The Patriot Act May Be Dead For Good 218
HughPickens.com points out Shane Harris's report at The Daily Beast that when powerful spying authorities under the Patriot Act expire at the stroke of midnight Monday, as currently appears likely, they may never return. "Senators have been negotiating over whether to pass a House bill that would renew and tweak existing provisions in the long-controversial law, but if the sunset comes and the provisions are off the books, lawmakers in both chambers would be facing a vote to reinstate controversial surveillance authorities, which is an entirely different political calculation. ...
Three major Patriot provisions are on the chopping block: so-called roving wiretaps, which let the government monitor one person's multiple electronic devices; the "lone-wolf" provision, which allows surveillance of someone who's not connected to a known terrorist group; and Section 215, which, among other things, the government uses to collect the records of all landline phone calls in the United States." Obama has been urging Congress to pass the Freedom Act, but not warning that the sky will fall if they don't. That may reflect a calculation on the president's part that the surveillance authorities aren't important enough to lose political capital fighting to keep them. Meanwhile with the Senate not slated to return to Washington until just hours before that deadline, opponents like Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) showing no signs of budging, and the House so far unwilling to bail out the upper chamber, the prospects for an eleventh-hour breakthrough look slim.
It won't die (Score:5, Insightful)
They'll come up with some sort of emergency measure or other. Not a snowflake's chance in Hell this will die.
Re: (Score:2)
And the NSA's Utah collection plant will stand. And nothing will change. Because money.
Re: (Score:3)
Not money. Blackmail. Remember, NSA has essentially entire communication history of everyone in US. No one is so clean that they cannot be blackmailed, especially in high political places.
Why else do you think Merkel doesn't even say anything about US criminal activity on its soil AFTER German media blows it all out in the open? There's a reason why they prioritised tapping her personal communications.
only takes 1 senator to filibuster & Rand Paul (Score:5, Insightful)
A single senator can filibuster a bill. Senator Rand Paul said he'd prevent it from passing before the Senate went on break, and he did so. Rand Paul is now saying he'll make sure it isn't passed on Sunday, and there's every reason to think he'll do so again, just like he did before.
I'll be considering him carefully when I choose my presidential vote.
Re:only takes 1 senator to filibuster & Rand P (Score:5, Insightful)
He'll never get the Republican nomination. Not a chance in hell. The old guard in the party would rather have Hillary Clinton than Rand Paul. She's less of a threat to them.
Re:only takes 1 senator to filibuster & Rand P (Score:4, Insightful)
Hillary would be the best republican since Eisenhower.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe since Reagan.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm amiga3d.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all. The GOP is dying for someone like her. As a republican, she would draw more votes than Reagan, even from the democrats. She's perfect. If I were to vote republican, I would vote for her in a heartbeat. I think the republicans should write her in during their primaries. Let's see if she shows up at the convention.
Re: (Score:2)
No need. She's got the Democratic nomination already.
that's the R party fight, libertarian or establish (Score:5, Interesting)
I can certainly see why he runs as a Republican- the current fight is between the libertarian side of the party and the remnants of the Moral Majority faction and the establishment power base. The unfortunate fact is that libertarian party candidates don't get elected to the presidency and the senate, republicans do. He therefore can accomplish a lot more by getting elected as a Republican than he could by losing a Libertarian. President Reagan largely redefined the republican party in his own image, so there's no reason Rand Paul couldn't do the same.
Of course Reagan also developed an alliance with the Moral Majority crowd in order to get elected, and that alliance affected the party platform. Moral Majority officially shut down many years ago and people are fed up with the establishment power base, so the party is ripe to be redefined again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
not that i see a problem with that in the slightest
Let's also not forget that Obama ran for office on a platform that included "I will stop domestic spying."
And as soon as he got into office, he did the opposite. As OP states, he called on Congress to pass the so-called "Freedom Act", which was really anything but. It was worse than the original in some ways.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
rand is actually doing something
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Let's also not forget that Obama ran for office on a platform that included "I will stop domestic spying." ... And as soon as he got into office, he did the opposite.
