Slashdot Mirror


Secret Rules Make It Pretty Easy For the FBI To Spy On Journalists (theintercept.com)

schwit1 shares with us a report on a 11-part series led by The Intercept reporter Cora Currier: Secret FBI rules allow agents to obtain journalists' phone records with approval from two internal officials -- far less oversight than under normal judicial procedures. The classified rules dating from 2013, govern the FBI's use of national security letters, which allow the bureau to obtain information about journalists' calls without going to a judge or informing the news organization being targeted. They have previously been released only in heavily redacted form. Media advocates said the documents show that the FBI imposes few constraints on itself when it bypasses the requirement to go to court and obtain subpoenas or search warrants before accessing journalists' information. The rules stipulate that obtaining a journalist's records with a national security letter requires the signoff of the FBI's general counsel and the executive assistant director of the bureau's National Security Branch, in addition to the regular chain of approval. Generally speaking, there are a variety of FBI officials, including the agents in charge of field offices, who can sign off that an NSL is "relevant" to a national security investigation. There is an extra step under the rules if the NSL targets a journalist in order "to identify confidential news media sources." In that case, the general counsel and the executive assistant director must first consult with the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's National Security Division. But if the NSL is trying to identify a leaker by targeting the records of the potential source, and not the journalist, the Justice Department doesn't need to be involved. The guidelines also specify that the extra oversight layers do not apply if the journalist is believed to be a spy or is part of a news organization "associated with a foreign intelligence service" or "otherwise acting on behalf of a foreign power." Unless, again, the purpose is to identify a leak, in which case the general counsel and executive assistant director must approve the request.

4 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Re:secret rules by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Too soon.

    Everybody still remembers the 'free press' being owned by the Clinton campaign. Try again in four years, most Americans have poor memories, CNN, NYT etc might have a tiny shred of credibility back by then.

    Then again, that would require they tone down the propaganda for a period, so they might not.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  2. Context matters, except to #PresidentTweety by shanen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The reality is rather more complicated than your feeble attempt at a joke might suggest. Not really blaming you. I wanted to think of some humorous aspect of the entire situation and came up drier than your attempted witticism.

    President Obama inherited a mess. The roots of the problem go back way before 2013, 2008, or even 2000. The entire governmental system has become hopelessly distorted by partisan politics. The founders hated political parties and understood the risks of putting party ahead of country. They probably would have outlawed political parties if they could have figured out any way to prevent the leopard from changing its spots, but at least they tried to isolate the sickness and keep it out of the judicial branch. Most prominently, that's why federal judges were appointed for life.

    A lot of people would point at Bush v Gore as the breaking point, but I actually think that was just the harvest. The seeds were planted decades before. Maybe Ike deserves the negative credit for trying to defuse two of his political adversaries by putting them on the Court? Or FDR for his attempts to pack the Court, though at least he failed in his bum's rush approach and had to wait for time to do its little ravaging act? Or maybe we should just jump all the way back to Marbury v Madison and President John Adams?

    Anyway, at this point I think whatever Obama did badly, #PresidentTweety is about to do worse.

    Nobody expects the Email Inquisition.

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  3. Why the eff are "Journalist" a protected class? by Kili · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are we not ALL citizens entitled to the same constitutional protections of our inalienable rights? Why the heck is it special for journalists and why are we not all equal under the law?

  4. Re:The Whole Game Is Rigged. by zifn4b · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yet they force us to play.

    Even more interesting is how those of us that recognize this and learn how to play by the rules of said game to our advantage are demonized in a true hello pot meet kettle fashion. Who exactly do they think we learned this from? It's the Lucifer Effect. FWIW - I won't compromise my morals and ethics but I will use the same tactics as those that those do not have morals and ethics use, I just use them in a different way strategically. Want to fix the problem? Fix the game. The game is creating bad people.

    --
    We'll make great pets