How Nancy Pelosi saved the NSA.

[DucatiMonster696]

Funny how democrats like Nancy pretend to care about civil liberties but at the same time she actively lobbied to save the NSA in one of the most pivotal votes that would of eroded the NSA's ability to spy on US citizens had it succeeded.

How Nancy Pelosi Saved the NSA Surveillance Program

The obituary of Rep. Justin Amash's amendment to claw back the sweeping powers of the National Security Agency has largely been written as a victory for the White House and NSA chief Keith Alexander, who lobbied the Hill aggressively in the days and hours ahead of Wednesday's shockingly close vote. But Hill sources say most of the credit for the amendment's defeat goes to someone else: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. It's an odd turn, considering that Pelosi has been, on many occasions, a vocal surveillance critic.

But ahead of the razor-thin 205-217 vote, which would have severely limited the NSA's ability to collect data on Americans' telephone records if passed, Pelosi privately and aggressively lobbied wayward Democrats to torpedo the amendment, a Democratic committee aid with knowledge of the deliberations tells The Cable.

"Pelosi had meetings and made a plea to vote against the amendment and that had a much bigger effect on swing Democratic votes against the amendment than anything Alexander had to say," said the source, keeping in mind concerted White House efforts to influence Congress by Alexander and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. "Had Pelosi not been as forceful as she had been, it's unlikely there would've been more Democrats for the amendment."

With 111 liberal-to-moderate Democrats voting for the amendment alongside 94 Republicans, the vote in no way fell along predictable ideological fault lines. And for a particular breed of Democrat, Pelosi's overtures proved decisive, multiple sources said.

"Pelosi had a big effect on more middle-of-the road hawkish Democrats who didn't want to be identified with a bunch of lefties [voting for the amendment]," said the aide. "As for the Alexander briefings: Did they hurt? No, but that was not the central force, at least among House Democrats. Nancy Pelosi's political power far outshines that of Keith Alexander's."

But despite the minority leader's instrumental role in swaying the vote, you won't find her taking credit: She's busy protecting her left flank from liberal supporters of Amash's amendment -- some of whom openly booed her at last month's Netroots Nation conference where she defended President Obama's NSA surveillance program.

When contacted, a Pelosi aide did not dispute the minority leader's assertive role in influencing Democrats, but passed along a letter Pelosi sent to the president today raising skepticism about the NSA's surveillance powers.

"Dear Mr. President," reads the letter. "Although the amendment was defeated 205-217, it is clear that concerns remain about the continued implementation of the program in its current form. Although some of us voted for and others against the amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and concerns about the current 215 collection program."

The letter goes on to question whether the bulk metadata collection program sufficiently protects the privacy of Americans, whether it could be tailored more narrowly and whether the law is being implemented in a manner consistent with Congress's intent. An aide later emphasized that Pelosi did note declare an official leadership position against the amendment, meaning there was no whip or count established to see how Democrats would vote.

Pelosi is no stranger to intelligence issues; she was a member of the House's intelligence committee in the aftermath of the September 9/11 attacks. In recent years, she's grown increasingly skeptical of surveillance powers authorized by the PATRIOT Act, which she voted against in 2005 when it was up for reauthorization and again in February. "Well, I didn't vote for the PATRIOT Act the last time it was up," she said today, at her weekly press briefing. "I don't want anybody to misunderstand a vote against the Amash resolution yesterday."

At the briefing, she emphasized her current effort circulating a letter for members to sign expressing concern over how metadata is collected. "The Administration is the custodian of the information. The ownership belongs to the American people," she said. "And we, as their Representatives, have to make decisions about it, we have to know more about it."

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p...ncy_pelosi_saved_the_nsa_surveillance_program

Additionally on a side note the White House has erased the "Change.gov" page which contained the promises made by Obama back in 2008 which was created by his transition team.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...istleblowers-just-disappeared-changegov.shtml

 

[Attic]

You say funny I say standard.

 

[bradley]

The only remaining injustice would have been the Wayback Machine's IP being seized by the FBI. At least, that's what Hugo Chávez would have done.

 

[Attic]

Additionally on a side note the White House has erased the "Change.gov" page which contained the promises made by Obama back in 2008 which was created by his transition team.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...istleblowers-just-disappeared-changegov.shtml

1984 shit right there. Liberals and conservatives need to get on board and start condemning this crap.


