FBI Employees Face Criminal Probe Over Patriot Act

DevanJedi writes "According to an article at Wired.com , several FBI agents are under investigation for illegally acquiring information an American citizens. Overzealous agents used 'misleading emergency letters' obtain phone records of thousands of Americans. This marks the first time government officers have been prosecuted for misuse of the Patriot Act. From the article: 'Unit employees, who are not authorized to request records in investigations, sent form letters to telephone companies to acquire detailed billing information on specific phone numbers by falsely promising that subpoenas were already in the works. According to a third source, FBI officials also said at the meeting that some bureau employees have already been granted immunity from prosecution in the investigation. The third source, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, did not recall, however, that FBI officials described the investigation as "criminal."'"

Comments

Wow...just wow

[Anonymous Coward]

"FBI officials also said at the meeting that some bureau employees have already been granted immunity from prosecution in the investigation."

If this is true, I honestly don't know what to say anymore.

I'm moving to Antarctica.

Re:Wow...just wow

[morgan_greywolf]

"FBI officials also said at the meeting that some bureau employees have already been granted immunity from prosecution in the investigation."

If this is true, I honestly don't know what to say anymore.

I do. It's high time the American people hold the government accountable for its actions and use its power of the vote to alter the course of American history.

Pity no one gives a damn enough to do it, though.

Re:Wow...just wow

[cromar]

For some of us, who no one listens to and don't speak very well, the only course is to wait for a revolution.

I do what little I can and I vote. It hasn't been working for shit.

Re:Wow...just wow

[russ1337]

>>>the only course is to wait for a revolution.

You'll be waiting a long time my friend. Anyone vocal enough to suggest starting a revolution becomes the enemy.... or disappears.

Re:Wow...just wow

[CrackedButter]

They're sent to Siberia aren't they? Oh wait, you're talking about the USA?

Re:Wow...just wow

[CrackedButter]

I forgot about that place, wow, the parallels are even more scary now between the USSR and the USSA.

Re:Wow...just wow

[rbanffy]

I am pretty sure suggesting a revolution or anything similar would qualify someone as a terrorist under the Patriot Act or some other law that may be passed under the same spirit.

Despite that, revolutions have a pretty high probability to go awfully wrong. Just because one went right doesn't guarantee the next will.

You know the drill - register as a voter and mobilize your community (visit your neighbors, propose meetings and other forms of discussion where you can explore your differences and inform yourselves about all candidates) so everyone in it can and will exercise their right - and duty - to vote well.

It's your country and your laws. Take them back.

One thing's for sure

[Anonymous Coward]

They were acting on direct orders from George Bush.

Pardons

[athloi]

Do the little guys get pardons too? It sure would be embittering to see Scooter Libby go free when salt of the earth NWO grunts got sent to prison.

Re:Pardons

[ArcherB]

Do the little guys get pardons too? It sure would be embittering to see Scooter Libby go free when salt of the earth NWO grunts got sent to prison.

Well, there is a big difference between what Scooter Libby did and what these guys are doing. Scooter was prosecuted for perjury. His "recollection" of a conversation was different than that of the guy he spoke with. No one was in danger over what Scooter did.

What these FBI guys are doing is unforgivable. They are literally endangering the lives of all of us. By abusing the PATRIOT Act, they are risking having it taken away from those agents who would use it legally to prevent some sort of terrorist attack from happening again.

That is inexcusable... or unpardonable.

Re:Pardons

[forrestt]

By abusing the PATRIOT Act, they are risking having it taken away

Then I, for one, say keep abusing it!!!

I am glad...

[cromar]

I am glad some small parts of our oppressive nanny state are breaking, at least. I hope it not too little, too late.

I'm so sick of this shit.

What we'll never know..

[foodnugget]

This is my main argument against the whole "we know what we're doing with this power" argument being put forward.

We, as citizens, have no idea why these records were sought, and what was done with them. Were they altered? Were the requests ultimately put to use that saved lives or harmed them? How many made it through without being caught? How will we ever know for sure?

