Slashdot Mirror


Disputed NSA Phone Program Is Shut Down, Aide Says (nytimes.com)

According to a senior Republican congressional aide, the National Security Agency has quietly shut down a system that analyzes logs of Americans' domestic calls and texts. "The agency has not used the system in months, and the Trump administration might not ask Congress to renew its legal authority, which is set to expire at the end of the year, according to the aide, Luke Murry, the House minority leader's national security adviser," reports The New York Times. From the report: In a raw assertion of executive power, President George W. Bush's administration started the program as part of its intense pursuit for Qaeda conspirators in the weeks after the 2001 terrorist attacks, and a court later secretly blessed it. The intelligence contractor Edward J. Snowden disclosed the program's existence in 2013, jolting the public and contributing to growing awareness of how both governments and private companies harvest and exploit personal data. The way that intelligence analysts have gained access to bulk records of Americans' phone calls and texts has evolved, but the purpose has been the same: They analyze social links to hunt for associates of known terrorism suspects.

Congress ended and replaced the program disclosed by Mr. Snowden with the U.S.A. Freedom Act of 2015, which will expire in December. Security and privacy advocates have been gearing up for a legislative battle over whether to extend or revise the program -- and with what changes, if any. Mr. Murry, who is an adviser for Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, raised doubts over the weekend about whether that debate will be necessary. His remarks came during a podcast for the national security website Lawfare. Mr. Murry brought up the pending expiration of the Freedom Act, but then disclosed that the Trump administration "hasn't actually been using it for the past six months." "I'm actually not certain that the administration will want to start that back up," Mr. Murry said. He referred to problems that the National Security Agency disclosed last year. "Technical irregularities" had contaminated the agency's database with message logs it had no authority to collect, so officials purged hundreds of millions of call and text records gathered from American telecommunications firms.
A spokesman for Mr. McCarthy's office said that Mr. Murry "was not speaking on behalf of administration policy or what Congress intends to do on this issue."

117 comments

  1. Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Government officials outright denied having such program in the first place, up until Edward Snowden revealed that this stuff was indeed real and in use. How can we trust them to tell the truth now?

    1. Re:Sure it is... by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Trump doesn't seem to like the NSA or FBI very much. That could theoretically be a false flag, but I think they actually just don't like each other.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah it is mutual. http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/03/the-push-for-a-trump-russia-back-channel-what-we-know.html - The Intel agencies don't like traitors much.

    3. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what utter nonsense.
      the nsa systems never collected stuff on Americans in the first place. That would have been illegal.

      It collected the stuff on Americans collected by the other 4 eyes in fvey.

    4. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You apparently cannot read, your statement had nothing to do with anything above it. Also yes, the NSA collects a lot of stuff including data involving Americans, and no, it's not illegal.

      But here's the text of the link you were too lazy to read or reply to :

      Despite their insistence that there was “no collusion” with the Kremlin, Trump associates had plenty of secretive interactions with Russians. The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has evidence that a meeting in the Seychelles days before Donald Trump’s inauguration was an effort to set up a back channel between the Kremlin and the incoming administration. As you may recall, Jared Kushner previously admitted that he discussed the possibility of communicating privately with Moscow during the transition — though he said his goals were innocent, and the link was never established.

      The true nature and purpose of these efforts remain a mystery, but recent reports have shed more light on the push establish a link between Team Trump and the Russians in the months before the president was sworn in. Here’s what we know so far.

      Kushner, Flynn, and Kislyak Discuss Back Channel
      There were several calls between Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., and Trump campaign officials Jared Kushner and Michael Flynn prior to Election Day, according to Reuters. In a statement before his closed-door appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee in July, Kushner said he had no recollection of these calls. Kushner initially failed to list dozens of contacts with foreign officials on his security-clearance form, and was recently stripped of his temporary top-secret clearance.

      Kushner and Flynn secretly met with Kislyak in Trump Tower on December 1, 2016. Last spring the Washington Post reported that Kushner proposed using Russian diplomatic facilities in the U.S. to establish a back channel for communication between the Trump transition and the Russian government. U.S. intelligence intercepted Kislyak describing the request to his superiors.

      Kushner told Congress that Kislyak raised the idea, saying he wanted to convey information from his “generals” about the Syrian civil war, but needed a secure line. Kushner said he suggested going through the Russian embassy, but nothing came of it:

      I believed developing a thoughtful approach on Syria was a very high priority given the ongoing humanitarian crisis, and I asked if they had an existing communications channel at his embassy we could use where they would be comfortable transmitting the information they wanted to relay to General Flynn. The Ambassador said that would not be possible and so we all agreed that we would receive this information after the Inauguration.

      On December 1, Kushner, Flynn, and Kislyak also talked about setting up a meeting between a Trump associate and a Russian contact, according to the Post:

      In addition to their discussion about setting up the communications channel, Kushner, Flynn and Kislyak also talked about arranging a meeting between a representative of Trump and a “Russian contact” in a third country whose name was not identified, according to the anonymous letter.

      Flynn resigned as Trump’s national-security adviser on February 13, 2017, saying he gave fellow administration officials “incomplete information” on his discussions with Kislyak regarding sanctions. On December 1, 2017, he pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about those discussions during the transition, and he’s now working with Mueller.

      Trump welcomes Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan to the White House on May 15, 2017.
      Secret Trump Tower Meeting With Emirates Leader
      Kushner and Flynn, along with Steve Bannon, had another secret Trump Tower meeting with the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates on December 15, 2016. In a breach of protocol, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan did not notify

    5. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why won't the FBI declassify the Uranium One documents?
      Who was FBI director at the time of the Uranium One deal?
      Why didn't Mueller recuse himself in the so-called "Russia investigation"?

      The Clinton-Russia Coverup continues...

    6. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back channels are not illegal. In fact, they have been quite useful over the years. Look up Teddy Roosevelt and how he delayed WWI for many years This is how we've dealt with DPRK for decades. This is still how we've dealt with Iran and Cuba. Without formal ties it makes conversation pretty hard. Try dealing formally with someone who has to posture that they have nothing to do with you publicly or that if they are seen speaking with you it is a weakness. So you take an alternative route and try to avoid armed conflict. QED

    7. Re:Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Government officials outright denied having such program in the first place, up until Edward Snowden revealed that this stuff was indeed real and in use. How can we trust them to tell the truth now?

      There's not a damn thing the NSA could ever claim right now that would be accepted as truth by a majority. They're professional liars. It's what they do for a living. Even a child would question their honesty at this point. Public statements are nothing more than another manipulation tool in the arsenal. If they're opening their mouths, it's to say something they want or need you to believe.

    8. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you had been paying attention you would know all the intelligence collected on Trump was all collected by British intelligence - with the exception of some of the calls to individuals under surveillance.

      The point is congress has no influence over what the NSA are doing in America, because the NSA do all their work in the UK and Australia. You spy on my wife, I spy on your wife and we tell each other anything we want to know. Technically not spying on our own wives when we get found out.

    9. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they talked to the Russians after winning the election (stomping Hillary like an old grape) just like every other incoming administration has done...yawn.

      Are you asking that Kerry and Biden, and a bunch of other democrats go to prison for their well documented and highly illegal contacts with Russia, Iran, etc?

      TDS is real.

    10. Re:Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you didn't know this program existed before Snowden's leak, frankly, you're an idiot.

    11. Re: Sure it is... by Archangel_Azazel · · Score: 2

      The Clinton-Russia Coverup continues..

      As does Russia's efforts to ensure we pay attention to the dancing bear. Nothing else to see here folks just a circus, oh and a bit of bread.

      --
      Your mind is like a parachute. It works best when it's been opened.
    12. Re: Sure it is... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3

      Why won't the FBI declassify the Uranium One documents? Who was FBI director at the time of the Uranium One deal? Why didn't Mueller recuse himself in the so-called "Russia investigation"?

      The Clinton-Russia Coverup continues...

      Really, we're still on the Uranium one deal? Fox News, of all outlets, debunked this over a year ago.

      From the linked article: "The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale. She did not," Smith said. "A committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the US to Russia."

      There is plenty for which to criticize Hillary Clinton. You don't have to resort conspiracy theories.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    13. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! If the NSA says it shutdown the program that you're not even supposed to know existed... oh nevermind... 9-11 was obviously an inside job (ae911truth dot org)

      Yes, it was. It's unfortunate that more people cannot recognize this.

    14. Re: Sure it is... by mSparks43 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ->Why didn't Mueller recuse himself in the so-called "Russia investigation"?

      Assuming this is a serious question and not just retorical propaganda.

      Because he didnt have a conflict of interest from being involved in the Trump campaign.

      Luckily for the entire Americunt justice system. Previously investigating criminals in the past doesnt mean you have to recuse yourself from investigating criminals in the future.

      Being motivated to put effort into finding crime makes for a good investigator.

      And also, he had previously been involved in covering up both Trump and Clintons visits to Lolita island, so they could be sure he wouldn't expose too much about the wrong people.

    15. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're all theorizing without first hand knowledge, including Shep Smith, and some will assume that 9 agencies independently, and with autonomy approved this sale, while others may credibly be of the opinion that a hierarchy, led by POTUS and SecState lobbied/bullied this through for personal gain. "Because Shep Smith told us so..." doesn't meet my threshold for "debunking", as I'm prejudiced by the stripes of Clinton's self-serving and deceitful behavior to believe the worst is the likeliest event. But it is only my opinion, since we are unlikely to see any real investigation of any Washington misdeeds...

    16. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you have 9 AGENCIES sign off with multiple levels each and individuals involved at every step, all professionally signing off? That means nobody bullied them. Nobody said a thing about it, and in fact there was nothing wrong with it.

      Russia has nuclear weapons. Giving them some low-grade Uranium does not affect proliferation. It does not make them more dangerous. It does not weaken the US.

      A country like Myanmar or something, that would be different. Think harder, GOP idiots. Treason in plain sight is what we're talking about. Trump is guilty. Uranium One, whatever 'wrong' went on, does not measure up.

      And they have investigated it. And they may again, but because nothing was found? Good luck with that. Mueller found a few things, witchy bitches.

      But don't take my word for it, watch Trump go off to jail.

    17. Re:Sure it is... by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Trump doesn't seem to like the NSA or FBI very much. That could theoretically be a false flag, but I think they actually just don't like each other.

      Obama liked it fine. Good thing we have Trump now.

    18. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shh. Don't talk about power and politics. Everyone plays nicey nice up there with laws and such. Us plebs just need to vote harder.

    19. Re:Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can not ever believe a republitard...they are ALL liars!

    20. Re: Sure it is... by kenh · · Score: 2

      As Secretary of State she could have killed the sale, and as Secretary of State she would likely be able to influence the Presidentâ(TM)s decision as part of her normal duties.

      When approval must be unanimous, any one of the approves can make or break the deal.

      Could the deal have gone forward without her approval/support? Doubtful.

      When HRC was on a trajectory to the Oval Office her houndation took in huge amounts of donations, as soon as she lost the election donations all but stopped. Coincidence?

      We know that her scheduler made notes of major foundation donors on her daily schedule as (fob, friends of bill) - why would donations stop if not connected to her work? The mission of the foundation never changed. Why note FOB on calendar if it didnâ(TM)t get the visitor special access?

      --
      Ken
    21. Re: Sure it is... by kenh · · Score: 1

      Having a back-channel with Russia was vital in defusing the Cuban Missle Crisis, but since that occurred before most slashdot terms were born they donâ(TM)t know about it.

      --
      Ken
    22. Re: Sure it is... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      My sense is that Obama started out fine with the security/spy people, but after a while got sick of them lying to him and by the end of his second term didn't trust them. The turning point seemed to be the Syria "red line" event, where the CIA was pushing him one way, and Obama went the other.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    23. Re: Sure it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why are the agencies harboring people suspected of plotting a coup against the President?

    24. Re: Sure it is... by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Perhaps various bad actors in USIC are worried that President Trump, once he wins reelection by a landslide, will begin to de-Stalinize the federal government. One can see how that might be an unappealing prospect for people who made a career of shitting all over the Constitution.

    25. Re: Sure it is... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      will begin to de-Stalinize the federal government.

      What does that even mean?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    26. Re: Sure it is... by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      It means to roll back the unamerican, seemingly Stalinesque policies - domestic spying, the police state, the gulag, coerced false confessions, citizen disarmament, secret laws, secret courts, torture camps, etc - that are undermining the freedom and prosperity of our country.

    27. Re: Sure it is... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      As Secretary of State she could have killed the sale, and as Secretary of State she would likely be able to influence the Presidentâ(TM)s decision as part of her normal duties.

      When approval must be unanimous, any one of the approves can make or break the deal.

      Could the deal have gone forward without her approval/support? Doubtful.

      When HRC was on a trajectory to the Oval Office her houndation took in huge amounts of donations, as soon as she lost the election donations all but stopped. Coincidence?

      We know that her scheduler made notes of major foundation donors on her daily schedule as (fob, friends of bill) - why would donations stop if not connected to her work? The mission of the foundation never changed. Why note FOB on calendar if it didnâ(TM)t get the visitor special access?

      I would not be surprised if this were the case. I understand how political power works. But the frothing over the Uranium One deal is that Secretary Clinton sold Uranium to Russia. That does not appear to be the case. That's all I'm saying.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  2. I guess Trump got tired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    of being recorded talking to Russia, undermining all his denials about having "no contact" and everything. World's dumbest traitor.

  3. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they "outsourced" that to facebook...

