NSA

'Trust Us' Pelosi Discovers She's Not Being Trusted with NSA Info

|

She didn't know that she didn't know

Funny how the attitude of the "We know best!" crowd of politicians can change when they discover that they're being left out of the "we" part. House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been defending the National Security Agency's surveillance tactics, insisting there's plenty of oversight and criticizing Edward Snowden's leaks.

So now that the latest leak shows that Pelosi doesn't know as much about the NSA's behavior as she thought she did, well, now she's troubled. Via The Hill:

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said on Friday that a report that the National Security Agency broke privacy rules thousands of times per year is "extremely disturbing."

She argued that under the law, the NSA should have reported the violations to Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court. 

"Congress must conduct rigorous oversight to ensure that all incidents of non-compliance are reported to the oversight committees and the FISA court in a timely and comprehensive manner, and that appropriate steps are taken to ensure violations are not repeated," she said in the statement.

Welcome to our world, Congresswoman! So are you ready to call Snowden a whistleblower yet?

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at 24_7@reason.com, or tweet us stories at @reason247.

NEXT: Russians See Snowden as a Whistleblower

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Welcome to our world, Congresswoman! So are you ready to call Snowden a whistleblower yet?

    Nah. She’s just trying to find a way to spin it into something that can be blamed on Bush.

    1. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t she one of many Democrats who voted in favor if the Iraq War, and later claimed that Bush “tricked” them into doing so?

      Seems to me that ok’ Nancy is far too gullible to be trusted with anything resembling the reins of power.

  2. She’ll claim the program would be just fine if only they had different TOP MEN.

  3. My heart goes out to Pelosi on this one. It must really suck to know there are people out there doing terrible shit in your name and with your money and not telling you about it, much less asking for your consent.

    1. I know. We should send her a box of chocolates to get her through the pain.

  4. She just figured out she’s behind public opinion and is trying to position herself into the concerned-face deep disturbed category before the public turns on her.

    1. Al Franken has only been doing this for 2.5 years and he did a 180 within a week.

      1. The botox makes it so that Nancy needs a much longer lead time on doing a concerned-face.

      2. Well he figured out how to pay his taxes only when he wanted the senate seat. Why wouldn’t you expect a certain amount of malleability from Stewart Smalley?

  5. Slate is spinning the new revelations as hard as they can.

    In addition, a May 2012 internal NSA audit counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications.

    Errors such as this?witting or unwitting?are an inevitable part of any surveillance operation. In the United Kingdom, for instance, a selection of spying “mistakes” conducted by security and police agencies are documented annually in an oversight report. But given that the NSA reportedly intercepts a massive 1.7 billion communications every day, it is surprising that internal reports of unlawful surveillance are not far higher.

    Mistakes were made. [shrug]

    1. Really, if there were anything left of our anti-government tendencies, we’d have half the administration in jail right now. Way past impeachment, and I think everyone knows that, as far as the written rules are concerned. Unfortunately, too many don’t give a shit, and that includes a nice chunk of the supposed opposition.

      1. The opposition doesn’t want to go to jail when it’s their turn to screw America again.

      2. Exactly. People went to jail and the president resigned because some people wiretapped an office or a hotel room or something.

        Now they’re wiretapping the whole country and relatively few people actually care.

        1. If Watergate happened today, Nixon would never have had to resign, and Woodward and Bernstein would have been investigated for espionage.

    2. the NSA reportedly intercepts a massive 1.7 billion communications every day

      I think I’ve found the problem.

    3. But given that the NSA reportedly intercepts a massive 1.7 billion communications every day, it is surprising that internal reports of unlawful surveillance are not far higher.

      So we’ve gone past “what the fuck is the NSA doing intercepting this shit” to “we should be grateful their fuckups and privacy violations aren’t greater, really”.

      These bootlicking scum are repulsive. I can only hope that they get to taste the boot as it smashes into their face.

      1. Yeah. ‘We* are so much better off than the people of Iran or North Korea.’

        *I say ‘we’ because CSIS is up to its hairline in collaboration with the US security establishment.

        1. Well of course they are. They’re undoubtedly deeper in than even the limeys are.

    4. Generally, when people make “witting” errors, don’t they get fired, and often sued for malpractice?

      1. Is it really a mistake if it’s intentional?

    5. Casualties are an inevitable part of drunk driving.

    6. God they are dishonest fucks. That is almost seven violations a day. And the total number of emails collected doesn’t tell you anything. Those incidents are not a count of individual emails they are a count of someone in the program doing something wrong.

  6. Congress must conduct rigorous oversight to ensure that all incidents of non-compliance are reported to the oversight committees

    Makes one wonder what the purpose of the oversight committees is.

