Spy Chief Pressed For Number Of Americans Ensnared In Data Espionage (reuters.com) 34
Dustin Volz, reporting for Reuters: U.S. lawmakers are pressing the nation's top intelligence official to estimate the number of Americans ensnared in email surveillance and other such spying on foreign targets, saying the information was needed to gauge possible reforms to the controversial programs. Eight Democrats and six Republicans made the request to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in a letter seen by Reuters on Friday, reflecting the continued bipartisan concerns over the scope of U.S. data espionage. "You have willingly shared information with us about the important and actionable intelligence obtained under these surveillance programs," wrote the lawmakers, all members of the U.S. House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee. "Now we require your assistance in making a determination that the privacy protections in place are functioning as designed." They requested that Clapper provide the information about data collected under a statute, known as Section 702, by May 6.
Heh, that's easy to answer (Score:4, Informative)
All of them
Re: (Score:2)
Including illegal aliens, or whatever they're called today, and anyone else with an email address, cell phone, etc. who may have engaged in the suspicious, terrorist-supporting act of "accessing the Internet."
Re: (Score:3)
Including illegal aliens
Not them. They have rights.
Re: (Score:2)
All of them, forever. Yes, even the unborn.
FTFY
I know the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Zero Americans have been caught. As once you look at a terrorist you become a terrorist to and instantly become unamerican. Since you are no longer an American those rights no longer apply to you. /knee jerk sarcasm might be in the above viewpoint
Yeah right (Score:4, Insightful)
What does it matter? This man is just going to lie before congress, and nobody will challenge any statement he makes.
Grandstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
This is grandstanding. Unless this information is released to the public and/or affects actual policy change, neither of which is likely, this reflects the desire of Congress to get attention in an election year.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well yeah, they are a tiny bit concerned the reelection rate might dip below the usual 95%.
Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
They're asking a known liar who lied UNDER OATH to congress to supply them with information in order to make a decision?
If I was in congress, I would demand this man be replaced with someone who can at the very least tell the truth UNDER OATH.
Re: (Score:3)
You know we're likely to elect such a person as president this year, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Google "trump testified before congress". I think we already know Hillary's story. And you can probably put Cruz in that pile too unless you believe in infallibility.
Re: (Score:3)
Problem is when someone is under multiple oaths, then which one takes priority? Most here would say congress trumps all others, but they would be wrong. There is a well defined legal framework for clandestine operations - there are no quotable examples because there are no public examples.
So true. As always, my ultimate allegiance is to my crossed index and middle fingers, concealed behind my back.
And thus does democracy flourish.
Re: (Score:3)
No. No oath he has taken requires perjury before Congress. His other oaths may call for his silence before Congress.
Re: (Score:3)
Silly me, I thought his oath was to uphold the Constitution.
Re: (Score:2)
Silly me, I thought his oath was to uphold the Constitution.
That old rag? Nobody in the federal government has taken it seriously since at least Woodrow Wilson. If there were justice done, the top leaders/administrators at FBI/CIA/NSA and every Executive Branch agency would be put in front of a firing squad.
Strat
Re: (Score:1)
Every single one of those fuckers has lied under oath. They're not gonna call him out on it.
Something seems odd here (Score:1)
Two bulls (Score:2)
Clapper went on to tell the old joke about the old national intelligence director and the young national intelligence director. The young ones says, "Hey, look at that bunch of Americans down there. Let's run down and spy on that one."
The old national intelligence director replied, "No son, let's walk down and spy on them all.
You want the truth? (Score:2)
He should have been prosecuted before... (Score:1)