Republican Speaker Johnson Furthers Obama’s Spying Legacy
In a typical bipartisan fashion of backstabbing the conservative Americans, the Congress recently passed the reauthorization of the federal agencies to spy on citizens without a warrant. The victory for the federal establishment comes as confirmation of the government’s continued overreach against the ideal of American liberty.
On April 12, the FISA reauthorization bill H.B. 7888 was passed in the House with the collusion of establishment Republicans. Three days later, the bill was brought back to a vote on the motion to reconsider it by Florida Republicans Laurel Lee and Anna Paulina Luna. Thanks to the continued collusion of 117 Republicans voting with Democrats, the legislation easily passed the House. Within days, it passed the Senate with 30 Republican Senators voting for it along with Democrats. Biden instantly signed it into law – as predictable.
Reauthorization of this bill means federal intelligence agencies can spy on Americans without requiring a warrant, hence the term “warrantless snooping” used by The Register to characterize the authority the bill gives the federal agencies. Conservatives opposed to such surveillance powers of the feds see this measure as a continuation of the infamous Obama years of spying on citizens and politically targeting people who advocate civil rights and free speech.
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, who exposed the Obama administration’s warrantless surveillance in 2013 and had to flee the country to stay safe, took to Twitter/X to express his concern for Americans’ loss of privacy rights and internet freedom when the bill passed the House.
The decision to negotiate and allow this bill for a vote on the House floor also brought Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson into the crosshairs of criticism by what legacy media calls the “far right.” On his show, conservative commentator Charlie Kirk asked Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky whether Speaker Johnson has been an imposter all along.
Speaker Johnson has come under fire as he suddenly shifted priorities and not only allowed FISA reauthorization bill for a vote in the House but also the $60 billion aid package for Ukraine within a week of the FISA legislation passing the House. Breitbart opined that Jonson essentially handed the House over to Democrats. Wendell Husebø wrote on Saturday (April 20):
In a string of recent betrayals by the Speaker–the recent government funding plan and last week’s reauthorization of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) without a requirement for warrants for surveillance on American citizens–this one stings America First conservatives even more.
President Trump, a victim of FBI’s political spying on Americans, was asked for a comment on Real America’s Voice about the FISA reauthorization. Trump said that he would scrap this authorization if it lacks the right checks and balances in case he gets back in the White House in November.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SFavjsPP5azF
Gripping headline our little Pakistani pundit lately publishing propaganda pilfered from Putin’s press, provides. Except FISA as we know it was G. Bush’s little affair and when it comes to weaponizing: Trump’s transgressions of government overreach are far greater, we’re just lucky he can’t spell fisa. The truth is, it’s a law fraught with abuse potential, and a law that nabs us the most bad guys the easiest. Of course, Khan can’t tell the entire truth about the bill.
Earnest Khan wants to pit you against Obama when really you should focus on the law. He wants you to think our government is an evil entity spying on everyone at their corrupt desire. He never asks or answers the obvious question: why does fisa keep getting approved? If he “followed the money,” he would find the answer is that Democrats and Republicans don’t want to get blown up, or have planes flown into buildings perpetrated by terrorists from foreign sponsors like his homeland of Pakistan. And of course he offers no alternative except to let his fellow Pakistani’s not be eavesdropped on without taking the pain and time, especially time, to get an adjudicated warrant.
Warrentless eavesdropping is the legal issue which should be for foreign assets only UNLESS a domestic citizen happens to be in the conversation. They may even include emails stored on servers in other lands: who hasn’t been there and not even known it? It’s the coincidental eavesdropping on citizens happening to be in the conversation of a suspected foreign terrorists, like people from Pakistan like Dempsey (not suspected, just foreign.)
The more controls, the longer it takes and lesser the results. Less controls and potential for abuse increases. One mistake and potentially the towers come down. Or worse. A miss is as good as a mile on this one. Individually, I doubt many of us worry about people listening to us while listening for terrorists and it’s pretty rare that abuses have occurred like the ones under Obama. And while privacy is aborted, it does open more free speech to the conversation. Just kidding. But that’s the rub. Safe or private? For now, I will take safe, and that’s what all sorts of lawmakers from both sides, throughout it’s history, have done over and over. I’m gonna trust em on this one but will continue to research the current oversight, monitoring, and control. That’s usually the rub. And, of course, not covered by the Dumpster.