I think he's wrong on this issue and can't help but wonder what his advisors are telling him to make him change his view so dramatically. My guess is they know more about the disposition of "missing" nuclear materials from the former Soviet Union than they are telling the public. It's the only thing I can think of that would explain it.
Re: It won't die (Score:2)
You assume he changed his stance. I think his stance hasn't changed - he just said what he needed to say to get elected. In other words, he lied. This is nothing new for him, by the way.
Re: It won't die (Score:5, Funny)
yeah, but then they'd have to wait [washingtonsblog.com] for something bad to happen to "re-justify" it. It sure would look bad for Rand and good for Jeb if that kind of thing happened a week before the NH Primary.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
First, get off your ass and call your critters and tell them to let it die.
Second, tell them to start supporting this...
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/27/whistleblowers-back-surveillance-state-repeal-act/
Re: (Score:2)
And the emergency measure that just has to pass will just happen to also expand what they can do legally. Because there will be no time to change the wording, it'll be fixed the next time. Promise.
Re:It won't die (Score:4, Insightful)
They'll come up with some sort of emergency measure or other. Not a snowflake's chance in Hell this will die.
Of course it could die. They could replace it with something worse.
Re:It won't die (Score:5, Insightful)
To be fair, a snowflake in Hell has a pretty good chance of dying.
In Dante's "Inferno" (Hell), the deeper in hell's levels, the colder it gets - at the ninth level, the worse, reserved for those committing betrayal, a frozen lake exist...
No thermal gradients in hell (Score:4, Funny)
There are no thermal gradients in hell. If there were, engineers could build a heat engine used to power an air conditioner.
Re: (Score:2)
There are no thermal gradients in hell. If there were, engineers could build a heat engine used to power an air conditioner.
There are no engineers in hell. If there were, lawyers could sue on grounds of emotional distress because of the overcrowding and ask for the lawyers' transfer to heaven...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are no lawyers in Hell, lawyers as we all know are famously soulless. All of them are on Earth.
Can We Have A Funeral? (Score:3, Funny)
I think a Dixieland Jazz parade would be suitable.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm prepared to play in the second line at the Patriot Act jazz funeral.
https://youtu.be/ZyI2XJCJ9ic [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2)
so what about all the *other* stuff? (Score:3, Interesting)
the government uses to collect the records of all landline phone calls in the United States
I haven't been following this super close, but I gotta question. The above sounds swell and all, but we've seen this massive barrage of info from Snowden/Greenwald about other things they've been doing. Subverting encryption standards. Getting malware onto hard disk BIOSs. Collecting the contents of communications, not just just the so called metadata. It goes on and on and on.
Does ALL that stuff die? Or is this - as I am going to go out on a limb here and guess is the case - just reshuffling the status quo a bit to make it appear that "something is being done", without reeling back the majority of this surveillance state that we've seen come to fruition?
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably that they've decided that only some of it is useful. And most of the rest they can contract out to corporations.
Re:so what about all the *other* stuff? (Score:5, Interesting)
No. It does not all die.
First, please remember that the NSA is a spy agency. So long that their targets are legitimate (more on that in a second), they are expected to do everything within their powers to get to it.
Subverting the standards was a low blow, but as the ol' Tennessee saying goes "fool me once.... shame on... you? [youtube.com]". Of course, by the time those standards were drafted, the standards body should have already known better (selling Enigma based encryption devices to foreign countries well into the 70's, anyone?). I'm hopeful, however, that we'll get spared "third time a fool".
As for the other activities, well, this is how spying gets done. That is how you spy on people in this day and age. With all of the justified criticism of the NSA, it would still be bad if they couldn't spy at all. They do, in fact, have a function to fulfill, and it is a function that needs fulfilling.
Circling back to who the targets should be. Spying against friendly foreign country leaders is not against the the law, or even, as far as I understand it, against the NSA's charter. It is an extremely foolish thing to do, but I don't think changing the law is the way to handle it.
Shachar
Re:so what about all the *other* stuff? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't you unpack that statement a little bit? What is the domestic function of the NSA?
