to terrorism.

So when Eric Holder's DOJ made expansive claims arguing that no one could sue federal employees for being wrongly wiretapped under Bush's illegal program, did he know this revelation from Glenn Fine's investigation into the wiretapping program? Were they thinking not so much of the Jewel plaintiffs, whose claim was focused on the dragnet collection of US person data, but of the Americans targeted in what Glenn Fine's office considers "significant misconduct"?

Because if Holder did know (and the timing suggests it is quite likely he did), it makes those cynical claims of sovereign immunity all the more disturbing.

More: http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/

[disndat]

34. Holder/Obama

playing cat and mouse with the Repugs obstructionists?

[PSPS]

9. Only if a congressman gets wiretapped do they care. The rest of us? Not so much.

[groovedaddy]

29. Er, try not at all. They didn't care about the Dem Texas Legislators who were

tracked down by Homeland Security.

[Downwinder]

10. If the Gov. can access all of our communication

why shouldn't we, the public, have access to all Gov. communications or at least records on the web? Can a Freedom of Information request be made for all Gov telephone records? Make one hell of an online database.

[mmonk]

31. Hah. I would love to see that. If there is no privacy for citizens,

it would seem there would be no law protecting our rulers either.

[KansDem]

50. Yeah, I'd like to tap the phones of the Bush Family

Why is it only they can listen in on the phone calls of others?

[L. Coyote]

12. Obama and Holder must, at times, feel like they inherited a criminal enterprise

How do you bring the USG under control after Bush?

[EFerrari]

15. No kidding. It's like you're Michael and you still think you can get out.

[OwnedByFerrets]

38. Thats not a bad analogy.

[Truth2Tell]

16. And of course they are helpless

to do anything other than continue it. Right?

:eyes:

[L. Coyote]

42. No. USG is immense, multitudes of people functioning in numerous roles

and they are in charge of it all. That's a big plate and pundits each want their favorite niche micro-tuned right now by Obama's own hand, it seems, and comments sometimes seem to assume that Obama does micro-manage every action by USG.

I see the urgencies of situations, court orders, dictating which actions are taken and find it difficult to imagine how the new leaders can handle the size of the plate? That tempers my expectations of how quickly change happens, not what change must happen.

[Truth2Tell]

51. Many of these issues

would simply require a one sentence order from the President to fix.

Obama to Emanuel: "All domestic wiretapping without the express consent of the FISA Court must end immediately. No exceptions. Anyone in my administration who violates this will have their ass handed to them. Make it happen now."

Done. Size of the plate my ass.

[L. Coyote]

53. Actually, laws provide parameters for decisions. Obama is not a dictator, and everyone from

Obama down has to adhere to the Constitution, existing law, and the rules and regulations of governance. That may not prevent Bush leftovers from doing what they want to do on Obama's watch.

[Truth2Tell]

55. The laws already exist. They don't need to be changed.

All that is required is an unequivocal order from the President to stop violating them.

Your insistence that somehow these decisions are the result of "Bush leftovers" is bizarre. There is no evidence of that whatsoever. None.

Maybe you don't want to believe that Obama would do these same unconstitutional things so you construct elaborate rationalizations to protect your image of him? That would be the generous explanation of the motives of you and other knee-jerk apologists. Other explanations would be less benevolent.

[L. Coyote]

60. I have a tree full of maybes. Presidents don't issu orders like don't violate the law!

It is assumed officials adhere to laws.
That's what they are for, after all.

If someone is violating the law, don't blame Obama first.
And I don't think they can use the excuse,
"I didn't get the order not to from Obama."

I've never endorsed Obama. I'm still watching and waiting.
I did indicate he was a preferable choice to Palin and McSame.
I invested in a tee-shirt, but it is in storage, not worn.

I think we are wiser to make judgements about politicians in light of their actions, not their promises. Call me old, or old-fashioned!

[Truth2Tell]

61. fair response.

Yet trees full of maybes must someday ripen into firmly held views. One can only withhold judgment for so long without abandoning all principle. I feel I can make fairly firm judgments on specific issues like wiretapping without coming to broad conclusions about Obama generally. Some maybes still in my tree as well.

[gulfcoastliberal]

66. Do you consider executive orders illegal?

All Obama has to do is put that text in an executive order - done.

[No Elephants]

54. Only by prosecuting past transgressions, but Obama wants to look only forward. .

[bjobotts]

13. Like they'd regulate themselves...riiight.

[OnyxCollie]

17. K&R. nt

[McCamy Taylor]

18. They spied on the press. They spied on Congress. It was a blackmail ops set up in early 2001

well before 9/11.

[boppers]

25. It's older than you think.

Narus has been inspecting voice since 1997, Snort (and its derivatives) have been doing the same with IP since 1998, and the tools that both are built on (packet capture and inspection tools) date back to the earliest network protocols, with actual taps going back at least as far as 1969 (yes, 40 years ago).

What changed, and made things "interesting", is that massive amounts of communications moved onto easily tappable bulk communications links, and legal arguments were made that tried to map older phone technology to newer technology.... poorly.

The existing law, which used to be "must get a permit to tap one line" became difficult to deal with, when that "one line" was carrying traffic from millions of people at *any* given second... and if that "one line" was in international waters, that meant that a single authorized tap for, oh, "Fred Terrorist who lives in Singapore" meant that all traffic going into the water to all of Asia, from the US, could be tapped.

In order to not waste time dealing with crushing amounts of data, smarter filtering had to be set up, so only "Fred Terrorist", and his known contacts, would be tapped, logged, and archived, from that line... and here's where it gets sticky with the congressman. The congressman talked to a "terrorist". This placed his overseas traffic on a "tappable" list, because traffic passing overseas is tappable without a warrant. What this winds up meaning, in practice, is that *all* traffic, to or from that congressman, is now collected.... *if* it travels onto a multi-national data link.

The final piece, closing the loop, is that many of the larger data/voice carriers don't only have "sea" links, there's sea, satellite, (etc.) spanning nations. Since carriers *DON'T* need a warrant to tap their own links, (but *DO* have to comply with taps), it's in the carrier's interest to just grab all relevant traffic, and let "somebody else" handle the problem of sorting out "legal" and "illegal" captured traffic.

[leveymg]

33. Did NSA stop using Naru/Verint diverter equipment? Or, are the backdoor taps to a "friendly" intel

service still in place?

[rpannier]

19. Evesdrop on one Congressman an outrage

Eavesdrop on millions of Americans...well, that's okay.

Kind of like...Kill one person you're a murderer, kill thousands you're a conqueror

[northernlights]

23. so it's illegal to wiretap congress?

but perfectly ok to wiretap the little people.

Uh-huh. I get it. Only the little people are spied on. Only little people pay taxes. Only little people go to jail for kidnapping, torture and murder.

[ima_sinnic]

24. I'm sure they will now reform that policy to ensure that only private citzens can be wiretapped,

not members of Congress.

[dcindian]

26. Congress sets up a law to protect themselves and yet we

have no such protection? Odd the constitution is the other way around it seems this government has run amok.

[barbtries]

27. they're worried about their credibility

fuck the people's rights, the NSA may lose credibility.

this reminds me of the woman who killed my daughter. she had gone out of her lane to pick up bekah's body, dragged it down the street, dumped it in the median then went home and passed out. when she was arrested she told the police she was upset because she'd been fired from the bars (where she'd been making a scene all that day and into the night - the firings had happened more than a year prior to the day she killed my daughter). she said it had "ruined her reputation." nothing about having killed a human being. she was upset because these former employers had ruined her reputation.

same with the NSA. they could care less that they have committed grievous wrongs except so far as it might impinge on their credibility.

[lostnfound]

36. That is

heartbreaking. May God comfort your broken heart. I am so sorry and horrified to read of this tragedy.
What a lovely name 'Bekah'. Was it short for Rebecca or does it stand alone?

[barbtries]

40. short for

Rebekah. thank you for your thoughts.

[mod mom]

30. I wonder if this was Bob Ney who passed backchannel dialogue w Iran to Rove.

February 26, 2007
Ex-Congressional Aide: Karl Rove Personally Received (And Ignored) Iranian Peace Offer in 2003

As Seymour Hersh reports the Pentagon has created a special panel to plan a bombing attack on Iran, we examine how the Bush administration ignored a secret offer to negotiate with Iran in 2003. We speak with the National Iranian American Council’s Trita Parsi, a former aide to Republican congressman Bob Ney.

…
While the Bush administration continues to insist it has no plans to go to war with Iran, the New Yorker magazine is reporting the Pentagon has created a special panel to plan a bombing attack on Iran that could be implemented within 24 hours of getting the go-ahead from President Bush. According to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the planning group was established within the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in recent months.

In response to the report, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman denied the US was planning to go to war with Iran and said “To suggest anything to the contrary is simply wrong, misleading and mischievous.” Whitman went on to say the White House is continuing to address concerns in the region through diplomatic efforts.

