REALITY WINNER - TURNCOAT - WANTED TRUMP WHITE HOUSE BURNED DOWN

REALITY WINNER - TURNCOAT - SHE WANTS TRUMP WHITE HOUSE BURNED DOWN:

ALSO WANTED TO JOIN TALIBAN LIKE BERGDAHL.

IS REALITY MENTALLY ILL? NO. JUST A MEDIA BRAIN-WASHED TRAITOR.

WILL SHE GO TO PRISON FOR TREASON OR BE REWARDED??


Sources: CBS News, CNN, Fox News, YouTube


***** Reality Winner - NSA leaker wanted to 'burn the White House down'


The woman accused of leaking classified information once wrote she wanted "to burn the White House Down...find somewhere in Kurdistan to live," prompting prosecutors to argue she would flee the country if she was released on bond.

Reality Winner appeared before a judge in Augusta, Ga., on Thursday who ordered her to remain jailed until her trial. Prosecutors argued that the 25-year-old might try to flee the U.S. if she was released on bond. They added that Winner wrote in her notebook plans to set the White House on fire, travel to Afghanistan and pledge her allegiance to the Taliban, WSB-TV reported.

Winner also called her mother while in jail and coached her on what tell the media, telling them that her daughter was "scared."

"Mom, those documents. I screwed up," Winner also confessed to her mom in the recorded jailhouse phone call.

Winner also allegedly told her sister she was "pretty, white and cute" and that Winner believed her bond hearing would play out in her favor, according to the news station.

The former government contractor pleaded not guilty to charges that she illegally retained and transmitted national defense information. Winner, the former Air Force linguist who speaks Arabic and Farsi, is accused of copying and mailing a classified report containing top-secret material to an online news organization, according to prosecutors.

Authorities haven't described the report or named the news outlet. But the Justice Department announced Winner's arrest Monday as The Intercept reported it had obtained a classified National Security Agency report suggesting Russian hackers attacked a U.S. voting software supplier before last year's presidential election. The NSA report was dated May 5, the same as the document Winner is charged with leaking.

Winner's mother and stepfather defended Winner, telling the judge she had no criminal history and that she would not attempt to flee. They added they would use their 20-acre home in Kingsville, Texas, to finance her bond.

"Because my client is a millennial and she knows how to use technology, that's somehow proof of evil intent," said Titus Nichols, Winner's defense attorney. "The government is scraping and clawing to build a mountain out of a molehill."

However, the judge said whether Winner's violent words was "a jest or not, it still concerns" him.

RUSSIAN CYBER ATTACKS - DEMS' NEW EXCUSE FOR HILLARY'S 2016 LOSS

RUSSIAN CYBER ATTACKS - DEMS' NEW EXCUSE FOR HILLARY'S 2016 LOSS:

IT WASN'T RUSSIA BUT THE NSA & DHS.

HILLARY LOST BECAUSE NOT EVEN THE FEDS TRUST HER.

HILLARY LOST DUE TO BLUE COLLAR WHITE VOTERS & MANY LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYED BLACK VOTERS CASTING BALLOTS FOR TRUMP.


Sources: Fox News, Sean Hannity, Alex Jones, Gateway Pundit, Youtube


***** Judge Napolitano Says It Was The NSA, Not The Russians Who Hacked DNC


Back in August, Judge Napolitano made some comments regarding the DNC hack.

On his show “Judge Napolitano’s Chambers”, Judge Nap shared his own thoughts on the leaked DNC emails:

The DNC and Clinton campaign decided to blame of all people, the Russians! They accused Vlademir Putin of being in cahoots with Donald Trump and having his intelligence services hack the DNC to expose e-mails to make Mrs. Clinton look bad and thereby benefit Donald Trump. But the Russians had nothing to do with it.

….a former high ranking NSA official who developed a software that the NSA now uses said the NSA hacked the DNC…the members of the intelligence community simply do not want Hillary Clinton to be President of the United States because she doesn’t know how to handle State secrets.

The left has been beating this ‘Russian drum’ for several months now. Russian hacking is one of the many false narratives that the left has been pushing in order to deny President Elect Trump his fully earned legitimacy.

In order to keep the Marxist agenda alive, the left must continue to foment civil unrest and division. The leftists need to get used to the new Republican party because the days of capitulating are over.

