9 ms·

Feinstein: CIA searched Intelligence Committee computers

151 points by pachydermic 13y ago

a3n 13y ago
> The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday sharply accused the CIA of violating federal law and undermining the constitutional principle of congressional oversight as she detailed publicly for the first time how the agency secretly removed documents from computers used by her panel to investigate a controversial interrogation program. > Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that the situation amounted to an attempted intimidation of congressional investigators, adding: "I am not taking it lightly." I guess the outrage, and constitutional protectiveness, depends on which citizens are being spied on. You know, we mere citizens are supposed to have overall oversight on Congress and the government. Can't we get a little outrage love too?
- phkn1 13y ago
  Glad to see she has belatedly grown a sense of moral indignation about overreach by intelligence agencies. Once can only hope that this debacle will add credence to the idea that the US clandestine apparatus is in dire need of meaningful reform.
- voidlogic 13y ago
  I understand where you are coming from. But looking at it pragmatically- Citizens will always have right/protection <= to that of Congress. Congress being outraged and defending its rights is at least a step in the right direction that has a realistic chance of leading to the protection of everyones rights.
Shivetya 13y ago
Apparently it goes both ways. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/03/07/220273/senate-staffers-slipped-secret.html http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/03/07/220273/senate-staffers...
- voidlogic 13y ago
  You could argue that the legislative branch has every right to do this, regardless of if the CIA knew or approved. After all, even if the CIA declared legislators broke the law (which they probably didn't due to their constitutional oversight role in the government trumping any normal laws), legislators are in fact the only people in government who could retroactively make their actions legal-
  - sigzero 13y ago
    No, I don't think you can. That isn't how classification boundaries work.
    - voidlogic 13y ago
      The Constitution is more authoritative than some law, which by definition is secondary to the Constitution. Congress could also pass a law that gives all of these committee members full access to everything that exists, and the CIA would be powerless to stop it without breaking the law.
Zigurd 13y ago
Let me know when the perps are put on trial. The rest is noise.
rosser 13y ago
I'm curious, Senator: Would this also be called "protecting America"? Or is it somehow different when it happens to you?
- cjensen 13y ago
  Yes, it is different when it happens to her. She represents one of the three branches of government. It is not within the authority of one branch to seize stuff from another.
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    Well, she's not just complaining about inter-branch stuff. > And she said that the CIA appears to have violated the Fourth Amendment, which bars unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as various federal laws and a presidential executive order that prevents the agency from conducting domestic searches and surveillance.
    - VonGuard 13y ago
      OP's point was the Feinstein has been defending the NSA's programs, and has, until now, seen no problem whatsoever with the government spying on its citizens.
      - Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
        Possibly because she felt that there was some level of oversight. If she believes that the CIA are intimidating the people meant to be providing that oversight you can see how that might change someone's view of such things.
    - spikels 13y ago
      Perhaps she has seen some secret version of the Fourth Amendment that only applies to her. I hope I'm just joking here...
  - snarfy 13y ago
    I thought it was 'we the people' with individual sovereignty and all that.
anonymousDan 13y ago
With my tin-foil hat on, this is just a ruse to improve her credibility.
- VintageCool 13y ago
  At first, I was excited about this and saw it as our generation's "only Nixon could go to China" moment. The spy agency's leading cheerleader within Congress accused them of going too far? Wow! However, according to the NY Times article, the documents were removed from the computer her staff was using in 2010. It clearly wasn't enough to change her mind in the past 4 years. That makes me rather cynical about whatever she is doing now.
cgtyoder 13y ago
Senator Feinstein is shocked, SHOCKED, that the dogs she said should be trained to bite other people's hands have bitten hers. Never saw this one coming.
Tloewald 13y ago
"Even the police began to sit up and take notice."
wil421 13y ago
The spies will spy. This is nothing new you cant fault them for it. Put someone on trial and maybe things will change.
- higherpurpose 13y ago
  What you said is contradictory. Either they "can't be faulted" or they can, and need to be charged. However, it doesn't make sense to say "spies will always spy". So are you saying they should have the power to spy on anyone? Even Congress, the president and their overseers? That doesn't sound very good for democracy to me. So if it is legal to do that for them now (which I'm sure it isn't), then it should be made illegal anyway.
  - wil421 13y ago
    Spies spy, that's what I am saying. It is in their nature to be deceptive, that is why I said cant fault them for it. Not in a legal way just it is what they do. Until you hold them accountable they have no reason to change.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  The CIA is explicitly banned from spying within the US. That's FBI territory. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/additional-publications/the-work-of-a-nation/items-of-interest/frequently-asked-questions.html#Spy https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/additional-publicat...
pachydermic 13y ago
And her actual speech here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/transcript-sen-dianne-feinstein-says-cia-searched-intelligence-committee-computers/2014/03/11/200dc9ac-a928-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html?hpid=z1 http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/transc...
TallGuyShort 13y ago
Would someone be willing to share with me their impression of Senator Feinstein? I have thought quite highly of her because every time there's been an issue I care deeply about, I have noticed her name as one of the Senators who wrote the relevant bill or supported it very early on. I recently mentioned this to a friend who had nothing but horrible things to say about her record and it seems she isn't so popular on HN as well (and the politics of HN and those of my friend differ greatly - hence my curiosity about what her reputation is). I feel like I must be misinformed about some other things :)