The example for restricting power I like to put forward for arguments sake:
Lets say you're, say, 35 years old, recently divorced, ready to move on and find yourself a new girl. Looking around, you meet someone in a bar, she's recently divorced too. Things are going well for the two of you, when all of a sudden, some charges are brought up on you.
Turns out, her former husband is employed at [pick your favorite cloak and dagger agency], and not happy about his wife dating again.

Are these charges real? are they made up?

Of course, I'm not proposing that this searching power will only be used for such purposes, or that fraudulent data could be put in, but where is the recourse for when some unhinged person attempts to abuse their position?

Similarly, lets say you're in a car accident with the son/daughter of a similarly employed person. They have unknown, potentially damaging power to affect your life and cause you serious trouble in an effort to change the outcome of the situation/extract revenge.

This kind of unchecked power *will* be abused. BOFHs aren't just in server rooms, they're in every employment position imaginable, and there is a nonzero percentage of them who will abuse their position for any reason. I've only given two, I'm certain you can think of many, many more!

Re:What we'll never know..

[fishbowl]

"Scenario #1 - "Reality": The weasel/lawyer defending the suspect gets the case thrown out because the police conducted their search illegally. All evidence against the murderer already presented in this case is considered inadmissable because it may have been affected by the illegal search. The killer goes free."

As it should be. The justice system has an overarching responsiblity to follow its own rules consistently, and in particular, to not abridge the rights of the accused -- illegal search and seizure being very high among those rights that shall not be abridged. The consequences for failing to meet this basic obligation are *dire* -- they may indeed find themselves letting a criminal go free. This alone should be sufficient to cause police and prosecutors and courts to follow their own rules to the razor's edge. It's not only that a criminal might go free or an innocent person might get convicted or a person may have rights that are abridged, but also, the reputations and careers of police, attorneys, judges, administrators, *should* be on the line and *should* be forfeit if mistakes like the ones you complain about are made.

You seem to regard "killer goes free" as the net effect, or the most serious consequence, but I do not. There is a more serious breakdown of the system that is *causing* "killer to go free".

I don't know why, but it seems to be hard for some people to accept that on balance, the rights of the people, and the integrity of the system as a whole, are far more important factors than any particular case -- even when your strawman brings up a particularly frightening case such as "killer goes free."

By the way, can you actually cite one case where "killer went free" because of procedural error or on grounds such as illegal search and seizure or Miranda warnings, or something of that nature? Or are you just trying to scare people?

Re:What we'll never know..

[Pendersempai]

The problem with your suggestion is that there is never any political will to go after the corrupt cops the way there is to go after the (obviously guilty) suspect. The cop performs an illegal search? "Whatever," think the prosecutors, fellow cops, and voting public, "it was for a good cause, and now this dangerous criminal is behind bars." You think these same prosecutors for whom the bad cop did such a favor will prosecute him? Not very likely.

The exclusionary rule, on the other hand, is enforced by the judge who is insulated from the political process and can take the long view and see that the gradual erosion of civil liberties is a much graver harm than one bad guy going free. It's a pure alignment of incentives: the only reason to violate a suspect's civil rights is to get him behind bars, and if violating his civil rights sets him free, there is no reason left to do it.

This incentive works well enough that it is the VERY RARE CASE where a suspect actually gets sprung by the exclusionary rule. These very rare cases are highly publicized so they probably seem like a higher proportion than they are, but that's also a good thing, since it wakes up the electorate and holds the corrupt cops and prosecutors responsible for their violations of suspects' civil rights.

The exclusionary rule is an enduring genius of the American legal system.

don't get too excited

[mytrip]

There is no chance of anyone getting more than a slap on the wrist over this. The government hasnt let the law gets in its way yet.

not yet prosecuted!

[c_jonescc]

The abstract claims that this is the first prosecution of Patriot Act abuse, however, the article claims only that this is an investigation that has the POSSIBILITY to lead to the first prosecution.

And looking at prosecutions of government abuse under the current admin, I wouldn't exactly count on it happening.

So let me get this straight...

[RingDev]

Someone said that they think a few people who were probably working for the FBI may have done something that could have been construed as illegal, and that there may, or may not be an investigation, and that if there were an investigation it could possibly be of a criminal investigation nature, all of which may be rendered moot because someone thought they heard someone else say that the people that someone thought might have committed a crime may have already been granted immunity?