  4. NSA? Google! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google knows more about all of us than the NSA,

    1. Re:NSA? Google! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's this. And people don't seem to realize or care.

      A lot of the spying that the NSA does has been outsourced to tech companies that collect the same information "for advertising purposes." Totally legal and completely opaque.

      They then grant government agencies complete access to their databases as part of secret government contracts. Sometimes these are several layers deep - there are a ton of "aggregation" companies that do nothing but merge "advertising" data from multiple sources. So you'll get a "market research" company that correlates Google and Facebook and Twitter data into a single consumer profile, which can be used to target advertising ... or for the NSA to track people.

      The NSA is really shutting down some of its surveillance programs because it legitimately does not need them any more because it can just outsource to private companies. Some of the creepier outsourced programs are things like license plate scanner databases, where private companies drive around scanning license plates and storing the times and locations in a giant searchable database. They sell access to this to repo companies hunting for vehicles... and also the three letter agencies and any police department that wants access too.

      We're also starting to see something similar but with facial recognition. Disabled location information on your phone? Fine, malls and hotels will run facial recognition on their surveillance cameras and sell that information to marketing companies who aggregate it with Facebook data to build a profile of where you've been, even if you don't carry a phone and always pay in cash.

    2. Re:NSA? Google! by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Sometimes these are several layers deep - there are a ton of "aggregation" companies that do nothing but merge "advertising" data from multiple sources. So you'll get a "market research" company that correlates Google and Facebook and Twitter data into a single consumer profile, which can be used to target advertising ... or for the NSA to track people.

      Just want to tack on that one of the biggest trackers is the credit card in your wallet. That 3 pages of 4pt text that was your credit agreement has a paragraph about them "from time to time" sharing your purchase information with "partners". In reality, they will sell the info on everything you've purchase to anybody with a cashier's check.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  5. Look at exactly what they said and how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That ONE system isn't being used. They didn't mention the ones that ARE. They don't credibly claim that they've turned off XKEYSCORE and the entire chain. It's a very limited statement designed to say exactly what it says.
     

    1. Re: Look at exactly what they said and how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More like they stopped using that codename.

      They neglected to tell you they switched code names or transferred all the project assets to a different program.

    2. Re: Look at exactly what they said and how. by Narcocide · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (it is called Facebook)

    3. Re:Look at exactly what they said and how. by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      is the 3 letter agency in palo alto some new meme since everyone seems to work there these days.

      also who the f uses texts and calls anymore?

      why do you even have trolls, wouldn't they need to use the system first to track who you are?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Look at exactly what they said and how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't feed the troll.

    5. Re:Look at exactly what they said and how. by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      He meant the DMV.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    6. Re: Look at exactly what they said and how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you can have fun sending NSA contractors on pointless scavenger hunts as revenge for reporting you to the NSA merely as a way for them to squander taxpayer money.

    7. Re:Look at exactly what they said and how. by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

      CARNIVORE is apparently also still alive, monitoring email throughout the USA's core internet backbone routers. It was merely renamed "DCS1000".

    8. Re:Look at exactly what they said and how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite possibly it's been replaced by something even more effective.

  6. No Need by mentil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's been superseded by a new, broader, more secretive, more intrusive, more brazenly unconstitutional program.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just one?

    2. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, people who work for "agencies" don't spam shitty youtube links everywhere they go, loser.

    3. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh give him a break, he is so proud of participating in a welfare program from Special Education of the Santa Clara Office of Education.

      He works in a room outside the security perimeter and all he does all day is tell users across US and overseas where is the "forgot password" link to reset their password so no risk for the USA.

      Who knows what he would be doing if we didn't take care of him?

      When we figure that most users have reset their password lately, we sometimes send him pick up plums for the food bank so it's a win-win for everybody.

    4. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He works in a room outside the security perimeter and all he does all day is tell users across US and overseas where is the "forgot password" link to reset their password so no risk for the USA.

      You fools! This is highly insecure, chance are that he has already setup a link scheme and tells his special link to users to change their password!

    5. Re:No Need by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're just following the Facebook playbook. "Tell them we'll stop, and maybe they'll believe it, forget about it, and leave us alone."

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    6. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they don't follow the Facebook playbook, they just take the data they need from Facebook. Why run a secret program when people willingly post it for all to see?

    7. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the important communication happens on Twitter so what's there to hide?

      Russia, if you're listening

      Captcha: lordly

    8. Re:No Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EXACTLY and PRECISELY ***THIS*** !!!

      If you think for a single second that the CIA, NSA, DEA, CONGRESS INTEL COMMITTEES, PRESIDENT, FISA, and the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, don't have utterly mind bending and MASSIVE programs running 24x365.... You're a fucking moron bro.

      The ONLY way to STOP THEM and get your FREEDOM back is to start USING
      Distributed P2P Transaction Mineable Privacy Cryptocurrencies such as Zcash, Monero, or even to a lesser current privacy stance Bitcoin Cash.

      Starve the fuckers out of the money they use to screw you over.
      Put as much of your life as you can in P2P cryptocurrency... user to user, person to person.
      NOW.

  7. their job is to lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are spies. Their entire purpose for existing is to lie about what they are doing and why they are doing it. They have lied to us repeatedly over their entire existence
      Do not believe them. I understand there are fine people in the NSA but this is their PR team. You know how much PR people lie... These are the PR people for spies.

  8. Not just a telephone wiretapping program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The evidence Snowden presented was of comprehensive digital surveillance programs that were described as encompassing virtually all online activity by means of intercepting traffic and direct assistance of "partners" (Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, YouTube, Skype, and Apple). Responding only to the "telephone metadata" part was a lie by omission that the media willingly participated in.

  9. BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The only wat the NSA would shut down a program is if it were obsolete. Presumably they don't need to specifically capture metadata anymore because they're now capturing the complete phone call through some other program.

  10. They just get leaks directly from Twitter now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    POTUS: we are going to attack XYZ in 3 days at 4am local time.

    Much easier and less costly. Plus Utah has the anti-spying laws which prohibit helping the USA's huge data warehouse there from cooling water and other infrastructure needs for all that EMC storage.

  11. anyone else read that as nasa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and wonder why nasa needs a phone in space and do a double take
    i'm not gris btw
    not that there's anything wrong with that

    1. Re:anyone else read that as nasa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. It was just you. You are alone.

  12. Outsourced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just outsourced it.

  13. the-making-of-the-fox-news-white-house by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/03/11/the-making-of-the-fox-news-white-house

  14. FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You wouldn't like people who used fan fiction paid for by your political opponent as the basis for turning the entire US intelligence gathering powers against you either.

    Because that's what the fantasy-based ("uncorroborated" and "unconfirmed") Steele dossier is - Hillary-paid-for fan fiction.

    And the FBI used it as the basis of at least four FISA warrants, and deliberately used it to brief Trump so they could then leak it to the press.

    1. Re:FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What aspect of it is fiction? Some parts of the dossier have been confirmed as being correct.

    2. Re:FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2, Informative

      You wouldn't like people who used fan fiction paid for by your political opponent as the basis for turning the entire US intelligence gathering powers against you either.

      Because that's what the fantasy-based ("uncorroborated" and "unconfirmed") Steele dossier is - Hillary-paid-for fan fiction.

      And the FBI used it as the basis of at least four FISA warrants, and deliberately used it to brief Trump so they could then leak it to the press.

      Much of the Steele Dossier has been proven true by subsequent investigation. None of it has been proven false, AFAIK.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    3. Re:FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by terrycarlino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really? lawfareblog? Glen Greenwald, not exactly a conservative, has called lawfareblog a tool "serving, venerating and justifying the acts of those in power", in this case the Democrats. It's highly regarded by left wing pundits.

      So basically the best you've got is a dossier put together by a British intelligence mercenary for opposition research paid for by the DNC.

      The truth is that none of the dossier has been proven true, despite the claims of many left wing media "news" services. Despite the point made that politically motivated "top intelligence officials" pushed it, when Comey was under oath he refused to state the dossier was confirmed. Because it wasn't. What we have here is a bunch of deep state actors who would love for it to be true so that their illegal actions to hamstring the duly elected president of the United States during the period before his inauguration and after could be justified. Former UK ambassador to Russia has stated the dossier is inconsistent with British Intelligence's information. Steele made it up. The DNC paid for it. Bad actors in the intelligence and justice bureaucracy used it to try to illegally overturn the election.

    4. Re:FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't trust anything from lawfareblog.com. What I would trust is the documentation covering the Woods Procedure.

      That's a procedure, invented by one Bob Mueller, that outlines how evidence is to be validated before being used for a FISA warrant. You keep believing in your lawfareblog fantasies. I want to see how the professionals verified the dossier that looks exactly like an article that Glen Simpson wrote for the Washington Post years ealier with just a few name changes.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re: FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by kenh · · Score: 1

      What part of the Steele Dossier has been proven correct? Be specific.

      --
      Ken
    6. Re: FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by kenh · · Score: 1

      Hereâ(TM)s an example of proof:

      Interviewer: do you have any properties or projects in Russia?