If you said anything besides, "It doesn't have a domestic function" then you are wrong. The US government is not supposed to be spying on US citizens. If there's some foreign government or organization that's communicating with an American citizen or permanent resident in order to commit a crime, just get a goddamned warrant.
Re: (Score:2)
It does have a domestic function, but I suspect that's not what you meant. I thought it was implicit in my reply, but here it is explicitly: The NSA does not have any domestic spying function, charter or legitimacy.
Shachar
* By "spying", I mean data collection. Analysis of otherwise legally obtained domestic data is where I'm not sure where I stand. On the one hand, letting a military oriented organization perform police work (and vice versa, e.g. SWAT teams) leads to exactly the sort of bad behaviour we are
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Circling back to who the targets should be.
Let's talk about the people who should not be targetted by military intelligence - the American people. That's the problem right there.
Re: (Score:3)
Nothing changes but the label.
They'll keep doing it, they'll just stop telling you about it and find different words for it.
They'll rename it to something like "The Free Beer and Guns For Country Boys Act."
See also, CISPA, CISA, CRISPA, BISPA, CRISCO, or whatever they're calling it for this trip through Congress.
Not a snowballs chance! (Score:4, Insightful)
The power hungry folks in Washington will never let this die.
Re: (Score:2)
Insight brings new information and analysis, not a "the world will never change" tirade.
Re:Not a snowballs chance! (Score:5, Informative)
"... it looks like the Patriot Act will be gone by Monday morning."
Correction: key provisions of the Patriot Act. What most people call "the Patriot Act" was actually a collection of bills and laws, only some of which were part of the Patriot Act itself.
So yes, technically most if not all of the Patriot Act would expire... but there are other sibling laws that need to go down in flames, too, before the damage done will really be repaired.
Re:Not a snowballs chance! (Score:4, Insightful)
The very worst of it should be gone after this weekend. If so I'll celebrate. It's a victory even if the war isn't quite over.
Re: (Score:3)
It's insightful because only some provisions of the Patriot Act will expire, and the FISA court will continue to do whatever they want.
Laws as sweeping as the Patriot Act don't just go away.
Re: (Score:3)
These systems were put into place over a long period of time, and at great expense, and it will take more than a bill expiring to force these systems to actually be dismantled. If the bill expires, but the systems are still in place, including all the taps at the ISP'
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If it fails, part of the failure can be attributed to John Oliver.
That guy has done more to clean up government in 2 years on HBO than most politicians do in a 2 decades in office.
If they don't pass it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: If they don't pass it (Score:2)
Just keep moving it between agencies every six months to keep investigations worthless. Create some new agencies if necessary.
it can expire because they'll do it anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
While true they have always done illegal stuff they can only use that kind of stuff certain ways and for certain purposes. By removing the legality of these actions the actions will not end but they wont be able to use them for anything but actual terrorism. The war on terror will now be a behind the scenes covert kind of war and they'll have to stop using those same tactics for regular crime. Spies never really stop spying or they wouldn't be spies.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA exists to counter exterior threats. It is accepted that sometimes there are black ops that occur in that environment. This has always been so. Things that never see the light of day because of the threat level. They are viewed by POTUS and top leaders in Congress. This has been accepted because taking action against clandestine foreign entities is generally accepted by the public at large. When they started turning those tactics to use against the American public is when the outrage started.
Yes and no (Score:4, Interesting)
Watch (Score:2, Informative)
for false flage operation if it is not renewed.
Never should have been passed (Score:5, Insightful)
Good riddance.
I remember that when the Patriot Act was first passed thinking that
- this was obviously on someone's wet dream wish list (it was not so much written as released from the vaults) and
- passing huge changes in security laws with little debate and less thought in the near panicked initial response to a terrorist attack is basically a good definition of what not to do in a crisis.
Of course, that was before the Bush Administration invaded Iraq and showed us that purposeful stupidity can be worse than mindless stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
this was obviously on someone's wet dream wish list (it was not so much written as released from the vaults)
There's probably an even better successor version of the law waiting in the vaults for the next event of a similar magnitude.
The intelligence agencies can just lay low for a few months; there's bound to be an event justifying uber-surveillance powers and a never-expiring new and improved version of patriot act that gives even more powers for surveillance of americans and casting dragnets and da
Re: (Score:2)
And as someone else mentioned, if nothing shows up quickly enough, another "false flag" operation. Though actually I think it's probably usually easy enough to instigate someone somewhere in the world to do something wildly threatening. So you just don't stop them, and maybe turn a blind eye to a few of their fumbles. (E.g., see all the advance reports on 9/11, including reports by the FBI about pilot training in the US that didn't involve landing.)
It's quite rare that an actual false-flag operation is
Re: (Score:2)
And as someone else mentioned, if nothing shows up quickly enough, another "false flag" operation.
It's not necessary, and I think 9/11 was a real incident, not a false-flag.
However, 9/11 could have prevented, and laziness/incompetence plus a poor job done by intelligence agency staff and neglect of their reports by those in charge contributed to the unmitigated success of the attack.
That's all that needs to happen after Pat. act expires. Laziness or incompetence by the intelligence agencies resulting
Re: (Score:2)
He's not an asshole, he's a dick. Easy mistake to make since dicks are very near assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it's a lot smaller. Only 28 gauge if I remember correctly.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI... [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well said (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Man! If even Underwood thinks the law is unpatriotic, it must be indeed horrible. I mean, we all saw what he had to do to become the President.
Re: (Score:3)
Everybody on this thread seems to have forgotten the DEA was collecting Americam phone metadata in bulk since 1992, well before the Patriot Act. They did it under USC 21 section 876 (administrative subpoenas).
From what I've read, they were probably exceeding their authority, but carriers like Sprint gave them the data anyway.
Moving to the private sector (Score:5, Interesting)
It does not mean that the spying will stop.
Only that it will be moved to the private sector.
In place of the NSA, it will be Verizon, Comcast et al who will be doing the bulk data collection.
And instead of being financed by tax money that is collected anyway, the bulk collection will be financed by additional charges to the phone/cable bills.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah that was the FREEDOM bill which is not going to be passed. Hence the issue with the PATRIOT act expiring.
President Obama clearly knows how to kill a bill. (Score:4, Interesting)
President Obama clearly knows how to kill a bill that he wants dead. All he needs to do is some out in favor of it and it is going to be DOA.
If he had fought hard against the reinstatement of the Patriot Act it would pass with a veto-proof majority.
(In his book even former President Bush said The Patriot Act was poorly named. He felt, in recollection, that by naming it such, it made it hard for there to be meaningful discussion. . . after all, who wants to go on record as opposing patriotism?)
Re: (Score:2)
snowden ftw (Score:5, Insightful)
this is all because of one man who did a brave thing and was forced to flee his country for a hostile nation. history books will write of snowden as a hero.
Re:snowden ftw (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed, while he seems often villified, it was him who showed the US that the spying was happening. It it looking like his legacy is having some serious positive consequences, in real terms. And he's risked his life and will probably have to spend his life in exile. But he did it for the good of his country.
A true patriot and a true hero.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't really believe you're anonymous to the NSA do you? The seeing eye is watching you.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I am, as I work for the NSA and simply delete my own files...
Wait a minute, someone is knocking at my door...
Notice the media slam this week on Rand Paul? (Score:5, Insightful)
From all over the media, political commentators have been slamming Rand Paul since the 'filibuster'. Not just competitive republicans running for office or stumping for their guy either. Fox news left him off the latest poll, Scarboro (former republican analyst) mocks him, Bill Kristol (ancient neocon acolyte) mocks him. Several editorial columns describe his maneuvering of the vote for renewing the patriot act as betrayal. Huffpo implied Rand's 'act' is so tedious that other senators roll their eyes.
Amazing how this man is so derided for actually acting on one of the biggest issues of our time instead of just going along
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
does it bother you that libertarians (or people who believe in libertarian beliefs) like him eventhough he is not a "libertarian"? Or do you dislike him because no true scotsman?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh good (Score:2)
Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish (Score:2)
Glad to see the law die, but I'm sure the surveillance state is "too big to fail" now, so they've already found some handy loophole in some arcane law and will quietly continue to fuck American freedoms anally without lube.
If you think obeying laws is actually going to happen in this case, you might want to go get some KY Jelly now.
Ding dong the witch is dead!!! (Score:2)
There will be more attacks, and they won't be preventable with the greatest of rights violations. If someone wants to mount an attack against the US they are like water or they are stupid. The water will get through any holes (and there are always holes). Or they are really stupid and are easy to catch.
But with each attack they point to it and say, "Lo
The NSA owns the US government (Score:3)
"And then we said, sure, we'll turn off the Patriot Act! HAH! HA HAAAAAH!"
So what? (Score:2)
Because the alphabet soup will suddenly give a shit about what they're legally allowed to do and actually adhere to that?
Strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
If a terrorist truly wanted to harm us, the best way they could do it would be to mount a showy but essentially superficial attack some place Monday morning right after this expired.
The actual damage and injuries and deaths from the attack itself would probably be minuscule, but the self-inflicted damage and injuries and deaths caused by the U.S. doubling down on even tighter surveillance, more war on terror, and the loss of our freedoms that we say we're trying protect would gladden the hearts of many a terrorist. It is a strategy that has worked well for them since well before 9/11.
Terrorists can't destroy us directly, but they're happy to let us do it to ourselves voluntarily.
Cue in (Score:3)
That would work great (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
My mod points just expired, but this^
9/11 was not Bin Laden's greatest success, the Patriot Act (and similar laws in other western countries) was.
He scared people into gladly giving up their own freedom. How brilliant, and disturbingly easy, was that!
Re: (Score:3)
The sad part is that the U.S. fell for it so quickly after Reagan snookered the USSR into bankrupting itself in a similar way.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I think it is because the three letter agencies are getting paranoid that publicly traded companies are gathering more intelligence and making more use of it then they are. They could require those companies to provide the information via warrents but they are worried that they don't know what questions to ask them ;P
Re: (Score:2)
The Patriot Act is not expiring... (Score:2, Informative)
Only Section 215 is expiring. The Patriot Act itself has long since been extended pretty much permanently.
Other parts of the Patriot Act, including the use of National Security Letters, still allow them to spy on anyone for any reason without a warrant. In fact, for the first few years after the Patriot Act was signed, the government didn't even invoke Section 215 to do this stuff because NSLs do the trick just as easy.
And Not Having a Law Will Stop Them? (Score:2)
I must have missed where there were consequences for those 3 letter agencies breaking the law?
Get off your asses. (Score:3)
Contact your Senators NOW and demand they let it die and anything else that has to do with spying on americans and the erosion of our rights and the constitution.
Do it now and then hand feed another person to do it right now. Hell I'll hand feed all of you.
https://www.sunsetthepatriotac... [sunsetthepatriotact.com]
Do it right now. Unless you hate freedom and america.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you libertarians (Score:2)
Once again it shows only leader like Rand Paul have our interests at heart.
Re: (Score:2)
They'll find a way (Score:2)
It doesn't matter if it's legal or not; our government will do any damn thing they feel like.
You fools! (Score:2)
You screwed up the anthrax shipments we were supposed to use in the flag operation, so we can get the Patriot Act renewed. Now what are we going to do?
What is the Patriot Act? (Score:2)
Not as big a victory as you may think (Score:2)
[crosses_fingers] (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What a profoundly naive and ignorant idea.
Expire all laws? Like all federal criminal law against fraud, racketeering, drug trafficking, computer misuse, theft, and murder?
All the laws enabling agencies like the FDA, which keeps the food supply safe? Laws that regulate and maintain the highway system and regulate interstate commerce? Laws that establish the FDIC and keep confidence in banks?
Not to mention the huuuuge body of procedural law, which defines how the courts work, how the military is governed
Re: (Score:2)
You post like a pregnant yak!!!