The authority for the United States government to capture the electronic records of all Americans without warrant falls under the auspices of FISA-702. Reauthorization of the current authority is being debated. This is a deep walk into why this issue is so important to our government.
Having researched almost every aspect to the construct and the argument, I am confident FISA-702 authority underpins a much bigger, quasi-constitutional justification for the collection of U.S. citizen metadata. Without the 702 authority the legal justification for the apparatus of surveillance no longer exists. It really is that simple.
It is not the just the illegal searching of the NSA database that presents the issue, although that aspect has received the majority of attention, the capture itself violates the Fourth Amendment. The only way the government can justify the capture of U.S. Citizen data is if there is some quasi-constitutional or national security reason for it. That’s where FISA-702 comes in.
Take away “702” search authority, and the data collection argument collapses. Any “incidental” search of the database then loses any plausible legal justification. 702 is the camel’s nose under the privacy tent that forms the baseline for all data records to be intercepted, stored and ultimately available for review.
♦ Only one legal case has ever pushed into the sphere of challenging this unconstitutional exploitation. A 2025 decision in the U.S. v. Hasbajrami in Brooklyn, New York, where Eastern District Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall identified the misuse of FISA-702 “backdoor searches” regarding defendant, Agron Hasbajrami.
Hasbajrami plead guilty to charges of attempting to provide material support to a terrorist organization, alleging that he intended to travel to the Federally Administered Tribal Area of Pakistan, where he expected to join a terrorist organization, receive training, and ultimately fight against U.S. forces and others in Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, after his guilty plea, while he is serving time in prison, prosecutors admitted some of the evidence against him came as a result of privacy violations, unlawful FISA-702 searches.
Hasbajrami sought to have the evidence against him thrown out on 4th amendment grounds (fruit of the poisoned tree) and withdraw his guilty plea. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied Hasbarjami’s blanket evidence suppression motion for the exclusion of all FISA Section 702 collection in his case but did not weigh in on whether the warrantless Section 702 database queries were constitutional, instead remanding the case back to Judge Hall for a review of that question.
Judge DeArchy Hall received the case again and reviewed all of the government motions against the request to suppress the evidence. What results is a very well-constructed explanation and opinion of how FISA-702 was misused in the case [SEE 60-pg Opinion HERE].
The judge determined that U.S. government officials did factually violate the technical rules and procedures for the use of FISA-702 searches, and the DOJ should have gone to court to obtain a warrant to look at Hasbajrami’s private communication.
In essence, yes, the 4th amendment protections of Hasbajrami were violated. However, the issue of overturning the resulting evidence becomes a matter of legal distinction.
The defendant, who admitted guilt (twice) did not claim the evidence was a result of misuse or a wrongful approach in searching the NSA’s library, from which FISA-702 search results are determined (a structural flaw in the defense motion). Instead, the defendant filed a suppression motion on the issue of his 4th amendment rights being violated.
The judge opinion holds that the FBI’s Section 702 queries violated the Fourth Amendment; however, the court ultimately denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the resulting evidence on separate grounds.
The value in the ruling by Judge Hall, is a few fold:
First, it is an excellent review of the FISA-702 origin and all of the constitutional arguments that surround the controversial law.
Second, the ruling clearly shows that FISA-702 searches are currently being used unlawfully and continually by government officials.
Third, the ruling clearly shows how “backdoor” 702 searches are violations of the Fourth Amendment. [Albeit in this case, of no value to the argument put forth by Hasbajrami.]
[SEE CASE RULING HERE]
The ruling essentially underpins the reality that government officials are using their access to the complete library within the NSA collection and storage database to conduct searches of U.S. communication that removes the constitutional protections of the 4th amendment.
Mr Agron Hasbajrami was ensnared by this surveillance process and admitted his guilt thereafter.
However, the issue is not Hasbajrami’s intent, or even his guilt. The issue is this constant surveillance state, the metadata library and the tens-of-millions of searches that are done on the private papers of American citizens. In essence we have a domestic surveillance state looking for suspect people who are operating against the interests of government.
Do not forget, now we have over 10,000 log-in portals with access to the NSA database, including an FBI workstation at the DC office of the Perkins Coie law firm that ties into the NSA database {GO DEEP}. Perkins Coie is a national security contractor with the DOJ and FBI .
