Lindsey Graham Is Outraged About Federal Surveillance Powers That Lindsey Graham Helped Create and Expand
The government can look at your phone records whenever it wants, but it's a different story when we're talking about his metadata.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) has finally discovered his inner civil libertarian—now that it's his phone calls being subjected to secret government surveillance.
Graham is incensed that his phone records were subpoenaed by federal prosecutors—without his knowledge—as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into President Donald Trump's role in the January 6 riot. He's accused the FBI of spying on him, and this week wrote a letter demanding the suspension and impeachment of federal Judge James Boasberg, who approved that subpoena and related gag order. In an interview on Fox News, Graham threatened to sue someone (it's unclear who, exactly) for "tens of millions of dollars" over all this.
This began last month, when FBI Director Kash Patel revealed that the phone records of eight Republican senators, including Graham's, were subpoenaed as part of Smith's investigation, dubbed "Arctic Frost." The data collected was from January 4-7, 2021, and the subpoenas included gag orders that prohibited telecom companies from informing Graham and the others of the investigation. (For more on the scandal itself, check out this piece from Reason's J.D. Tuccille.)
Graham is, rightfully, bent out of shape over this violation of his civil liberties.
"They spied on my phone records as a senator and a private citizen," Graham said on Fox News this week. "I'm sick of it."
Yes, I'm sick of it too. But if Graham is looking for someone to blame for the broad, effectively limitless surveillance powers that federal law enforcement possesses, he might start by checking a mirror.
Graham has been a key player in the construction of America's modern digital and telecom panopticon. As a member of the House, he voted for the Patriot Act in 2001. After Edward Snowden revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) was scooping up Americans' phone records, Graham said he was "glad the NSA is trying to find out what the terrorists are up to overseas and in our country." (He later tried to place sanctions on any country aiding Snowden.) He voted to codify those surveillance powers into Section 702 in 2008 and has repeatedly backed its reauthorization. In 2017, he was one of several Republican senators to back a bill that would have made Section 702 permanent, which would have removed the periodic opportunities for Congress to review, reform, and (maybe someday) abolish the program. He's tried to undermine encryption for online communication.
Of course, any converts to the cause of civil liberties are welcome—and perhaps Graham's newfound distaste for surveillance overreach will actually bring about some reforms. After all, the very same senators who are so outraged about this violation of civil liberties also hold the power to reform federal surveillance laws to protect all Americans' privacy.
In the meantime, however, Graham seems less upset about the existence of those federal surveillance powers and more upset about how they were used. The government can look at your phone records whenever it wants, but it's a different story when we're talking about his metadata.
In Graham's world, the government should only be surveilling the bad guys—you know, like people who might be plotting to overthrow the government—and if you're not doing anything wrong, hey, you've got nothing to worry about.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Yes, he did.
Nothing will help your preferences more than going after anybody who will assist with your goals, though.
As if Lynthay Gayham has any clue what's in any bill his handlers tell him to vote for.
Creepy Lindsay:
https://tenor.com/view/lordimass-lordimoose-gif-21650022
Didn't DiFi have a similar come to Jesus moment when her phone was traceed?
Fer crying out loud, when will people anticipate?
Graham is an asshole and Boehm is mostly correct here. But it's a little more complicated. A title 2 president spied on a title 1 senator for political reasons and a title 3 judge signed off on it. That looks downright insurrectiony.
Worse.
Title 2 president told a title 2 DA to appoint a title 2 SP, to spy on over 400 organizations and people from an opposition party, including title 1, including entities that didnt even exist during the time for the predicate of said warrants, while working with a title 3 judge who claimed the title 1 entities were likely to destroy evidence if told about it.
Nixon. 1 office.
Obama. All tea party organizations. And journalists
Biden. Any conservative.
Only one of these was held accountable.
Boehm is literally repeating jack smiths narrative on the validity of his warrants. Wow.
Ever look into the scope of all those warrants eric?
