NSA Reform Lite - The Empire Strikes Back

Ron Wyden blasted the House adoption of the USA Freedom Act which was so watered down and full of holes that some of it's original sponsors voted against it.  According to the Washington Post half of the original co-sponsors turned against the bill after it was gutted.

The new version from the House Rules Committee, privacy advocates say, significantly weakened the reform and included loopholes that could potentially allow bulk data collection on U.S. citizens to continue.

Privacy advocates weren't the only ones upset about the changes. Many co-sponsors of the original version were also concerned. In fact, a Washington Post analysis of the votes shows that 76 of the 152 co-sponsors of the earlier version voted against passage of the altered version on the House floor Thursday. So, half of the co-sponsors ended up voting against what was supposed to be their own NSA reform bill.

That includes Rep. Jared Polis, (D-Colo.), who released a press statement about his change of heart after the vote. “Unfortunately, the USA Freedom Act, which I cosponsored as introduced, has been watered down and co-opted to the point that it creates the possibility that NSA could misuse the bill- contrary to the legislative intent- to conduct broad searches of communication records," Polis said.

Ron Wyden had this to say.

Given the Executive Branch’s record of consistently making inaccurate public statements about these laws in order to conceal ongoing dragnet surveillance of Americans, it would be naive to trust the Executive Branch to apply new surveillance laws with restraint. 

It is unfortunately clear that some of the same officials who were responsible for conducting this dragnet surveillance and misleading the public about it are now working to make sure that any attempt at reform legislation is as limited as possible. 

Congress Trashes the Constitution, Blames Snowden

The NSA and Corporate Media are waging a bizarre sideshow over whether Edward Snowden tried to raise his concerns inside the NSA about their disregard of Constitutional protections of US citizens.  Wait a minute, these folks are arguing that he should have raised his voice privately to the folks running the unconstitutional operation?  You gotta be kidding, he'd have been squashed and locked up in some hole in a distant country and he knew it.  Even Ron Wyden didn't reveal it to the public because it would have been the end of his career.  The Intelligence game is rigged against whistleblowers and everybody knows it.

The current sideshow from Dianne Feinstein alleges essentially that Snowden didn't try to single handedly stop the criminal actions of Congress, the President and the NSA.  As The Guardian reported, first everybody claimed there were No emails on the subject, then claimed they found one email.  You can bet your ass there's lots more they're hiding, but even if there's only one the fact remains that whistleblowers were on a suicide journey if they told their bosses that they were criminals.

Senate intelligence committee members Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have long argued the administration may have been in breach of surveillance statutes in its activities. They were prevented from raising many of their concerns in public due to confidentiality requirements. Ben Wizner, Snowden’s legal adviser, said of the email: “This whole issue is a red herring. The problem was not some unknown and isolated instance of misconduct. The problem was that an entire system of mass surveillance had been deployed – and deemed legal – without the knowledge or consent of the public. Snowden raised many complaints over many channels. The NSA is releasing a single part of a single exchange after previously claiming that no evidence existed.”

The real issue that the media should be focusing on is the conduct of Congress, specifically the members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees who are supposed to be protecting our rights and the Constitution, and whether or not they should be judged as criminals for their part in the unconstitutional acts, along with President Obama.  All of then knew what was happening and let it go on without even telling most other members of congress.

Has Too Big to Jail Finally Been Overcome?

We finally have a felony conviction, aiding and abetting tax evasion, for the major bank Credit Suisse, but what are the penalties?  For starters the bank will be fined $2.6 billion, a fair hunk of change to be sure, but the CEO Brady Dougan said this in a press statement, so where's the beef?

Dougan said the settlement had had little impact on business. “We have found no instances where clients cannot do business with us,” he said. “Our discussions with clients have been very reassuring and we haven’t seen very many issues at all.”

So much for feeling too much pain, now does he go to jail?  Not a chance in my opinion, even if Switzerland extradited him which they won't. Then there's the matter of the tax evaders, Credit Suisse hasn't been required to reveal who they are so the IRS can collect taxes from them, as well as prosecute them.  That has Senators Carl Levin and John McCain puzzled too after they did all the investigative work that led to the conviction.

Senators Carl Levin and John McCain welcomed the $2.6bn fine of the bank announced Monday but said more needed to be done. Levin and McCain led the permanent subcommittee on investigations team that uncovered much of the wrongdoing at the bank.

In a statement, Levin said it was “appropriate” that Credit Suisse had been held criminally liable for aiding and abetting tax evasion – the first bank of this scale to held criminally liable for 20 years.

He said the fine struck “an important blow against tax evasion through bank secrecy”.

“But it is a mystery to me why the US government didn’t require as part of the agreement that the bank cough up some of the names of the US clients with secret Swiss bank accounts. More than 20,000 Americans were Credit Suisse account holders in Switzerland, the vast majority of whom never disclosed their accounts as required by US law. This leaves their identities undisclosed, with no accountability for taxes owed. The changes Credit Suisse has agreed to make to its practices are long overdue and welcome, but must be carefully monitored,” he said.

McCain said he was “gratified” by the Justice Department’s decision to require Credit Suisse to plead guilty to criminal wrongdoing. “In such cases, it is vitally important for all Americans to know that no financial institution is ‘too big to prosecute,’” he said. But he added that questions remained.

“Over the next few days, I look forward to reviewing this guilty plea closely to see whether it appropriately holds officers, directors and key executives individually accountable and whether the plea will be sufficient to help deter similar misconduct in the future,” he said.

In The Guardian story, they interviewed  John Coffee, Adolf A Berle professor of law at Columbia Law School, and he said.

“It is less than a severe sanction when no officers are indicted, when the settlement does not require the dismissal of any employees and where they do not get the names of these US customers,” he said. He said other regulators could take further action, the SEC could bar it from being a money manager, but that was not going to happen.

“Mary Jo White [chair of the SEC] does not want to inconvenience a major bank over a little thing like a federal felony conviction,” he said.

GM Lawyers at work, ban "Problems"

The General Motors ignition switch defect has revealed that GM had a list of banned words in Emails, including "problem".  Lawyers don't like words with clear-cut meanings.

What do the words “safety,” ‘’chaotic” and “problem” have in common?
They’re all on General Motors’ list of banned words for employees who were documenting potential safety issues.
The revelation of the 68-word list is one of the odder twists in GM’s ongoing recall of 2.6 million older-model small cars for defective ignition switches.
On Friday, the U.S. government slapped GM with a $35 million fine for failing to report the deadly defect for more than a decade. The government also released a 2008 GM training document that includes the list and warns employees to stick to the facts and not use language that could hurt the company down the road.
The word “defect,” for example, “can be regarded as a legal admission” and should be avoided, the company document says.
Adjectives like “bad,” ‘’terrifying,” ‘’dangerous,” ‘’horrific” and “evil” are on the list. So are unflattering terms like “deathtrap,” ‘’widow-maker” and “Hindenburg.” Even seemingly benign words like “always” and “never” made it on the list.