Mr. Hasbajrami was caught wanting to join a terrorist organization. However, as we have witnessed in the reality of the J6 roundup, a “terrorist organization” may well be defined as your local “patriot group”, “parent’s advisory committee” or designated “anti-vaxxers.”
♦ The Fourth Amendment aspect to the ‘warrantless’ government capture of American citizen records has never been fully argued in court; the modern definitions are opaque, and the govt has a vested interest in retaining the untested status quo. The last thing the executive and legislative branches of government want is a valid 4th Amendment privacy case to reach the Supreme Court.
The Intelligence Community (IC) has told Congress, particularly the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, that all hell will break loose if they don’t reauthorize full electronic surveillance of Americans.
Congress has historically been scared of the “seven ways from Sunday” IC.
However, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard slowly began to change things; specifically change things as they pertain to the domestic use of intelligence agencies.
According to intelligence experts, Speaker Johnson and most Republicans believe the IC justification. I do not buy this argument, because too much recent evidence exists showing how Congress is aware how this metadata capture is being continually exploited.
The only way to really test congressional knowledge is to question them. No one is questioning them. The congressional position is willful blindness.
The IC argument is: we have let thousands of terrorists into the country through the southern border crisis. They say: “we need to monitor terrorists, and if you take away the 702, the foreign terror cells will activate and start killing us all. Do you want that blood on your hands?” You cannot take away surveillance tools.
The DC conversation is, “Ok, we’ll reauthorize it, but you cannot use it against us – and all the sex parties and perverted stuff we do when no one is around; you must promise to keep our secrets hidden“… Then, just like the 2024 reauthorization, they exempt themselves.
The IC agree to accept a reauthorization that exempts Congress. The IC keep the process – just promise not to use it against Congress. This outlook is similar to what we saw in the CR bill extension that included text forbidding the FBI from seeking search warrants against Senator’s telecommunications.
If you ask me why, I now take the position that FISA-702 is the gateway to the massive surveillance system being put into place using Real ID and the AI facial recognition software provided by Palantir (CIA exploit). In essence, the gateway that allows the full-scale surveillance state, is opened by the prior authorization of FISA-702 that negates any 4th Amendment protection.
All of the surveillance mechanisms being updated and enhanced by AI search and capture, come from the IC being allowed to exploit the NSA database. That same database access is the targeting mechanism for FISA-702. If warrantless searches of the NSA database were stopped, the Palantir/IC and Tech Bro collaboration could hit a brick wall. The significance of this FISA-702 issue is much bigger than most can appreciate.
There is still no warrant requirement in the newest version of the FISA (702) reauthorization bill as proposed [SEE HERE]. The new modifications are only nine pages, and I previously recommended all those interested review the language.
The House proposal was originally for a three-year extension of 702 with a new structural compliance report process requiring the FBI to submit a monthly report to the Civil Liberties Protection Officer (CLPO) within the office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Essentially, the ODNI becomes the compliance auditor for how the FBI uses the process.
The CLPO reviews the names and summaries of intents that have been searched through the use of FISA (702) as submitted -monthly- by the FBI. If there are any violations or concerns the CLPO notifies the Intelligence Community Inspector General for investigation. Both the CLPO and the ICIG report to the ODNI (Tulsi Gabbard, currently).
“The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community shall investigate each query referred … to determine whether the query constitutes a violation of laws, rules, or regulations or an abuse of authority.” It’s another layer of compliance review intended to stop search abuses within the database that is held and maintained by the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command.
Here’s the issue with that part: The FBI can only submit the names that were searched if they are aware of them. Meaning, the FBI doesn’t maintain the audit trail, so the FBI only knows who was searched using 702 based on the FBI ‘searcher‘ reporting their search.
This compliance process doesn’t address unlawful database searches that are not reported because they are unknown to the FBI compiling the report.
The NSA and Cyber Command would still need to be monitoring and auditing the searching of the NSA database; and those searches may, or may not, be done by FBI officials who are filling out reports telling the DNI of their activity.
If a non-FBI person is abusing the database; or if an FBI agent simply doesn’t report his search; that/those search(es) would not show up on the monthly report to be delivered to the CLPO. Hence, how would the Civil Liberties Protection Officer even know?
That layer of compliance just doesn’t make sense.
If this audit process was going to be a compliance review, then the report should come from the NSA/Cyber Command, not the FBI. And the NSA/Cyber Command could simply provide the audit trail to the Civil Liberties Protection Officer (DNI) monthly.
This could even be done today, without any FBI involvement whatsoever.
The simple fact that congress is putting the FBI into the compliance loop tells me that congress is trying to maintain a system that can be exploited for unlawful or unauthorized searches.
FINAL THOUGHT – This contextual information has begun penetrating Washington DC stakeholders. A non-pretending review of the history behind the FISA(702) issue is enough to make a person pause. Perhaps, just perhaps, this is one of the reasons why SSCI Chairman Tom Cotton and SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner are both in a hurry to see Tulsi Gabbard depart and the ODNI revert back to being their ally.
~ Support CTH Mission Here ~




‘Congress has historically been scared of the “seven ways from Sunday” IC.’
Along with the DNI and everyone else “made an offer they can’t refuse”.
The “offerors” being the same entities who became all-powerful as a result of the event that only they could have covertly executed as overwhelming evidence indicates:
ae911truth.org
It is the gathering of my information that violates my 4th amendment rights. Those rights are God given, not bestowed upon me by any government. 702 is simply the mechanism that glosses over my rights to search my stuff. Blow the whole effing thing up including the Nevada data center that houses my stuff.
702 was never an issue on anyone’s radar other than patriots like SD and those at CTH until TPTB realized the weapon might be turned on them. Then of course those same powers outlawed it for themselves but not for me
Eff them all.
Targeted Individuals agree with you 💯
The non targeted should agree with me more.
So….
Orwell was prescient and correct…
“Some pigs (a corrupt, immoral Congress) are actually more equal than others (the rest of us).
While we express outrage, rightly so, at “Two Tier Laws and (In)Justice” across the pond, we stand in our own glass houses.
Fixable?
Somehow I think not.
Without 702 illegal foreign gangsters from places like Uzbekistan, Somalia and India will penetrate our goverment and commercial systems and rob us blind-which is a threat to our national security-wait, that is allowed to happen every day.
🤣🤣. Exactly, plus, many sit in our congress.
The crisis of 9-11 gave birth to a beast that is in my humble opinion of more damage to individual liberty than the actual attack, psychological and physiological damage done to the country.
Pause and consider what a weaponized government did during dopey’s “presidency”. Fences in DC, mandatory vax, Grandmas going to prison for being in DC during J6……….and most importantly as we know here at CTH a stolen presidency.
Lenin would have been proud of our gov’t and called it his own during 2020 to 2024………….so would Mao.
Republicans have a history of creating tools of surveillance and oppression. Nixon is infamous for creating a vast administrative state with few sideboards (EPA being the most egregious).
Then there is the drunk W with all he did.
Now Trump is foisting AI into all government agencies.
Don’t blame Trump for ai being foisted on us. It was coming with or without him. However, how it is used will be at least partly his legacy.
Am I the only one who is fairly certain the Patriot Act was written pre 9/11, shoved in a drawer, and released once those who drew up the most unconstitutional piece of legislation ever signed into law thought a reasonable amount of time had passed? So we wouldn’t accuse them of exactly what I am accusing them of?
Lenin, Mao, and every despot that ever lived would be envious and admire what the U.S./5 eyes have done.
Tu Sundance for posting this.
Mind if I look over your shoulder to see and learn what you are doing? Who’s asking? Why, it’s me, your friendly government representative. I am here for your security and well being! How do I know that? Well…you’ll just have to trust me.
Guess what? The government and it’s representatives have lost my trust! It’s just a plain and simple fact.
(The above presentation was provided by an anonymous source)
The first mistake is implicitly trusting government in the first place. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.
It is the proverbial hammer where everything is a nail. When there are not enough criminals by which it can utilize it’s “lawful” authority on, it creates them in order to expand jurisdictions and ultimately, power.
I truly wish this would go to SCOTUS—we would quickly learn how “constitution abiding” each “justice “ is! Only a fool would declare that FISA 702 does NOT VIOLATE the constitution! I called both my DEMOCRAT Senators about a month ago—we are closely watching!
Praying and praying more that the FISA (702) gets either totally kicked to the curb or setup with 4th amend protections and real legal teeth to send abusers to prison. Yeah that includes all you CONgress critters. No carve outs….
Get rid of Wiles, that witch is holding Trumps head under water.
I vote for the first choice, totally kicked to the curb!
the coib!