- adventured 13y ago
  I find her to be extraordinarily repulsive. I'd put her on the top 10 list of worst standing politicians in America. She has been one of the strongest supporters of the military's domestic espionage programs. As a powerful US Senator, that inherently makes her one of the biggest supporters of the rapidly expanding police state, with all the violence and broad Constitutional violations that entails.
  - zipwitch 13y ago
    Don't forget wrecking the US Postal Service so that her husband's real estate company can profit.
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago
  She's a hyper statist.
- usefulcat 13y ago
  I don't know that much about her in general, but from what I do know she has typically defended the actions of the NSA. So I would think that for her to come out publicly against the CIA like this is a pretty big deal.
  - kordless 13y ago
    Yeah, I just got an email from her that said: > First, please be assured that the NSA does not conduct mass surveillance on U.S. citizens. Its mission is to collect foreign signals intelligence to detect foreign national security threats. Stating the mission as a rationalization to deflect accusations is just silly. Frankly, I see little difference between the two agencies. They clearly are doing whatever the hell they want with our data.
raldi 13y ago
To paraphrase Bender, "This is the worst kind of spying: the kind against me!"
higherpurpose 13y ago
So they are getting charged under the Espionage Act, right? Or is that reserved only for whistleblowers now, and not for real spies, spying on their own country? Just wanting to make sure.
alexeisadeski3 13y ago
What's the big deal? So long as they've got nothing to hide they shouldn't be worried.
wcummings 13y ago
So someone correct me if I'm wrong, but is the CIA really investigating a leak ..... to the oversight committee?
tibbon 13y ago
What in the world would the CIA be looking for in searching members of Congress? Do they actually think that elected officials are involved in terrorism or endangering the security of the US? If members of Congress are being watched, then I really have to assume that everyone is a suspect. To be honest, the makes the Nixon spying stuff seem tiny in comparison. I have voted for Obama twice, but if it turns out that this came from his administration it really does seem like grounds for some sort of hearings (I really can't believe I'm saying that, because 99.999% of calls for impeachment are just absurd)
- jdimov 13y ago
  As a matter of fact, US government officials are indeed involved in a wide variety of terrorist activities around the world and do seriously endanger (and routinely and indiscriminately violate) global security and peace. However, I doubt that's what the CIA was trying to find, as they know this all too well - after all, the CIA is the executive branch of the US terrorist network.
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  I have voted for Obama twice, but if it turns out that this came from his administration... The heads of the nation's intelligence agencies answer to the President. Congress may approve their funding, but he provides their marching orders. If there was ultimately nothing inappropriate about this, then their boss, the President, needs to be publicly standing behind the CIA. Otherwise, if he remains silent and heads do not roll, then he is either complicit or indifferent.
  - hackinthebochs 13y ago
    >then he is either complicit or indifferent. Those aren't the only possibilities.
    - MrZongle2 13y ago
      Go on...
ameister14 13y ago
They threatened her staff; that's why she's speaking out. I honestly dislike Senator Feinstein. I think she's excused actions that are unacceptable to me and her conception of her constitutional duties to the people of the United States seems off. However, if this is what it takes to get some of this out in the open, so be it.
zmanian 13y ago
Feinstein's motivations are confounding. I suspect that she knows that in the long run of history the Rendition, Detention and Interrogation program will be considered an unambiguous set of war crime's authorized at the highest levels of the US government and seeks to be personally exonerated from these crimes. Anywho, https://shameonfeinstein.org/ https://shameonfeinstein.org/
- lukeschlather 13y ago
  Everyone in this thread seems to be conflating the NSA metadata spying and the CIA torturing people. These are very different things and it seems Feinstein has been (surprise surprise) consistent in her view that torture is bad and the CIA shouldn't do it, and that the NSA's activity has adequate oversight. I disagree on the latter point, but I have to say the former is more important and can't fault Feinstein for focusing on it.
nateabele 13y ago
Ohhhh, I see. It only 'raises Constitutional issues' and '[undermines] the Constitutional framework' when it happens to you.
- ixnu 13y ago
  A new category of laws needs to be enumerated: "Laws that only apply to Congress". This is the reverse of the "Laws that do not apply to Congress" [0] [0] Whistleblower Protections; Subpoenas for Health and Safety Probes; Keeping Workplace Records; Prosecution for Retaliating Against Employees; Posting Notices of Workers’ Rights; Anti-Discrimination and Anti-Retaliation Training http://www.propublica.org/article/do-as-we-say-congress-says-then-does-what-it-wants http://www.propublica.org/article/do-as-we-say-congress-says...
godgod 13y ago
I love how the CIA is spying on her meanwhile she's helping the NSA spy on us all.
erdle2 13y ago
And they found what we all know, her husband, Richard Blum, has had billions steered his way in the form of government contracts.
cle 13y ago
"The searches, officials said, were conducted in an effort to determine how committee staff members had gained access to a draft version of an internal agency review of its controversial interrogation program." "Feinstein confirmed that committee investigators had received and reviewed documents detailing the interrogation policy but said she didn’t know whether they were provided intentionally or unintentionally by CIA officials or by agency whistleblowers." These political games are extremely complex and I don't know if we'll ever know what actually went on here. I suppose it's possible that the CIA leaked these unauthorized documents to Feinstein to give them a pretext for searching her computers.
adolgert 13y ago
Her CSPAN video: http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4486712/sen-feinstein-accuses-cia-searching-congressional-computers http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4486712/sen-feinstein-accuses-...
Glyptodon 13y ago
First reported 5 days ago, only news once Feinstein says something?

