PDA

View Full Version : Justice Department: FBI acted illegally on data



George Gervin's Afro
03-10-2007, 10:19 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11100916/

WASHINGTON - The FBI improperly and, in some cases, illegally used the USA Patriot Act to secretly obtain personal information about people in the United States, a Justice Department audit concluded Friday.

And for three years the FBI has underreported to Congress how often it forced businesses to turn over the customer data, the audit found.

FBI agents sometimes demanded the data without proper authorization, according to the 126-page audit by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine. At other times, the audit found, the FBI improperly obtained telephone records in non-emergency circumstances.

FBI Director Robert Mueller said he was to blame for not putting more safeguards into place.

“I am to be held accountable,” Mueller said. He told reporters he would correct the problems and did not plan to resign.

“The inspector general went and did the audit that I should have put in place many years ago,” Mueller said.

The audit blames agent error and shoddy record-keeping for the bulk of the problems and did not find any indication of criminal misconduct.

Still, "we believe the improper or illegal uses we found involve serious misuses of national security letter authorities," the audit concludes.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who oversees the FBI, said the problems outlined in the report involved no intentional wrongdoing. In remarks prepared for delivery to privacy officials late Friday, Gonzales said that “there is no excuse for the mistakes that have been made, and we are going to make things right as quickly as possible.”

At issue are the security letters, a power outlined in the Patriot Act that the Bush administration pushed through Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The letters, or administrative subpoenas, are used in suspected terrorism and espionage cases. They allow the FBI to require telephone companies, Internet service providers, banks, credit bureaus and other businesses to produce highly personal records about their customers or subscribers — without a judge's approval.

About three-fourths of the national security letters were issued for counterterror cases, and the other fourth for spy investigations.

Chief acknowledges deficiencies
In an earlier statement, Mueller called Fine's audit "a fair and objective review of the FBI's use of a proven and useful investigative tool."

The finding "of deficiencies in our processes is unacceptable," Mueller said.

"We strive to exercise our authorities consistent with the privacy protections and civil liberties that we are sworn to uphold," Mueller said. "Anything less will not be tolerated. While we've already taken some steps to address these shortcomings, I am ordering additional corrective measures to be taken immediately."


Fine's annual review is required by Congress, over the objections of the Bush administration.

The audit released Friday found that the number of national security letters issued by the FBI skyrocketed in the years after the Patriot Act became law.

In 2000, for example, the FBI issued an estimated 8,500 letters. By 2003, however, that number jumped to 39,000. It rose again the next year, to about 56,000 letters in 2004, and dropped to approximately 47,000 in 2005.

CONTINUED: Thousands of requests not in database

Over the entire three-year period, the FBI reported issuing 143,074 national security letters requesting customer data from businesses, the audit found. But that did not include an additional 8,850 requests that were never recorded in the FBI’s database, the audit found.

Also, Fine’s audit noted, a 2006 report to Congress showing that the FBI delivered only 9,254 national security letters during the previous year — on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents — was only required to report certain types of requests for information. That report did not outline the full scope of the national security letter requests in 2005, nor was it required to, Fine’s office said.


Additionally, the audit found, the FBI identified 26 possible violations in its use of the national security letters, including failing to get proper authorization, making improper requests under the law and unauthorized collection of telephone or Internet e-mail records.


Of the violations, 22 were caused by FBI errors, while the other four were the result of mistakes made by the firms that received the letters.

Unauthorized signatures
The FBI also used so-called "exigent letters," signed by officials at FBI headquarters who were not authorized to sign national security letters, to obtain information. In at least 700 cases, these exigent letters were sent to three telephone companies to get toll billing records and subscriber information.

"In many cases, there was no pending investigation associated with the request at the time the exigent letters were sent," the audit concluded.

In a letter to Fine, Gonzales asked the inspector general to issue a follow-up audit in July on whether the FBI had followed recommendations to fix the problems.

“To say that I am concerned about what has been revealed in this report would be an enormous understatement,” Gonzales said in remarks prepared for delivery to the privacy officials. “Failure to adequately protect information privacy is a failure to do our jobs.”

