Mediaboss Marketing

This story, from the Jan. 12, 2017, edition of the New York Times, was little-remarked upon at the time, but suddenly has taken on far greater significance in light of current events:

In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the governments 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

One of the central questions behind the Mike Flynn flap that should have been asked but largely wasn't is: who was wiretapping the general? The answer, we know now, was the National Security Agency, formerly known as No Such Agency, the nation's foremost signals-intelligence (SIGINT) collection department.

Once compartmentalized to avoid injuring private citizens caught up in the net of the Black Widow(as we all are already) and her technological successors, the NSA was suddenly handed greater latitude in what it could share with other, perhaps more politicized bodies of the intelligence community. Why?

Let's call the roster of the bad guys:

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch signed the new rules, permitting the N.S.A. to disseminate raw signals intelligence information, on Jan. 3, after the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., signed them on Dec. 15, according to a 23-page, largely declassified copy of the procedures.

Previously, the N.S.A. filtered information before sharing intercepted communications with another agency, like the C.I.A. or the intelligence branches of the F.B.I. and the Drug Enforcement Administration. The N.S.A.s analysts passed on only information they deemed pertinent, screening out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal information.

Now, other intelligence agencies will be able to search directly through raw repositories of communications intercepted by the N.S.A. and then apply such rules for minimizing privacy intrusions.

This is not expanding the substantive ability of law enforcement to get access to signals intelligence, said Robert S. Litt, the general counsel to Mr. Clapper. It is simply widening the aperture for a larger number of analysts, who will be bound by the existing rules.

Read the original post:
Surprise: At the End, Obama Administration Gave NSA Broad New Powers - PJ Media

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Binney was an architect of the NSAs surveillance program. He became a famed whistleblower when he resigned on October 31, 2001 after spending more than 30 years with the agency.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Asked whether he believes the NSA is tapping Trump, Binney replied: Absolutely. How did they get the phone call between the president and the president of Australia? Or the one that he made with Mexico? Those are not targeted foreigners.

Binney further contended the NSA may have been behind a data leak that might have revealed that Michael Flynn, Trumps national security adviser, allegedly misled Vice President Mike Pence and other Trump administration officials about the contents of his phone calls with Russias ambassador to Washington.

Regarding Flynns case, Binney stated of the NSA:

If they werent behind it, they certainly had the data. Now the difference here is that FBI and CIA have direct access inside the NSA databases. So, they may be able to go directly in there and see that material there. And NSA doesnt monitor that. They dont even monitor their own people going into databases.

So, they dont monitor what CIA and FBI do. And theres no oversight or attempted oversight by any of the committees or even the FISA court. So, any way you look at it, ultimately the NSA is responsible because they are doing the collection on everybody inside the United States. Phone calls. Emails. All of that stuff.

He was speaking on the podcast edition of this reporters talk radio program, Aaron Klein Investigative Radio, broadcast on New Yorks AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphias NewsTalk 990 AM.

During the interview, Binney referred to a 2008 report referencing two NSA whistleblowers who said they worked at the agencys station in Fort Gordon, Georgia and were asked to not only monitor phone calls of U.S. citizens but transcribe them.

Utilizing data provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden, the Guardian and Washington Post in June 2013 released a series of articles reporting that the NSA was collecting the telephone records of millions of Americans.

Prior to those reports, National Intelligence Director James Clapper claimed on March 12, 2013 during an open session of the Senate Intelligence Committee that the NSA was not wittingly collecting data on Americans.

Not wittingly, Clapper said when asked whether the NSA was spying on U.S. citizens. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.

During the interview, Binney charged that the NSA was over-funded and out of control.

He offered recommendations for how he says Trump can reign in the agency:

He can order that they put a filter on the front end of all their collection that eliminates any U.S. citizens anywhere in the world unless they have a warrant for it. If they dont, then he has to put people in jail if they violated.

So, I mean, thats the way to do it. The other way is to cut their budget. I mean they are given too much money anyway. When they are given too much money, they get to do wild and crazy things. And this is wild and crazy. Violations of the Constitutions 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments.

On Wednesday, Trump singled out the NSA and FBI in a series of tweets about Flynns case as well as reports in the New York Times and Washington Post claiming further contacts between Trump advisors and Russia.

The Times on Tuesday seemed to be quoting from intercepted phone calls to report on alleged contacts between Trump campaign aides and Russian intelligence agents.

The Times reported:

Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trumps 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.

American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said.

Aaron Klein is Breitbarts Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, Aaron Klein Investigative Radio. Follow him onTwitter @AaronKleinShow.Follow him onFacebook.

See more here:
EXCLUSIVE NSA Whistleblower: Agency 'Absolutely' Tapping Trump's Calls - Breitbart News

Published February 15, 2017

BY MICHAEL WALSH | PJ Media

This story, from the Jan. 12, 2017, edition of the New York Times, was little-remarked upon at the time, but suddenly has taken on far greater significance in light of current events:

In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the governments 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

Read this article:
Surprise: At the End, Obama Admin Gave NSA Broad New Powers - Fox News

President Donald Trump (Photo: Twitter)

Attorney Larry Klayman, the founderof Freedom Watch, is asking a federal court to hold an emergency hearing on the National Security Agency, alleging likely CIA spying on President Donald Trump.

In an emergency supplement filed Wednesday with the U.S. District Court in Washington, he saidthe NSA and likely the Central Intelligence Agency are continuing to violate the [Fourth] Amendment to the Constitution and related statutes.

Klayman charged the agencies spied onPresident Trump, the White House, his former National Security Adviser General Michael Flynn and others in his administration.

He is requesting an emergency status conference to determine how to proceed.

See Klaymans explanation:

Klaymans newest filing was an addition to his argument to the court that his original cases should not be dismissed, as the government wants.

Police State USA: How Orwells Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!

His issue was the governments program to obtain and keep metadata from all cell phone calls in the country. He brought the first case several years ago.

Related story:

Flynn defiant: Intelligence leaks a criminal act'

While the media is focused on the so-called Russian election hacking scandal, it ignores the fact that our own government has committed the biggest violation of constitutional rights in American history, leaving the intelligence agencies free to continue their pattern and practice of violating the law in its intelligence gathering operations, Klayman argued against a dismissal.

As plaintiff Klayman argued in this court on Nov. 18, 2013, We have never seen in the history of this country this kind of violation of the privacy rights of the American citizens. We live in an Orwellian state.'

His argument continued, This court concurred, finding the almost-Orwellian technology that enables the government to store and analyze the phone metadata of every telephone user in the United States is unlike anything that could have been conceived in 1979.

The arguments this week came shortly after Flynn resignedas national security adviser over his conversations about sanctions with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Then, on Wednesday, followed reports of the leaking ofinformation in the Trump administration.

Klayman argued that the district court, which already is well into an advanced position regarding chargesof government spying, should take up the issue. He pointed out that judges are allowed access to classified information behind closed doors and that the continuing unlawful conduct of the government defendants is highly destructive of our republic.

Klayman charged in a filing before the election: The intelligence agencies conscious disregard for the law has been ongoing for decades, and there is no reason to believe that, all of a sudden, they will begin to respect the constitutional right of plaintiffs, and all Americans. Indeed, even today, [then-]President-elect Donald Trump credibly accused outgoing CIA chief, John Brennan, who worked with James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, of leaking false news reports and classified information to the media in an attempt to undermine him.

Trumps statement at that time was: Outgoing CIA chief, John Brennan, blasts Pres-Elect Trump on Russia threat. Does not fully understand. Oh really, couldnt do much worse just look at Syria (red line), Crimea, Ukraine and the buildup of Russian nukes. Not good! Was this the leaker of Fake News?

WND reported on Klaymans case oneyear ago, when U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, who previously said the NSAsspy-on-Americans cell phone monitoring program likely is unconstitutional, helda status hearing.

The judge had noted the cases were at the pinnacle of national importance.

Klayman, at that time, said: Mass surveillance of the citizenry cannot be permitted when it is likely based on reasons that go far beyond catching terrorists. Indeed, as Judge Leon found on two occasions in issuing his prior preliminary injunctions, Obama and his agents at the spy agencies have not been able to cite one instance when the unconstitutional mass surveillance caught even one terrorist.

Police State USA: How Orwells Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!

In Klaymans case, Leon ruled Dec. 16, 2013, and again Nov. 9, 2015, that the NSA program likely was unconstitutional, barring the government agency and Obama from conducting mass telephonic metadata surveillance over the plaintiffs.

The cases involve not only telephonic metadata mass surveillance, Klayman said, but mass surveillance of all Americans Internet and social media activity.

Klayman, at the beginning of the case, originally sued the NSA, Barack Obama, then-Attorney General Eric Holder and a number of other federal officials. Other defendants include NSA chief Keith Alexander, U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Judge Roger Vinson, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA chief John Brennan, FBI chief James Comey, the Department of Justice, the CIA and the FBI.

Plaintiffs in the case include Klayman, Charles and Mary Ann Strange, Michael Ferrari, Matt Garrison and J.J. Little.

Two of Americas influential civil-rights groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have sided with Klayman.

The data that the NSA collects, they explained in a brief, reveals political affiliation, religious practices and peoples most intimate associations.

It reveals who calls a suicide prevention line and who calls their elected official; who calls the local tea-party office and who calls Planned Parenthood.

The groups brief said the relevant fact for whether an expectation of privacy exists is that the comprehensive telephone records the government collects not just the records of a few calls over a few days but all of a persons calls over many years reveals highly personal information about the person and her life.

Link:
Emergency hearing sought to stop NSA 'spying' on Trump - WND.com

German Chancellor Angela Merkel appeared as a witness at the final hearing in the three-year existence of the parliamentary committee charged with investigating the 2013 NSA scandal. Although she admitted to technical and organizational mistakes, she parried suggestions that she knew or should have known about widespread American and German spying on allies at an early stage of the affair.

Merkels testimony was particularly anticipated not just because of her position as chancellor, but because of her high-profile statement in 2013: "Spying among friends - that simply isnt done."

The chancellor, appearing relaxed, began with a 25-minute statement full of self-quotations from 2013-15. In it she tried to prove that she had consistently come out against intelligence surveillance of allies in the wake of the Snowden leaks in 2013. She also sought to show that she had only gradually learned about the extent of the NSAs spying on Germans and the German foreign intelligence service BNDs monitoring of German allies, which emerged after journalistic inquiries in 2015.

She said that she had complained to then US President Barack Obama about the US spying in 2013 and insisted that US intelligence services operating on German soil follow German law.

"Were not in the Cold War any more," Merkel quoted herself as telling Obama.

Merkel said that the situation had been made more complicated by the complex and constantly evolving nature of surveillance technology.

"There are always some contradictions between freedom and security, and a balance must be maintained," Merkel said.

Merkel downplayed the importance of so-called "handygate"

The cell phone affair

The conservative chairman of the committee Patrick Sensburg was far less aggressive in his questioning of Merkel than he had been grilling high-ranking chancellors office leaders on Monday. One main thread of his queries had to do with alleged NSA eavesdropping on Merkel's cell phone.

Speaking without notes other than her opening remarks, Merkel said that it was never proven that the American intelligence service had listened in on her conversations. She added that she had received assurances from Obama that her phone was not tapped and wouldnt be in the future.

When asked why she didn't have her cell phone forensically examined, she said that she didnt want to give additional insights into her communication habits. She said it was easier for her just to procure a new device.

Deficits or something more?

The Social Democrats, the Left Party and the Greens sought to suggest that Merkel had violated her own principle that allies shouldnt spy on one another by failing to pursue the matter vigorously enough with Washington and to ensure that similar practices by BND were discontinued.

Merkel says she didn't know until 2015 that the BND spied on allies

In response to Merkel's insistence that she only gradually learned about the BND's use of so-called selectors, computer search terms, aimed at European political leaders and businesses, Christian Plisek of the SPD asked: "Is it responsible to demand things of intelligence services abroad, when youre not sure what our own ones are doing?"

When Plisek asked if she had inquired about where the BND got information it passed along to her, Merkel replied tersely: "I dont need information about sources of information."

Merkel said that her assertion that "friends" should spy on one another was a statement of political belief and not an assertion that Germany didnt run surveillance on allies. When pressed why it took until March 2015 for the BND to discontinue using certain controversial selectors, the chancellor blamed "technical and organizational deficits."

"You say that it cant be that friends spy on one another and yet the BND did precisely that over years," objected Andr Hahn of the Left Party. "And that was just down to 'technical and organizational deficits?'"

Merkel denied any deeper knowledge of German surveillance practices before 2015 and any responsibility for mistakes made by her subordinates. She said that she as chancellor set policy targets and trusted others to see that they were met.

Few tense moments

The mood at the hearing was fairly congenial

Konstantin von Notz of the Greens suggested that talk of a no-spy agreement between Germany and the US in 2013, which ultimately yielded no results, was a strategy to blunt the political damage of the NSA affair. Merkel denied that thiswas the case.

Notz also asked Merkel to name the reason why the former president of the BND Gerhard Schindler went into early retirement in 2015. The chancellor refused to do so, but said that she was happy thatGermanys foreign intelligence service was able to make a "new start."

The committee succeeded in highlighting mistakes madein the BND and to a lesser extent in the chancellors office. But it didnt uncover evidence of any massive misdeeds by Merkel or her associates.

In a break in the testimony, Plisek told reporters that he believed that chancellor didn't know about the practices within the BND when she made her "friends don't spy on friends" remark, although he did add that she seemed to have erected a "protective wall" around herself to keep from knowing more than she absolutely had to.

Although Merkel appeared to grow slightly more irritable as the hearing wore on, none the questioners managed to provoke her into an unmeasured response. Indeed, during the break she joked with reporters as though at a social event rather than a parliamentary investigative hearing.

Merkel's testimony ends the main investigative work of the committee, which was formed in March 2014. It now has until the second half of June to file its final report on the NSA-BND spying affair.

Original post:
Merkel testifies on NSA spying affair - Deutsche Welle