Interesting. I read a quite different spin put on this. Frankly, I don’t care as much about motive as I do about just getting rid of 702. It’s an abomination.
If there was a search of a database that transaction can be recorded. That is a fundamental security capability for enterprise software. Also, on a file server file access activities can be logged. You can run key-loggers and take screenshots (Windows 11, I see you!) .
The database manager and system administrator have to actually turn those capabilities on. They are not on by default.
Self-reporting is ignorant since in the enterprise the #1 threat to security is always a rogue employee.
AI is something that could be of great use in these cases.
I will only stick it partway in! They would never lie would they? Millions of terrorists across the border? Who do we blame but ourselves? Congress can’t admit that. How about we ship them to Guantanamo Bay and not tell anyone they have been removed for political reasons? The republic is sadly finished.
There is precedent for not telling “because of the sensitivity of the matter”?
“why this issue is so important to our government”
Our Founding Fathers would be mortified at what this Republic has become. We are a crime syndicate with nuclear weapons. Home of the Fraud, Land of the Grift.
Passage of the FISA extension has been (temporarily) delayed. But surveillance of enemies (of which there are many) is necessary. Maybe there is a glimmer of hope that the FISC can be fixed? So I’ve given some thought to the FISC problem before reading Sundance’s analysis. The following approach could make political spying more difficult, but does not address massive non-warrant spying which clearly violates the 4th Amendment.
The political FISC issues are ancient: “Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes”? The current FISC was designed to fail the Constitution.
In addition, the FISC was designed to perform incompatible triple duties. In addition to “deciding” whether to issue surveillance warrants, the FISC is forced into an incompatible primary role as National Security Protector, which takes precedence over its duty to observe the 4th Amendment burdens as a secret court with no Appeal risk or public embarrassment risk for its secret decisions. Another entity is needed to watch corrupted or self-protective DOJ/FBI “watchers”.
The Constitution requires that the President ”preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, and “Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. NOT the DOJ/FBI or the CIA or the FISC – The “President”. These Presidential duties include protecting national security by surveilling enemies, AND insuring 4th Amendment protections against political, financial or other inappropriate spying. And yet the DOJ/FBI and the FISC can proceed without challenge to long-term 85% illegal spying, and can intentionally secretly surveil the President by together issuing a warrant on a different innocent ‘Target’, based on unsworn, false evidence. Massive illegal FBI spying was only ‘discovered’ because Admiral Michael S. Rogers, then Commander of U.S. Cyber Command, blocked FBI access upon discovering massive illegal surveillance. Someone “outside” the captured FISC system.
The 4th Amendment requires sworn evidence of ‘probable cause’:
Amendment 4 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Our courts are designed to ‘decide’, not to investigate. Reasons for decisions are written and subject to appellate review. The “party presentation principle”, which requires competent opposing arguments (owing loyalty to each, respectively) rather than an investigating judge, are necessary to have proper decisions. The Founders especially wanted to prevent secret, political “Star Chamber” courts of the British system. The layer of separate Appellate court review by an unpredictable panel is designed to make corruption more difficult.
The current FISC design is a rogue mess. The FISC is secret, so a few specific judges can be placed to control surveillance without review. There is no Appeal of fraudulently granted warrants. The secret FISC issues and extends warrants without any sworn probable cause evidence, which is intended to focus responsibility. The FISC also authorizes multiple surveillance ‘hops’ against potentially millions of US Citizens who are completely unknown to the Court, apparently without even checking on extent and results from ‘hop’ use when asked to extend its warrants. There is no check on “hop” misuse. Remarkably, there is only Appellate review for the DOJ to appeal refusal of the FISC to grant a warrant. Any review review check for improper warrants is forbidden. 50 USC § 1803(a)
The DOJ/FBI and the FISC surely recognized their authority to secretly surveil a potential (and then elected) President was Constitutionally and otherwise ‘problematic’. DOJ/FBI authority is derived from and subject to the President. National security surveillance is derived from and subject to the President. FISC practice of issuing warrants without sworn evidence must arguably be derived from the President’s National Security powers. But PDJT did not authorize secret surveillance of the President. In view of “the sensitivity of the matter”, DOJ/FBI and FISC did not formally identify the President as their specific “Target” in the warrant, or to Congress. Instead, they easily issued, and repeatedly extended a warrant multiple times against a minor, non-threat target, Carter Page (a loyal CIA asset) because he was in contact directly or indirectly with PDJT. The FISC surely knew the Carter Page warrant was a ‘multi-hop’ warrant against potentially millions of a political campaign, donors and voters, KNOWING the real target included the US President, one or two ‘hops’ away from Carter Page, without sworn evidence. Had Hillary Clinton won, this DoJ/FBI/FISC subterfuge would successfully have masked a warrant to secretly surveil a presidential party and its candidate. When it became known that unsworn and ‘pee-pee’ evidence were fraudulent, the FISC was inexplicably lenient in protecting the integrity of its proceedings.