The more infallible an administration is, the more dangerous it is.

 

[gevorg]

Additionally on a side note the White House has erased the "Change.gov" page which contained the promises made by Obama back in 2008 which was created by his transition team.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...hangegov.shtml

Pants on fire!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's ok. Pelosi and Obama endorse it.

Ten years ago there were "principled" people who objected to things like this supposedly because they were wrong. It appears that what they objected to was Bush and not what he embraced.

Yes Obama the Peace prize winner. Suckered.

 

[TerryMathews]

It's ok. Pelosi and Obama endorse it.

Ten years ago there were "principled" people who objected to things like this supposedly because they were wrong. It appears that what they objected to was Bush and not what he embraced.

Yes Obama the Peace prize winner. Suckered.

You're only saying that because he's a white African. Racist.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You're only saying that because he's a white African. Racist.

Well at least the "you don't like Obama so that means you are racist" types are not as active these days.

No wonder why I'm cynical. I haven't much reason to trust anyone in DC when they say good morning.

 

[Attic]

Term limits. Yea I know the pres and all.

But CONgress would be well contained by imposing term limits on the rabid dogs that chew away at our liberties and financial well being through their ability run free and untroubled by such a clear border as term limits.

Get Feinstein and her Ultra wealthy husband out so they can stop passing massive pork to benefit their estate and Pelosi, just put her down FFS. Pelosi belongs in laguna beach running an art store/coffee shop where her wayward mind is still entertaining but much less damaging on a national scale.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Term limits. Yea I know the pres and all.

But CONgress would be well contained by imposing term limits on the rabid dogs that chew away at our liberties and financial well being through their ability run free and untroubled by such a clear border as term limits.

Get Feinstein and her Ultra wealthy husband out so they can stop passing massive pork to benefit their estate and Pelosi, just put her down FFS. Pelosi belongs in laguna beach running an art store/coffee shop where her wayward mind is still entertaining but much less damaging on a national scale.

I think that's become already worked around. Individuals may come and go but partisan influence remains forever. We need some control over both. I'd love to see a recall mechanism in place to provide for accountability in office.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

I think that's become already worked around. Individuals may come and go but partisan influence remains forever. We need some control over both. I'd love to see a recall mechanism in place to provide for accountability in office.

I'd like to remove corporate financing of elected officials.

 

[mshan]

Meta-Data?:

"The NSA has trillions of telephone calls and emails in their databases that they've collected over the last several years," Greenwald told ABC News' George Stephanopoulos. "And what these programs are, are very simple screens, like the ones that supermarket clerks or shipping and receiving clerks use, where all an analyst has to do is enter an email address or an IP address, and it does two things. It searches that database and lets them listen to the calls or read the emails of everything that the NSA has stored, or look at the browsing histories or Google search terms that you've entered, and it also alerts them to any further activity that people connected to that email address or that IP address do in the future."

Greenwald explained that while there are "legal constraints" on surveillance that require approval by the FISA court, these programs still allow analysts to search through data with little court approval or supervision.

"There are legal constraints for how you can spy on Americans," Greenwald said. "You can't target them without going to the FISA court. But these systems allow analysts to listen to whatever emails they want, whatever telephone calls, browsing histories, Microsoft Word documents."

"And it's all done with no need to go to a court, with no need to even get supervisor approval on the part of the analyst," he added."

http://news.yahoo.com/glenn-greenwa...-invasive-142510196--abc-news-topstories.html

"Q: Is there a way to collect this data that is consistent with the Fourth Amendment, the constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure?


Binney: Two basic principles you have to use. ... One is what I call the two-degree principle. If you have a terrorist talking to somebody in the United States — that's the first degree away from the terrorist. And that could apply to any country in the world. And then the second degree would be who that person in the United States talked to. So that becomes your zone of suspicion.

And the other one (principle) is you watch all the jihadi sites on the Web and who's visiting those jihadi sites, who has an interest in the philosophy being expressed there. And then you add those to your zone of suspicion.

Everybody else is innocent — I mean, you know, of terrorism, anyway.

Wiebe:Until they're somehow connected to this activity.

