Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 192
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Ideology
    Independent
    Posts
    1,690
    Rep Power
    2
    Post Like Stats

    Default Is leaking information that is not legally classified illegal?

    Not quite sure how thoroughly this has ever been tested in court, but legally, the government is not supposed to be able to classify material merely because said material would be embarrassing or because they are covering up a crime... so if material in regards to Flynn was classified only to cover up a crime, is leaking said material really illegal?

  2. #121
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    19,720
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOnStraight View Post
    I have been trying to find the section dealing with what we had happen with Flynn, but the USC is so huge and spread out.

    The NSA was conducting surveillance of the conversations between Kislyak and Russian citizens, or the Russian government, Kislyak was the target. There must be a specific USC covering how we deal with protecting the privacy of US citizens caught up in the type of surveillance net. Just as there is a USC section dealing with they are surveilling foreign terrorists, and how that was not blanket permission to net the conversations made by American citizens..

    I remember the discussions we had here, where Bush claimed his NSA was only monitoring foreign terrorists overseas. We discussed how that should not give them blanket permission to record the conversations made by any American citizens. The thought back then was, if the NSA surveils a terrorist in Yemen, and the spoke to any US citizen, that the NSA would need to get a separate warrant to keep the recording or the transcript, of the conversation by the US citizen.

    In fact, i think I recall, that if an US citizen was caught on the phone, when it was a foreigner who was being surveilled, that the NSA had to either stop the recording right then, and get a warrant. Or the NSA had to edit out the words spoken by the US citizen.
    The biggest part of the controversy was over wireless wiretaps (ring a bell?). This article summarizes it better than I could but to be very brief, Bush asserted he didn't need a warrant to surveil foreign targets communicating through US routes. He never needed a warrant to intercept foreign data but that wasn't as easy and just going to MaBell and placing a bug. The main argument was that a FISA warrant was to problematic or slow for surveillance of terrorists.

    http://www.belfercenter.org/publicat...lance-and-fisa

    FISA warrant is required when the data intercepted is in the US but the target must be a foreign agent. If the foreign agent is communicating with a US citizen, they only need to protect their identity to the greatest extent possible. If the identity of the US citizen is critical to the intelligence, then even that goes out the window. This all occurs only after the intelligence has been gathered. A FISA warrant for the Russian ambassador would be a totally trivial matter and it would surprise me if there wasn't one. This article talks about minimization and how Flynn's identity wasn't necessary to protect.

    https://lawfareblog.com/treatment-flynns-phone-calls-complies-fisa-minimization-procedures

  3. Sponsored Links
  4. #122
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    19,720
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zantax View Post
    Our friends on the left have swept that entire debate into the memory hole.
    Keep reading.

  5. #123
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Male
    My Mood
    Sanguine
    Posts
    21,140
    Rep Power
    21
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tguns View Post
    https://www.lawfareblog.com/michael-...want-call-aclu

    Clearly not written by a "Trumpist", but is discusses some of the issues regarding the leaking.
    Ironic, isn't it? It's the left who are wringing their hands, hysterical that the evil Trump will use the NSA surveillance of suspected terrorists, etc... to capture and then use the private conversations of US citizens for nefarious and vindictive political smearing of their opponents.
    Chances are this was a post by me responding to a Looney Lydon LaRouche Liberal

  6. #124
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Male
    My Mood
    Sanguine
    Posts
    21,140
    Rep Power
    21
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DonDraper View Post
    The contents of the conversation were not revealed as far as I know, provide reference to a specific law stating that revealing any information at all about an American citizen is a felony.
    The very fact that we know Flynn spoke to Kislyak, is a violation of the law, all by itself, much less the topics he may have discussed.

    If the NSA had deleted the call, or edited out the portions of the call by Flynn, then no one would be able to cite who Kislyak spoke to, much less what was the person said.

    So either the 0bama admin;

    did seek a warrant to keep the call, and someone illegally revealed it

    or the admin did not seek a warrant and the NSA has illegally retained the call.

    or the call was ended, and deleted, but someone in our government who listened to the call, retained that information, and then illegally revealed that the call took place, and revealed what was discussed.
    Chances are this was a post by me responding to a Looney Lydon LaRouche Liberal

  7. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Ideology
    Independent
    Posts
    1,690
    Rep Power
    2
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOnStraight View Post
    The very fact that we know Flynn spoke to Kislyak, is a violation of the law, all by itself, much less the topics he may have discussed.

    If the NSA had deleted the call, or edited out the portions of the call by Flynn, then no one would be able to cite who Kislyak spoke to, much less what was the person said.

    So either the 0bama admin;
    did seek a warrant to keep the call, and someone illegally revealed it

    or the admin did not seek a warrant and the NSA has illegally retained the call.

    or the call was ended, and deleted, but someone in our government who listened to the call, retained that information, and then illegally revealed that the call took place, and revealed what was discussed.
    I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your charges, I was asking if you can provide some reference to your statements.

  8. #126
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Somewhere in Amerexico
    Posts
    114,201
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DonDraper View Post
    I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your charges, I was asking if you can provide some reference to your statements.
    Never fear, if anything illegal took place I have every confidence Jeff Sessions will get to the bottom of it fairly soon and we'll know about it.
    Self appointed forum Mark Zuckerberg, feel free to ask me if any news story is real or fake.

  9. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Somewhere in Amerexico
    Posts
    114,201
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    But what we know for sure is, if Kislyak's phone was tapped, it was classified or it was illegal, one or the other.
    Self appointed forum Mark Zuckerberg, feel free to ask me if any news story is real or fake.

  10. #128
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Male
    My Mood
    Sanguine
    Posts
    21,140
    Rep Power
    21
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dantes View Post
    I don't think that's necessarily true. I read a nice article describing the legality of it. They are only required to protect the identity of the American citizen to the greatest extent possible. If the identify of the American is needed to be known as a component of the intelligence, even that can be fudged.
    Don't you recall the conniptions people were having in Bush's first term, when it was discovered that the NSA was capturing just the phone numbers of people calling known, or suspected terrorists, while they were physically overseas?

    Then later on, people were equally upset that the NSA was tapping the overseas phone calls to and from foreign terrorists, and they were afraid we might capture a US citizen's conversation, or simply recorded their telephone number.

    I even remember how tapping overseas phone was not good enough, because the actual telephone lines were physically located in the US and owned by a US carrier.

    In 2017, we have done a complete 180. Now, not only is okay to surveil a foreigner, on US soil, but we can use that surveillance as an excuse to listen in on and record the conversations of any US citizen who talks to that foreigner, without the knowledge or the permission from either party.
    Chances are this was a post by me responding to a Looney Lydon LaRouche Liberal

  11. #129
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male
    My Mood
    Content
    Ideology
    Get off my lawn
    Posts
    27,804
    Rep Power
    25
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOnStraight View Post
    Ironic, isn't it? It's the left who are wringing their hands, hysterical that the evil Trump will use the NSA surveillance of suspected terrorists, etc... to capture and then use the private conversations of US citizens for nefarious and vindictive political smearing of their opponents.
    In the end, I agree with our leftist comrades in as far as this Russian issue needs to be investigated. If Trump is somehow dirty in this, we need to know and he needs to be dealt with. On the other hand, if it's nothing more than what it appears to be on the surface, I have little doubt that through the course of the investigation our leftist bretheren will have well overplayed their hand and given Trump the political capital and reasoning he needs to govern how he wishes to.

    That aside, this issue with people in the intelligence community playing politics with national security needs to be a large part of our focus on this. THIS is a dangerous situation, when career beurocrats use the authority we vest in them to play out their vindictive desires, we have reached a point where government stability is at issue. Whomever these people are, they need to be rooted out and dealt with in a way that leaves no question in anyones mind that such acts will no longer be tolerated.

  12. #130
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    19,720
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOnStraight View Post
    Don't you recall the conniptions people were having in Bush's first term, when it was discovered that the NSA was capturing just the phone numbers of people calling known, or suspected terrorists, while they were physically overseas?

    Then later on, people were equally upset that the NSA was tapping the overseas phone calls to and from foreign terrorists, and they were afraid we might capture a US citizen's conversation, or simply recorded their telephone number.

    I even remember how tapping overseas phone was not good enough, because the actual telephone lines were physically located in the US and owned by a US carrier.

    In 2017, we have done a complete 180. Now, not only is okay to surveil a foreigner, on US soil, but we can use that surveillance as an excuse to listen in on and record the conversations of any US citizen who talks to that foreigner, without the knowledge or the permission of either party.
    I don't trust your memory and neither should you.

