• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Capitol Police Are Spying On Members Of Congress And The Americans They Meet

anatta said:
This isn't just security searches of bags or exigent threats..from the OP:

Capitol Police initiative that involves deep dives into the speech, background, and lifestyle details of who members of Congress are meeting with, including donors, Hill staff, mayors, state legislators, and other Americans exercising their First Amendment right to petition their government.
Click to expand...
We have insurrections at the capital. We know this. It would be a neglect of duty to not so do.

Do you prefer a terrorist friend blows up the building and the members? Is that it?
 
noonereal said:
We have insurrections at the capital. We know this. It would be a neglect of duty to not so do.
Do you prefer a terrorist friend blows up the building and the members? Is that it?
Click to expand...
deep social media search and personal documents without any probable cause? Yes I have a problem with that
as a violation of the first amendment and perhaps the 4th

Cops should do any security they need to do in terms of physical security
That doesn't give them a license to troll thru personal records and social media without some form of probable cause
 
anatta said:
deep social media search and personal documents without any probable cause? Yes I have a problem with that
as a violation of the first amendment and perhaps the 4th

Cops should do any security they need to do in terms of physical security
That doesn't give them a license to troll thru personal records and social media without some form of probable cause
Click to expand...

So no preventative policing for you. You just want them available to beat when you attempt to overthrow the government, got it.
 
anatta said:
do we have a section for Police State matters? <---comment
thefederalist.com

Report: Capitol Police Are Spying On Lawmakers And People They Meet

Police surveillance is another way of keeping voters and the accountability they might bring at a healthy distance.
thefederalist.com thefederalist.com

Besty Woodruff Swan and Daniel Lippman broke the details this week of a new Capitol Police initiative that involves deep dives into the speech, background, and lifestyle details of who members of Congress are meeting with, including donors, Hill staff, mayors, state legislators, and other Americans exercising their First Amendment right to petition their government.

Personal details on Capitol Hill staff, state legislators, or donors are dispersed to partisans and suddenly leaked at an opportune political moment by some agency conveniently immune to the Freedom of Information Act and subject to limited oversight. After the aggressive leaking, spinning, and shaming that bureaucrats engaged in during the Donald Trump years, we’ve seen what’s possible.

This practice also comes dangerously close to burdening the free exercise of political speech, which includes the right to petition the government “for a redress of grievances” without fear of reprisal.
Click to expand...
Certain members on the right have given good reason for some discreet surveillance.
 
anatta said:
deep social media search and personal documents without any probable cause? Yes I have a problem with that
as a violation of the first amendment and perhaps the 4th

Cops should do any security they need to do in terms of physical security
That doesn't give them a license to troll thru personal records and social media without some form of probable cause
Click to expand...
Deep social media search????? Oh scary.

That is not like the NSA searching through telephone calls that both parties believe are private. That would bother me without probable cause. "Deep" social media search. I would like to see who came up with the adjective "deep" as it seems purposefully provocative and not part of an instruction that would actually be in the manual covering this activity. I bet if you removed the word "deep" nobody would look at that twice.
 
jnug said:
Deep social media search????? Oh scary.

That is not like the NSA searching through telephone calls that both parties believe are private. That would bother me without probable cause. "Deep" social media search. I would like to see who came up with the adjective "deep" as it seems purposefully provocative and not part of an instruction that would actually be in the manual covering this activity. I bet if you removed the word "deep" nobody would look at that twice.
Click to expand...
your objection is the word "deep" ( and the NSA searching as problematic as it is isn't for content -just metadata)
I agree it's a buzzword. I looked at the original Politico source and found this as well

www.politico.com

Capitol Police examines backgrounds, social media feeds of some who meet with lawmakers

The little-known new practice by the department’s intelligence analysts, instituted since the Jan. 6 attack, is highly controversial given the civil liberties concerns it raises.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
.....told Capitol Police analysts to search for information about lawmakers’ opponents and their opponents’ supporters:
“List and search all political opponents to see if they or their followers intend to attend or disrupt the event.”

In another document reviewed by POLITICO, one Capitol Police official noted that Farnam directed analysts to run “background checks” on people whom lawmakers planned to meet, including donors and associates. When staff were listed as attending these meetings, Capitol Police intelligence analysts also got asked to check the social media accounts of the staffers.
 
Gateman_Wen said:
Certain members on the right have given good reason for some discreet surveillance.
Click to expand...
we dont keep surveillance on Americans when they arent being investigated for a crime
That requires probable cause or at least incidental collection - not continuous monitering
 
noonereal said:
So no preventative policing for you. You just want them available to beat when you attempt to overthrow the government, got it.
Click to expand...
I want them to be able to police the 2020 BLM riots as well.. "Preventive policing" is a nice Stasi euphamism
 
anatta said:
do we have a section for Police State matters? <---comment
thefederalist.com

Report: Capitol Police Are Spying On Lawmakers And People They Meet

Police surveillance is another way of keeping voters and the accountability they might bring at a healthy distance.
thefederalist.com thefederalist.com

Besty Woodruff Swan and Daniel Lippman broke the details this week of a new Capitol Police initiative that involves deep dives into the speech, background, and lifestyle details of who members of Congress are meeting with, including donors, Hill staff, mayors, state legislators, and other Americans exercising their First Amendment right to petition their government.

Personal details on Capitol Hill staff, state legislators, or donors are dispersed to partisans and suddenly leaked at an opportune political moment by some agency conveniently immune to the Freedom of Information Act and subject to limited oversight. After the aggressive leaking, spinning, and shaming that bureaucrats engaged in during the Donald Trump years, we’ve seen what’s possible.