This comes against the backdrop of last week’s allegation that Bush’s chief advisor Karl Rove personally received a copy of a secret offer from the Iranian government to hold negotiations four years ago. The Bush administration decided to ignore the grand bargain offer. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently claimed she had never even seen the document. At the time Iran said it would consider far-reaching compromises on its nuclear program, relations with Hezbollah and Hamas and support for a Palestinian peace agreement with Israel.

-snip

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/26/ex_congressional_aide_karl_rove_personally

[Soylent Brice]

32. which congressman, and why? who wants to bet it was

a democrat?

[pleah]

35. K&R

[ElsewheresDaughter]

37. O boy...some more of Cheney's "stay behinds" in the NSA, CIA and DOD ...scary for the next decade

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Amonester]

52. I never trusted the McCain/Palin idio-oligarchy to ever end this...

so I'm glad they "lost"

although I understand the "change" we were hoping we would get will clearly never happen before the end of times

never give up

[HillWilliam]

41. And just yesterday a "leak" to NYT from the CIA basically blackmails

the President with a bigass dare to do anything to the intelligence community WRT cleaning it up.

The whole damn shootin-match is out of control and gone completely rogue.

We can thank Poppy Bush for much of that.

Obama has the balls, I believe. But does he have the backing and the leverage to root the Bush-mafia out of what used to be a decent intelligence community?

[BlueJessamine]

43. NSA Wiretapping: Justice Department Reining It In

Source: The Huffington Post

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has reined in electronic surveillance by the National Security Agency after finding the agency had improperly accessed American phone calls and e-mails.

The problems were discovered during a review of the intelligence activities, the Justice Department said in a statement Wednesday night.

The New York Times, which first reported the matter on its Web site, said the NSA had been improperly intercepting communications by Americans.

In its statement, the Justice Department said it has taken "comprehensive steps to correct the situation and bring the program into compliance."

The Justice Department did not elaborate on what problems it found.

Once corrective measures were taken, Attorney General Eric Holder sought authorization for renewing the surveillance program, officials said.

Government officials have also briefed lawmakers on the issue.



Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/16/nsa-wiretapping-justice-d_n_187616.html

[derby378]

44. I'm not convinced yet (n/t)

[ananda]

45. Me.. I would like to see all wiretapping and surveillance..

.. subject to court order and judicial scrutiny.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

46. Pinko.

[SkyDaddy7]

48. Right!

It must be done legally because who know what horrible plans these right wing hate groups have planned! I just have bad feeling we are going to see another Oklahoma City Bombing or an Eric Rudolph or worse?

[harmonicon]

47. "improperly"?

Such a polite way to say "illegally".

[peace13]

49. Reset the laws to read as they did before * got his dirty hands on them.

Get your warrants like you have always been allowed to under the law. Stop stealing the rights of the American People. If you persist in this illegal spying you are no better than the murderer in chief was.

[No Elephants]

56. Renewing WHAT surveillance program, specifically?

[Uncle Joe]

57. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.:thumbsup:

[Uncle Joe]

58. P.S. I've tried to recommend this thread, but a bug error has prevented me from doing so. n/t

[fascisthunter]

59. we are becoming more and more like a Police State

[rhett o rick]

63. Wouldn't it be cool if President Obama used the NSA to spy on the bush crime family.

anyone wonder what Jeb is up to nowadays?

[L. Coyote]

64. The FBI does domestic federal crime inquiries. They work for the DoJ ...

If Obama did that, the FBI would have to investigate. The NSA "cannot" do domestic spying, except very narrowly when .... (okay, bring in the trainload of elephants) ...

[rhett o rick]

65. When you say, "The NSA "cannot" do domestic spying", do you mean they

can't physically, technologically, or are limited by some memos? I bet the bush crime family keeps in touch with their long time friends the bin Laden family. Also, they most likely contact the Saudi's on a regular basis. Seems like good enough excuse to spy on them to me.

[karynnj]

67. Remember the John Bolton trial where he would not provide

information on some of the people wire tapped. Biden, Kerry and others really grilled him on this but he never produced them --- and he was never approved by the SFRC. I wonder whether he was involved in trying to spy on the member of Congress.

[Hydra]

69. Big Brother is watching

As someone pointed out, Bush was bringing all of these programs into the mainstream from the shadows...now they're just going back into the shadows again.

As someone told me once, "I think it's likely that the attack Pearl Harbor was known beforehand and allowed to happen as a justification to enter the war...but were they wrong to do that? Wasn't it worth it for us to stop the Nazis?"

Me: "There are always better ways to do things than to sacrifice people."

In this case, sacrifice was/is desirable to doing the right thing.