-----------------------------------------------


****** REPORT: FBI Director Comey Tells Trump That Russians Didn't Influence the Election

FBI Director James Comey has informed President-elect Donald Trump that there is "no credible evidence that Russia influenced the outcome of the recent U.S. presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee and the e-mails of John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign" according to a report from author and journalist Ed Klein.

Citing sources who were briefed on Comey’s conversations with Trump, Klein reports that Comey said that the only member of the U.S. intelligence community who was ready to assert that the Russians sanctioned the hacking was Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan, who "takes his marching orders from President Obama."

"In Comey’s view, the leaks to the New York Times and The Washington Post alleging that the Russians tried—and perhaps even succeeded—in tilting the election to Trump were a Democratic Party effort to delegitimize Trump’s victory," Klein writes.

If Klein's reporting is accurate, this would be a powerful blow to the current left-wing narrative that the Russian government intervened on behalf of the President-elect during the 2016 presidential election

TRUMP vs PAUL RYAN: TRUMP WINS (THE MEETING)

TRUMP vs PAUL RYAN: TRUMP WINS

TRUMP & RYAN ARE PLANNING TO TALK OUT DIFFERENCES.

IS PAUL RYAN BEING BLACKMAILED?

Sources: ABC,  Fox News, CNN, WSJ, Talking Points Memo, YouTube

US House Speaker and staunch Republican Paul Ryan publicly denounces his support for presumptive 2016 GOP Presidential Candidate Donald J Trump, yet no one thinks this is strange or out of character for Ryan.

Both Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney publicly state they would rather support Hillary Clinton than Trump and yet no one questions these unusual, out of character remarks from these two GOP Giants?

Could it be that the NSA has collected dirt on Ryan and Romney and they are being Blackmailed by the Democrats?

Trump and Ryan are planning to meet in the near future to discuss their ideological differences.

Stay Tuned.

***** Mr. Trump Goes to Washington: Inside His Capitol Hill Meetings

Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump will travel to Washington, D.C., Thursday for a series of meetings with top Republican leaders in an effort to bring the party together after a messy and divisive primary race.

Trump has at least three meetings planned with GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who largely spurned his presidential campaign during the GOP primary.

He'll first meet with House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, and Republican National CommitteeChairman Reince Priebus at the RNC at 9 a.m. Trump will then meet with Ryan and the other members on his leadership team: House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-California, House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana, Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris-Rodgers, R-Washington, and Deputy Majority Whip Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina.

Ryan and McMorris-Rodgers have not yet endorsed Trump's campaign, while McCarthy and Scalise have said they will support the Republican nominee.

Later Thursday morning, Trump will meet with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, along with his leadership team: Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, and John Thune, R-South Dakota. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Mississippi, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee -- Senate Republicans' campaign arm -- will also attend the meeting at the NRSC headquarters.

One person Trump won't be meeting? His former rival, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who told reporters today that Trump has not been in touch with him. "There are no plans for us to meet," Cruz said.

FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT SPIES ARE LOCAL MAIL CARRIERS IN CHARLOTTE, ATLANTA & CHICAGO

#‎Atlanta‬

FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT SPIES ARE LOCAL MAIL CARRIERS:

IN CHARLOTTE, ATLANTA & CHICAGO.

* Discussion Highlights:

~ U.S. Mail Carriers have in fact teamed up with the Federal Govt to Spy on citizens.
Including Men who are working to catch up their Child Support payments.

~ US Mail Carriers working as SPIES is a growing problem in cities with a high BLACK Male UNEMPLOYMENT Rate such as CHARLOTTE, ATLANTA and CHICAGO.

~ Low Delinquent Child Support actual balances are being trumped to extremely high balances via State & County Fees which could be considered a CHILD SUPPORT TAX.

~ In 2015 Pres OBAMA and UN Officials spearheaded a Global Child Support Treaty.

However most of the Child Money collected does not go to Mothers. Instead it goes to State Coffers.

~ Due to low Child Support balances being trumped up to extremely high Child Support balances via State & County Fees, and high UNEMPLOYMENT Rates, many Fathers can NEVER really get caught up, thus many Fathers end up in JAIL or PRISON.

When these Men are Incarcerated, the States then receive FEDERAL FUNDING.

~ Snail mail spy: U.S. Postal Service active partner with feds for surveillance

The U.S. Postal Service has two key programs with the federal government aimed at rooting out terrorism that track and record data on all mail that travels through its offices.

