

There’s a Secret Patriot Act, Senator Says (2011) - cheese1756
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/secret-patriot-act/

======
just2n
I have a few thoughts after reading this article:

1\. This (re: citizens violating classified laws or legal interpretations) is
definitely a situation where any sane judge/jury would find against the
ignorantia juris non excusat principle, so I don't expect the use of any of
this to hold up in any court, ever, not just because its effects are
potentially unconstitutional. And any judge worth the wood upon which they sit
would dismiss any evidence presented that has been gathered as a result in
that it wasn't obtained with a legal warrant, or in any manner that is
constitutional.

2\. This is massive amounts of ammunition for conspiracy theorists, especially
truthers. Let me give it a try: 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated by the US
government under the Bush administration as a false flag operation in order to
to get the Patriot Act passed with plans to classify interpretations which
would give the government over-reaching powers to violate the constitutional
rights of citizens to the point of being able to create a Stasi state.

3\. Why don't we demand impeachment if Obama re-authorizes any part of the
Patriot Act, obviously knowing about classified secret interpretations which
have already been found to be unconstitutional (re: classified findings)? The
congress has the ability to decide whether or not the President has committed
a "high crime", and I'm fairly certain this fits the historical meaning of
that term.. knowingly and willingly violating the constitutional rights of
every US citizen, a constitution which the president is sworn to defend
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_Presiden...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_President_of_the_United_States)).

~~~
shadowfiend
Wait… The Patriot Act is passed and reauthorized by Congress first. So you're
suggesting that if Congress passes a reauthorization, and Obama signs it, then
that same Congress should go back and impeach him? This seems… Unlikely…

The Patriot Act is a law. The buck stops at Congress. They passed it the first
time. They reauthorized the parts of it that are still around the subsequent
times. Trying to redirect the blame to the administration, which has, by the
way, done plenty of things wrong, is a misunderstanding of the system and a
distortion that does no one any favors. When we concentrate responsibility in
the executive, we support the concentration of _power_ in the executive, as
well.

The Patriot Act is Congress's responsibility. And unless we send a strong
signal as a nation, from sea to shining sea, to our representatives, that its
powers are no longer acceptable (if, indeed, they ever were), nothing will
change substantively. Congress is where the blame lies, no matter which
administration the act was passed under or which administration it's being
administered under now. Congress, Congress, Congress. They pass the laws, no
matter whether or not the administration helps write them.

~~~
just2n
Well of course it was initially passed by Congress. However, because of the
nature of the checks and balances between parts of our government, all 3 are
equally guilty here since the Executive has enforced the law, and the Judicial
since it has not summarily found it unconstitutional and overreaching, and
thus killed it with fire. Further, and more to the point, I find that the
Executive is more guilty here than any other, because it has classified
interpretations which allow for the mass violation of constitutional rights.
This isn't something that is up to Congress, and this is where the current
President comes into play.

As for impeachment, it's much easier to try to punish a single person, or
demand such, than it is to demand the punishment of hundreds. I don't think we
should cry foul when a bad law is passed -- it's bound to happen. Rather, when
both of the other branches fail to do their duty to balance power, or worse,
exacerbate the problem.

------
cheese1756
It's pretty interesting to look at the NSA leaks in hindsight, especially with
an eye towards the foreshadowing and warning signs that exist today for the
countless programs we don't know about. Take a look at this too, from a year
ago: [http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/nsa-
spied/](http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/nsa-spied/)

~~~
mabhatter
But NSA leaks are TREASON, no matter how small. This isnt even military level
treason, this is death in a cold ditch treason. To maintain operational
discipline they have to kill him... Very horribly.

This only shows that the premiere spying organization has been ruined from
reckless expansion and mission creep. They are hiring SPIES that are
pretending to be police...

The NSA's charter is signals intelligence. If its a signal, they are EXPECTED
to read it, if its encrypted, they are EXPECTED to crack it. Doesn't matter
who it's from or to. Advances in computers gave generated more electronic
personal communication, and more ability to spy and collect it. The problem
comes back to the patriot act and the his guided idea that the NSA was
supposed to SHARE its intel. The problem is that the NSA as spies are looking
for things that are ILLEGAL for police to look for, they are looking for
things that cause blackmail and treason... Bad gambling debts, family medical
problems, cheating politicians and executives, religious extremists in
people's families... The things that give terrorists and spies leverage over
honest people that have access to the government and can be used for
blackmailing them into illegal activities.

Regular police have no business with that kind of info, and they have no
concept of using it with restraint, they just hurt people with it.

------
rdl
I suppose Wyden/Paul 2016 isn't really feasible, but it would be a good way to
solve issues of governmental overreach.

~~~
frozenport
I believe in public education and health care.

~~~
rdl
I don't think a President Wyden would try to repeal ACA or really do too much
meddling; he'd be busy for 4 years downsizing the defense-intelligence-
industrial complex, which would provide more than enough savings to defer
dealing with the other issues for a while.

------
malandrew
If I were Wyden, I would just pen an entire new bill that describes exactly
what is going on already and send it to the Congress to be voted on. I would
be the best way to publish what is happening. Everything in the bill could be
written in the future tense, so it can't be seen as declassifying what is
going on in the present.

------
jgreen10
Seems like there are two options here:

1\. Define laws mathematically

2\. Fight corruption

Not sure which one is easier.

~~~
InclinedPlane
#1 is not possible, so....

~~~
jcromartie
Why not?

~~~
samolang
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as
far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." \- Albert Einstein

------
graycat
IANAL, so help!

So, as in the OP, suppose I'm in business, and the FBI knocks at my door and
says that they want all the data in my server farm.

I say, "Just a minute while I contact my lawyer". Then I turn to the FBI and
say, "My lawyer says we'll see you in court. I've got to get back to work. Be
seeing you.".

So, in court, the FBI lawyers tell the judge that they are due the data in my
server farm because of a double secret, triple top secret, national security,
national command authority, black law that can't be talked about because the
first rule of black law is never talk about the rules of black law.

Then the judge says what? This is a joke, right? Or, get out'a here. Or. you
can take your double-triple nonsense back to your FBI HQ funny farm and use it
for intellectual self abuse, but you've got nothing more to do here or with
the defendant.

That's the way it would work, right?

Or, maybe as in the OP there are some double-triple secret laws, but as soon
as the FBI wants to use one to get all the data in my server farm, we go to
court, and the judge starts laughing, right?

~~~
mcguire
"I say, 'Just a minute while I contact my lawyer'."

Wouldn't it be amusing if, by revealing the request to an outside, third-
party, your lawyer, you were in violation of the requirements of the request
and had therefore committed a criminal act?

"...because of a double secret, triple top secret, national security, national
command authority, black law..."

Of course, the judge is privy to the law and the government's evidence, even
if you and your defense counsel are, regrettably, not. But he, naturally, can
be trusted to understand the gravity of the situation and act in a fair,
impartial manner with regards to the laws of this nation, right?

You poor bastard.

~~~
graycat
Sounds like I will need to program a big red button for my server farm: I see
a knock at the door with an FBI badge and then push the big red button. Boom
-- my Web site starts putting up circulating arrows indicating an over busy
condition; the last of my data for an incremental backup gets encrypted and
shipped, in pieces, but with considerable redundancy, to 10 undisclosed,
secure, foreign locations; and all the data on my server farm is erased by
being written over. Then I open the door with the FBI guys!

Or, I have a really nice looking server farm, totally neat and squeaky clean,
behind nice, spotless glass walls, with doors controlled with finger print
scanners. So, I let the FBI in to that _glass house_ and let them have all the
data. When they come back the next week and demand the private key for the RSA
encryption, I object and delay but finally give in and let them have the key.

Meanwhile, there are some optical fibers running to a hidden basement of a run
down, ugly, old building where the real server farm is!

When the FBI/NSA/CIA/DHS decrypts the data they got, all they see is "Mary had
a little lamb.".

Meanwhile, back at the farm, everything's been moved to Iceland with backup
sites in Switzerland, the Cayman Islands, etc. And I'm out'a here on my
private plane/yacht/submarine, whatever, to my own undisclosed, secure,
foreign location. Then my Web site goes live again!

Unfortunately such things may not be entirely a joke.

------
ambassador451
If only the mainstream media would stop parroting government lies, then I
think we the people could rise up and stop the NSA. It's going to take
intelligent people like us on the internet to finally stop Pax Americana from
oppressing our freedoms.

~~~
Amadou
This is what happens when you don't parrot the government lies (from a
previous HN article): [http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case-
barrett...](http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case-barrett-
brown)

The espionage-industrial complex is on the order of a $50 billion/year
industry. That kind of money buys a lot of ignoring american ideals.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Don't peddle this bullshit.

There is a more than strong enough case of government abuse of power and
wrongdoing, there's no need to make allusions to shadowy conspiracies that
kill people without leaving any evidence. It weakens the argument rather than
strengthening it. Stand on the facts, the facts are more than good enough.

~~~
Amadou
I don't know where you got "allusions to shadowy conspiracies that kill
people" from. I posted (a) a story about a reporter being very publicly
persecuted for investigative reporting unfriendly to the government status quo
and (b) referred to the quite well established fact that money tends to make
people forget their ideals.