I think you miss the point. If we are going to be a constitutional republic why not follow the constitution? Why sacrifice individual rights to make someone’s job easier. They swore to uphold the constitution. They lied.
You have a very Trumpian warped view of FISA. FISA focuses on international bad actors threatening the USA. It only spies on domestic bad guys that are in partnership with the foreign actors. The problem is our government is trying to adhere to the US Constitution but the bad guys keep taking advantage of it!!! So we have to have a legal way of taking care of our precious US Constitution while being able to go after the domestic and foreign bad guys. The average hard working tax paying red white and blue American has nothing to worry about with FISA.
Biden fan? Or Gov employee?
Speaker Johnson is a “sell out” to we constitutional conservatives just like the past 5 gutless/spineless speakers (Hastard, Lott, Boehner,Ryan and McCarthy) have been in the past!!! They WANT/SEEK bi-partisanship with the evil demorats in the worst way! It’s sickening to watch or observe the useless Repubs/RINOs (one in the same) “cave” or enhance the Neo-Marxism policies as dictated by the moronic lunatic radicals of the left! Speaker Johnson is a weak man who at one time condemned or rmischaracterized the George Floyd debacle as justice gone astray! He wanted to systematically condemn, change or re-arrange policies to fit the radical left’s narrative!!! Please, my God, get rid of this clown who also sold us down the river on FISA! I truly don’t believe America is going to survive with gutless/spineless weak Republicans like this in our House or Senate!! We are doomed forever! President Trump can NOT cure ALL this sickness – cancer by himself!!! Once again, the gutless Repubs have left We The People empty handed!! Make America Pray Again!!!!!
Your far right view is exactly why Speaker Johnson did what he did. He got CIA and Fed one-on-one meetings where they shared what is going on with threats to the USA. Johnson realized that his far right wing and the Dem far left wing were both harming the US cause. So he partnered with all that were in the middle, including Independents, to get the job done for this country. Your “constitutional conservative” label is a load of crap used to disguise your isolationist racist views. Our whole system of governance is set up on the principles of negotiation, not isolationism nor one party Shanghai style rule! When Independents vote against Trump and for Johnson, we are actually taking a stance against you!
Parks, Bbope — FISA has little to do with Biden as President except he will probably not veto what Congress passes. This one is really all of us but led by the Congress. In Congress, it’s bipartisan. I have already provided opinion as to the effects, risks, and rewards. Even the most adamant free-speech-personal-liberty-small-government or progressive-socialist when facing the possibility of a small group of thugs getting into a number of airplanes and flying them into High Schools and Hospitals can become pretty damned intrusive to avoid owning that ooops. Better to apologize for eavesdropping than dropping that ball.
Therefore, being Biden or Trump does not seem to matter —- both Presidents signed FISA bills. Trump signed his version in 2017, fucking idiot can’t remember shit and now, running for his life out of jail, he is against it.
Bush signed it, Obama used and abused it, Trump said nothing and signed it, and Biden will sign it too. Candidates sometimes stand against it but, then again, some of them say they can fix ObamaCare in a day and will have infrastructure week next Monday.
Parks: the word privacy does not appear in the Constitution. There are aspects of privacy covered by a number of Bill of Rights amendments.
Privacy of our beliefs and the right to make our beliefs public — the first amendment
Privacy of home against soldier being able to live there – 3rd
Privacy of UNREASONABLE searches of person or possessions – 4th
Privacy of personal info against self-incrimination – 5th
And the ninth which is a grab bag — see Goldberg on Griswald.
But the word privacy never appears. Bork in his confirmation attested to the Constitution offers NO RIGHT of personal privacy whatsoever. A number of times, the SCOTUS has used the 14th’s term of LIBERTY to be construed as privacy for cases on interference with parent’s upbringing, education, and they have gone the other way too. But privacy is not a right within the Constitution, sorry.
Try this, seems pretty good general discussion: *http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html*
So you can feel this is an invasion of privacy and listening to foreign terrorists warrantless is wrong, I can feel it’s a necessary evil. But the word privacy is not there, not in plain English in the Constitution, there is nothing specifying PRIVACY as a right, and over the years the SCOTUS has used BoR amendments to approach rights of privacy by using other amendments with certain cases.
So far, FISA is Constitutional. Has been since George Bush signed it into law.
I agree Frank! Well said.
Bromamce