PDA

View Full Version : Something Rather Alarming On Amash's FB Page




jeffro97
12-10-2014, 09:47 PM
So, I was casually strolling through Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/812569822115759), when I came upon this.


When I learned that the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2015 was being rushed to the floor for a vote—with little debate and only a voice vote expected (i.e., simply declared "passed" with almost nobody in the room)—I asked my legislative staff to quickly review the bill for unusual language. What they discovered is one of the most egregious sections of law I've encountered during my time as a representative: It grants the executive branch virtually unlimited access to the communications of every American.

Sirens firing off all around, I read a bit on.


On Wednesday afternoon, I went to the House floor to demand a roll call vote on the bill so that everyone's vote would have to be recorded. I also sent the letter below to every representative.
With more time to spread the word, we would have stopped this bill, which passed 325-100. Thanks to the 99 other representatives—44 Republicans and 55 Democrats—who voted to protect our rights and uphold the Constitution. And thanks to my incredibly talented staff.
###

Block New Spying on U.S. Citizens: Vote “NO” on H.R. 4681

Dear Colleague:

The intelligence reauthorization bill, which the House will vote on today, contains a troubling new provision that for the first time statutorily authorizes spying on U.S. citizens without legal process.

Last night, the Senate passed an amended version of the intelligence reauthorization bill with a new Sec. 309—one the House never has considered. Sec. 309 authorizes “the acquisition, retention, and dissemination” of nonpublic communications, including those to and from U.S. persons. The section contemplates that those private communications of Americans, obtained without a court order, may be transferred to domestic law enforcement for criminal investigations.

To be clear, Sec. 309 provides the first statutory authority for the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of U.S. persons’ private communications obtained without legal process such as a court order or a subpoena. The administration currently may conduct such surveillance under a claim of executive authority, such as E.O. 12333. However, Congress never has approved of using executive authority in that way to capture and use Americans’ private telephone records, electronic communications, or cloud data.

Supporters of Sec. 309 claim that the provision actually reins in the executive branch’s power to retain Americans’ private communications. It is true that Sec. 309 includes exceedingly weak limits on the executive’s retention of Americans’ communications. With many exceptions, the provision requires the executive to dispose of Americans’ communications within five years of acquiring them—although, as HPSCI admits, the executive branch already follows procedures along these lines.

In exchange for the data retention requirements that the executive already follows, Sec. 309 provides a novel statutory basis for the executive branch’s capture and use of Americans’ private communications. The Senate inserted the provision into the intelligence reauthorization bill late last night. That is no way for Congress to address the sensitive, private information of our constituents—especially when we are asked to expand our government’s surveillance powers.

I urge you to join me in voting “no” on H.R. 4681, the intelligence reauthorization bill, when it comes before the House today.

/s/

Justin Amash
Member of Congress



HR 4681 is the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2015 (https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr4681-113/show), which has now been passed in both the Senate and House, and now only awaits the Presidents signature.

Here were the "NO" votes from the House:


Amash
Bass
Bentivolio
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clawson (FL)
Cohen
Conyers
Cummings
DeFazio
DelBene
DesJarlais
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Eshoo
Farr
Garamendi
Garcia
Garrett
Gibson
Gohmert
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Grayson
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Gutiérrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Holt
Honda
Huelskamp
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Kildee
Kingston
Labrador
Lee (CA)
Lewis
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lummis
Massie
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meadows
Mica
Moore
Mulvaney
Nadler
Nugent
O'Rourke
Pallone
Perry
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Posey
Rangel
Ribble
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Salmon
Sanford
Schakowsky
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Speier
Stockman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Tierney
Tipton
Velázquez
Waters
Weber (TX)
Welch
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoho

44 Republicans, 55 Democrats

Henry Rogue
12-10-2014, 10:17 PM
44 Republicans and 55 Democrats Bipartisan, unfortunately so was the yes vote.

tangent4ronpaul
12-10-2014, 10:31 PM
The Senate inserted the provision into the intelligence reauthorization bill late last night.

Who did this? McCain? The Fiend?

-t

Brian4Liberty
12-10-2014, 11:04 PM
542881520957272064

HOLLYWOOD
12-11-2014, 02:09 AM
Senate passed an amended version of the intelligence reauthorization bill with a new Sec. 309—one the House never has considered. Sec. 309 authorizes “the acquisition, retention, and dissemination” of nonpublic communications, including those to and from U.S. persons. The section contemplates that those private communications of Americans, obtained without a court order, may be transferred to domestic law enforcement for criminal investigations.

