• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI broke law for years in phone record searches

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
8,957
Reaction score
8,842
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The FBI illegally collected more than 2,000 U.S. telephone call records between 2002 and 2006 by invoking terrorism emergencies that did not exist or simply persuading phone companies to provide records, according to internal bureau memos and interviews. FBI officials issued approvals after the fact to justify their actions.

E-mails obtained by The Washington Post detail how counterterrorism officials inside FBI headquarters did not follow their own procedures that were put in place to protect civil liberties. The stream of urgent requests for phone records also overwhelmed the FBI communications analysis unit with work that ultimately was not connected to imminent threats.

FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni said in an interview Monday that the FBI technically violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act when agents invoked nonexistent emergencies to collect records.

Among those whose phone records were searched improperly were journalists for The Washington Post and the New York Times, according to interviews with government officials.
Source

If the FBI wants to request phone records, they have to issue a National Security Letter (NSL) that specifies which terrorism investigation the phone records pertain to. Eventually the procedure evolved to where they were getting phone records before issuing an NSL, and then the NSL was never issued at all.

Terrorists can only win if they can get the USA to beat its own self. This is an example of that.
 
If it has aided the FBI, then it probably should be legalized.

Simple logic.
 
If it has aided the FBI, then it probably should be legalized.

Simple logic.

Fascist logic. Everything for the State. I'd rather operate by the rights and liberties of the individual than by the desires and whims of the State.
 
Fascist logic. Everything for the State. I'd rather operate by the rights and liberties of the individual than by the desires and whims of the State.
Okie dokie, thanks for giving your own opinion on the subject.

:2razz:
 
If someone wants to make copies of my phone calls, I don't feel that my rights have been violated.

The FBI has information where I made a call at H-hour on D-day. So what?
 
If someone wants to make copies of my phone calls, I don't feel that my rights have been violated.

The FBI has information where I made a call at H-hour on D-day. So what?

That's fine. You are more than free to submit in this case. But just because you don't feel it's a violation or you don't care about your info being handed out at whim of government doesn't mean that you should make policy which requires the rest of us do the same. If the government wants my information about something, they can go get a warrant like they're supposed to. If they ain't got probable cause enough against me to get a warrant, then they can mind their own business.
 
If someone wants to make copies of my phone calls, I don't feel that my rights have been violated.

The FBI has information where I made a call at H-hour on D-day. So what?
Folks don't like it when their information is given to law-enforcing institutes.

They feel it hurts their odds at getting clean out of a committed crime.
 
If it has aided the FBI, then it probably should be legalized.

Simple logic.

No.

The FBI will follow the law.

The law applied to everybody or nobody. It does not work both ways.

The FBI needs to be held accountable for spying on its own citizens.
 
No.

The FBI will follow the law.

The law applied to everybody or nobody. It does not work both ways.

The FBI needs to be held accountable for spying on its own citizens.
I agree, the law is above everyone.

I do believe however that if the FBI finds it necessary to use those methods, then a legalization - or rather - a partial legalization, should be considered.
 
That's fine. You are more than free to submit in this case. But just because you don't feel it's a violation or you don't care about your info being handed out at whim of government doesn't mean that you should make policy which requires the rest of us do the same. If the government wants my information about something, they can go get a warrant like they're supposed to. If they ain't got probable cause enough against me to get a warrant, then they can mind their own business.

I think you're blowing it all out of proportion. What do they really have?
 
Folks don't like it when their information is given to law-enforcing institutes.

They feel it hurts their odds at getting clean out of a committed crime.

That's all this pontificating accomplishes.
 
I think you're blowing it all out of proportion. What do they really have?

The ability to obtain my papers without proper warrant or oversight. That's my information, a company holds it but it's mine. If the government wants it, they can go get a warrant. It's that simple, we have legal procedures by which government can get the information. They can use those channels. Nothing extra-Constitutional though. I don't like it.
 
Oh, bull****. :roll:

It's not just people who have committed crimes who don't want the FBI going through their phone records.
 
The ability to obtain my papers without proper warrant or oversight. That's my information, a company holds it but it's mine. If the government wants it, they can go get a warrant. It's that simple, we have legal procedures by which government can get the information. They can use those channels. Nothing extra-Constitutional though. I don't like it.

I agree, it's a very slippery slope. Legal rules are there for a reason.
 
Oh, bull****. :roll:

It's not just people who have committed crimes who don't want the FBI going through their phone records.
Correct.

It's also the people who consider committing crimes in the future. :tongue4:
 
The ability to obtain my papers without proper warrant or oversight. That's my information, a company holds it but it's mine. If the government wants it, they can go get a warrant. It's that simple, we have legal procedures by which government can get the information. They can use those channels. Nothing extra-Constitutional though. I don't like it.

Your phone records aren't your papers. There's nothing there for the FBI to use against you.

If these were records of bank transactions? Yeah. Phone call transcripts? Hell, yeah! But, call history? Again; so what?
 
Your phone records aren't your papers. There's nothing there for the FBI to use against you.

If these were records of bank transactions? Yeah. Phone call transcripts? Hell, yeah! But, call history? Again; so what?

The so what is that if they want the information, they have to obtain a warrant. They can't just go and get whatever information they want from companies through bullying or force or whatever other option is open to government. It's not that difficult if you have reasonable suspicion to get the warrant, so they can go and get the warrant. And the system is in place to prevent abuse, so I'd rather go through the system designed to protect the rights and liberties of the individual instead of just brushing this off as a "whatever" thing.
 
Your phone records aren't your papers. There's nothing there for the FBI to use against you.

If these were records of bank transactions? Yeah. Phone call transcripts? Hell, yeah! But, call history? Again; so what?
Not to mention that the call history is only taken if the FBI considers you a suspect or a potential threat.
 
Not to mention that the call history is only taken if the FBI considers you a suspect or a potential threat.

All the more easier for them to just obtain the warrant.
 
Not to mention that the call history is only taken if the FBI considers you a suspect or a potential threat.

Yeppers!

I've rethunk my position. If they want to listen in on my calls, that's fine. They won't hear anything interesting...lol
 
All the more easier for them to just obtain the warrant.

Until someone slips through the cracks and frags a few hundred people. Then, you'll wondering why no one tried to stop them.
 
All the more easier for them to just obtain the warrant.
Contrary to popular belief, it is not really easy for the FBI (or any other law-enforcing institution) to receive a warrant from the court.
It requires a difficult procedure, as any other appeal to the court.

And at investigations when time is essential, it might have been a contributing decision, while law-violating, to take the call record without a warrant.
 
Yeppers!

I've rethunk my position. If they want to listen in on my calls, that's fine. They won't hear anything interesting...lol

And you're free to agree to it. Just don't make me agree along with you. I will hold the government to the law and to the Constitution. They'll have to respect my rights and liberties, acting accordingly. I'm not going to consent to their search and seizure of my information, my effects and papers, without proper warrant first.
 
Contrary to popular belief, it is not really easy for the FBI (or any other law-enforcing institution) to receive a warrant from the court.
It requires a difficult procedure, as any other appeal to the court.

And at investigations when time is essential, it might have been a contributing decision, while law-violating, to take the call record without a warrant.

Them's the breaks of freedom my friend.
 
Back
Top Bottom