Binney: You pull in all the contents involving (that) zone of suspicion and you throw all the rest of it away. You can keep the attributes of all the communicants in the other parts of the world, the rest of the 7 billion people, right? And you can then encrypt it so that nobody can interrogate that base randomly.

That's the way of preventing this kind of random access by a contractor or by the FBI or any other DHS (Department of Homeland Security) or any other department of government. They couldn't go in and find anybody. You couldn't target your next-door neighbor. If you went in with his attributes, they're encrypted. ... So unless they are in the zone of suspicion, you won't see any content on anybody and you won't see any attributes in the clear. ...

It's all within our capabilities.

Drake: It's been within our capabilities for well over 12 years.

Wiebe:Bill and I worked on a government contract for a contractor not too far from here. And when we showed him the concept of how this privacy mechanism that Bill just described to you — the two degrees, the encryption and hiding of identities of innocent people — he said, "Nobody cares about that." I said, "What do you mean?"

This man was in a position to know a lot of government people in the contracting and buying of capabilities. He said. "Nobody cares about that."



http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...istleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/

 

[LightPattern]

Good posts! By both OP & mshan.

Meta-Data?:


http://news.yahoo.com/glenn-greenwa...-invasive-142510196--abc-news-topstories.html

I saw that exchange on TV this morning. Well worth watching. Here's the video link.

"NSA officials are going to be testifying before the Senate on Wednesday, and I defy them to deny that these programs work exactly as I just said." Glenn Greenwald.

He was directly contradicted by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers on "Face the Nation."

Rogers argued the program culls data that's merely "to-from - no names, no addresses" and is kept at bay by strict regulations that pre-require a counterterrorism nexus for snooping. He said the tight 217-205 vote on a bill that would have mandated the NSA to prove a specific individual was under investigation before collecting his or her records was driven by misunderstanding.

"The day before the vote, people were asking, 'How many of the numbers have recordings attached to them?' Well, the answer is zero. If you have to ask that the day before the vote - I knew I was in an education problem here. There are no recordings of phone calls; there are no dossiers. They do not record your e-mails. None of that was happening, none of it, zero," Rogers said.

I hope this gets the coverage it deserves this week.

 

[TerryMathews]

Good posts! By both OP & mshan.



I saw that exchange on TV this morning. Well worth watching. Here's the video link.




He was directly contradicted by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers on "Face the Nation."



I hope this gets the coverage it deserves this week.

I would say, if they're not storing everything, then why do they need this much additional storage? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I would say, if they're not storing everything, then why do they need this much additional storage? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

...You act as if this brand new one is their only one too :sneaky:

 

[TerryMathews]

...You act as if this brand new one is their only one too :sneaky:

I did say additional...

 

[Darwin333]

I would say, if they're not storing everything, then why do they need this much additional storage? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

I had to look up what an exobyte is..... holy shit thats a fuckload of storage.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

1984 shit right there. Liberals and conservatives need to get on board and start condemning this crap.


The more infallible an administration is, the more dangerous it is.

The right and the left are both the up, and the up is all about pushing all of us further down. There is no real difference in the two and that much is obvious to anyone paying attention.

Wake UP.

 

[lothar]

It's ok. Pelosi and Obama endorse it.

Ten years ago there were "principled" people who objected to things like this supposedly because they were wrong. It appears that what they objected to was Bush and not what he embraced.

Yes Obama the Peace prize winner. Suckered.

Pretty much.

 

[LightPattern]

Here's the video link.

Quote:
"NSA officials are going to be testifying before the Senate on Wednesday, and I defy them to deny that these programs work exactly as I just said." Glenn Greenwald.​

I hope this gets the coverage it deserves this week.

Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 29 Jul -

"The WH now scheduled a meeting between Obama & House Dems on Wed morning when NSA hearing was supposed to be. It's now being re-scheduled."

I wonder if they (admin & NSA officials) are worried about something. :biggrin:

 

[Smoblikat]

Pants on fire!

It is far too convenient that we are fighting the mentality of an enemy, and not just a nationality. You could wipe out the entire middle east, but the "terrorists" are not limited to one geographical location, their problems are in their head which is something that we cannot protect against. Every time he says terrorist I immediately think of Eurasia, and how we are at war with that same principle............