So, who/what in the US Senate inserted the new section 309? This smells of Lindsey Graham/McCain/Menedez.
So, who/what in the House RUSHED THIS TO THE FLOOR for a quick voice vote?

These sly calculating snakes in the US Senate/House that amend a bill like this, then RUSH IT TO THE FLOOR back in the House for a quick "rubberstamp"voice vote. The Congressman are off the hook, to being on the recorded voting for the new section 309 amended bill from the Senate.

Everyone knows, rep. Mike Rogers, the Military-Security Industrial Complexes go to man when they need big bucks and contracts. John Boehner is definitely a Big Totalitarian Fascists... as usual.
https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr4681-113/show

Reminds me when Congressman Maxine Waters did the same thing with an Amendment and voice vote(no objections) in sticking Americans with $5+ Billion in Haitian previous debt held by the IMF/WB/Central Banksters. No One is on record for that one... and that's how these scumbags operate, with the American public not having a clue what's truly going on.

ClydeCoulter
12-11-2014, 02:41 AM
It's still immoral, unconstitutiona and unnatural, and therefore unlawful.

HOLLYWOOD
12-11-2014, 03:24 AM
Senate's 309: Can't keep data on Americans for longer than 5 years, with the exception of EVERY EXCUSE government can conjure-up... then they can keep it on record indefinitely. Are your internet and voice transmissions encrypted? Then the government can spy on you and keep all communication FOREVER. Your representatives don't make the decisions, the Attorney General does, and Americans have witnessed a long line of "Himmlers" running that office and abusing the powers.

What scumbags... be nice to know who installed the changes in "The secret meeting of a select few who make all the secret changes without debate or vote..." that Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) spoke/warned yesterday sfternoon on the Senate floor about the cromnibus/defense bill.


SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS.

(a) Definitions- In this section: Comments (https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr4681-113/text?version=eas&nid=t0:eas:32#)Permalink (https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr4681-113/text?version=eas&nid=t0:eas:188)


(1) COVERED COMMUNICATION- The term ‘covered communication’ means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired without the consent of a person who is a party to the communication, including communications in electronic storage.
(2) HEAD OF AN ELEMENT OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY- The term ‘head of an element of the intelligence community’ means, as appropriate--

(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community; or
(B) the head of the department or agency containing such element.

(3) UNITED STATES PERSON- The term ‘United States person’ has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).


(b) Procedures for Covered Communications-


(1) REQUIREMENT TO ADOPT- Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the requirements of paragraph (3).


(2) COORDINATION AND APPROVAL- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall be--



(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence; and
(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.


(3) PROCEDURES- (paragraph 3)


(A) APPLICATION- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or certification issued by a court established under subsection (a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a United States person and shall permit the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject to the limitation in subparagraph (B).


(B) LIMITATION ON RETENTION- A covered communication shall not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless--

(i) the communication has been affirmatively determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to understand or assess foreign intelligence or counterintelligence;
(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law enforcement agency;

(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably believed to have a secret meaning;

(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably believed to be non-United States persons;

(v) retention is necessary to protect against an imminent threat to human life, in which case both the nature of the threat and the information to be retained shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees not later than 30 days after the date such retention is extended under this clause;

(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery obligation, in which case access to information retained for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an annual basis; or

(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is approved by the head of the element of the intelligence community responsible for such retention, based on a determination that retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States, in which case the head of such element shall provide to the congressional intelligence committees a written certification describing--
(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States;
(II) the duration for which the head of the element is authorizing retention;

(III) the particular information to be retained; and
(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence community is taking to protect the privacy interests of United States persons or persons located inside the United States.

GunnyFreedom
12-11-2014, 05:24 AM
I am reading this I am actually horrified. Amash is understating it I think

GunnyFreedom
12-11-2014, 05:44 AM
SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS.


(a) Definitions- In this section:


(1) COVERED COMMUNICATION- The term ‘covered communication’ means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired without the consent of a person who is a party to the communication, including communications in electronic storage.
(2) HEAD OF AN ELEMENT OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY- The term ‘head of an element of the intelligence community’ means, as appropriate--


(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community; or
(B) the head of the department or agency containing such element.

(3) UNITED STATES PERSON- The term ‘United States person’ has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801) (b) Procedures for Covered Communications-



(1) REQUIREMENT TO ADOPT- Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) COORDINATION AND APPROVAL- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall be--


(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence; and
(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.


(3) PROCEDURES-


(A) APPLICATION- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or certification issued by a court established under subsection (a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a United States person and shall permit the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject to the limitation in subparagraph (B).
(B) LIMITATION ON RETENTION- A covered communication shall not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless--


(i) the communication has been affirmatively determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to understand or assess foreign intelligence or counterintelligence;
(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law enforcement agency;
(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably believed to have a secret meaning;
(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably believed to be non-United States persons;
(v) retention is necessary to protect against an imminent threat to human life, in which case both the nature of the threat and the information to be retained shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees not later than 30 days after the date such retention is extended under this clause;
(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery obligation, in which case access to information retained for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an annual basis; or
(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is approved by the head of the element of the intelligence community responsible for such retention, based on a determination that retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States, in which case the head of such element shall provide to the congressional intelligence committees a written certification describing--
(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States;
(II) the duration for which the head of the element is authorizing retention;
(III) the particular information to be retained; and
(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence community is taking to protect the privacy interests of United States persons or persons located inside the United States.

gg
h
h

GunnyFreedom
12-11-2014, 05:45 AM
Did Congress just declare martial law on the Internet?

GunnyFreedom
12-11-2014, 06:11 AM
SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS.


(a) Definitions- In this section:


(1) COVERED COMMUNICATION- The term ‘covered communication’ means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired without the consent of a person who is a party to the communication, including communications in electronic storage.




ANY nonpublic communication including everything on the Internet or on private servers not on the internet, or on private or commercial computers everywhere, without your consent.





(2) HEAD OF AN ELEMENT OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY- The term ‘head of an element of the intelligence community’ means, as appropriate--


(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community; or
(B) the head of the department or agency containing such element.

(3) UNITED STATES PERSON- The term ‘United States person’ has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801) (b) Procedures for Covered Communications-



(1) REQUIREMENT TO ADOPT- Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) COORDINATION AND APPROVAL- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall be--


(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence; and
(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.


(3) PROCEDURES-


(A) APPLICATION- The procedures required by paragraph (1) shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or certification issued by a court established under subsection (a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a United States person and shall permit the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject to the limitation in subparagraph (B).




Intelligence apparently includes domestic police activity section (ii) retention by law enforcement agency. This basically means the databases will fall under the command of the DHS Fusion Centers, now with a wide net to collect "everything" and do complex analysis and data-mining for criminals, traitors, and thought-criminals.



(B) LIMITATION ON RETENTION- A covered communication shall not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless--


(i) the communication has been affirmatively determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to understand or assess foreign intelligence or counterintelligence;
(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law enforcement agency;



All that 'Constitution' stuff notwithstanding, that whole "not authorized by court order" will be retained for the rest of time if we think there might be a crime in there somewhere.

To me this means that whatever they are calling "Carnivore" nowadays will be piped through the DHS and node out to the Fusion Centers. Then law enforcement will have access to all that crazy NSA wiretapping stuff. Forget breaking into our phones...



(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably believed to have a secret meaning;


We will keep it forever if it's at all encrypted, you know, just because. Even if we think you might be speaking in dog-whistles, we will keep that blog comment FOREVER in your permanent file, buddy.


(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably believed to be non-United States persons;
(v) retention is necessary to protect against an imminent threat to human life, in which case both the nature of the threat and the information to be retained shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees not later than 30 days after the date such retention is extended under this clause;



lmao @ imminent threat after 5 years :rolleyes:



(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery obligation, in which case access to information retained for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an annual basis; or



This actually makes any 'conditions' on retention meaningless. Some guy in a hovel says "comply" with a new records-keeping standard and now they are 20.



(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is approved by the head of the element of the intelligence community responsible for such retention, based on a determination that retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States, in which case the head of such element shall provide to the congressional intelligence committees a written certification describing--
(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to protect the national security of the United States;



lmao @ "we will just keep them longer than 5 years if we want to anyway" haha so why even bother to list conditions? ffs

It's fer National Security! Secure the Homeland, every mundane citizen duck and cover while we come around and count your money and test your toilets for drugs.




(II) the duration for which the head of the element is authorizing retention;
(III) the particular information to be retained; and
(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence community is taking to protect the privacy interests of United States persons or persons located inside the United States.

gg
h
h

Lord have mercy. Are y'all seeing what I am seeing in this bill?

jeffro97
12-11-2014, 06:30 AM
Sometimes I wish this was Alex Jones stuff, but when you come upon it yourself... it's just too much. And I listen to Jones on occasion, and I believe some of the stuff he say's. I can't wait to hear his take on this.

I try to remain a bit skeptical with this in my mind, but I know I can't. It's written down, and it passed both houses of Congress. It really scares me deep down.

Occam's Banana
12-11-2014, 06:47 AM
Sometimes I wish this was Alex Jones stuff, but when you come upon it yourself... it's just too much. And I listen to Jones on occasion, and I believe some of the stuff he say's. I can't wait to hear his take on this.

I try to remain a bit skeptical with this in my mind, but I know I can't. It's written down, and it passed both houses of Congress. It really scares me deep down.

The important question isn't whether you're paranoid - it's whether you're paranoid enough ...

Cleaner44
12-11-2014, 09:12 AM
The "lawmakers" in Congress don't give a shit if their bills are unconstitutional. They will literally write down any stupid idea and pass it into law. Maybe 10 years from now it will be struck down, but even then the criminals in our government won't stop their illegal collecting.

(Not you NSA guy, not you CIA guy, not you random intelligence worker reading my every word...)

Origanalist
12-11-2014, 09:21 AM
Did Congress just declare martial law on the Internet?

It's not like it wasn't expected, government can't abide by that which it can't or doesn't control.

buck000
12-11-2014, 11:09 AM
Yesterday, I was talking with a financial advisor I know, and he said, "buy gold." Specifically, an ETF like GDX.

He said that people like Jeremy Siegel (http://www.newsmax.com/finance/siegel-10correction-stocks/2014/12/09/id/611968/) and Brian Wesbury are typically hugely perpetually bullish, but are even talking about a correction of some kind. I don't know about those folks, but I trust my friend a fair amount.

TaftFan
12-11-2014, 04:07 PM
At 11:45 PM last night, we learned that we would be considering a revised version of the Intelligence Authorization Act for 2015 that funds agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This was in essence the third bite at this particular apple of trying to increase oversight of the NSA and limit its surveillance of American citizens without a warrant. Sadly, it again fell short of protecting our civil liberties.

Though I was pleased to see that the base text of an idea I introduced in H.R. 3436, the NSA Inspector General Act of 2013, (requiring that the Inspector General for the NSA is Senate confirmed) was again included, the bill overall falls short.

There are still no meaningful prohibitions on the NSA collecting metadata of U.S. citizens without needing a warrant and probable cause, and consequently it is a violation of our 4th amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Even worse in this particular bill is a new section snuck in without any discussion that for the first time codifies the “the acquisition, retention, and dissemination” of collected records. This means watch what you say on the phone and write over the email…they will now have codified their ability to hang onto your records for the next five years given this passed unanimously in the Senate last night.

Credit goes to Justin Amash for spotting this new part of the bill and so the two of us hurried down to the floor of the House to ask for a recorded vote on this bill. The bill ended up passing by a vote of 325 to 100, but having the vote was important because otherwise these votes that go through by voice and are not voted on are deemed to have been supported “unanimously”…and I believe for those of us who care about civil liberty there is anything but unanimous support for government’s expansion in this sphere.https://www.facebook.com/RepSanfordSC/posts/310578122485309

jeffro97
12-11-2014, 04:58 PM
I'm liking Sanford more and more. I'm glad we have him there with Justin.

anaconda
12-23-2014, 10:59 PM
I am reading this I am actually horrified. Amash is understating it I think

Where is Rand on this? He should be going ballistic.

anaconda
12-23-2014, 11:11 PM
PDF of the final bill:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr4681enr/pdf/BILLS-113hr4681enr.pdf

anaconda
12-23-2014, 11:17 PM
Does anyone know why there is no roll call listed here for the Senate on HR 4681? It is my best understanding that the number of the bill remained "H.R. 4681" when the Senate apparently voted on it.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_113_2.htm

jeffro97
12-27-2014, 07:28 AM
Does anyone know why there is no roll call listed here for the Senate on HR 4681? It is my best understanding that the number of the bill remained "H.R. 4681" when the Senate apparently voted on it.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_113_2.htm

It was a voice vote (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr4681) in the Senate, so no record was taken as a result. What a shame...