The New York Times reported on a U.S. Postal Service “mail cover” program that’s been in place for decades. That program allows postal workers the ability to record — by hand — all the information on the front and back of letters that are mailed to residences, at the request of law enforcement.

But another program, called “Mail Isolation Control and Tracking,” is much more high-tech.

It started in 2001, after anthrax attacks hit at Capitol Hill and at various spots around the nation, and gives U.S. Postal Service workers the ability to photograph the exterior of each piece of mail that passes through the office.

The data is then recorded in case it’s needed in a future investigation.

An ex-Justice Department worker said, Newser reported:

“In the past, mail covers were used when you had a reason to suspect someone of a crime.

Now it seems to be, ‘Let’s record everyone’s mail so in the future we might go back and see who you were communicating with.’ Essentially, you’ve added mail covers on millions of Americans.”

Post Sources: Washington Times, NY Times, Marshall Project, YouTube

GAY MARRIAGE: Why Is Pres OBAMA Obsessed With GAY Rights?? (UTAH)

#UTAH

WHY IS PRES OBAMA OBSESSED WITH GAY MARRIAGE??

OBAMA RECOGNIZES GAY MARRIAGE IN UTAH

Effective immediately the OBAMA Admin has announced it will recognize GAY Marriage in UTAH.

Why am I Not surprised??

Pres OBAMA will Speak up LOUD & CLEAR for GAY Marriage,

yet remain SILENT for a CHILD in CALIFORNIA who was almost MURDERED just to Cover-Up Medical MALPRACTICE & ORGAN Harvesting.

I have NEVER in my life time seen a U.S. President so Obsessed with GAY Marriage!

And if any American Voters Oppose GAY Marriage, or Disagree with GAY Marriage the OBAMA Admin Punishes those people.

It's absolutely Unreal how much Pres OBAMA caters to GLAAD & other GAY Rights Organizations.

Is it because GLAAD donated a ton of MONEY to both of his Presidential Campaigns??

Let's be real people.

OBAMA fights Harder for GAY Marriage then he does for ANYTHING else in America.

For ex:

AL-QAEDA

Improving OBAMACARE

JOBS

EDUCATION

Fixing the NSA

Restructuring the IRS & Reforming the TAX CODE, etc.,

Instead he is Only Laser-Focused on GAY Marriage & GAY Rights!

So is there any wonder why most American Voters NO longer TRUST him???

WHY IS PRES OBAMA OBSESSED WITH GAY MARRIAGE??




ARTICLE: "Obama Administration Will Recognize Same-sex Marriages In Utah"

The Justice Department announced Friday it will recognize - for federal purposes - same-sex marriages performed for a short period in Utah.

The state on Wednesday said it would not recognize the approximately 1,000 marriages or marriage licenses issued for gay and lesbian couples, at least until the issue is fully resolved in the courts.

"These families should not be asked to endure uncertainty regarding their status as the litigation unfolds," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a videotaped message.

"In the days ahead, we will continue to coordinate across the federal government to ensure the timely provision of every federal benefit to which Utah couples and couples throughout the country are entitled – regardless of whether they in same-sex or opposite-sex marriages," he added.

The federal government's decision will likely create more legal chaos over the constitutionality of same-sex marriage that is playing out in Utah, and several other states.

The Supreme Court last year said gay and lesbian couples legally married in their states were entitled to the same federal benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex partners.

The office of Utah Gov. Gary Herbert had sent a letter to Cabinet officials Wednesday saying that, based on advice from the state's attorney general, "state recognition of same-sex marital status is on hold until further notice.

"Please understand this position is not intended to comment on the legal status of those same-sex marriages - that is for the courts to decide," the governor's chief of staff, Derek Miller, wrote. "The intent of this communication is to direct state agency compliance with current laws that prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages."

The current legal and political fight erupted December 20 when U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby concluded Utah's law banning same-sex marriage, approved in 2004, conflicted with the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. That prompted many counties to begin issuing marriage licenses, but the state then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The justices on Monday blocked enforcement of the district court ruling until the constitutional questions are fully resolved. A federal appeals court could hold oral arguments as soon as March. A ruling there could affect all states within the court's jurisdiction: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming.

But Holder said, "In the meantime, I am confirming today that, for purposes of federal law, these marriages will be recognized as lawful and considered eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages."

Sources: AP, CNN

MITT ROMNEY vs HILLARY CLINTON In 2016: What Do You Think??