I'm outraged! Outraged, I tell you, to find out that the domestic espionage I voted for is being used on ME! ME! I'll SUE!
And then nothing happened.
Poor Lindsey... but if he's got nothing to hide, he's got nothing to worry about.
The leopard is well fed.
Graham is one of the biggest hypocritical assholes in Congress. He'll do and has done anything for power, including sucking off Trump.
Indeed. A concise description of light loafered Lindsay.
Yes, I'm sick of it too. But if Graham is looking for someone to blame for the broad, effectively limitless surveillance powers that federal law enforcement possesses, he might start by checking a mirror.
Every single American should be doing that.
This is such Theater Kid outrage. Like the Useful Idiots in pink kitty hats screaming about the evils of capitalism with their Stanley cup full of Starbucks and their airpods in their ears.
Face it: we happily traded virtually all our privacy long ago, and continue to do so today, for Cool Stuff Of Convenience and Luxury.
The minute you accepted that RFID chipped debit card, you helped them build a psych profile and a pattern of life. The minute you accepted that pocket computer, you helped them map all your associates and build a biometric profile (especially if you were dumb enough to hand over your fingerprints or facial profile because you were too stupid to remember or too lazy to enter a password). Your Roomba has mapped your house. Your Fitbit and Smartwatch has created a whole physical profile of your health and fitness. Your social media and browser/cookie and streaming service history is a real-time tracking of your psych profile. Your 23andMe is basically the prequel to Gattaca. You think those fancy cameras in your cellphone were designed for influencers to influence? You think drones were designed for entertainment value? You think all the gizmos and doodads in your car are for your safety and comfort? You know why you were forced to wear a mask during COVID? Surprise, it had nothing to do with public health.
Where did you think all this information was going? And to what end?
You don't get to be sick of it, Eric. You don't get to be outraged, Lindsey.
https://read.gov/aesop/094.html
I'm no Luddite. I picked up those snakes just the same as everyone else here.
But I'm not whining about the snakebites like you and Lindsey are. Nor am I feigning outrage over the fact that the government is using the exact same tech we are, as if one could reasonably argue "I should get a car, but the government should still have to ride a horse."
We can accept that privacy is no longer really a thing in modern society, or we can go live in a cave and never emerge from it. And not one single person here is living in a cave.
So, spare me the overly dramatic couch-fainting. This is the world we asked for.
I don't own any of that crap. Just one computer.
No Me Phone, no Alexis, no Roomba , ten year old minivan, no dumbass watches and certainly no goddamn debit card. I pay cash when shopping.
Good. That's smart. But it's moot. Do you use the savings cards at your grocery store, or pay full price for everything? Because if it's the former, they've data-mined that. Same goes for your Costco card. Does your minivan have plates on it? Because all those traffic cams and street cams can see your every move. You're certainly banking, correct? Clearly you have internet. Won't be long until your driver's license is chipped in one way or another.
The point is, it's unavoidable now. The age of digital privacy is over. And physical privacy is coming to an end the more we "Smart"en our homes and vehicles and everything else.
No Costco, no Sam's Club, no courtesy card at the local grocery store...they don't have that anyway.
I pay cash for every purchase I make in person.
But yes, in a nearby town, Traverse City, Mi. Flock cameras are everywhere. Warning, they are watching and tracking everyone.
Lady Lindsay has to be one of the most despised and loathed politicians in Washington, D.C. I'm sure there are others but Graham is by far one of the worst. He never met a war he didn't like and sucks Satanyahu's d*** whenever he can.
A disgusting piece of human trash.
To the people of South Carolina: what the hell are you thinking, re-electing this piece of trash? Are you people brain dead? Or just stupid?
What's that. Like 5% of the blame-shifting of CHAZ insurrectionist-fans trying so desperately to turn Jan-6 election fraud protest into a make-believe act of insurrection.
Your BS party-partisan propaganda is old and stale.
The Patriot Act is a curse. Election integrity isn't.