TOM HENEGHAN EXPLOSIVE INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS
ALL
Patriot Americans MUST know,
with sources inside American/European intelligence agencies and INTERPOL
reporting what is really going on behind the scenes of the corporate-controlled,
fascist, extortion-friendly propaganda U.S. media's massive deceptions
with sources inside American/European intelligence agencies and INTERPOL
reporting what is really going on behind the scenes of the corporate-controlled,
fascist, extortion-friendly propaganda U.S. media's massive deceptions
Sunday September 7, 2014
NAZI Treason Escalates
by Tom Heneghan,
International Intelligence Expert
UNITED States of
America - It can now be reported that
Congressman Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, and Senator Dianne
Feinstein, Democrat of California, have conspired with the U.S. NSA and
the U.S. Department of Justice to hide relevant evidence that proves
abuse of the American People's Constitutional rights aka Section 215 of
the totally UN-Constitutional BrushFRAUD era neo-Nazi Patriot Act.
In
fact, Rogers co-sponsored legislation which covered up the phone
dragnet against the American People in which members of Congress voted
for FISA legislation that re-authorized the Patriot Act without certain
members of Congress not realizing what they had just voted for.
ISIS
remains a total U.S.-British Intelligence and NAZI Paperclip NSA
creation funded by the Saudi Royal Family and crooked worldwide banks as
to continue UN-Constitutional NAZI Paperclip occupation of the United
States and allow algorithms and other NSA-type technology to manipulate
world financial markets.
Related
[color highlights added]
Patriot Act's absurd new spawn: Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse
Creative legal interpretations may now enable the government to sign off on things that will blow your mind
Congress may be preparing to
reinforce two horrible FISA Court decisions and an abusive government search
with no debate in the coming weeks: a decision to give national security orders
unlimited breadth, one making it legal for the government to investigate
Americans for activities protected under the First Amendment, and the FBI’s
“back door” searches of Americans’ communication content collected under the
FISA Amendment Act Section 702 authority.
On Tuesday, the ACLU and the Department of Justice argued about the legality of the NSA’s phone dragnet
program before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. Much of the discussion focused
on the implications of the government’s theories that it can collect all phone
records in the United States based on a claim they are “relevant” to standing terrorism
investigations. “You can collect everything there is to know about everybody
and have it all in one big government cloud,” said Judge Gerard Lynch,
describing the implications of the government’s theories to Assistant Attorney
General Stuart Delery.
But the ACLU and the government also engaged in an equally important
debate — on whether the FISA Court’s interpretation of the word “relevant”
overstepped Congress’ intent – focused on whether Congress had backed FISC’s definition of “relevant” by
reauthorizing the Patriot Act twice.
The executive branch and the FISA Court have spent the last 15 months arguing that Congress “ratified” the expansive interpretations on which the phone dragnet program relies when it reauthorized the Patriot Act in 2010 and 2011 because, having been informed of the program, Congress extended the Patriot Act without changing that language. “When Congress reenacts a statute without change,” the administration said in a white paper on the phone dragnet in August 2013, ”it is presumed to have adopted the administrative or judicial interpretation of the statute if it is aware of the interpretation.” Three federal judges have bought that claim, relying on it to rule the program is legal.
The government’s claim with regards to past authorizations is terribly
weak. There were at least six known instances where Congress did not get notice
it should have; in several cases, those obligations were imposed by law. Perhaps the most important – in
which House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers did not invite most
congressmen to read notice of the dragnet provided to Congress in 2011 — means
that 65 of the people who voted to reauthorize the Patriot
Act in 2011 probably had had no way of learning about the phone dragnet. And,
as the ACLU’s Alexander Abdo pointed out in Tuesday’s hearing, Congress couldn’t have been
briefed on the legal analysis underlying the phone dragnet because the FISA
Court never got around to writing an opinion on it until 2013, in response to
the Snowden leaks.
The executive’s claim that Congress “ratified” the phone dragnet before
the Snowden leaks — and therefore that the program currently complies with the
intent of Congress — is farcical. And the judges on the panel — in addition to
Lynch, fellow Democratic appointees Robert Sack and Vernon Broderick — seem skeptical of the government’s claim that
secret briefings offered about an unannounced program can support a claim that
Congress knowingly ratified the program.
So the government’s argument that the program is legal because Congress
reauthorized the Patriot Act after the government started secretly using it to
collect most phone records in the U.S. may fail to persuade the 2nd Circuit.
But that won’t be true going forward.
The government’s public release of numerous
court opinions and other intelligence information over the last 15 months means
no one in Congress can make a credible claim to be uninformed of the decisions
underlying these parts of the government’s spying. In 2011, most members of Congress probably didn’t know the FISC had
redefined the word “relevant” in a key Patriot Act definition to mean
“everything,” but they should know that now. Yet none of the current
proposals to reform the dragnet do anything about the definition of “relevant.”
They limit collection of phone records in other ways, but would permit bulky
collection under that “relevance” standard in a number of ways and by
association using a number of statutes.
Thus, while the
2nd Circuit might rule the current dragnet illegal in part because the legal
logic of it would permit the government to “collect everything there is to know
about everybody,” if Congress passes the USA Freedom Act without changing that
definition of “relevant,” it will be easier for the government to win this
argument in the future.
Congressional passage of the USA Freedom Act with the existing language
intact would also probably “ratify” two other intelligence community programs:
first, a more recently released decision, a February 2013 opinion in which Judge John Bates ruled
that prohibitions on using the Patriot Act to investigate Americans based
solely on First Amendment-protected activities – such as political speech or
religion — do not apply if associates of the targeted person are engaged in
unprotected activities. Bates took language from Congress prohibiting the
government from using Patriot authorities against Americans for nothing more
than their speech and created a loophole allowing the government to do just
that.
As Stanford law professor Jennifer Granick said in a post on this opinion, “Most people, when they
cite [the] statutory language [from the Patriot Act], believe it means that
Americans won’t be subjects of terrorism investigations for the First Amendment
protected things they say or do.” But based on what we can see of Bates’
opinion, Granick continued, “They would be wrong.”
And while the language of the opinion pertains to a terrorism
investigation, the novel interpretation of the phrase might now apply in other
uses of Patriot authorities, such as counterintelligence investigations, which
sometimes includes hacking or leak investigations. Behind a veil of secrecy,
Bates and the government appear to have made it OK to investigate Americans for
their free speech again.
In addition, the government has revealed the FBI conducts “back door”
searches — warrantless searches on U.S. persons’ data collected under FISA
Section 702 – even for “assessments” of counterterrorism investigations. The
FBI keeps no records of such searches, presumably because it
dictated for itself in 2011 it need not keep any records of assessments. As a result, it refuses to tell Congress how
many Americans have been subjected to such warrantless searches.
In a letter released Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper seemed to point to back door searches. He hailed Sen.
Leahy’s version of the USA Freedom Act because it ”recognize[s] the technical
limitations on our ability to report certain types of information.” The big
topic the bill limited was FBI searches of 702 information.
That suggests Clapper is pointing to Leahy’s exemption for FBI’s back door
searches.
That would be
particularly troubling given that back door searches are one area of
particularly acute constitutional concern.
And if Congress doesn’t do anything about these issues, in the future
the government will argue — more credibly, this time — that Congress signed off
on these expansions of Executive authority.
Whether by passing USA Freedom Act this fall or by reauthorizing the
Patriot Act next June, Congress is likely to extend the life of the Patriot
Act. Given the absurd implications of some of the recently released FISC
opinions, Congress would do well to redefine this language to reclaim the plain
English meaning, contrary to FISC’s reinterpretations of it.
Thus far, however, they show no sign of doing so.
Marcy Wheeler writes at EmptyWheel.net
and is the author of "Anatomy of Deceit."
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/
There Are NO Terrorists - There NEVER Were Any Terrorists
http://www.
http://www.
Banks Remain On the Brink
http://www.
http://www.
Black
Ops and PsyOps and God Save the Queen
http://www.
http://www.
Black
Ops and PsyOps 2, Pivot!
http://www.
http://www.
PsyOps
and Black Ops 3
http://www.
http://www.
PsyOps and Black Ops 4
http://www.
http://www.
PsyOps
and Black Ops and Ponzi Schemes 5
http://www.
http://www.
The REAL Terrorists are
Exposed: They are the Bankers and the NSA
http://www.
http://www.
ISIS PsyOp Exposed as British Intelligence-NAZI Paperclip U.S. NSA
Trickery
http://www.
http://www.
ISIS Crooked Bank Ponzi Scheme Exposed!
http://www.
ISIS TOTALLY EXPOSED! http://www.
http://www.