#HILLARYvsROMNEY2016

HILLARY CLINTON vs MITT ROMNEY IN 2016: WHAT DO YOU THINK??

It's pretty clear HILLARY CLINTON is going to campaign again for the Oval Office in 2016.

It's also pretty clear CHRIS CHRISTIE will be one of her Opponents.

But what about MITT ROMNEY throwing his hat in the ring again ??

I know his WIFE doesn't want him to but....

I would be stoked to see MITT ROMNEY Win the 2016 GOP Nomination and run against HILLARY CLINTON!

If MITT does decide to run again, I think MARCO RUBIO would make a GREAT GOP Vice-President pick. (just my opinion)

As for the Haters who reject MITT ROMNEY as a possible 2016 GOP U.S. Presidential Nominee, EAT ME!

Now please don't get it twisted.

I would absolutely LOVE....LOVE....LOVE to see HILLARY CLINTON become the First legally elected Woman U.S. President because I Strongly feel she would make a GREAT President, who will Fairly represent both MIDDLE CLASS & LOW INCOME Voters just as her husband former U.S. President BILL CLINTON did.

However......

I would also absolutely LOVE.....LOVE......LOVE to see MITT ROMNEY run again.

ROMNEY'S last campaign was very Well-Organized & I believe he learned a lesson or two from Pres OBAMA'S Election MACHINE.

I think ANN ROMNEY should re-consider the possibilities & allow MITT to run again.

PRAY about it ANN.

Like HILLARY, Gov ROMNEY definitely has a lot to offer Our Country.

The third time just might be a Charm for him!

HILLARY CLINTON vs MITT ROMNEY IN 2016: WHAT DO YOU THINK??


Sources: CBS News Online, Youtube

EDWARD SNOWDEN vs MIKE ROGERS: I Trust SNOWDEN! He Deserves Some Level Of Clemency!

#EdwardSnowdenMikeRogersNSA

The whole world now wants America to Pardon/ Forgive NSA Whistleblower EDWARD SNOWDEN for alerting American Citizens that Our Civil Liberties & PRIVACY were being severely Violated by our Elected Officials (Pres OBAMA & CONGRESS).

I too believe Mr SNOWDEN deserves some level of Clemency for his Courageous act.

Initially I judged Mr SNOWDEN as a TRAITOR.

However as I researched the FACTS of his case, I learned this Young Man is indeed more of a PATRIOT than a TRAITOR.

Why??

Here are four reasons:

**1) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT Hire himself as a NSA employee, the Federal Gov't did.

**2) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT conduct his Background Check, the Federal Gov't did.

**3) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT grant himself a Security Clearance, the Federal Gov't did.

**4) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT Violate our Civil Liberties & PRIVACY, the Federal Gov't did.

Thus how can EDWARD SNOWDEN be a Criminal??

Mr SNOWDEN knew he was being Hired to be a HACKER for the Federal Gov't but he thought he was just being Hired to HACK into the Personal Info of Real Suspected TERRORISTS.

Not SPY on Innocent American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE!

Not SPY on Innocent American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE for POLITICAL Reasons, or just to keep entire Communities of Human Beings in BONDAGE!

The Federal Gov't Hired Mr SNOWDEN.....offered him a Great Salary....and in exchange for keeping that Great Salary, they expected him to Betray the American People by HACKING into their Personal Lives WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE!

Please understand I am Not Opposed to the U.S. Federal Gov't using Broad Surveillance Powers Legally for authentic NATIONAL SECURITY purposes because I too want to be SAFE from TERRORISM.

I am Only Opposed to the U.S. Federal Gov't ABUSING its Broad Surveillance Powers to Violate the same U.S. Constitution its ELECTED Officials have vowed to uphold, for POLITICS & other Personal reasons!

So in essence the Federal Gov't is using the NSA NOT to track down Real Suspected TERRORISTS as Congressman MIKE ROGERS proclaims.

And why is the Federal Gov't COLLECTING DATA & INFO on Each American Citizen??

It's being stored at a huge Compound in UTAH but Why??

Federal Gov't Officials are using the NSA to SPY on ALL American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE just because they Can, NOT because they need to!

i.e., "Big Brother" Is Here!

This is beyond WRONG & ILLEGAL!

Another example of Federal Gov't ABUSE is the IRS targeting Innocent American Citizens for their RELIGIOUS Beliefs & POLITICAL Affiliations.

Or......

Using the IRS to RETALIATE against Innocent American Citizens.

Both actions are also WRONG & ILLEGAL!!

So do I strongly believe EDWARD SNOWDEN is a necessary, Courageous Young Whistleblower who deserves some level of Clemency??

YES!!

FYI:

I WILL NEVER TRUST CONGRESSMAN MIKE ROGERS (R-MI) AGAIN.

Why??

One word.....DETROIT!








"Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower"


Seven months ago, the world began to learn the vast scope of the National Security Agency’s reach into the lives of hundreds of millions of people in the United States and around the globe, as it collects information about their phone calls, their email messages, their friends and contacts, how they spend their days and where they spend their nights.

The public learned in great detail how the agency has exceeded its mandate and abused its authority, prompting outrage at kitchen tables and at the desks of Congress, which may finally begin to limit these practices.

The revelations have already prompted two federal judges to accuse the N.S.A. of violating the Constitution (although a third, unfortunately, found the dragnet surveillance to be legal).

A panel appointed by President Obama issued a powerful indictment of the agency’s invasions of privacy and called for a major overhaul of its operations.

All of this is entirely because of information provided to journalists by Edward Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor who stole a trove of highly classified documents after he became disillusioned with the agency’s voraciousness. Mr. Snowden is now living in Russia, on the run from American charges of espionage and theft, and he faces the prospect of spending the rest of his life looking over his shoulder.

Considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, Mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. It is time for the United States to offer Mr. Snowden a plea bargain or some form of clemency that would allow him to return home, face at least substantially reduced punishment in light of his role as a whistle-blower, and have the hope of a life advocating for greater privacy and far stronger oversight of the runaway intelligence community.

Mr. Snowden is currently charged in a criminal complaint with two violations of the Espionage Act involving unauthorized communication of classified information, and a charge of theft of government property. Those three charges carry prison sentences of 10 years each, and when the case is presented to a grand jury for indictment, the government is virtually certain to add more charges, probably adding up to a life sentence that Mr. Snowden is understandably trying to avoid.

The president said in August that Mr. Snowden should come home to face those charges in court and suggested that if Mr. Snowden had wanted to avoid criminal charges he could have simply told his superiors about the abuses, acting, in other words, as a whistle-blower.

“If the concern was that somehow this was the only way to get this information out to the public, I signed an executive order well before Mr. Snowden leaked this information that provided whistle-blower protection to the intelligence community for the first time,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference. “So there were other avenues available for somebody whose conscience was stirred and thought that they needed to question government actions.”

In fact, that executive order did not apply to contractors, only to intelligence employees, rendering its protections useless to Mr. Snowden. More important, Mr. Snowden told The Washington Post earlier this month that he did report his misgivings to two superiors at the agency, showing them the volume of data collected by the N.S.A., and that they took no action. (The N.S.A. says there is no evidence of this.) That’s almost certainly because the agency and its leaders don’t consider these collection programs to be an abuse and would never have acted on Mr. Snowden’s concerns.

In retrospect, Mr. Snowden was clearly justified in believing that the only way to blow the whistle on this kind of intelligence-gathering was to expose it to the public and let the resulting furor do the work his superiors would not. Beyond the mass collection of phone and Internet data, consider just a few of the violations he revealed or the legal actions he provoked:

■ The N.S.A. broke federal privacy laws, or exceeded its authority, thousands of times per year, according to the agency’s own internal auditor.

■ The agency broke into the communications links of major data centers around the world, allowing it to spy on hundreds of millions of user accounts and infuriating the Internet companies that own the centers. Many of those companies are now scrambling to install systems that the N.S.A. cannot yet penetrate.

■ The N.S.A. systematically undermined the basic encryption systems of the Internet, making it impossible to know if sensitive banking or medical data is truly private, damaging businesses that depended on this trust.

■ His leaks revealed that James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, lied to Congress when testifying in March that the N.S.A. was not collecting data on millions of Americans. (There has been no discussion of punishment for that lie.)

■ The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court rebuked the N.S.A. for repeatedly providing misleading information about its surveillance practices, according to a ruling made public because of the Snowden documents. One of the practices violated the Constitution, according to the chief judge of the court.

■ A federal district judge ruled earlier this month that the phone-records-collection program probably violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. He called the program “almost Orwellian” and said there was no evidence that it stopped any imminent act of terror.

The shrill brigade of his critics say Mr. Snowden has done profound damage to intelligence operations of the United States, but none has presented the slightest proof that his disclosures really hurt the nation’s security. Many of the mass-collection programs Mr. Snowden exposed would work just as well if they were reduced in scope and brought under strict outside oversight, as the presidential panel recommended.

When someone reveals that government officials have routinely and deliberately broken the law, that person should not face life in prison at the hands of the same government. That’s why Rick Ledgett, who leads the N.S.A.’s task force on the Snowden leaks, recently told CBS News that he would consider amnesty if Mr. Snowden would stop any additional leaks.

And it’s why President Obama should tell his aides to begin finding a way to end Mr. Snowden’s vilification and give him an incentive to return home.


Sources: AP, CBS News, CNN, NY Times, Russia Today, The Guardian, Youtube

NSA: New Ruling Claims NSA Overreach Does Not Violate 4th Amendment Rights (It Does!)

#NSARuling

ANOTHER NSA RULING:

WHO SHOULD MANAGE THE NSA??

U.S. MILITARY vs U.S. FEDERAL GOV'T:

Friday a New York Federal Judge ruled NSA Data Mining & Mass Phone Surveillance of American Citizens is LEGAL.

Can someone please explain how can a procedure be LEGAL if it Violates the U.S. Constitution?? (4th Amendment)

I thought that Federal Judges were supposed to use LEGAL Precedent to Interpret & Enforce Laws, Not use the Judicial Bench to Legislate NEW Laws,
Or use the Judicial Bench to Destroy the U.S. Constitution!!

Now let's be clear.

If the U.S. Military manages the NSA Program, it Is LEGAL & I concur.

Why??

Because the U.S. Military will use ONLY use the Collected Metadata & Collected Personal Citizen Info to Target Real TERRORISTS.....

Not TARGET U. S. Citizens.
(i.e., National Security Purposes)

However.....

If the U.S. Federal Gov't manages the NSA Program, and SPIES on American Citizens,
We could be held HOSTAGE & have Collected Private Info used against Us.

Thus this action is Not LEGAL if the NSA is Managed by the Federal Gov't because it Violates Our 4th Amendment Rights.

I am also concerned if the U.S. Federal Gov't manages the NSA Program, it will use Collected Metadata & Personal Citizen Info for POLITICAL Purposes........

Not for National Security purposes!


Source: USA Today

NSA PHONE SPYING ON U.S. CITIZENS RULED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY A FEDERAL JUDGE

NSA PHONE SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL & MAKES THE INTERNET LESS SAFE.

FEDERAL GOV'T CAN'T USE 1979 SCOTUS CASE TO SPY ON AMERICAN CITIZENS NOR TO CREATE "BIG BROTHER" TYPE SOCIETY.


"Updated: Federal Judge Finds NSA Spying Unconstitutional"

Government can't use 1979 law to justify its "Almost-Orwellian" Technology.

In a stunning decision, a DC-based federal judge has ruled that the National Security Agency spying revealed this summer violates the constitution.

The opinion (PDF) published today by US District Judge Richard Leon is in response to a lawsuit filed by Larry Klayman, a longtime conservative activist.

Klayman was fast on the draw, filing his lawsuit on June 6, one day after widespread NSA surveillance was revealed in June.

Leon's order grants an injunction that will shut down the NSA's Bulk Telephony Metadata Program, and it requires the government to destroy the metadata collected on the plaintiffs' accounts. The shutdown will only happen if an appeals court agrees with Leon, who has stayed the injunction pending appeal, "in light of the significant national security issues at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues."

A problematic precedent

Today's 71-page order works around a problematic precedent for privacy reformers, Smith v. Maryland. That's the 1979 Supreme Court decision that found there's "no reasonable expectation of privacy" in the actual phone numbers dialed from a telephone, because they are "business records." That's what allows "pen registers" to be installed by police without judicial review, since it's not a "search" in the eyes of courts.

"The question before me is not the same question that the Supreme Court confronted in Smith," wrote Leon. Using a pen register "is a far cry from the issue in this case." We've reached a turning point in the history of technology, in Leon's reading. The government's decades-old reasoning can't hold up in the present day.

He writes:

Indeed, the question in this case can more properly be styled as follows: when do present-day circumstances—the evolutions in the Government's surveillance capabilities, citizens' phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies—become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court 34 years ago that a precedent like Smith simply does not apply?

The answer, unfortunately for the government, is now.

The court of 1979 could not "have ever imagined how the citizens of 2013 would interact with their phones," writes Leon, leaving the Smith precedent with little value.

The pen register the court considered was operational for less than two weeks, in March 1976, and there was "no indication from the Court's opinion that it expected the Government to retain those limited phone records once the case was over." The "almost-Orwellian technology" used by the government to capture phone data "is unlike anything that could have been conceived in 1979."

The NSA is using two weeks of data collected from a single phone to justify "the creation and maintenance of a historical database containing five years' worth of data," writes Leon. "And I might add, there is the very real prospect that the program will go on for as long as America is combatting terrorism, which realistically could be forever!"

Fundamentally, Leon is making the case that the law must be reconsidered in the age of the smartphone. He cites data from CTIA counting more than 326 million mobile subscribers in 2012, including 22 million computers, tablets, and modems.

"Count the phones at the bus stop, in a restaurant, or around the table at a work meeting or any given occasion," writes Leon. "Thirty-four years ago, none of those phones would have been there. Thirty-four years ago, city streets were lined with pay phones. Thirty-four years ago, when people wanted to send 'text messages,' they wrote letters and attached postage stamps."
A new North Star

The Smith case and NSA surveillance are wildly different, so a different analysis must take place. "I cannot possibly navigate these uncharted Fourth Amendment waters using as my North Star a case that predates the rise of cell phones," writes Leon.

No judge outside the secret Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court has "has ever recognized a special need sufficient to justify continuous, daily searches of virtually every American citizen without any particularized suspicion," writes Leon. "In effect, the Government urges me to be the first non-FISC judge to sanction such a dragnet."

And Leon won't do it. The Verizon subscribers who filed the suit do have an expectation of privacy, and the government has intruded on it, he concludes.

In Leon's reading of the record, the government isn't merely trying to investigate possible terrorists. It's trying to do so as fast as it possibly can. "The affidavits in support of the Government's brief repeatedly emphasize this interest in speed," he notes. But the Government can't cite a single instance where the bulk metadata program "actually stopped an imminent attack."

He notes that the government could have shown more evidence to the judge privately, in chambers, but didn't. "Although the Government has publicly asserted that the NSA's surveillance programs have prevented 54 terrorist attacks, no proof of that has ever been put before me," Leon writes.

That leads him to have "serious doubts about the efficacy of the metadata collection program." While there's a "limited record" at this point in the litigation, the plaintiffs have a "substantial likelihood" of showing their privacy interests outweigh the government's interest in collecting the bulk data.

They are likely to show the bulk data program is an unreasonable search, and violates the Fourth Amendment, Leon finds. The public interest "weighs heavily in favor of granting an injunction" that will bar the government from collecting any metadata in association with their personal Verizon accounts.

Government lawyers also said that removing just the plaintiffs, two Verizon subscribers, from its database will be burdensome. That's not a "burden" Leon takes seriously. "Of course, the public has no interest in saving the government from the burdens of complying with the Constitution!"

A controversial plaintiff

In the coming months, Leon's opinion will be considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. That court considers an array of federal agency issues, and until recently it had leaned strongly Republican as the Senate held up confirmation of the candidates put forth by the Obama Administration.

However, the opposition to judicial nominees has eased somewhat following Obama's re-election, and three of the four vacancies have been filled in 2013.

The case against the NSA is not Klayman's first controversial lawsuit. Many of his cases have not ended well. Klayman has been rebuked and sanctioned by several judges, and he has been barred from some courtrooms.

In 2012, Klayman filed a lawsuit in Florida to kick President Barack Obama off the primary ballot in that state, based on the discredited theory that he was not born in the United States. In 2011, he sued Facebook for "negligence" because it didn't remove an anti-Israel page quickly enough. Neither suit was successful.

The Klayman suit is not the only challenge to NSA telephone-data program.

The more widely known case is the one filed in July by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union.

That case, filed on behalf of First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles, was consolidated with a pre-Snowden anti-NSA lawsuit called Jewel v. NSA.

The government has filed a motion to dismiss, and the case awaits a judge's decision. A DC-based privacy group, EPIC, tried to take the issue straight to the Supreme Court, but that failed.

Dissatisfaction with NSA surveillance has hit Congress, as well.

The USA Freedom Act, which would end NSA spying, has 130 co-sponsors.

NSA leaker Edward Snowden's statement on today's decision has been published in The New York Times. Snowden said:

I acted on my belief that the N.S.A.'s mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts.

Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights. It is the first of many.


Sources: ARS Technica, CNN, NBC News

Bush Administration Used Wiretapping (Illegally) & Spied On U.S. Citizens Just For The H*LL Of It!...80% Warrantless

Huffington Post, CBS News----

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the legal basis for the effort but shielding almost all details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal.

The report, compiled by five inspectors general, refers to "unprecedented collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Just what those activities involved remains classified, but the IGs pointedly say that any continued use of the secret programs must be "carefully monitored."

The report says too few relevant officials knew of the size and depth of the program, let alone signed off on it. They particularly criticize John Yoo, a deputy assistant attorney general who wrote legal memos undergirding the policy. His boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, was not aware until March 2004 of the exact nature of the intelligence operations beyond wiretapping that he had been approving for the previous two and a half years, the report says.

Most of the intelligence leads generated under what was known as the "President's Surveillance Program" did not have any connection to terrorism, the report said. But FBI agents told the authors that the "mere possibility of the leads producing useful information made investigating the leads worthwhile."

The inspectors general interviewed more than 200 people inside and outside the government, but five former Bush administration officials refused to be questioned. They were Ashcroft, Yoo, former CIA Director George Tenet, former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and David Addington, an aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

According to the report, Addington could personally decide who in the administration was "read into" _ allowed access to _ the classified program.

The only piece of the intelligence-gathering operation acknowledged by the Bush White House was the wiretapping-without-warrants effort. The administration admitted in 2005 that it had allowed the National Security Agency to intercept international communications that passed through U.S. cables without seeking court orders.

Although the report documents Bush administration policies, its fallout could be a problem for the Obama administration if it inherited any or all of the still-classified operations.

Bush brought the warrantless wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006, and Congress authorized most of the intercepts in a 2008 electronic surveillance law. The fate of the remaining and still classified aspects of the wider surveillance program is not clear from the report.

The report's revelations came the same day that House Democrats said that CIA Director Leon Panetta had ordered one eight-year-old classified program shut down after learning lawmakers had never been apprised of its existence.

The IG report said that President Bush signed off on both the warrantless wiretapping and other top-secret operations shortly after Sept. 11 in a single presidential authorization. All the programs were periodically reauthorized, but except for the acknowledged wiretapping, they "remain highly classified."

The report says it's unclear how much valuable intelligence the program has yielded.

The report, mandated by Congress last year, was delivered to lawmakers Friday.

Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., told The Associated Press she was shocked to learn of the existence of other classified programs beyond the warrantless wiretapping.

Former Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made a terse reference to other classified programs in an August 2007 letter to Congress. But Harman said that when she had asked Gonzales two years earlier if the government was conducting any other undisclosed intelligence activities, he denied it.

"He looked me in the eye and said 'no,'" she said Friday.

Robert Bork Jr., Gonzales' spokesman, said, "It has clearly been determined that he did not intend to mislead anyone."

In the wake of the new report, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt, renewed his call Friday for a formal nonpartisan inquiry into the government's information-gathering programs.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden _ the primary architect of the program_ told the report's authors that the surveillance was "extremely valuable" in preventing further al-Qaida attacks. Hayden said the operations amounted to an "early warning system" allowing top officials to make critical judgments and carefully allocate national security resources to counter threats.

Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

The report questioned the legal advice used by Bush to set up the program, pinpointing omissions and questionable legal memos written by Yoo, in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. The Justice Department withdrew the memos years ago.

The report says Yoo's analysis approving the program ignored a law designed to restrict the government's authority to conduct electronic surveillance during wartime, and did so without fully notifying Congress. And it said flaws in Yoo's memos later presented "a serious impediment" to recertifying the program.

Yoo insisted that the president's wiretapping program had only to comply with Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure _ but the report said Yoo ignored the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, which had previously overseen federal national security surveillance.

"The notion that basically one person at the Justice Department, John Yoo, and Hayden and the vice president's office were running a program around the laws that Congress passed, including a reinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment, is mind boggling," Harman said.

House Democrats are pressing for legislation that would expand congressional access to secret intelligence briefings, but the White House has threatened to veto it.

(This version CORRECTS that Bush brought wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006 rather than started the program in 2006.)

Sources: Huffington Post, CBS News, Political Base