  7. It’s uncanny how these “legislators” act like they’re in high school. Nancy is butthurt because she thought she was in on all the secrets, making her better than everyone else, and now it turns out Mary Sue was getting fingerbanged by Bobby Jo and a bunch of people knew and didn’t tell her.

    Fuck you, Nancy.

    1. “My leg wasn’t bugging me too much and the weather was so nice, and every day after school Nancy and I would go to her house to fuck and have a hot tub.”

      1. I saw that last night for the first time in forever. God, if only I had been a little bit brighter in HS about which girls I hung out with.

    2. what is with the fingers today? Is it Finger Friday or something and you all didnt tell me? Am I supposed to include fingers in a comment to earn an OkyDoky badge?

        1. lol

      1. Back in the day, we called it stinky finger…

    3. “Fuck you, Nancy.”

      Eeeewwwwwwwww….

      Epi, you are more perverted than I thought.

      1. You have no idea, dude.

    4. Billy Joe. Bobby Jo would imply a 3 way lesbian affair, which is probably a little complex for high school, unless you’re filming a porno.

  8. Did she ever vote against any of the acts that empowered the NSA?

    Did she vote against the Patriot Act or any of the renewals?

    Now you find out the lesson that Dr Frankenstein learned?

    1. Don’t use Abby Normal’s brain?

      1. At least Dr. Frankenstein know that Frankenstein wasn’t the monster.

        /pedant

  9. “There is no spying on Americans, we don’t have a domestic spying program.” – Barack Obama

    So chill out, everybody. Mommy Pelosi is just being hysterical. Daddy says everything is fine, and who are we to not to believe him?

  10. lol, you have to tap it to know what’s in it!

    evenimtiredoftheseanonbotspoofs.com

    1. Like Edwardo said I was amazed that my trans-sister could make $2437 per day spoofing the anonbot, but when she bought her new Smart Car I knew it was true!

      1. Dammit. I read trans-sister and now I’ve got Steely Dan’s Bad Sneakers stuck in my head.

        1. May as well play the album.

  11. Ok, someone help me out here.

    Why don’t you guys vote for D’s instead of R’s. Let me know where I’m wrong:

    I hear less outrage on the right than I do on the left about this issue – in fact, it was the right that created these programs, starts these wars, etc. The left is just a bunch of reactionary pussies reacting to the constant right threat – which wouldn’t be the case if we had libertarians on our side too.

    On economic issues, the right is just as complicit in spending your tax money as the left is. They created romneycare and medicare D, run up debt when they’re in power, etc. They have no interest in reducing spending at all – they bellyache about it when they’re not in power, but its clearly a ploy to get in power, not to actually reduce spending. You think they’re going to cut SS when in power? Medicare? The military? Really?

    And in our first past the post system, you’re going to be stuck with one of these two groups. Why do libertarians all run as R’s and enable worse abuses? You’re never going to take over their party – all you do is support the worst excesses of it – invasions of privacy (crickets from conservatives right now, have you noticed?), the non-stop spending (yet instead of on everyone it’s the war machine), state religions, interference with your bodies, etc, etc, etc.

    1. Most people here would not vote for the vast majority of R’s in office.

  12. At least with the liberals you could put an end to the privacy abuses (and the drug wars and other parts of your agenda). Did you guys miss the vote the other day where the democrats voted overwhelmingly to end this shit and the republicans voted overwhelmingly to continue it?

    Why won’t you take half a loaf instead of no loaf?

    Or is it you have no interest in actually achieving any of the objectives I’m told you care about?

    We could have a coalition that could stop some of the shit we both care about if you’d just give up on the economic shit that neither conservatives nor liberals will EVER agree with you on.

    1. And if only there was a Democratic President who could just order the NSA to stop doing it. That God damned Bush is never going to leave the White House.

    2. “At least with the liberals you could put an end to the privacy abuses (and the drug wars and other parts of your agenda).”

      I see, and what would you call the lying asshole in the WH?

    3. “You libertarians would do so much better if you’d give up on these things that make you libertarians”

      DRINK!

    4. It’s too fucking soon, asshole. The last anti-gun hysteria collective brown acid trip from your team was just four months ago, and you dare come in here with this shit about how much better we are with Democrats? Help me out here. Take a razor to your vein. Remember, down the road not across the street.

  13. “Why won’t you take half a loaf instead of no loaf?”

    Because you’re not offering half a loaf. You’re offering a crumb and a kick in the ass.

  14. At least with the liberals you could put an end to the privacy abuses (and the drug wars and other parts of your agenda).

    That you believe this is one of the first reasons why we’re not interested.

  15. Hey squirrels. You’ve got a memory leak javascript on the main page that’s hanging IE.

  16. At any point in history, was it the liberal side or the conservative side that put an end to the privacy invasions by the government?

    Is it the liberals making headway legalizing marijuana or the conservatives?

    If you keep running to the R, neither of these will EVER end.

    I’m sorry we’re not a steamroller or able to implement our desires by fiat, but we seem to be getting further with our shared agenda than libertarians are…why are you against progress? Do you think one day conservatives are going to wake up and decide they’re libertarians? You share precisely ZERO common desires.

    1. “At any point in history, was it the liberal side or the conservative side that put an end to the privacy invasions by the government?”

      By definition any side making a change in the government could be called “liberal.” Your faction’s misappropriation of that label does not put you on common ground.

      As far as I can see there are only two aspects of privacy progressives as a whole are concerned about – abortions and sex (but only in some circumstances). The rest is subject to control, and therefore no expectation of privacy.

    2. I care not about history. I care about modernity. I do not see Team Blue rushing to end privacy invasions by the government — I seem them continuing to justify them, and in fact, attempt to expand them. I see a President who has had more prosecutions against whistleblowers than every President before him combined. I see a President who has continued to go after medical marijuana users and refuses to commute or pardon minor drug offenders.

      I also see you making a weird assumption that most people here are in favor of Team Red.

      And I also see you trying to get us interested in a party who has never seen a tax they didn’t like and who absolutely refuse to do anything about the budget, continuing to deny that debt is even a problem.

      No thanks.

    3. ProgressiveLiberal| 8.16.13 @ 3:57PM |#
      “At any point in history, was it the liberal side or the conservative side that put an end to the privacy invasions by the government?”

      Lenin, Mao, Stalin; teapartiers all!

    4. “At any point in history, was it the liberal side or the conservative side that put an end to the privacy invasions by the government?”

      I suppose you’re thinking of such famous drug-legalizers as Wilson, FDR, Joe Biden, etc., etc.

      1. Responded to the wrong talking point, I should have responded to this:

        “Is it the liberals making headway legalizing marijuana or the conservatives?”

      2. That’s exactly the sort of thing I mentioned above. Progressives are AWFUL on those issues and yet progressive dupes are convinced that TEAM BLUE is the answer. Drug War: democratic administration increases number of people in prison on drug charges and TEAM BLUE still believes they’ve got the best record. Democratic administration double taps wedding parties, kills children, and target’s American citizens with drones, but TEAM BLUE still believes they’re the best thing out there. Dems stomp all over the bodies of murdered children trying to get guns banned or at least registered, and think the feds should have copies of all your medical records, but somehow TEAM BLUE is better on privacy. If that is progress, no fucking thanks.

        1. This. There’s a higher concentration of unjustifiably smug assholes on the left than on the right.

    5. At the same time you’re making (very minor) headway legalizing marijuana you’re dialing the gun-grabbing crazy up to eleven, so kindly pour yourself a nice tall glass of shut the fuck up, you pathetic twatwaffle.

    6. Wow, you guys really are delusional.

      90% is people lumping liberals in with neoliberals – which you should recognize as the same as people lumping libertarians in with conservatives. In fact, liberals aren’t for a single thing you complain about – except the social programs which enjoy broad support from everyone except the libertarians.

      Do you people really think Al Gore was going to attack Iraq and write the partiot act? Really? I get that neoliberals are pussies, but they REACT to conservatives, not lead them. As long as your team keeps ensuring republican leadership, you’re going to get the exact opposite of what you want.

      Again, when exactly was it that republicans were for a single policy that you are for – when did they cut SS, cut medicare, reduce spending, not increase the security state, etc, etc, etc?

      I agree that Obama and the neoliberals are awful – but we were a few liberal primary votes of shutting down this shit a few weeks ago. This will NEVER happen if you keep running politicians under team R, voting for team R’s speakers and leaders…which is exactly what they do.

      Hey, has the country ever enacted a libertarian piece of legislation without the liberals being for it too? No? Keep being lost in the woods…

      Thanks for the answers, I was wondering if opinion had changed…I see you’re all against progress on any of your fronts, still….anyways, good luck.

  17. A “left-liberal progressive” appealing to a mythical nonexistent past. Oh the irony. The original left-liberal progressives by the way were the Germans liberals who opposed the Bismarckian welfare state. Though they did support the Kulturkampf…

    1. Opposed because Bismarck stole their ideas, not because they opposed the ideas.

      American progressives, meanwhile, fapped to photos of Bismarck.

      1. Opposed because Bismarck stole their ideas

        I don’t think think that is accurate since they were classical liberals who hated the Socialists. One of their leaders even wrote a proto-Orwellian attack on Socialism.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Richter

  18. Dude no way man, how cool is that?

    http://www.Global-Anon.com

  19. People went to jail and the president resigned because some people wiretapped an office or a hotel room or something. Nice post

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.