    The critiques were about warrantless collection of information on US citizens.

    We have every reason to believe there was a FISA warrant on the Russian ambassador.

    If you could back up your memory with any sources, I could discuss it.

  13. #131
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    19,720
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zantax View Post
    But what we know for sure is, if Kislyak's phone was tapped, it was classified or it was illegal, one or the other.
    Agreed, although I would say it's almost certainly just classified. Now, the real question is whether Sessions is willing to prosecute the release of the details based on the Espionage act.

  14. #132
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Age
    53
    Posts
    17,597
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    13
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unaffiliated View Post
    The People should be able to see anything they want, anytime they want unless the information directly harms/compromises our national security or puts American citizens' lives at risk. Except for those two narrow exceptions, our government (and all of its activity) should be as transparent to any citizen as our company's activity is to me as the operations manager.

    Government by the people means the people are the boss and in every company I've ever worked for, the boss can ask to see anything he or she wants whenever he or she asks for it.

    On a side note: I have a real issue with classifying information in this country. Like I said above, for national security I can understand the need for secrecy but I have a feeling our government classifies a lot of stuff that they just don't want citizens to see or know, embarrassing stuff and maybe even illegal activities. Essentially 'classified' (IMO) is more about keeping us in the dark about things than protecting us from harm.
    And yet slightly more than half those voting voted for someone who on a regular basis did exactly what you are complaining about and was given a pass by the media and most liberals here and in Congress.

    Can't imagine Hillary being treated like this if she had won. Of course, according to many in the media and here she did win.
    I'm not afraid of the dark. It's what I see in the dark that scares me.

  15. #133
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    32,872
    Rep Power
    21
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    If NYTs told the truth about these leakers being intelligence agency officials, then its pretty much impossible for me to believe that there aren't any number of regulations and signed documents by such agents that they will not discuss what they have learned outside of the agency.
    I have no reason to know the laws involved about these agents, but your question will be answered in full if they are ever caught.

  16. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    32,872
    Rep Power
    21
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tguns View Post
    In the end, I agree with our leftist comrades in as far as this Russian issue needs to be investigated. If Trump is somehow dirty in this, we need to know and he needs to be dealt with. On the other hand, if it's nothing more than what it appears to be on the surface, I have little doubt that through the course of the investigation our leftist bretheren will have well overplayed their hand and given Trump the political capital and reasoning he needs to govern how he wishes to.

    That aside, this issue with people in the intelligence community playing politics with national security needs to be a large part of our focus on this. THIS is a dangerous situation, when career beurocrats use the authority we vest in them to play out their vindictive desires, we have reached a point where government stability is at issue. Whomever these people are, they need to be rooted out and dealt with in a way that leaves no question in anyones mind that such acts will no longer be tolerated.
    The NYTs article, supposedly based on intelligence officers leaks, included a statement by them that they had not "so far" found any evidence of campaign officials in collusion with Russians over the hacking. Nor would they say how much of this was just business discussions. By the "so far" statement, it implies to me that is what they were hoping to find and found nothing.
    They have already been looking into it.

  17. #135
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Gender
    Male
    Ideology
    Independent
    Posts
    1,690
    Rep Power
    2
    Post Like Stats

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tguns View Post
    In the end, I agree with our leftist comrades in as far as this Russian issue needs to be investigated. If Trump is somehow dirty in this, we need to know and he needs to be dealt with. On the other hand, if it's nothing more than what it appears to be on the surface, I have little doubt that through the course of the investigation our leftist bretheren will have well overplayed their hand and given Trump the political capital and reasoning he needs to govern how he wishes to.

    That aside, this issue with people in the intelligence community playing politics with national security needs to be a large part of our focus on this. THIS is a dangerous situation, when career beurocrats use the authority we vest in them to play out their vindictive desires, we have reached a point where government stability is at issue. Whomever these people are, they need to be rooted out and dealt with in a way that leaves no question in anyones mind that such acts will no longer be tolerated.
    Right now there's a lot of smoke, but of course, who knows if it's anything too serious. Trump said it was just an innocent conversation he had with the Russians, but during that same press conference he said he had the biggest EC margin since Reagan, so I can't believe **** he says... It may be be much ado about nothing, or he could be a KGB puppet, both are equally plausible to me right now.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •