FBI Illegally Collected Phone Records during Bush Era

[-Cp]

WASHINGTON -- The FBI violated the law in collecting thousands of U.S. telephone records during the Bush administration, The Washington Post reported Monday.

Citing internal memos and interviews, the Post said the FBI invoked nonexistent terrorism emergencies or persuaded phone companies to provide information as it illegally gathered more than 2,000 records between 2002 and 2006.

The bureau said in 2007 that it had improperly obtained some phone records, and the Justice Department inspector general is expected to release a report this month detailing the extent of the problem.

FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni told the Post that agents technically violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which was enacted in 1986, by citing nonexistent emergencies to collect records. "We should have stopped those requests from being made that way," she said.

Documents obtained by the Post show that FBI managers as high as the assistant director level approved the emergency requests. Caproni said FBI Director Robert Mueller did not know about the requests until late 2006 or early 2007, after the inspector general's investigation had begun.

Caproni told the Post that the bureau will await the inspector general's report before deciding whether disciplinary action is warranted.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/19/report-fbi-illegally-collected-phone-records/?test=latestnews

[Abbey Marie]

What exactly are "phone records"? Phone numbers? Lists of numbers called? Eavesdropping? It is important to know what it means. I don't care if the FBI has my number and I don't care if they see a list of my calls. Listening in on conversations is a level higher and is more of a concern.

[SassyLady]

What exactly are "phone records"? Phone numbers? Lists of numbers called? Eavesdropping? It is important to know what it means. I don't care if the FBI has my number and I don't care if they see a list of my calls. Listening in on conversations is a level higher and is more of a concern.

I have to agree with you Abbey. I have no problem with the FBI having a copy of my phone records........they are sold to every telemarketing, scamming and phishing company in the world anyway.......why not our national security agencies?

[-Cp]

I have to agree with you Abbey. I have no problem with the FBI having a copy of my phone records........they are sold to every telemarketing, scamming and phishing company in the world anyway.......why not our national security agencies?

Actually, that's not true - the only things passed on to those telemarketing companies etc... is your phone #... not your call records...

[HogTrash]

If it is discovered that any of these phone records turn out to belong to non-muslims I may have a problem with the FBI's actions.

[Noir]

Some durty dealings are coming to light,


The US justice department is preparing a report which concludes that the FBI repeatedly broke the law by invoking terrorism emergencies that did not exist to obtain more than 2,000 telephone call records over four years from 2002, including those of journalists on US newspapers, according to emails obtained by the Washington Post.

The bureau also issued authorisations for the seizure of records after the fact, in order to justify unwarranted seizures.

The Washington Post said the emails show how counter-terrorism *officials inside FBI headquarters breached regulations designed to protect civil liberties.

The FBI's general counsel, Valerie Caproni, told the Washington Post that the agency violated privacy laws by inventing non-existent terrorist threats to justify collecting the phone records. "We should have stopped those requests from being made that way," she said.

Caproni said that FBI's issuing of authorisations after the fact was a "good-hearted but not well thought-out" move to give the phone companies legal cover for handing over the records.

After the 9/11 attacks, the USA patriot act greatly expanded the government's ability to monitor American citizens, including increased access to their phone calls with the approval of lower-level officials than previously allowed. But the authorisation had to be tied to an open terrorism investigation.

The Washington Post said two FBI officers had raised concerns. Special agent Bassem Youssef observed that the necessary authorisations were not being sought before phone records were seized and were sometimes only given later in response to complaints from phone companies. Another official, Patrice Kopistansky of the FBI's legal office, noticed a similar problem. She also raised concerns when she was unable to get investigators to provide her with an open terrorism case to justify issuing relevant authorisation.

The Washington Post reported that Kopistansky and Youssef discussed the worsening "backlog" of cases without the necessary authorisations, or where false claims were made about terrorism emergencies. "I also understand some of these are being done as emergencies when they aren't necessarily emergencies," Kopistansky wrote to Youssef in April 2005.

The FBI subsequently issued a blanket authorisation covering all past searches, although its legality was questioned.

The Washington Post said journalists on the newspaper and the New York Times were among those whose phone records were illegally searched. The FBI later apologised to editors of both papers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/19/fbi-terror-emergencies-phone-callsFBI

[-Cp]

If it is discovered that any of these phone records turn out to belong to non-muslims I may have a problem with the FBI's actions.

And it's that way of thinking that allows the Govt. to continue its total destruction of the U.S. Constitution..

[PostmodernProphet]

can someone help me out with the "illegal" part?.....it sound like what is allowed under the Patriot Act.....

[82Marine89]

What exactly are "phone records"? Phone numbers? Lists of numbers called? Eavesdropping? It is important to know what it means. I don't care if the FBI has my number and I don't care if they see a list of my calls. Listening in on conversations is a level higher and is more of a concern.