151 points by pachydermic 13y ago

a3n 13y ago

> The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday sharply accused the CIA of violating federal law and undermining the constitutional principle of congressional oversight as she detailed publicly for the first time how the agency secretly removed documents from computers used by her panel to investigate a controversial interrogation program. > Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that the situation amounted to an attempted intimidation of congressional investigators, adding: "I am not taking it lightly." I guess the outrage, and constitutional protectiveness, depends on which citizens are being spied on. You know, we mere citizens are supposed to have overall oversight on Congress and the government. Can't we get a little outrage love too?

phkn1 13y ago
Glad to see she has belatedly grown a sense of moral indignation about overreach by intelligence agencies. Once can only hope that this debacle will add credence to the idea that the US clandestine apparatus is in dire need of meaningful reform.
voidlogic 13y ago
I understand where you are coming from. But looking at it pragmatically- Citizens will always have right/protection <= to that of Congress. Congress being outraged and defending its rights is at least a step in the right direction that has a realistic chance of leading to the protection of everyones rights.

Shivetya 13y ago

Apparently it goes both ways. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/03/07/220273/senate-staffers-slipped-secret.html http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/03/07/220273/senate-staffers...

voidlogic 13y ago
You could argue that the legislative branch has every right to do this, regardless of if the CIA knew or approved. After all, even if the CIA declared legislators broke the law (which they probably didn't due to their constitutional oversight role in the government trumping any normal laws), legislators are in fact the only people in government who could retroactively make their actions legal-
- sigzero 13y ago
  No, I don't think you can. That isn't how classification boundaries work.
  - voidlogic 13y ago
    The Constitution is more authoritative than some law, which by definition is secondary to the Constitution. Congress could also pass a law that gives all of these committee members full access to everything that exists, and the CIA would be powerless to stop it without breaking the law.