I'm all for the investigation of the allegations, removal of the perpetrators from the FBI, as well as imprisonment for any of them that are convicted of committed criminal offenses. But how about we wait 15 minutes before printing this story and figure out what the hell is actually going on first?!?

-Rick

Press core, grow a pair

[SuperBanana]

The third source, who also spoke on condition of anonymity,

Sure would be nice if the US Press Core grew a pair. Everywhere else in the world, officials put their name to their comments because the press won't print comments without any name; there's no accountability, so people have no incentive to tell the truth, so there's no point in printing the comments. I'm so fed up with US politicians and officials covering their asses with "anonymous" comments, and the press core lapping it up.

For chrissakes, some of these people are even telling the press exactly how to "anonymously" describe them: Cheney, for example, always demands to be quoted as "a senior Bush administration official."

Prediction.

[nick_davison]

Wow, if only there was some way we could have predicted this?

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Politics

[BrookHarty]

Please Please Please, let one of the FBI agents be working on request of the whitehouse staff.

I'd hate to see it be just average schmoes just stalking their ex-girl/boy friends.

Also, subpoenas first you lame ass telcos, checks and balances....

Bush Fatigue

[PopeRatzo]

I'm getting tired of seeing so many stories about the illegal activities of the Bush Administration here at Slashdot.

But not nearly as tired as I am of having a president and vice president who have corrupted the entire structure of the Executive Branch and who have weakened the foundation of our Nation.

To those of you who think these stories don't belong at a site that's for "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters", I'd say that while the illegality and corruption of the Bush Administration, and their poisonous use of technology to take away our rights and consolidate power is no longer "news", it certainly qualifies as "stuff that matters".

I invite any of you who don't think that both Bush and Cheney should be removed from office to please explain. Today, I learned from the Wall Street Journal that there are still 26% of the population (Harris Poll) who support the President. I really need to know why. I have enough faith in the fairness and decency of the American people that it surprises me that Bush's support is still in double digits.

Re:Bush Fatigue

[SatanicPuppy]

Your faith is based on the assumption that the majority of people are intellectually honest enough to change their opinion in the face of new evidence.

The bulk of those who are still solid bushies are living in a persistent fantasy world. They think the war in Iraq will be "won"...whatever the hell that means, since we still don't seem to have a defined goal other than it going away. They think we went there in the first place for the "right reasons." They think the reason the terrists haven't blown up the Sears tower is because we're "fighting them over there" and not just because terrorists as a whole tend not to be all that successful.

I don't think anything would convince them they're wrong. I mean literally anything; if he was caught on tape having sex with an underage boy, they'd say it was a liberal framejob. There is practically nothing they won't believe is someone else's fault. They're emotionally wedded to their position. If things were reversed, we'd see a similar number of liberal weenies blaming it all on the conservatives.

It's sad to say, but there just aren't a lot of free-thinkers in the world. It just shows up more here because things have gotten so polarized.

Re:Bush Fatigue

[Cheesey]

That 26% would support the devil himself if he was (or pretended to be):

1. Christian (ironic isn't it?)
2. Republican

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." - Sinclair Lewis, 1935

I must admit I was initially unsure about voting for Adolf Hitler, but when I heard about his sensible pro-life stance and opposition to non-Christians, I was all for him. I mean, those are the issues that really matter, right? His foreign policy decisions have also been first rate. I think the invasion of France has been a damn good idea, and we'll definitely defeat the insurgents in the next few months. And with their new powers, the Gestapo have been doing a fine job of eradicating the terrorist threat in the Fatherland. I often see them making arrests, which just goes to show how lucky we are to have them - our enemies are everywhere. I'm sure that the stories of human rights abuses in internment camps like Auschwitz are just liberal lies. So that's why I support our President. He's a fine Christian man, and I will not even listen to anyone who doesn't think so.

"Employees"?

[A non-mouse Coward]

Slashdot editors make it look like the administrative assistants, custodians, and assembly line workers are evil or something. Call it like it is: try "agents".

What these FBI guys are doing is unforgivable.

[falconwolf]

They are literally endangering the lives of all of us. By abusing the PATRIOT Act, they are risking having it taken away from those agents who would use it legally to prevent some sort of terrorist attack from happening again.

I hope it, the PATRIOT Act, is gotten rid of. It's not needed. And I was against it to begin with as well as against renewing it. They already had all the power needed to reduce the risk of terrorist attackes. Yes, I said "reduce the risk", as the risk can't be eliminated even in a police state run by a military dictator.

Falcon

anonymous sources

[falconwolf]

I'm so fed up with US politicians and officials covering their asses with "anonymous" comments, and the press core lapping it up.

So, you want to get rid of anonymous sources then? Perhaps you didn't live through Watergate which eventually led to Nixon's impeachment. "Follow the money" said one source to a newspaper reporter.

Falcon

"Slashdot liberal whining"?

[TomorrowPlusX]

One of the tags for this article is "slashdotliberalwhining".

Just seeing that broke my heart, makes me want to cry. What have we come to when holding our officials responsible for their actions accounts to "liberal whining"?

I know we'll never hold Bush accountable, nor Cheney nor any of the real players in this situation. But still, America is supposed to be free, and part of that is punishing police, soldiers, fbi agents, or even presidents when they break the law. The idea that somehow they are above the law, the very *idea* that they are above the law kind of obviates the whole fucking spirit of freedom and why America was founded.

Let me say this exactly once: These FBI agents are *citizens*, and so are soliders, and so are Bush and Cheney. They are not above the law.

I'm not saying this as a liberal ( though I am one ) nor as a libertarian ( though I also sort of am one ) but as a human being, and as an american. A deeply frightened and ashamed-for-my-countrymen american.

Re:"Slashdot liberal whining"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, N8F8, they are very much BELOW the law, just like the rest of us. You and your kind will be responsible for dragging this country into a police state, where whistleblowers are quietly carted off to torture cells in Gitmo, where merely setting your foot out the door is a treacherous affair; is walking on your lawn illegal? Have you angered an authority? Are you allowed to listen to music? How can you protect your finances from destruction during a frivolous lawsuit? Can you take pictures of the sunset over a bridge? Does hauling all these bags around in my trunk make me look like a terrorist? Am I allowed to say "terrorist" on the Internet? What if someone's watching? What if I check out a book by a liberal author, never mind a Democratic senator, at the library...do I end up on a list? If I twitch at the TSA security screening at the airport, is someone going to tackle me, taze me, or worse, fire at me? I forgot to throw away this bottle of water!

My God, what is happening to the United States of America? If only people like N8F8 could see beyond popular opinion and think for themselves, really understand and stop taking their freedom for granted, maybe then we could turn the tide against the NeoCons and have our beautiful, free, thinking society back.

PATRIOT Act

[falconwolf]

roving wiretaps

Roving wiretaps were already allowed before the PATROIT Act. They were allowed as late as 1988.

Expanding the warrants that can be issued by a judge to include targets more specific to terrorism.

What, warrants couldn't of been used before the act?

Created new crimes related to money laundering and financing terrorism

Like need more laws making things illegal.

Permits the confiscation of the property of those convicted of participating in or planning a terror attack

HAHA!!! Like RICO couldn't have been used for this? If they can use it to pull over someone driving because they fit a profile then confiscate any money found then it should be usable for terrorism as well.

Increased border security provisions to help stop illegal aliens from entering the country, with added provisions for the Canadian border.

You're talking to wrong person about so called "illegal aliens". If you do want to talk about them then what Native American Indian tribe are you from? If you're not Indian then you're an illegal alien. Those wanting to make it illegal to immigrate are no better than the Know Nothings who wanted to exclude the Irish from immigrating to the USA, or those who supported the Chinese Exclusion Act.

If you really want to argue that the Patriot Act is "not needed", you need to specifically address which of these provisions you don't like

Such as searching book store and library records? What of sneak and peek search warrants? The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 was specifically setup so the president could get warrants after Nixon abused his office. Or being barred from talking about what you know like Sibel Edmonds was by a Gag order issued by the admin?

Falcon