Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A Real American President: Donald Trump -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (192876)	3/13/2020 12:24:01 AM
From: FJB	2 Recommendations Recommended By Honey_Bee Mrjns Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 457885

President Trump: Democrats Canceled Rallies But Nobody Was Showing Up Anyway Iran Shows New Burial Pits in Iran So Big They’re Visible from Space <<< Commiefornia Primary Finally Called — For Breadline Bernie — Quid Pro Joe Leads in Total Delegates 848 to 695

To: FJB who wrote (192876)	3/13/2020 12:58:45 AM
From: teevee	2 Recommendations Recommended By Honey_Bee Thehammer Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 457885

I suspect Schiff got that info from his rat boy Carmella who is connected to the NSA who has access to that information without subpoenas.

To: FJB who wrote (192876)	3/13/2020 8:20:50 AM
From: Mrjns	5 Recommendations Recommended By alanrs FJB Honey_Bee Thehammer Thomas M. Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 457885

Penil-Neck needs to hang Adam Schiff’s Surveillance State An FCC official calls him out for obtaining call records without judicial review. By Kimberley A. Strassel March 12, 2020 7:09 pm ET Lawmakers are debating ways to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from abusing its surveillance authority again. While they’re at it, they have an obligation to address their own privacy transgressor, Rep. Adam Schiff. That’s the gist of a pointed letter from Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr, which landed Thursday at the House Intelligence Committee. Chairman Schiff spent months conducting secret impeachment hearings. His ensuing report revealed that he’d also set up his own surveillance state. Mr. Schiff issued secret subpoenas to phone carriers, to obtain and publish the call records of political rivals. Targets included Rudy Giuliani and another attorney of the president, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee (Rep. Devin Nunes) and a journalist (John Solomon). Impeachment is over, but Mr. Carr hasn’t forgotten this abuse of power, and his letter, which I obtained, calls for answers and reform. The FCC takes call privacy seriously, only recently having proposed some $200 million in fines on phone carriers for failing to protect customer data. Mr. Carr’s message to Mr. Schiff is that Congress doesn’t get a pass. It is not automatically entitled to “a secret and partisan process that deprives Americans of their legal right to maintain the privacy of this sensitive information.” Mr. Carr doesn’t dispute that Congress may, “in at least some circumstances,” have the legal authority to obtain call records under the Communications Act. The offense, he writes, was denying his targets the right to fight the subpoenas: “Courts long ago established a process for Americans to seek judicial review before Congress obtains and then publishes documents in response to a congressional subpoena.” As a lawyer and congressional lifer, Mr. Schiff knows this. It’s expected that Congress give notice of demands, as it did when it issued subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and Mazars for Donald Trump’s financial records. That notice allowed the president to file suit to block those institutions from responding. The Supreme Court in December issued stays, halting Deutsche Bank and Mazars compliance while it considers Mr. Trump’s appeal. Oral arguments are scheduled for March 31. Congress isn’t entitled to everything. This history is what made Mr. Schiff’s subpoenas so devious and abusive. He issued them secretly. He didn’t notify his targets, and Republican committee members were barred from telling the public what they knew about the subpoenas. Worse, he deceived one of his targets. He sent a subpoena for call records to Mr. Giuliani on Sept. 30 and suggested Mr. Giuliani had two weeks to work with the committee, even as Mr. Schiff was already secretly demanding Giuliani call records from a phone carrier. House Democrats suggest this cloak-and-dagger was necessary for their investigation. Mr. Carr punctures that absurd claim. Yes, law enforcement sometimes needs secrecy in surveillance warrants, so as to freely monitor “real time” on continuing communications. But Mr. Schiff was seeking past call data. Telling Mr. Giuliani about the carrier subpoenas wouldn’t change the call-record history. The only reason to keep him in the dark was to strip him of the right to litigate. Mr. Carr details how many legal issues Mr. Schiff denied his targets the opportunity to test. He notes that the Supreme Court is considering the limits on congressional subpoena authority in Trump v. Mazars and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, and that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia last month dismissed a House lawsuit to compel testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn. Mr. Carr also points out the heightened First Amendment questions that accompanied Mr. Schiff’s acquisition and publication of records for an investigative journalist—one who was writing stories critical of Mr. Schiff. And he asks whether Mr. Schiff exceeded his authority by publishing call records that lack “any apparent nexus to the Committee’s legitimate work.” That includes a drive-by smear of Mr. Nunes. In Watkins v. U.S. (1957), the Supreme Court held that “there is no congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure,” especially when “the predominant result can only be the invasion of the private rights of individuals.” Meanwhile, Mr. Carr asks: Is Mr. Schiff continuing to issue secret subpoenas? And what else is he sitting on? The impeachment report indicates the committee obtained “nearly 4,000 pages of confidential call records,” nowhere near what Mr. Schiff published. Who else’s life is getting ransacked at this moment? “The Committee created out of whole cloth a secret and effectively unreviewable and unchecked mechanism for obtaining call records on any and all Americans,” Mr. Carr writes. He holds out the possibility the FCC will modify its rules to check such abuse. But he also suggests Congress take the question up as part of its surveillance debate. That’s the better forum, and it ought to be as big a priority for Republicans as reform of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The House has little credibility to lecture the FBI on surveillance abuse if it won’t rein in its own snoopers. Write to kim@wsj.com.