      Trump: no, all around the world but none in Russia

      Cohen testimony indicates trump was trying to negotiate a deal unsuccessfully.

      The Cohen testimony is viewed by author as PROOF that Trump lied!

      In fact, negotiating to start a project is very different than having a project in a foreign country, but with a little bit of TDS negotiating equals ownership.

      Read your link again, it isnâ(TM)t the slam-dunk piece you think it is.

      --
      Ken
    7. Re: FBI and NSA used Hillary-paid fan fiction by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      If one is negotiating a project in Russia, it is misleading to say that one has no projects in Russia. That is, unless it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Everyone knows that Trump lies like clouds rain, so I'm not sure what your point is, exactly.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  15. I don't believe you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't believe you. The. End.

  16. Well, I for one totally believe the NSA by ph1ll · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... after James Clapper lied to Congress.

    Sorry, I mean "simply forgot" to mention it as his lawyer puts it. "Oh, you Congressmen were asking questions about that surveillance program? I thought you meant another one."

    It was so nice of Edward Snowden to remind him about it. And what thanks does he get?

    --
    --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
    1. Re:Well, I for one totally believe the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would like to follow up with John Brennan's comments to Congress, involving the CIA.
      He was asked if the CIA was spying on the Senate, he said no. They were (reasons for it were astonishingly bad)

      Michael Cohen, most evil person on the planet for lying to Congress saying March 2016 instead of June 2016 (that was the lie that got him 2 year jail sentence).
      Meanwhile, Brennan and Clapper were never charged for much worse lies.

      DC can't be fixed, NSA and CIA can't be trusted.

    2. Re:Well, I for one totally believe the NSA by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Continuity of Government is the most important government program and the 'intelligence' agencies support that, not the Constitution.

      Clapper was Just Following Orders.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  17. Tells you a lot about the Republicans by MikeRT · · Score: 2

    In a raw assertion of executive power, President George W. Bush's administration started the program as part of its intense pursuit for Qaeda conspirators in the weeks after the 2001 terrorist attacks

    No congressional authorization and almost certainly unconstitutional if all of the facts were declassified, and not a peep except from Rand Paul. Trump uses a law they wrote to have the military use construction funds to build his wall? ROAAARRRR MUH CONZTITUSHUNZ!!!

    Until about 2016, a lot of us on the right didn't place too much stock in the MIC conspiracies, but I think the last 2.5 years have pretty much settled any dispute about whether or not we live in a welfare-warfare state.

    1. Re:Tells you a lot about the Republicans by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      In the Bush case, there was at least an argument that there was a national security justification. With Trump and his wall, there are valid concerns that, should his "national emergency" declaration be upheld, future Democratic administrations may use the same tactic against things such as gun control or even healthcare(both of which in my opinion are far closer to a "national emergency" than illegal immigration over the Southern border). Politics have shown time and again that it is a pandora's box: once you let a tactic out, it will be used against you later by the other side. Some people are starting to recognize this, but most politicians look no further than the next election so have no concern for long-term effects, it's all about getting them reelected now.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re: Tells you a lot about the Republicans by kenh · · Score: 1

      Now that this âtacticâ(TM) has been discussed, a Democrat administration will use it to address the national crisis of gun violence, medical care for all, andclimate issues GUARANTEED. Do you imaginetheDemocrat bade will letthose problems persist knowing theirs an easy way to address the issue with the stroke of a presidential pen?

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:Tells you a lot about the Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny... It was a Republican President in his farewell address to the nation Jan of 1961 who told us about the MIC and NOBODY listened then.

    4. Re:Tells you a lot about the Republicans by 1ucius · · Score: 1

      Not to mention (according to TFA), "...and a court later secretly blessed it." That is, it wasn't "a raw assertion of executive power...."

    5. Re: Tells you a lot about the Republicans by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      I like Ike

  18. 100% true by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    We shut down that one and are using something much more effective now. It even detects people writing treason on webs

  19. In other words by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They don't need it anymore. They got something better.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  20. In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news, an unnamed man was found hanged in his apartment. Police don't suspect any sort of foul play and aren't looking for any perpetrators.

  21. No. Really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It really is shut down.

    They have a new and improved program now, hosted in a newly built datacenter/tap.

    The old program is shutdown. This new one is a whole other level.

  22. source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can just buy this information from google, like everyone else.

  23. calls and texts by mythix · · Score: 1

    Not really surprising. people are moving to internet based communications. calls and texts have moved to the background. I'm sure they have enough internet based spying systems operational.

