Get PJ Media on your Apple

Two Dems Warn NSA Violations Just ‘Tip of a Larger Iceberg’

But a Republican chairman claims "disclosed documents demonstrate that there was no intentional and willful violation of the law."

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

August 16, 2013 - 2:59 pm

WASHINGTON — A pair of civil-liberties Democrats whom the White House tried to appease in a closed-door meeting warned today that fresh reports of thousands of privacy violations by the National Security Agency are just the “tip of a larger iceberg.”

On Thursday, the Washington Post published its report of a May 2012 audit leaked by former contractor Edward Snowden that found 2,776 violations over the previous year of executive orders and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provisions governing spying on Americans or foreign targets in the U.S. These included both computer and operator errors.

Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) have been some of President Obama’s harshest critics — within his party and outside — on domestic spying. They were among allies and foes of the NSA programs summoned by Obama to the Oval Office at the beginning of the month as he hoped to calm his detractors before promising new, vague reforms.

“The executive branch has now confirmed that the ‘rules, regulations and court-imposed standards for protecting the privacy of Americans’ have been violated thousands of times each year. We have previously said that the violations of these laws and rules were more serious than had been acknowledged, and we believe Americans should know that this confirmation is just the tip of a larger iceberg,” Wyden and Udall said in a joint statement this afternoon.

“While Senate rules prohibit us from confirming or denying some of the details in today’s press reports, the American people have a right to know more details about of these violations. We hope that the executive branch will take steps to publicly provide more information as part of the honest, public debate of surveillance authorities that the Administration has said it is interested in having.”

A week ago, Wyden carefully lauded Obama’s promised reforms unveiled in a press conference just before he took off to Martha’s Vineyard for vacation. The senator stressed, though, that “notably absent from President Obama’s speech was any mention of closing the backdoor searches loophole that potentially allows for the warrantless searches of Americans’ phone calls and emails under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

“I am also concerned that the executive branch has not fully acknowledged the extent to which violations of FISC orders and the spirit of the law have already had a significant impact on Americans’ privacy,” Wyden said Aug. 9.

Today, he and Udall said “the public deserves to know more about the violations of the secret court orders that have authorized the bulk collection of Americans’ phone and email records under the USA PATRIOT Act.”

“The public should also be told more about why the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has said that the executive branch’s implementation of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has circumvented the spirit of the law, particularly since the executive branch has declined to address this concern,” they continued.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who last month introduced the FISA Court Reform Act of 2013 and the FISA Judge Selection Reform Act of 2013, said the latest revelations underscored the need for “a special advocate who can push the FISA Court to hold NSA accountable, and uncover illegal over-reaching.”

“Changes in selection of the Court judges can make it a more effective watchdog. The audit reveals a disregard or disrespect for Constitutional privacy rights that undermines public trust and credibility so essential for intelligence activities that protect our national security,” Blumenthal said. “Even as reforms progress, the Justice Department should investigate and pursue possible violations of law as appropriate.”

But the leaders of the intelligence committees held fast to their support for the NSA programs.

“The disclosed documents demonstrate that there was no intentional and willful violation of the law and that the NSA is not collecting the email and telephone traffic of all Americans, as previously reported,” asserted House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.).

“Congress and the court have put in place auditing, reporting, and compliance requirements to help ensure that the executive branch, the Congress, and the Court each have insight into how the authorities granted to the NSA are used. As a result, even the inadvertent and unintentional errors are documented,” he continued. “We demand these reviews so the NSA can constantly improve and correct any technical missteps that may impact Americans.”

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) dismissed a “large majority of NSA’s so-called ‘compliance incidents’” as “roaming” incidents, in which a non-American whose phone is being monitored outside the United States wanders onto U.S. soil.

“The NSA generally won’t know that the person has traveled to the United States. As the laws and rules governing NSA surveillance require different procedures once someone enters the U.S.—generally to require a specific FISA court order—NSA will cite this as a ‘compliance incident,’ and either cease the surveillance or obtain the required FISA court order. The majority of these ‘compliance incidents’ are, therefore, unintentional and do not involve any inappropriate surveillance of Americans,” Feinstein said.

“As I have said previously, the committee has never identified an instance in which the NSA has intentionally abused its authority to conduct surveillance for inappropriate purposes,” Feinstein continued. “I believe, however, that the committee can and should do more to independently verify that NSA’s operations are appropriate, and its reports of compliance incidents are accurate. This should include more routine trips to NSA by committee staff and committee hearings at which all compliance issues can be fully discussed.”
Both Feinstein and Rogers said they were aware of previous failings.

“The Committee has been apprised of previous incidents, takes seriously each one, and uses the oversight and compliance regime to provide us insight into these operations and whether further adjustments must be made. The Committee does not tolerate any intentional violation of the law,” Rogers said. “Human and technical errors, like all of the errors reported in this story, are unfortunately inevitable in any organization and especially in a highly technical and complicated system like NSA.”

“By law, the Intelligence Committee receives roughly a dozen reports every year on FISA activities, which include information about compliance issues. Some of these reports provide independent analysis by the offices of the inspectors general in the intelligence community. The committee does not receive the same number of official reports on other NSA surveillance activities directed abroad that are conducted pursuant to legal authorities outside of FISA (specifically Executive Order 12333), but I intend to add to the committee’s focus on those activities,” Feinstein said.

“The committee has been notified—and has held briefings and hearings—in cases where there have been significant FISA compliance issues. In all such cases, the incidents have been addressed by ending or adapting the activity,” she added.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) announced today that he would hold a hearing on the reports to “continue to demand honest and forthright answers from the intelligence community. ”

“The American people rely on the intelligence community to provide forthright and complete information so that Congress and the courts can properly conduct oversight.  I remain concerned that we are still not getting straightforward answers from the NSA,” Leahy said. “…Using advanced surveillance technologies in secret demands close oversight and appropriate checks and balances, and the American people deserve no less than that.”

The only administration response to the latest revelations came in an interview State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki gave to MSNBC today, where she was asked about the president’s claim last week that “what you’re not reading about is the government actually abusing these programs and, you know, listening in on people’s phone calls or inappropriately reading people’s e-mails.”

“Remember that these programs are done with the goal of keeping the American people safe, also keeping people around the world safe. These are programs that many countries also participate in, many countries work with the United States on. And that is one of the top priorities when you’re the commander in chief,” said Psaki, who served as traveling press secretary on Obama’s 2012 campaign.

“So that is why these programs are in place. But, again, you heard the president talk about the importance of being open and transparent with the American people, and I know that that is something that is being reviewed and discussed internally we speak,” she added.

Meanwhile, the administration continued a charm offensive of sorts to convince Americans that they’re as transparent as can be as Alex Jole, civil liberties protection officer for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, wrote a simplistic first-person, day-in-the-life-style op-ed for McClatchy-Tribune News Service.

“Explaining to the public how all of this comes together is important, but is hard to do because it involves sensitive information that adversaries could exploit to avoid detection. By definition, most intelligence work can’t be done openly. A fully transparent intelligence service, after all, could not be an effective one,” Joel wrote.

“It’s human nature for such secrecy to fuel suspicion and mistrust. People assume that when someone hides something, it’s because he’s doing something wrong. This natural suspicion is evident in the concerns about two programs that were recently disclosed.”

Joel proceeded to explain vast telephone metadata collection and surveillance on the communications of foreign targets outside the U.S.

“Some people question whether people who work for the government can be trusted. In my experience, intelligence professionals – and those overseeing them – are profoundly committed to the oath they take to support and defend the Constitution. People inside government have questions and concerns just like everyone else,” he wrote. “It’s my job to raise civil liberties and privacy issues about intelligence activities, and I do.”

A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken before the latest report found 70 percent of Democrats and 77 percent of Republicans agreeing that the NSA programs intrude on privacy rights. Fifty-two percent of GOPs and 51 percent of Dems said the mass surveillance is not justified.

UPDATE: White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest released a statement saying the audit report is the result of Obama’s “long” advocacy for transparency at the NSA. “This Administration is committed to ensuring that privacy protections are carefully adhered to, and to continually reviewing ways to effectively enhance privacy procedures,” Earnest said.

Bridget Johnson is a career journalist whose news articles and opinion columns have run in dozens of news outlets across the globe. Bridget first came to Washington to be online editor at The Hill, where she wrote The World from The Hill column on foreign policy. Previously she was an opinion writer and editorial board member at the Rocky Mountain News and nation/world news columnist at the Los Angeles Daily News. She has contributed to USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, Politico and more, and has myriad television and radio credits as a commentator. Bridget is Washington Editor for PJ Media.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
C'mon, so they messed up 2,776 times. Cut them some slack--everyone deserves a 2,777th chance.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Um, they just called their boss a liar. Shouldn't they just switch sides now?
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) have been some of President Obama’s harshest critics — within his party and outside — on domestic spying."