Zigurd 13y ago

Let me know when the perps are put on trial. The rest is noise.

rosser 13y ago

I'm curious, Senator: Would this also be called "protecting America"? Or is it somehow different when it happens to you?

cjensen 13y ago
Yes, it is different when it happens to her. She represents one of the three branches of government. It is not within the authority of one branch to seize stuff from another.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  Well, she's not just complaining about inter-branch stuff. > And she said that the CIA appears to have violated the Fourth Amendment, which bars unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as various federal laws and a presidential executive order that prevents the agency from conducting domestic searches and surveillance.
  - VonGuard 13y ago
    OP's point was the Feinstein has been defending the NSA's programs, and has, until now, seen no problem whatsoever with the government spying on its citizens.
    - Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
      Possibly because she felt that there was some level of oversight. If she believes that the CIA are intimidating the people meant to be providing that oversight you can see how that might change someone's view of such things.
  - spikels 13y ago
    Perhaps she has seen some secret version of the Fourth Amendment that only applies to her. I hope I'm just joking here...
- snarfy 13y ago
  I thought it was 'we the people' with individual sovereignty and all that.

anonymousDan 13y ago

With my tin-foil hat on, this is just a ruse to improve her credibility.

VintageCool 13y ago
At first, I was excited about this and saw it as our generation's "only Nixon could go to China" moment. The spy agency's leading cheerleader within Congress accused them of going too far? Wow! However, according to the NY Times article, the documents were removed from the computer her staff was using in 2010. It clearly wasn't enough to change her mind in the past 4 years. That makes me rather cynical about whatever she is doing now.

cgtyoder 13y ago

Senator Feinstein is shocked, SHOCKED, that the dogs she said should be trained to bite other people's hands have bitten hers. Never saw this one coming.

Tloewald 13y ago

"Even the police began to sit up and take notice."

wil421 13y ago

The spies will spy. This is nothing new you cant fault them for it. Put someone on trial and maybe things will change.

higherpurpose 13y ago
What you said is contradictory. Either they "can't be faulted" or they can, and need to be charged. However, it doesn't make sense to say "spies will always spy". So are you saying they should have the power to spy on anyone? Even Congress, the president and their overseers? That doesn't sound very good for democracy to me. So if it is legal to do that for them now (which I'm sure it isn't), then it should be made illegal anyway.
- wil421 13y ago
  Spies spy, that's what I am saying. It is in their nature to be deceptive, that is why I said cant fault them for it. Not in a legal way just it is what they do. Until you hold them accountable they have no reason to change.
ceejayoz 13y ago
The CIA is explicitly banned from spying within the US. That's FBI territory. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/additional-publications/the-work-of-a-nation/items-of-interest/frequently-asked-questions.html#Spy https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/additional-publicat...

pachydermic 13y ago

And her actual speech here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/transcript-sen-dianne-feinstein-says-cia-searched-intelligence-committee-computers/2014/03/11/200dc9ac-a928-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html?hpid=z1 http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/transc...

TallGuyShort 13y ago

Would someone be willing to share with me their impression of Senator Feinstein? I have thought quite highly of her because every time there's been an issue I care deeply about, I have noticed her name as one of the Senators who wrote the relevant bill or supported it very early on. I recently mentioned this to a friend who had nothing but horrible things to say about her record and it seems she isn't so popular on HN as well (and the politics of HN and those of my friend differ greatly - hence my curiosity about what her reputation is). I feel like I must be misinformed about some other things :)

adventured 13y ago
I find her to be extraordinarily repulsive. I'd put her on the top 10 list of worst standing politicians in America. She has been one of the strongest supporters of the military's domestic espionage programs. As a powerful US Senator, that inherently makes her one of the biggest supporters of the rapidly expanding police state, with all the violence and broad Constitutional violations that entails.
- zipwitch 13y ago
  Don't forget wrecking the US Postal Service so that her husband's real estate company can profit.
alexeisadeski3 13y ago
She's a hyper statist.
usefulcat 13y ago
I don't know that much about her in general, but from what I do know she has typically defended the actions of the NSA. So I would think that for her to come out publicly against the CIA like this is a pretty big deal.
- kordless 13y ago
  Yeah, I just got an email from her that said: > First, please be assured that the NSA does not conduct mass surveillance on U.S. citizens. Its mission is to collect foreign signals intelligence to detect foreign national security threats. Stating the mission as a rationalization to deflect accusations is just silly. Frankly, I see little difference between the two agencies. They clearly are doing whatever the hell they want with our data.

raldi 13y ago

To paraphrase Bender, "This is the worst kind of spying: the kind against me!"

higherpurpose 13y ago

So they are getting charged under the Espionage Act, right? Or is that reserved only for whistleblowers now, and not for real spies, spying on their own country? Just wanting to make sure.

alexeisadeski3 13y ago

What's the big deal? So long as they've got nothing to hide they shouldn't be worried.

wcummings 13y ago

So someone correct me if I'm wrong, but is the CIA really investigating a leak ..... to the oversight committee?

tibbon 13y ago

What in the world would the CIA be looking for in searching members of Congress? Do they actually think that elected officials are involved in terrorism or endangering the security of the US? If members of Congress are being watched, then I really have to assume that everyone is a suspect. To be honest, the makes the Nixon spying stuff seem tiny in comparison. I have voted for Obama twice, but if it turns out that this came from his administration it really does seem like grounds for some sort of hearings (I really can't believe I'm saying that, because 99.999% of calls for impeachment are just absurd)

jdimov 13y ago
As a matter of fact, US government officials are indeed involved in a wide variety of terrorist activities around the world and do seriously endanger (and routinely and indiscriminately violate) global security and peace. However, I doubt that's what the CIA was trying to find, as they know this all too well - after all, the CIA is the executive branch of the US terrorist network.
MrZongle2 13y ago
I have voted for Obama twice, but if it turns out that this came from his administration... The heads of the nation's intelligence agencies answer to the President. Congress may approve their funding, but he provides their marching orders. If there was ultimately nothing inappropriate about this, then their boss, the President, needs to be publicly standing behind the CIA. Otherwise, if he remains silent and heads do not roll, then he is either complicit or indifferent.
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  >then he is either complicit or indifferent. Those aren't the only possibilities.
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    Go on...

ameister14 13y ago

They threatened her staff; that's why she's speaking out. I honestly dislike Senator Feinstein. I think she's excused actions that are unacceptable to me and her conception of her constitutional duties to the people of the United States seems off. However, if this is what it takes to get some of this out in the open, so be it.

zmanian 13y ago

Feinstein's motivations are confounding. I suspect that she knows that in the long run of history the Rendition, Detention and Interrogation program will be considered an unambiguous set of war crime's authorized at the highest levels of the US government and seeks to be personally exonerated from these crimes. Anywho, https://shameonfeinstein.org/ https://shameonfeinstein.org/

lukeschlather 13y ago
Everyone in this thread seems to be conflating the NSA metadata spying and the CIA torturing people. These are very different things and it seems Feinstein has been (surprise surprise) consistent in her view that torture is bad and the CIA shouldn't do it, and that the NSA's activity has adequate oversight. I disagree on the latter point, but I have to say the former is more important and can't fault Feinstein for focusing on it.

nateabele 13y ago

Ohhhh, I see. It only 'raises Constitutional issues' and '[undermines] the Constitutional framework' when it happens to you.

ixnu 13y ago
A new category of laws needs to be enumerated: "Laws that only apply to Congress". This is the reverse of the "Laws that do not apply to Congress" [0] [0] Whistleblower Protections; Subpoenas for Health and Safety Probes; Keeping Workplace Records; Prosecution for Retaliating Against Employees; Posting Notices of Workers’ Rights; Anti-Discrimination and Anti-Retaliation Training http://www.propublica.org/article/do-as-we-say-congress-says-then-does-what-it-wants http://www.propublica.org/article/do-as-we-say-congress-says...

godgod 13y ago

I love how the CIA is spying on her meanwhile she's helping the NSA spy on us all.

erdle2 13y ago

And they found what we all know, her husband, Richard Blum, has had billions steered his way in the form of government contracts.

cle 13y ago

"The searches, officials said, were conducted in an effort to determine how committee staff members had gained access to a draft version of an internal agency review of its controversial interrogation program." "Feinstein confirmed that committee investigators had received and reviewed documents detailing the interrogation policy but said she didn’t know whether they were provided intentionally or unintentionally by CIA officials or by agency whistleblowers." These political games are extremely complex and I don't know if we'll ever know what actually went on here. I suppose it's possible that the CIA leaked these unauthorized documents to Feinstein to give them a pretext for searching her computers.

adolgert 13y ago

Her CSPAN video: http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4486712/sen-feinstein-accuses-cia-searching-congressional-computers http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4486712/sen-feinstein-accuses-...

Glyptodon 13y ago

First reported 5 days ago, only news once Feinstein says something?