  24. In case you wondered where the data is stored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is probably the main site:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

    Video of a hilarious occasion when a group highlighted to the world what's happening at that location (note that, unlike what is mentioned in the video, the site's storage capacity is exabytes, not just petabytes):
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsEkmHRbThk

  25. That's called doing their job. Also see Cuban miss by raymorris · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > Why would Trump associates continue pursuing a back channel nine days before the inauguration?

    See for example the Cuban missile crisis. Which would have been the nuclear war, had it not been for back channels facilitating a peaceful resolution by letting leaders on each side know what the other one would accept and not accept via official communications.

    You copy-pasted a lot of stuff about "December 1" and "days before the inauguration". That's when Trump was the president-elect. When he was about to take control of the nuclear football (the big button). It would be extraordinarily reckless for him to NOT start opening lines of communication at that point. Like end-of-world reckless. A US president damn well better have a way to get a message to someone to who can whisper in Putin's ear, and vice-versa.

  26. The "Great Hero"!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The intelligence contractor Edward J. Snowden"

    AKA the "great hero" who blamed USA for doing "stuff" & went to live in RUSSIA!!! A country w/ a really long history of doing "stuff"!!! :-)

  27. haha, well if they say it then it must be true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean that program they said didn't exist because they would never do something like that?

    Ok. 2 possibilities.l
    1. It's a lie.
    2. They rolled it into a new program.

  28. Trust but verify by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    "might not ask Congress to renew its legal authority,"

    Yeah, so who watches the watchers? We have no good reason to trust this or any other agency. None.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  29. Uh, huh Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A spokesman for Mr. McCarthy's office said that Mr. Murry "was not speaking on behalf of administration policy or what Congress intends to do on this issue."

  30. So there's a new program now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the old program is shut down then what was it replaced with? Only telling half the truth is a big part of security work...

  31. ROFLMAO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This works on who exactly?

    I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but there is no way, at all, the government is relinquishing that data ever.

    The Republicans or the Democrats have 0 intention to repeal the patriot act.

    Big brother is watching and he likes what he sees, the world for the taking when he's ready to squeeze.

  32. Unused is not âoeshut downâ by kenh · · Score: 2

    "The agency has not used the system in months, and the Trump administration might not ask Congress to renew its legal authority, which is set to expire at the end of the year, according to the aide, Luke Murry, the House minority leader's national security adviser," reports The New York Times.

    Theyâ(TM)ve likely just found newer, less legally challenging ways to achieve the goals of the original program. They are doing something with their SLC data center...

    --
    Ken
  33. Social Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twitter? Facebook?

    Favorite scene in Person of Interest - when Finch reveals that his company created one of the most popular social media sites. "Why bother spying on people when they will just give you their information?"

  34. 10% of the truth is a lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure they are telling the truth... probably about 10% of the truth. Which is at best misleading.

    I have no trouble believing that the exact system is no longer being used in precisely the way it was being used ten years ago.

    Is there a replacement system that does something similar?

  35. Re:That's called doing their job. Also see Cuban m by houghi · · Score: 1

    Why have somebody whisper it is Putins ear when he can shout it himself or tweet it?

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  36. Trump haters are commie simpletons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ISIS, Iran, Russia and China want the democrats back so much!

    They can gut the country, remove it's identity, all the time doing SJW mental gymnastics.

    Left nowadays is kind of a political version of flat-earthers. It doesn't have to make sense, just shout loudly enough and call anyone a Nazi who doesn't agree with the madness.

  37. leaking classified info by 1ucius · · Score: 1

    "Mr. Murry...disclosed that the Trump administration 'hasn't actually been using it for the past six months.'" That sounds a whole lot like leaking current intelligence methods. I'd suspend Mr. Murry's clearances for awhile.

    1. Re:leaking classified info by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Unless it is a ruse.

      "That old thing! Nobody is using that. Go ahead. Use the phone. Nobody is listening anymore."

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  38. Of course it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wink wink

  39. Ray Morris, ridiculous nazi faggot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol. Just lol. Ray Morris, you're a fucking TRAITOR.

  40. why I take this as a victory by Micah+NC · · Score: 1

    Any time the news is NOT about government expanding intel into individual people's lives I for one will take as a win for everyone in this country.

    Usually the government expands this stuff and then they almost publicly BRAG about. The fact that the bragging might be receding and and attempt to portray a whiff at privacy at least leaves young minds open to the ideal that government should not be invading our every choice.

    Bush and Trump did so many brazen things over this and both parties in DC LOVED it. Boo that!

    So I say, turn your smoke detectors down for once and enjoy an isolated, narrow victory.

  41. Good question. Public vs private & other reaso by raymorris · · Score: 2

    That's a good question. There are several reasons, some of which are unique to international relations and some of which apply to any negotiation, and you can use yourself.

    In high-profile political relations, one thing very important to the leaders is to look like they won. In many cultures, they want to look "tough". They don't want the appearance of giving in. In fact, for their career it's often better to not make a deal at all than to look like they gave in. For their countries, making a deal is normally better. Looking tough is a low priority. There are things that are important talking points to the leader's political base, and there are things that actually matter. So there is a difference between what the leaders want to show on Twitter and what is actually good in the political relationship.

    It's not unusual for staff to exchange appearance, words, for concrete things. "He doesn't mind giving you most of what you want, if you give us these things, but he needs you to publicly be hesitant, act like he drove a hard bargain." So one leader gives up the political points of bragging, acting like he won, in exchange for getting what his country wants. Timing matters. "He has to stay tough for now because we're also negotiating with Iran. After the Iran negotiation is over, he can take a softer position".

      At work we're in negotiations with a supplier. The supplier starting out saying they want to raise the price they charge us by 400%. They think we are dependent on them. It wouldn't have hurt if one of our engineers bumped into one of their engineers at a conference and mentioned that we're testing open source replacements and there is no way our boss is going to agree to anything like 400%. Also an increase more than 35% requires a ton of paperwork on our side to get it approved. Our guy could quietly hint to them that our boss would probably do 35%, but 36% would be a much harder sell. That's kinda what happened, though not exactly.

    Managers get a certain budget approved for raises every year. They can then apportion those raises among their people. Before you ask for a raise, do you think it would be helpful to know if your manager has a big pool available this year, or a small pool? A back channel can tell you, so you start the direct negotiation with the manager from a workable starting point. I learned that this year my manager didn't get his usual bonus because thr company is trying to cut payroll expenses for a year. Do you think that's useful information if I'm thinking about asking him to get me a lot more money?

    I'd say more about that last point, but it's NEXT week that I have a meeting planned with my manager and someone at work reads Slashdot. Let's just say that my plans are affected by back channel info about what he can and can't agree to.

  42. We used to call this upgrades by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    The old system is replaced by a different suite.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  43. Re:That's called doing their job. Also see Cuban m by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    Are you really that dim? You can't necessarily shout everything you know. That's called being stupid.

    Instead, each side is playing both internal and external politics. Trump has to take a "I won't take in shit off of that Kim, guy" stance internally, while being agreeable to Kim externally. Kim has to take a "I'm standing up to the evil America" stance internally, while being agreeable to Trump externally. What they both do is negotiate a stance that allow both leaders to save face internally, while dialing back the threat of nuclear war externally.

    Not being able to see and understand how this works with actual humans illustrates a lack of maturity.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  44. It's a given... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty much a given that they are not "ending" this program, they are just "hiding" it again.

  45. Explain how that can happen by lamer01 · · Score: 1

    Without the supreme court shutting it down?

    1. Re: Explain how that can happen by kenh · · Score: 1

      Itâ(TM)s a power Presidentâ(TM)s have but never used, now that the genie is out of the bottle, do you really imagine a President Kamala Harris or Cory Booker will say âoeyeah, I could invoke a national emergency and fix [global wrming|gun violence|medicare for all|college debt|opiod crisis] continue but since Trump didnâ(TM)t build the wall congress refused to fund, my hands are tied.â

      And remember, it was the Supreme Court that upheld the Obamacare âoetaxâ despite democrats calling it a âoefineâ in the bill. (SCOTUS apparently knewwhat they meant)

      --
      Ken
    2. Re:Explain how that can happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Supreme Court will have to rule on Trump's emergency first. If they allow this one, they're going to find it really hard to justify shutting down the next one.

  46. Headline: Robocallers Beat NSA by MtnDeusExMachina · · Score: 1

    NSA was cranking along connecting 98% of all spoofed numbers to other spoofed numbers when they suddenly realized that 100% of their data was crap.

  47. It's Creimer spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not the TLA part that is the meme. It's the affiliate link at the bottom of all the posts and the something positive hashtag. It's Creimer spam though I'm guessing it's actually the trolls who ran Creimer off this site pretending to be Creimer, like those APK imposters.

  48. Not funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not funny at all. The parties swapped after 1964. Eisenhower was a laizefare democrat by today's standards.

  49. Eric admitted it dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what about live witness testimony ON CAMERA where Eric Trump said the Russians really really like golf and financed all their stuff?

    Your lies aren't the slam-dunk denials you think they are.