The current FISC was designed to be a Constitutional failure. There is no structural responsibility for informing the Court of improprieties in warrant applications from the DOJ/FBI, or review of improper use of a granted warrant. There is no review or appeal of improperly-granted warrants, or sanctions for misused warrants. There is no significant consequence for criminal misuse (up to 85%), no practice of requiring sworn probable cause evidence, and no investigation, consequence or correction for misuse of surveillance information.
This rogue behavior was possible and forseeable because of the inadequate design of both the DOJ/FBI and FISC facilitated rogue behavior well beyond their legitimate goals.
Legitimate goals are:
1. Quickly enable surveillance of ALL ACTUAL National Security threats. Do NOT miss surveilling any true threats. (Presidential duty and authority)
2. Enable the President to enforce the laws and protect civil rights of US Citizens as required by the Constitution.
3. Protect against, penalize and correct improper surveillance. [such as illegal surveillance for financial or other personal or entity misuse, harm, gain or advantage; improper permission of surveillance access to non-government employees or entities such as law firms; or illegal partisan political surveillance of politicians, candidates for State or Federal Office or their staff/family, political donors, etc. ]
4. Maintain secrecy of proper surveillance result and prevent its improper use.
5. Protect against and penalize unauthorized ‘leaking’, disclosure or use of confidential and classified information.
6. Provide availability of Appellate review of improper warrant issuance and sanctions for improper surveillance.
7. Return the FISC primary role to ‘decider’, without primary investigative and prosecutorial responsibility for national security.
When these are the only goals, FISC re-design is relatively simple.
The Constitution requires that the President “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, and that the President “shall “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. These duties include protecting national security by surveilling enemies, and insuring 4th Amendment protections against political, or other inappropriate spying.
But the President cannot ‘take care’ to faithfully execute the laws, or defend the Constitution under the current DOF/FBI and FISC design.
28 U.S. Code § 519 provides that “Except as otherwise authorized by law, the Attorney General shall supervise ALL criminal and civil litigation of United States.
This leaves the DOJ and FBI responsible for policing themselves, while preventing the President from carrying out the duties of the Office when the DOJ/FBI commit crimes and protect themselves. The DOJ/FBI have repeatedly demonstrated they should not be the sole investigators and prosecutors of their own improper/illegal actions.
The President should be able, and is required, to protect civil rights, and to investigate and prosecute illegality and Constitutional violations by the DOJ/FBI and FISC.
The Office of Counsel to the President and Vice President (PC) was created in 1943 to handle legal requirements and other aspects of the Presidency (not personal matters). 3 U.S. Code § 105 authorizes the President to appoint and fix the pay of employees in the White House Office …[to] perform such official duties as the President may prescribe.”
To ‘fix’ the FISC mess, the Presidential Counsel should be given statutory authority to represent the President at the FISC. The PC would also be given authority, equal to that of the Attorney General, to investigate, indict and prosecute only DOJ/FBI employees and FISC judges under specific limited number of criminal statutes including 8 USC § 242-243 (Deprivation of rights under color of law), 18 USC § § 1961-68 (RICO), 18 USC §§ 793–798, 50 USC § 421, 18 USC § 1924, and 18 USC § 641 (release/misuse of classified information – FBI ‘leaks’ are notoriously tolerated).
Criminal law enforcement may involve dual authority of the Office of the President with the DOJ. If there is conflict, the President can designate which is to take the lead responsibility (makes sense because the President (with Office of the President) has pardon responsibility.
PC could itself apply to the FISC for surveillance of National Security threats identified by the President, if refused by DOJ, which the DOJ could oppose at the FISC, and appeal to the Appellate court.
The FISC staff would continue to review warrant applications for sufficiency. Presidential Counsel (PC) would typically not need to attend or participate in routine, well-evidenced warrant applications. But the PC would represent the President as a party in any proceeding at the FISC to permit the President to ”preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, and “Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. The PC would receive all surveillance applications, extension applications, and other pleadings in, to or by the FISC and represent the President, NOT the defendant against whom surveillance is requested. The PC could supplement review of warrant requests by the FISC staff, review and argue the adequacy of scope of warrants, with normal authority of counsel representing the Constitutional requirements for warrants for named and unnamed defendants (without responsibility or authority to represent any defendants themselves). The PC could request the FISC to limit or modify a requested warrant, and could appeal the grant or scope of a surveillance warrant, but the surveillance would continue during the appeal. The FISC appellate review court would have added statutory authority to review and act on warrant grant or other actions of the FISC.
The Office of Presidential Counsel attorneys would have full security clearance (so they are not blocked by “redactions”), the power to subpoena records and DOJ/FBI oath-signing witnesses, and to cross-examine them in FISC proceedings. The Office of Presidential Counsel would have authority to move the FISC to discipline unethical DOJ/FBI practices and behavior.
Because of the true urgency of necessary and legitimate surveillance, appealed FISA Warrants would be active and unfettered while on appeal,. But if reversed, the Warrants would be withdrawn, delegitimizing any improer surveillance results. The OPC would have authority to seek FISC orders to destroy, repair, correct and remediate any improper surveillance, as well as utilize its authority for selective enforcement of specific criminal laws.
The PC would have authority to request FISC Court sanctions for DOJ false or misleading applications or other improper behavior, in addition to its criminal law enforcement responsibilities.
Probable Cause for a warrant must be supported by adequate oath or affirmation, but if speed of initiating surveillance is appropriate, the adequate sworn or affirmed evidence may be filed within a specified time (e.g., 60 days) after FISC warrant issuance. If adequate sworn evidence is not provided, the Warrant would be withdrawn.
The Presidential Counsel would further have authority to petition the Chief Justice for removal for “bad behavior” of FISC judges, with copies to the Congressional Judiciary committees.
The Founders structured the Constitution to both share and divide duties and authority to spread the risks of malfunction and malevolent power concentration. The Judicial system depends on reviewable proceedings, appealability of wrongful decisions to different ‘deciders’, a record of decision reasons. and faithful representation of opposing arguments. A secret court with few judges, without appeal review or consequences for criminality is destined to become corrupted.
“Power (to spy) corrupts and absolute power(to spy) corrupts absolutely”
I would expand on that and add that power is magnetic, irresistible even, to the most corruptible.
There is no need to be nervous. No one is ever prosecuted, much less thrown in prison.
Congress doesn’t care whether the FBI, DoJ, CIA or whoever uses 702s to spy on regular citizens. They only get an iota of concern when THEY are surveilled by a government agency. Notice which side gets spied on and which side feigns outrage. They aren’t the same!
Signal Trace ties into this almost perfectly.
https://www.leonardocompany-us.com/lpr/elsag-signaltrace
HEAVENLY FATHER,
Thank YOU for sending Professor Sundance to us! 😊
YOU gave amazing research abilities to him.
He has a truly understandable way of explaining information to us.
Please continue to BLESS and Keep him.
Again, Thank YOU, FATHER,
In JESUS NAME, AMEN , & AMEN
The argument about having “let thousands of terrorists into the country through the southern border crisis” does not wash. First of all, if that was a real concern, why didn’t they do something to prevent it happening at the time? They didn’t, so today it is just a convenient argument they are using to keep 702 on the books.
Second, since all those people they let in are foreigners, and presumably everyone they are in contact with regarding their terror activities are also foreigners, the government does not need 702 to surveil any of them and to monitor all their communications. Maybe they have lost track of some of them, but that does not negate our 4th Amendment rights. This is not about surveilling those foreigners. It is about surveilling the citizenry.
The IC may have agreed not to monitor members of Congress, but every one of them must know that is BS. They will monitor Congress more than most anyone else. They may not admit to know anything about members of Congress, but the IC would not give up the easiest way to assemble blackmail material against them.
The whole thing needs to go away – FISA 702 and the FISC. They don’t need any of it to monitor foreigners and international communications and never did. They only need it to monitor American citizens in violation of the 4th Amendment, as SD points out. They can jolly well get regular warrants using regular methods in ordinary federal courts for that. This reauthorization needs to be defeated, and that NSA datacenter turned off and data deleted.