Were DiFi’s Aides Who Claimed “Only a Small Number” of Back Door Searches Ignorant or Lying?
Yesterday, we learned:
- NSA conducted unwarranted back door searches on 198 US persons’ content last year and 9,500 back door searches on US person metadata
- CIA conducted around 1,900 unwarranted back door searches on US person content, and an uncounted number of back door searches on US person metadata
- FBI conducted a substantial number of unwarranted back door searches on US person content and metadata — so much so it doesn’t count it
Back in November, when Dianne Feinstein was trying to codify these unwarranted back door searches explicitly into law, here’s what anonymous sources described as Senate Intelligence Committee aides told the WaPo:
They say that there have been only a “small number” of such queries each year. Such searches are useful, for instance, if a tip arises that a terrorist group is plotting to kill or kidnap an American, officials have said.
“Only a small number.”
Over 2,000 counted searches between the CIA and NSA. Uncounted, but substantial, number of searches by FBI. “Only a small number.”
Were these anonymous sources ignorant — relying on false information from the Agencies? The actual number of unwarranted back door searches doesn’t appear in the unredacted portions of the one Semiannual Section 702 Compliance report we’ve seen (see page 13); there doesn’t appear to be a redacted section where they would end up.
So have the Agencies (CIA and NSA in this case; FBI’s back door searches get audited in a different way) simply hidden from their Congressional overseers how frequently they were doing these searches?
Or were these aides trying, once again, to pass legislation permitting the nation’s spy agencies to conduct intrusive searches on Americans by lying?
One way or another, it’s a damn good thing Ron Wyden asked for and insisted on getting an answer to his question of how common these back door searches are (even if the FBI still refuses to count them). Because the key people who are supposed to oversee them are either ignorant or lying about them.
I don’t know about DiFi’s aides, but I’m sure that she doesn’t want to know about it.
Sure makes one feel comforted to know we’re probably “protected” by a “protocol” in these regards…. Uh, where might we find that protocol? And what was the vote on that? Under what provision of the Constitution is it authorized?
Because the key people who are supposed to oversee them are either ignorant or lying about them.
I personally have begun to suspect the possibility that the key people who are supposed to oversee them are BOTH ignorant and lying about them.
I asked you this on Twitter, Marcy, but I wanted to put it here, too.
“NSA conducted unwarranted back door searches on 198 US persons’ content last year”
I’m missing something. Spencer Ackerman yesterday wrote this:
‘ The National Security Agency searched through its data troves of emails and other communications data for 198 “identifiers” of Americans’ information in 2013 alone, a practice civil libertarians denounce as a way to evade constitutional privacy protections. ‘
That does not describe what you say here. That’s not the search “on 198 US persons’ content.” It’s a search of **the entire data trove** for those identifiers, isn’t it? Meaning if they have 50,000 comms in the trove, searching for the identifiers of 198 ppl – might get 10,000 hits. Meaning *many more* than 198 people get their content searched.
Am I just completely misunderstanding this?
Does “accessed” work better for you?
When you google my site, you search all sites, but you only pull up my site. That’s waht I meant.
No, it’s still not making sense. ‘ searched through its data troves of emails and other communications data for 198 “identifiers” of Americans’ information ‘ is not **anything** like ‘searches on 198 US persons’ content’.
__
Those two things are totlally different.
What I’m picturing is a huge data trove – pick a number, say 50,000 – the content of 50,000 Americans. They search that for Identifiers – phone numbers, email addresses (more? names?). Isn’t that going to briing back a LOT of hits? Allowing them to search the content of every comm that brings bak a hit?
What they’re basically doing is pulling up the content tied to 198 identifiers. That will include their counterpart conversation (which SHOULD be non-US persons, so long as they only pull one degree from the actual target).
The data trove is only foreign communications? Or supposed to be?
Why am I getting the impression that Wyden is saying it’s a data trove of *American’s* content? Which would lead me bcak to my first questions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-officials-disclose-data-on-backdoor-searches-of-americans-phone-calls-e-mails/2014/06/30/31eeea4e-0089-11e4-8fd0-3a663dfa68ac_story.html
Now I’m just being dumb. It IS American’s content, as the story says in the first graf.