I have to agree with you Abbey. I have no problem with the FBI having a copy of my phone records........they are sold to every telemarketing, scamming and phishing company in the world anyway.......why not our national security agencies?


can someone help me out with the "illegal" part?.....it sound like what is allowed under the Patriot Act.....

And this is how it starts. "I don't care if they do this one little thing..." which then becomes something much larger. You all need to fear the government that doesn't fear it constituents and feels it can do what it wants unchecked and uncontrolled.

[DragonStryk72]

What exactly are "phone records"? Phone numbers? Lists of numbers called? Eavesdropping? It is important to know what it means. I don't care if the FBI has my number and I don't care if they see a list of my calls. Listening in on conversations is a level higher and is more of a concern.

Phone records is every call made to and from your phone, the numbers that were called or called you, and the length of the conversations down to the minute. They also likely checked the line via tap, since it would be useless to just snag generic phone records. However, none of it seems to have been to stop actual terrorism, so it's violating it's mandate, and we apparently paid them to do it.

[DragonStryk72]

can someone help me out with the "illegal" part?.....it sound like what is allowed under the Patriot Act.....

It's not allowed under the patriot act, actually, but it's close enough to it that they figured they could get away with it. Even under the Patriot Act, you can only do a warrantless wiretap with probable cause, something missing from these cases. That they tried to cover it in legal loopholes states that they knew it was illegal, and did it anyway.

[PostmodernProphet]

It's not allowed under the patriot act, actually, but it's close enough to it that they figured they could get away with it. Even under the Patriot Act, you can only do a warrantless wiretap with probable cause, something missing from these cases. That they tried to cover it in legal loopholes states that they knew it was illegal, and did it anyway.

why are you going on about warrantless wiretaps.....the OP says nothing at all about wiretaps....again, do you have any evidence of anything that was actually illegal?....

[DragonStryk72]

why are you going on about warrantless wiretaps.....the OP says nothing at all about wiretaps....again, do you have any evidence of anything that was actually illegal?....

Right, because they haven't concluded the investigations yet, but still, jacking the phone records is not covered by the Patriot Act, unless you can prove otherwise?

[PostmodernProphet]

Right, because they haven't concluded the investigations yet, but still, jacking the phone records is not covered by the Patriot Act, unless you can prove otherwise?

okay...

`Sec. 2702. Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records';

(B) in subsection (a)--

(i) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking `and' at the end;

(ii) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:

`(3) a provider of remote computing service or electronic communication service to the public shall not knowingly divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by paragraph (1) or (2)) to any governmental entity.';

(C) in subsection (b), by striking `EXCEPTIONS- A person or entity' and inserting `EXCEPTIONS FOR DISCLOSURE OF COMMUNICATIONS- A provider described in subsection (a)';

(D) in subsection (b)(6)--

(i) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking `or';

(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting `; or'; and

(iii) by adding after subparagraph (B) the following:

`(C) if the provider reasonably believes that an emergency involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requires disclosure of the information without delay.'; and

(E) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:

`(c) EXCEPTIONS FOR DISCLOSURE OF CUSTOMER RECORDS- A provider described in subsection (a) may divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2))--

`(1) as otherwise authorized in section 2703;

`(2) with the lawful consent of the customer or subscriber;

`(3) as may be necessarily incident to the rendition of the service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service;

`(4) to a governmental entity, if the provider reasonably believes that an emergency involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person justifies disclosure of the information; or

`(5) to any person other than a governmental entity.'.

(2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT- The table of sections for chapter 121 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 2702 and inserting the following:

`2702. Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records.'.

(b) REQUIREMENTS FOR GOVERNMENT ACCESS-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(A) by striking the section heading and inserting the following:

`Sec. 2703. Required disclosure of customer communications or records';

(B) in subsection (c) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);

(C) in subsection (c)(1)--

(i) by striking `(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service may' and inserting `A governmental entity may require a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service to';

(ii) by striking `covered by subsection (a) or (b) of this section) to any person other than a governmental entity.

`(B) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications covered by subsection (a) or (b) of this section) to a governmental entity' and inserting `)';

(iii) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as paragraph (2);

(iv) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) as subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D), respectively;

(v) in subparagraph (D) (as redesignated) by striking the period and inserting `; or'; and

(vi) by inserting after subparagraph (D) (as redesignated) the following:

`(E) seeks information under paragraph (2).'; and

(D) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated) by striking `subparagraph (B)' and insert `paragraph (1)'.

(2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT- The table of sections for chapter 121 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 2703 and inserting the following:

`2703. Required disclosure of customer communications or records.'.