Senators outraged over the conclusions signaled they would provide tougher oversight of the FBI — and perhaps limit its power.

"I am very concerned that the FBI has so badly misused national security letters," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the FBI.

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., another member of the judiciary panel, said the report "proves that 'trust us' doesn't cut it."

The American Civil Liberties Union said the audit proves Congress must amend the Patriot Act to require judicial approval anytime the FBI wants access to sensitive personal information. “The attorney general and the FBI are part of the problem, and they cannot be trusted to be part of the solution,” said Anthony D. Romero, the ACLU’s executive director.

Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said Gonzales "commends the work of the inspector general in uncovering serious problems in the FBI's use of NSLs."



Finally we can put to rest the Yoni type's argument concerning abuses. Their common defense has been "prove someone's civil rights have been violated by Bush's programs. Well here you go..

exstatic
03-11-2007, 12:52 PM
What a surprise. Did anybody REALLY think they were only going after terrorists with their newfound powers?

jochhejaam
03-11-2007, 02:04 PM
The American Civil Liberties Union said the audit proves Congress must amend the Patriot Act to require judicial approval anytime the FBI wants access to sensitive personal information.
Right, because there's no possibilty of judges exceeding their authority. :rolleyes
Prosecute the abusers, but there is no need to open the door that would allow judicial activists to interfere with, or cripple, the efforts to provide Security for the American people.

Johnny_Blaze_47
03-11-2007, 02:43 PM
What is everybody bitching about?

If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got no reason to worry about what the FBI chooses to see.

boutons_
03-11-2007, 02:53 PM
Would you like a Dem-politicized DoJ and the DNC getting access all your private data?

As this example shows, when the paranoid wisdom and brilliance of the Constitution is not respected (Exec unchecked by other branches), there will ALWAYS be abuses.

"There's nothing new under the sun."

"Power (and money) corrupts"

The Exec failed to protect the country from the WTC attack, and now we are expected to trust them with no controls on their power?

Johnny_Blaze_47
03-11-2007, 03:06 PM
and now we are expected to trust them with no controls on their power?


http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/12/17/bush.cabinet/story.gonzalez.pool.jpg


Yes.

Winehole23
10-29-2014, 12:55 PM
More than a decade later, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has published an analysis (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/10/peekaboo-i-see-you-government-uses-authority-meant-terrorism-other-uses) on use of the sneak-and-peek power. Just as critics predicted, it’s now a ubiquitous part of federal law enforcement.


Law enforcement made 47 sneak-and-peek searches nationwide from September 2001 to April 2003. The 2010 report reveals 3,970 total requests were processed. Within three years that number jumped to 11,129. That’s an increase of over 7,000 requests. Exactly what privacy advocates argued (https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.php) in 2001 is happening: sneak and peak warrants are not just being used in exceptional circumstances—which was their original intent—but as an everyday investigative tool.



And as critics predicted, it is overwhelmingly used in cases that have nothing to do with terrorism. But even if you’re a cynic, it’s pretty shocking just how little the power is used in terrorism investigations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/10/29/surprise-controversial-patriot-act-power-now-overwhelmingly-used-in-drug-investigations/

Winehole23
10-29-2014, 12:56 PM
Out of the 3,970 total requests from October 1, 2009 to September 30, 2010, 3,034 were for narcotics cases and only 37 for terrorism cases (about .9%). Since then, the numbers get worse. The 2011 report reveals a total of 6,775 requests. 5,093 were used for drugs, while only 31 (or .5%) were used for terrorism cases. The 2012 report follows a similar pattern: Only .6%, or 58 requests, dealt with terrorism cases. The 2013 report confirms the incredibly low numbers. Out of 11,129 reports only 51, or .5%, of requests were used for terrorism. The majority of requests were overwhelmingly for narcotics cases, which tapped out at 9,401 requests.

boutons_deux
10-29-2014, 01:38 PM
and of those "narcotics" cases, how many were against marijuana users, rather than big dealers and hard drugs?

Drug War is a business and huge, self-protecting bureaucracy.