Why? Because Donald Trump’s pick for head of National Intelligence is for them. This would include Democrats, Republicans, the Credentialed Media, and former intel head honchos (you know, who were completely wrong on Russia Russia Russia, Hunter’s laptop, and so much more)
Gabbard backs use of warrants to ensure Section 702 searches are ‘targeted and justified’
Tulsi Gabbard, President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as director of national intelligence, said Thursday she is in favor of using warrants to carry out data collection under a controversial clause in a foreign intelligence collection law.
Gabbard’s stance on warrant use for data collection under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act — which allows the federal government to collect and share data on foreign targets who may pose national security risks — runs counter to views by current and former officials that the warrants slow down critical data collection.
Counter! What does the law say? Isn’t that what matters? That it is the only thing that matters? Well, per legal challenges, courts have ruled that one is not needed. The ACLU has sued multiple times to require warrants, at least where Americans are involved. My personal opinion is that as soon as a specific American, group, or company is identified then a warrant should be required. And, it is a very slippery slope when the Federal Bureau of Investigation is trolling the electronic information of Americans with blanket authorization.
Remember, Section 702 is supposed to be about communications and such for people outside the U.S., which can at times involve Americans outside the U.S. and inside. The FBI is super against needing a warrant when it involves Americans in the US, because it would be inconvenient. Because they want to take the short route.
(ACLU) FBI, CIA, and NSA officials routinely search through this vast trove of data for information specifically about Americans, even though these communications were all collected without a warrant. Information found through these “backdoor searches” can be used to prosecute Americans for crimes, even if they are not related to national security.
It’s not often the ACLU is right these days, but, they have a point. And, remember when Democrats were losing their ever-lovin’-shit over Section 702 during the Bush years? I do. Of course, that was simply because Bushitler was president. They were rather quiet during the Obama years. Back to original article
“Warrants should generally be required before an agency undertakes a U.S. Person query of FISA Section 702 data, except in exigent circumstances, such as imminent threats to life or national security,” Gabbard wrote in pre-submitted answers to questions from members of the Senate Intelligence Committee ahead of her Thursday confirmation hearing. “This warrant requirement strengthens the IC by ensuring queries are targeted and justified.
Gabbard was pressed on this answer by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) during the hearing, confirming this was still her current position. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) later asked Gabbard if she knew that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, where Gabbard said the warrants would be obtained from, had ruled that warrants were not required, and Gabbard answered that she was “aware.”
Others will disagree. I disagree. The FBI is trolling up all this data, then querying it. If a person is a U.S. citizen the FBI should be required to get a warrant. Foreigners in the U.S.? Are they here legally? Yes? Should they get 4th Amendment protections? That’s questionable? But, American citizens damned sure should IMO, courts be damned.
Regardless, now that Gabbard is the nominee the Elites are against protecting Americans. BTW, I do support Gabbard. Yes, she certainly holds old school Democrat beliefs: socially liberal but for protection of America. Like a JFK. But, she seems to want to do the job as required by Trump, who nominated her. We can disagree on social issues, but, we agree on national security. And that’s what the job is. I think she will do great.
