Changes

Under FISA, if the government makes certain allegations,<ref>being an "agent of a foreign power," member of a terrorist organization or drug cartel, illegal weapons smuggler, acting against the national security interests of the United States, for example.</ref> an American citizen and his or her entire network of personal and electronic contacts, and your contacts' contacts, can be stripped of your constitutional rights of due process, right to counsel, and the right to face your accusers by a court, meeting in secret, without you ever being notified what has happened.

Under FISA, if the government makes certain allegations,<ref>being an "agent of a foreign power," member of a terrorist organization or drug cartel, illegal weapons smuggler, acting against the national security interests of the United States, for example.</ref> an American citizen and his or her entire network of personal and electronic contacts, and your contacts' contacts, can be stripped of your constitutional rights of due process, right to counsel, and the right to face your accusers by a court, meeting in secret, without you ever being notified what has happened.

Former U.S. Attorney and ''[[National Review]]'' journalist  covering [[national security]] Andrew McCarthy writes {{quotebox|FISA authorities are not criminal-law authorities. It is not just that '''FISA is not designed to ferret out evidence of [[crime]]; it is not permitted to be used for that purpose'''. FISA’s objective is the collection of foreign intelligence, the gathering of information about the actions and intentions of foreign powers that may threaten American interests.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/trump-russia-probe-fbi-fisa-application/</ref>}}

Former U.S. Attorney and ''[[National Review]]'' journalist  covering [[national security]] [[Andrew McCarthy]] writes {{quotebox|FISA authorities are not criminal-law authorities. It is not just that '''FISA is not designed to ferret out evidence of [[crime]]; it is not permitted to be used for that purpose'''. FISA’s objective is the collection of foreign intelligence, the gathering of information about the actions and intentions of foreign powers that may threaten American interests.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/trump-russia-probe-fbi-fisa-application/</ref>}}

There exists within the statute a potential that allows for domestic spying on political opponents similar to the abuses which toppled President [[Richard Nixon]].<ref>[http://lawnewz.com/opinion/sally-yates-should-be-investigated-for-her-possible-role-in-watergate-style-surveillance/ Sally Yates Should Be Investigated For Her Possible Role in Watergate-Style Surveillance], by Robert Barnes, February 15th, 2017</ref> Such abuses, and more,<ref>[http://www.gopbuzz.com/blog/2013/04/19/obama-has-achieved-imperial-presidency-that-nixon-wanted-by-georgetown-law-professor-jonathan-turley/ Obama Has Achieved Imperial Presidency That Nixon Wanted], Jonathan Turley, April 19, 2013</ref> have in fact occurred against the campaign of [[Donald Trump]] during the Presidency of [[Barack Obama]].<ref>''New York Times'' reports "In the Obama administration’s last days, some '''White House officials scrambled to spread information about''' Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of '''President-elect Donald Trump''' and Russians — '''across the government.''' [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html?_r=0]</ref> Abuses such as spying on members of Congress,<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/03/10/kucinich_i_was_wiretapped_as_a_congressman_they_can_certainly_tap_a_presidential_candidate.html Kucinich: I Was Wiretapped As A Congressman, They Can Certainly Tap A Presidential Candidate], Ian Schwartz, March 10, 2017</ref> congressional committees tasked with overseeing agencies that administer the law,<ref>

There exists within the statute a potential that allows for domestic spying on political opponents similar to the abuses which toppled President [[Richard Nixon]].<ref>[http://lawnewz.com/opinion/sally-yates-should-be-investigated-for-her-possible-role-in-watergate-style-surveillance/ Sally Yates Should Be Investigated For Her Possible Role in Watergate-Style Surveillance], by [[Robert Barnes]], February 15th, 2017</ref> Such abuses, and more,<ref>[http://www.gopbuzz.com/blog/2013/04/19/obama-has-achieved-imperial-presidency-that-nixon-wanted-by-georgetown-law-professor-jonathan-turley/ Obama Has Achieved Imperial Presidency That Nixon Wanted], Jonathan Turley, April 19, 2013</ref> have in fact occurred against the campaign of [[Donald Trump]] during the Presidency of [[Barack Obama]].<ref>''New York Times'' reports "In the Obama administration’s last days, some '''White House officials scrambled to spread information about''' Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of '''President-elect Donald Trump''' and Russians — '''across the government.''' [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html?_r=0]</ref> Abuses such as spying on members of Congress,<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/03/10/kucinich_i_was_wiretapped_as_a_congressman_they_can_certainly_tap_a_presidential_candidate.html Kucinich: I Was Wiretapped As A Congressman, They Can Certainly Tap A Presidential Candidate], Ian Schwartz, March 10, 2017</ref> congressional committees tasked with overseeing agencies that administer the law,<ref>

[https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/a-brief-history-of-the-cias-unpunished-spying-on-the-senate/384003/ A Brief History of the CIA's Unpunished Spying on the Senate: President Obama's choice to lead the intelligence agency has undermined core checks and balances with impunity.] CONOR FRIEDERSDORF, DEC 23, 2014</ref> the Supreme Court,<ref><small>[[Daniel Ellsberg]], in responding to a question about why should people care, said: "Do they really believe that real [[democracy]] is viable, when one branch of government, the Executive, knows or can know every detail of every private communication (or credit card transaction, or movement) of: every journalist; every source to every journalist; every member of Congress and their staffs; every judge, at every level up to the Supreme Court? Do they think that every one of these people "has nothing to hide," nothing that could be used to blackmail them or manipulate them, or neutralize their dissent to Executive policies, or influence voting behavior? Is investigative journalism, or aggressive Congressional investigation of the Executive, or court restraints on Executive practices, really possible with that amount of transparency to the Executive of their private and professional lives and associations? And without any of those checks, the kind of democracy you have is that of the German Democratic Republic in [[East Germany]], with its [[Stasi]] (which had a minuscule fraction of the surveillance capability the NSA has now, but enough to turn a fraction of the population of East Germany into secret Stasi informants)."</small>

[https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/a-brief-history-of-the-cias-unpunished-spying-on-the-senate/384003/ A Brief History of the CIA's Unpunished Spying on the Senate: President Obama's choice to lead the intelligence agency has undermined core checks and balances with impunity.] CONOR FRIEDERSDORF, DEC 23, 2014</ref> the Supreme Court,<ref><small>[[Daniel Ellsberg]], in responding to a question about why should people care, said: "Do they really believe that real [[democracy]] is viable, when one branch of government, the Executive, knows or can know every detail of every private communication (or credit card transaction, or movement) of: every journalist; every source to every journalist; every member of Congress and their staffs; every judge, at every level up to the Supreme Court? Do they think that every one of these people "has nothing to hide," nothing that could be used to blackmail them or manipulate them, or neutralize their dissent to Executive policies, or influence voting behavior? Is investigative journalism, or aggressive Congressional investigation of the Executive, or court restraints on Executive practices, really possible with that amount of transparency to the Executive of their private and professional lives and associations? And without any of those checks, the kind of democracy you have is that of the German Democratic Republic in [[East Germany]], with its [[Stasi]] (which had a minuscule fraction of the surveillance capability the NSA has now, but enough to turn a fraction of the population of East Germany into secret Stasi informants)."</small>

https://freedom.press/news-advocacy/highlights-from-daniel-ellsbergas-reddit-ama-on-edward-snowden-and-nsa-surveillance/</ref> intimidation of journalists for reporting on the FISA law,<ref>[http://www.cjr.org/criticism/national_security_letters.php When can the FBI use National Security Letters to spy on journalists? That’s classified.] By Trevor Timm, ''Columbia Journalism Review'', JANUARY 11, 2016</ref> and blackmail are either known to have occurred or potentially exist under the law.<ref>https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/trump-is-challenging-the-whole-cia-media-nexus/</ref> In 2017 the FBI said they could not assure that the hundreds of people administering programs created by the law would be investigated for [[felony]] criminal abuses.<ref>

https://freedom.press/news-advocacy/highlights-from-daniel-ellsbergas-reddit-ama-on-edward-snowden-and-nsa-surveillance/</ref> intimidation of journalists for reporting on the FISA law,<ref>[http://www.cjr.org/criticism/national_security_letters.php When can the FBI use National Security Letters to spy on journalists? That’s classified.] By Trevor Timm, ''Columbia Journalism Review'', JANUARY 11, 2016</ref> and blackmail are either known to have occurred or potentially exist under the law.<ref>https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/trump-is-challenging-the-whole-cia-media-nexus/</ref> In 2017 the FBI said they could not assure that the hundreds of people administering programs created by the law would be investigated for [[felony]] criminal abuses.<ref>

Snowden, who is being sought by U.S. authorities for leaking classified information and is now in [[Russia]], was the catalyst that exposed the vast authority of the NSA by revealing how the agency is capable of retrieving and storing vast amounts of what Americans considered private communications in their servers." http://circa.com/politics/some-us-intelligence-officials-want-trump-to-rescind-obamas-expansion-of-nsa-data </small></ref> The 2002 Amendments to the bill allowed for these changes, although the outdated name 'Foreign Intelligence' attached to the bill's name and the FISA courts established by it remained. Furthermore, technological development expanded the meaning of the term 'wiretap'. While earlier amendments expanded the meaning beyond a microphone plant or hardwire tap on a telephone line to include satellite, microwave, and fiber-optic cables, the original law authorized 'wiretaps' only on a telephone number. With the advent of cell phones, which made it cheap and easy to change phone numbers, the authorization to 'wiretap' was changed from an electronic device to a person, regardless of what telephone or electronic source of transmission they may be using or is available for eavesdropping. Under the revisions, it is the person who is 'wiretapped', not the location or electronic device.

Snowden, who is being sought by U.S. authorities for leaking classified information and is now in [[Russia]], was the catalyst that exposed the vast authority of the NSA by revealing how the agency is capable of retrieving and storing vast amounts of what Americans considered private communications in their servers." http://circa.com/politics/some-us-intelligence-officials-want-trump-to-rescind-obamas-expansion-of-nsa-data </small></ref> The 2002 Amendments to the bill allowed for these changes, although the outdated name 'Foreign Intelligence' attached to the bill's name and the FISA courts established by it remained. Furthermore, technological development expanded the meaning of the term 'wiretap'. While earlier amendments expanded the meaning beyond a microphone plant or hardwire tap on a telephone line to include satellite, microwave, and fiber-optic cables, the original law authorized 'wiretaps' only on a telephone number. With the advent of cell phones, which made it cheap and easy to change phone numbers, the authorization to 'wiretap' was changed from an electronic device to a person, regardless of what telephone or electronic source of transmission they may be using or is available for eavesdropping. Under the revisions, it is the person who is 'wiretapped', not the location or electronic device.

On October 26, 2001, Title II of the [[Patriot Act]] made significant changes to some of the original provisions of FISA. Nine months after the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11th terrorist attack]], other proposals to amend FISA were submitted. The amendments granted cross-agency intelligence sharing at their discretion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL30465.pdf Congressional Research Service, February 15, 2007]</ref> Still, turf wars, competition, and mistrust between agencies exist leading to a redundancy of effort. Coordinated efforts on a target, on the other hand, can be devastating. Witness the illegal activities focused against Donald Trump and associates in 2016–18.

On October 26, 2001, Title II of the [[Patriot Act]] made significant changes to some of the original provisions of FISA. Nine months after the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11th terrorist attack]], other proposals to amend FISA were submitted. The amendments granted cross-agency [[intelligence sharing]] at their discretion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL30465.pdf Congressional Research Service, February 15, 2007]</ref> Still, turf wars, competition, and mistrust between agencies exist leading to a redundancy of effort. Coordinated efforts on a target, on the other hand, can be devastating. Witness the illegal activities focused against Donald Trump and associates in 2016–18.

===Snowden leaks===

===Snowden leaks===

===702 queries (Title VII)===

===702 queries (Title VII)===

Section 702 permits the government to target for surveillance foreign persons located outside the United States for the purpose of acquiring foreign intelligence information. However

Section 702 permits the government to target for surveillance foreign persons located outside the United States for the purpose of acquiring foreign intelligence information. However

Section 702 addresses American citizens, or "US persons", caught up in foreign surveillance (incidental collection) as well. Section 702 requires "masking" a US persons identity in reports and transcripts. The FISA Court doesn't give FISA-702 “warrants”, they give FISA-702 search or surveillance approval. 702 queries are forbidden without FISA court approval. A 702(16) is a phone search query based on “TO” and/or “FROM”. A 702(17) is an email or text query based on “ABOUT”.  

Section 702 addresses American citizens, or "US persons", caught up in foreign surveillance (incidental collection) as well. Section 702 requires "masking" a US persons identity in reports and transcripts. The [[FISA Court]] doesn't give FISA-702 “warrants”, they give FISA-702 search or surveillance approval. 702 queries are forbidden without FISA court approval. A 702(16) is a phone search query based on “TO” and/or “FROM”. A 702(17) is an email or text query based on “ABOUT”.  

A FISA-702(16) Search Result would come from the FBI counter terrorism database or NSA database that returns a US person as the result of a “To” or “From” search. For example, querying phone number TO: BadGuy or FROM: BadGuy might return a list of phone numbers that also contains a US persons' phone number.  That US person is protected by the [[Fourth Amendment]].  To look at the “upstream” connections of the US Person to other people, most likely other US persons and citizens, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to review the upstream results. If the search was vital to [[national security]], the upstream phone numbers could be reviewed without asking FISA permission first.

A FISA-702(16) Search Result would come from the FBI counter terrorism database or NSA database that returns a US person as the result of a “To” or “From” search. For example, querying phone number TO: BadGuy or FROM: BadGuy might return a list of phone numbers that also contains a US persons' phone number.  That US person is protected by the [[Fourth Amendment]].  To look at the “upstream” connections of the US Person to other people, most likely other US persons and citizens, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to review the upstream results. If the search was vital to [[national security]], the upstream phone numbers could be reviewed without asking FISA permission first.

A FISA-702(17) Search Result would come from the FBI counter terrorism database or NSA database that returns a US person (702) as a result of an “ABOUT” (17) search. For example, querying everything in email ABOUT: BadGuy might return communication of an American who wrote a letter about BadGuy or maybe he told a friend in a text to check out a media story about BadGuy.  To look at the email or text of the American, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to see the email/text content. If the search was vital to national security, the email and text could be looked at without asking FISA permission first.

A FISA-702(17) Search Result would come from the FBI counter terrorism database or NSA database that returns a US person (702) as a result of an “ABOUT” (17) search. For example, querying everything in email ABOUT: BadGuy might return communication of an American who wrote a letter about BadGuy or maybe he told a friend in a text to check out a [[media]] story about BadGuy.  To look at the [[email]] or text of the American, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to see the email/text content. If the search was vital to national security, the email and text could be looked at without asking FISA permission first.

Section 702 collection is not subject to individual formal FISA Court approvals. Due to frequency of collection, instead of issuing individual court orders, the FISC approves annual certifications submitted by the [[Attorney General]] and the [[Director of National Intelligence]] that specify categories of foreign intelligence information the government is authorized to acquire.

Section 702 collection is not subject to individual formal FISA Court approvals. Due to frequency of collection, instead of issuing individual court orders, the FISC approves annual certifications submitted by the [[Attorney General]] and the [[Director of National Intelligence]] that specify categories of foreign intelligence information the government is authorized to acquire.

The DOJ's National Security Division (NSD) maintains oversight of the Intelligence Agencies (such as the FBI) use of Section 702 authority. The NSD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) jointly conduct reviews of the Intelligence Agencies Section 702 activities every 60 days.

The [[DOJ National Security Division]] (DOJ-NSD) maintains oversight of the Intelligence Agencies (such as the FBI) use of Section 702 authority. The DOJ-NSD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (O[[DNI]]) jointly conduct reviews of the [[US intelligence community|Intelligence Agencies]] Section 702 activities every 60 days.

The NSD – with notice to the ODNI – is required to report any incidents of Agency noncompliance or misconduct to the FISA Court.

The NSD – with notice to the ODNI – is required to report any incidents of Agency noncompliance or misconduct to the FISA Court.

In the [[Russiagate]] scandal,<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com</ref>  702 "About" queries are known to have occurred using the terms "Michael Cohen travel" which returned an errant result with the wrong "[[Michael Cohen]]" having traveled to [[Prague]]. Candidate [[Donald Trump]]'s lawyer provided evidence he never traveled to Prague, with other government sources corroborating the evidence. The episode proved [[Christopher Steele]] received raw FISA 702 data from the [[FBI scandal|FBI]], and thus the [[criminal]] [[conspiracy]] within the [[Obama administration]] to violate civil rights and interfere in the 2016 election.

In the [[Russiagate]] scandal,<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com</ref>  702 "About" queries are known to have occurred using the terms "Michael Cohen travel" which returned an errant result with the wrong "[[Michael Cohen]]" having traveled to [[Prague]]. Candidate [[Donald Trump]]'s lawyer provided evidence he never traveled to Prague, with other government sources corroborating the evidence. The episode proved [[Christopher Steele]] received raw FISA 702 data from the [[FBI scandal|FBI]], and thus the [[criminal]] [[conspiracy]] within the [[Obama administration]] to violate civil rights and interfere in the 2016 election.

[[John Carlin]] was head of the [[DOJ National Security Division]]. Surveillance of Donald Trump and associates originated under Carlin's tenure. Carlin announced his resignation on September 27, 2016, after filing the Government's proposed 2016 Section 702 certifications on September 26, 2016. The filing did not disclose [[FISA abuse]]s. Carlin was aware [[NSA]] chief [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] ordered a compliance audit which uncovered the FISA abuse. The 2016 certifications were scheduled for FISA Court approval on October 26, 2016.

[[John Carlin]] was head of the DOJ National Security Division. Surveillance of Donald Trump and associates originated under Carlin's tenure. Carlin announced his resignation on September 27, 2016, after filing the Government's proposed 2016 Section 702 certifications on September 26, 2016. The filing did not disclose [[FISA abuse]]s. Carlin was aware [[NSA]] chief [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] ordered a compliance audit which uncovered the FISA abuse. The 2016 certifications were scheduled for FISA Court approval on October 26, 2016.

===Woods proceedures===

===Woods proceedures===