This practice also comes dangerously close to burdening the free exercise of political speech, which includes the right to petition the government “for a redress of grievances” without fear of reprisal.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they should stop conspiring against the United States?
 
anatta said:
like what actions? Ignoring a subpoena? and without any probable cause?
Click to expand...
Showing probable cause is not required for a subpoena.

More precisely, it might be said in favor of the use of administrative subpoenas in criminal investigations that they:
  • provide a time-honored, court-approved means for agencies to acquire information in order to make well informed decisions;
  • should be available for terrorism investigations;
  • do not ordinarily require probable cause and consequently can be used from the beginning of an inquiry to gather information;
  • can be used to gather information held by third parties other than the target of an inquiry;
  • often can encourage the cooperation of third parties by providing immunity for cooperation similar to that available in a judicial context;
  • often can make third parties subject to nondisclosure requirements thereby reducing the possibility that the target of an investigation will flee, destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses, or pose a risk to national security;
  • can be made judicially enforceable both to ensure compliance and to safeguard against abuse;
  • are less intrusive than search warrants; material is gathered and delivered by the individual rather than seized by the government; there is ordinarily an interval between the time of service of the subpoena and the time for compliance, allowing parties to consult an attorney;
  • can be more easily and quickly used than grand jury subpoenas, but are otherwise similar; and
  • are now available for investigations relating to some crimes and there is no obvious reason why they should not be available for other equally serious criminal investigations.
 
The Federalist is questionable BUT after an ALEC GOP conspiracy to commit insurrection that is costing
taxpayers millions upon millions of tax dollars for rehab what in hell would you expect .......?
 
It's not a big deal, really. If you want to fly on an airplane, guess what? DHS checks you out.
 
KingLeo said:
Showing probable cause is not required for a subpoena.

More precisely, it might be said in favor of the use of administrative subpoenas in criminal investigations that they:
  • provide a time-honored, court-approved means for agencies to acquire information in order to make well informed decisions;
  • should be available for terrorism investigations;
  • do not ordinarily require probable cause and consequently can be used from the beginning of an inquiry to gather information;
  • can be used to gather information held by third parties other than the target of an inquiry;
  • often can encourage the cooperation of third parties by providing immunity for cooperation similar to that available in a judicial context;
  • often can make third parties subject to nondisclosure requirements thereby reducing the possibility that the target of an investigation will flee, destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses, or pose a risk to national security;
  • can be made judicially enforceable both to ensure compliance and to safeguard against abuse;
  • are less intrusive than search warrants; material is gathered and delivered by the individual rather than seized by the government; there is ordinarily an interval between the time of service of the subpoena and the time for compliance, allowing parties to consult an attorney;
  • can be more easily and quickly used than grand jury subpoenas, but are otherwise similar; and
  • are now available for investigations relating to some crimes and there is no obvious reason why they should not be available for other equally serious criminal investigations.
Click to expand...
why dont you just cite the source instead of making me ask for it. I realize national security
hasits own carve outs - but that terrorism..anyways..source please
 
Razoo said:
The Federalist is questionable BUT after an ALEC GOP conspiracy to commit insurrection that is costing
taxpayers millions upon millions of tax dollars for rehab what in hell would you expect .......?
Click to expand...
www.politico.com

Capitol Police examines backgrounds, social media feeds of some who meet with lawmakers

The little-known new practice by the department’s intelligence analysts, instituted since the Jan. 6 attack, is highly controversial given the civil liberties concerns it raises.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
multivita-man said:
It's not a big deal, really. If you want to fly on an airplane, guess what? DHS checks you out.
Click to expand...
against a pre-generated list. they dont search your background for a routine security check
 
anatta said:
do we have a section for Police State matters? <---comment
thefederalist.com

Report: Capitol Police Are Spying On Lawmakers And People They Meet

Police surveillance is another way of keeping voters and the accountability they might bring at a healthy distance.
thefederalist.com thefederalist.com

Besty Woodruff Swan and Daniel Lippman broke the details this week of a new Capitol Police initiative that involves deep dives into the speech, background, and lifestyle details of who members of Congress are meeting with, including donors, Hill staff, mayors, state legislators, and other Americans exercising their First Amendment right to petition their government.

Personal details on Capitol Hill staff, state legislators, or donors are dispersed to partisans and suddenly leaked at an opportune political moment by some agency conveniently immune to the Freedom of Information Act and subject to limited oversight. After the aggressive leaking, spinning, and shaming that bureaucrats engaged in during the Donald Trump years, we’ve seen what’s possible.

This practice also comes dangerously close to burdening the free exercise of political speech, which includes the right to petition the government “for a redress of grievances” without fear of reprisal.
Click to expand...
Capitol police don't have the power to spy on Americans. At least not without a warrant.
Now, due to the Patriot Act, the FBI and other federal agencies could spy on Americans, and do, due to the Patriot Act not requiring a warrant under certain rules.
 
anatta said:
why dont you just cite the source instead of making me ask for it. I realize national security
hasits own carve outs - but that terrorism..anyways..source please
Click to expand...

anatta said:
www.politico.com

Capitol Police examines backgrounds, social media feeds of some who meet with lawmakers

The little-known new practice by the department’s intelligence analysts, instituted since the Jan. 6 attack, is highly controversial given the civil liberties concerns it raises.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...

anatta said:
against a pre-generated list. they dont search your background for a routine security check
Click to expand...


Holy shit you are freaking the **** out.

Here's a simple piece of advice for rightists in Congress. Don't enable an attack on that Congress.

Our government deserves to use a lot of methods to defend itself beyond simple uses of courts. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom