Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: DEA Agents Are Told To Cover Up Spying Program Used Against Americans [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)29. What is that?
Let me help you out a bit...
From a slightly more direct article about how NSA data gets shared for nonterrorism purposes.
Which FIRMLY brings into the argument the Constitutionality of this entire farce.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/us/other-agencies-clamor-for-data-nsa-compiles.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
The money quote, with the good bit emphasized:
From a slightly more direct article about how NSA data gets shared for nonterrorism purposes.
Which FIRMLY brings into the argument the Constitutionality of this entire farce.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/us/other-agencies-clamor-for-data-nsa-compiles.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
The money quote, with the good bit emphasized:
The security agencys spy tools are attractive to other agencies for many reasons. Unlike traditional, narrowly tailored search warrants, those granted by the intelligence court often allow searches through records and data that are vast in scope. The standard of evidence needed to acquire them may be lower than in other courts, and the government may not be required
That has nothing to do with my point, and the title of the article you linked to is: Other Agencies Clamor for Data N.S.A. Compiles
From the link:
Smaller intelligence units within the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Secret Service, the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security have sometimes been given access to the security agencys surveillance tools for particular cases, intelligence officials say.
But more often, their requests have been rejected because the links to terrorism or foreign intelligence, usually required by law or policy, are considered tenuous. Officials at some agencies see another motive protecting the security agencys turf and have grown resentful over what they see as a second-tier status that has undermined their own investigations into security matters.
But more often, their requests have been rejected because the links to terrorism or foreign intelligence, usually required by law or policy, are considered tenuous. Officials at some agencies see another motive protecting the security agencys turf and have grown resentful over what they see as a second-tier status that has undermined their own investigations into security matters.
Like I said, the Reuters piece, which is cited in the OP, indicates that this has nothing to do with NSA programs, and is about criminal investigations, including international crimes.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Minions will be here shortly to tell us all that this is actually a good thing
Fumesucker
Aug 2013
#3
i think they've worn themselves out on this one. lots of confusion that this isn't a fake scandal...
nashville_brook
Aug 2013
#4
So any supporters here of the surveillance state want to continue defending this bullshit?
davidn3600
Aug 2013
#5
It is beyond the realm of possibility that these programs will NOT be used
Vinnie From Indy
Aug 2013
#9
That is certainly consistent with what we've learned in the Chicago area. We never have
AnotherMcIntosh
Aug 2013
#12
Is this one of those super-secret programs whose details can be kept from Congress?
AnotherMcIntosh
Aug 2013
#17
"Some experts say". That's not much to go on regarding something that's been in use for decades now.
randome
Aug 2013
#32
The claim is that the DEA is lying even to prosecutors about where they get evidence
Fumesucker
Aug 2013
#28
"So long as the evidence is strong enough, does it matter whether it came from route A or route B?"
Marr
Aug 2013
#44
WAPO: "The NSA is giving your phone records to the DEA. And the DEA is covering it up."
Catherina
Aug 2013
#46
"report makes no explicit connection between the DEA and the earlier NSA bulk phone surveillance"
ProSense
Aug 2013
#51
Make up your mind. "nothing to do" with the metadata program? or "we dont know"?
David Krout
Aug 2013
#59
I rarely agree with you, nadin- but you are 100% correct on this one.
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#60