Which makes them, at least on this, a hell of a lot closer to the Founding Fathers than are most Republican politicians, including many who falsely call themselves conservatives.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (22)
All Comments   (22)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
2776 violations of the law. What are they not telling us about each violation?
Could it be "One violation was a computer glitch (when 26.5 million phone calls were accidentally recorded). A second violation was a keying in error (when 12 million internet accounts were totally copied). The 2770th violation of the law was another operator error (when 27 million...). All simple mistakes. There was not intent to violate the law."
47 weeks ago
47 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am beginning to think that Snowden was the ultimate whistle blower and patriot.

didn't think this at first, but with being first called a phony scandal by B.O., a distraction, we don't spy and now thousands of violations this is high time for the lame stream media to start to crucify the person who is in charge of this program.

And that would be B.O.

But I'm sure he can say he just read about the problems like everyone else.

Or maybe he can say he was just playing spades with Reggie and knew nothing, you know, leading from behind, while playing spades and not be accounted for or accountable for anything.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm sitting here watching Fox Sunday and they are discussing this.
Peter King, who must be the stupidest man in Congress, doesn't think thousands of eff ups are significant (he says it's like a batting average, stupid moron!) As far as he is concerned, nothing to see here. What a putz.
And watch for the end of the world, because I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with that nut, Kucinich!
I did not think it possible.
I think I need a drink. Is the sun over the yardarm, yet?
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Dianne Feinstein would, if permitted, force Americans to turn in their firearms to the federal government while she remains steadfast in her advocacy of a federal program to spy on Americans without remorse. She would have fit nicely into the Third Reich.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
The NSA must have discovered some skeleton(s) in Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) closet, just like supreme court chief justice john roberts.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Let's see, the IRS would never play favorites against conservatives. Oh, they did? Well it must have been just a couple of low level people that made a mistake. What? The NSA are spying on Americans in unheard of numbers? Naw, that must be a mistake. Oh, you have proof? Oh, well, those were just accidental. There were thousands of incidents in just one year? Uhhhhh....We'll look into it but we can't say anything about what we are doing about it because of National Security. Yeah, that's the ticket. The Sheeple will believe that one.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Civil-liberties Democrats." That's a very small club.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
The realization that the Feral Government is monitoring the private communications of American citizens is scary enough. But when one considers the attacks on our freedoms by Obama and his Prog allies, it goes beyond scary. It fits neatly in with the attacks on our 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendment rights placed in our Constitution by the Founders of our American government.

As such, the knowledge that the Ferals are monitoring our private communications, in clear violation of the Constitution, clearly shows that it was not inadvertent, accidental or any other such excuse. It is another piece of evidence of the criminal plot to undermine and make irrelevant our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

I do not think of myself as a conservative or libertarian or any other such term. I think of myself as a Constitutional Patriot. As such, I have problems even with the title of the so-called Patriot Act. A patriot, according to Webster, is "one who loves and loyally or zealously supports one's own country". There is no indication that a patriot can include one who would support one's country only after major changes to the very fabric of our Constitutional freedoms and our American concept of the rule of law.

Actually, one's country could be no more than defined boundaries but America is more than that. It is an idea, a way of life that citizens are free and the government answers to the citizens. I am in love with the Constitutional concept of our government including all of our rights in the first several Amendments.

I know it will be difficult if not impossible to return to Constitutional government and the now dated idea of the rule of law without very major turmoil possibly including a lot of bloodshed. I am not in any way advocating insurrection but I smile when someone writes about keeping their powder dry.



48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Herbert Romerstein (author of "The Venona Secrets" and "Stalin's Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt's Government") on Agent Harry Hopkins, Alger Hiss and other Traitors [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FX4t_KGFq94]
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Whats the beef? Since there have only been 'thousands' of violations of the Patriot Act and not 'hundreds of thousands' of violations its no big deal - right?

As for the Patriot Act I've always maintained many of its parts are at the very least borderline unconstitutional. I remember the braying coming from democrats when this act was first introduced after 911. Now all I'm hearing is a couple of progressives that might otherwise have a difficult reelection should they do/say nothing - which is what the republicans are saying - pretty much nothing.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Patriot Act , along with Bush's massive spending, was largely condoned by conservatives because we had just been thrown into a new war that wasn't well understood. We knew that the 9/11 terrorists had been on our soil and had triggered alerts and attracted scrutiny, but except for a rare few, no official actions had been taken against them. So we allowed a bill of questionable legality to be passed. It may have helped. I hope it has. But it may become our Achilles' heel.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All