Shoould Cell phone info be used to find those involved in the January 6th riot/insurrection?

[Razoo]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh yes the Patriot Act = another ALEC document

 

[Robertinfremont]

Anything and everything should be used to track them down.
This shit needs to stop now.

2017-2020 Democrats hate Cops guts want them defunded and locked in jails.
2021 Democrats love cops, want the law breakers funded but locked into prisons.
Democrats pass law to fund even criminal killers in prisons.

Democrats award convicts $1400 for being in prison.

Republican's try to carve out illegal's getting checks too.
Democrats refuse to support Republican's.

 

[MaryP]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

2017-2020 Democrats hate Cops guts want them defunded and locked in jails.
2021 Democrats love cops, want the law breakers funded but locked into prisons.
Democrats pass law to fund even criminal killers in prisons.

Democrats award convicts $1400 for being in prison.

Republican's try to carve out illegal's getting checks too.
Democrats refuse to support Republican's.

What does the above Old Man Yells at Cloud bullshit have to do with domestic terrorist insurrections, other than the fact that you seem to get away with making shit up?
I never called for defunding cops, I called for duplicating the Camden NJ approach and for reeling in the undeserved and outsized political influence of police unions.

The rest is fact free evidence free bullshit, and seeing as how you are incapable of linking to anything, (because you refuse to) it's just more Old Man Yells at Cloud.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I don't see anything wrong with that.

It's no different than police chasing a suspect that they observed committing a crime.
They can't just randomly follow drivers around on the road for no good reason but if the person is arousing reasonable suspicion they sure can, and they can pull them over.
FBI cannot access FCC and telco records at random however there is no reason that they can't flag ALL cell traffic that went through the cell sites maintained for the Capitol itself on the date in question.
That's right, the US Capitol complex HAS its own cell system, so as soon as you set foot there, you're using that cell system.
It no different than the Pentagon, which by the way ALSO has ITS own cell systems.
If you're at or IN the Pentagon, you're on their system.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I don't see anything wrong with that.

That is precisely how the patriot Act works with one difference. Calls originating in known terrorist nations are screened for content.

 

[Robertinfremont]

What does the above Old Man Yells at Cloud bullshit have to do with domestic terrorist insurrections, other than the fact that you seem to get away with making shit up?
I never called for defunding cops, I called for duplicating the Camden NJ approach and for reeling in the undeserved and outsized political influence of police unions.

The rest is fact free evidence free bullshit, and seeing as how you are incapable of linking to anything, (because you refuse to) it's just more Old Man Yells at Cloud.

For all I know you are not actually a Democrat but might be working for the Chinese.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

Yes. Absolutely.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

What does the above Old Man Yells at Cloud bullshit have to do with domestic terrorist insurrections, other than the fact that you seem to get away with making shit up?

If there was a god, Robertinfremont would have some serious splainin’ to do.

 

[Razoo]

It has never been about defunding law enforcement never never. That is right wing spin and a poor choice of words for saying let's reallocate the tax dollars to bring on some new staff people with expertise in talking down etc etc etc instead of shooting down.

And getting rid of trigger happy and perhaps racist law enforcement should be a priority.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It has never been about defunding law enforcement never never. That is right wing spin and a poor choice of words for saying let's reallocate the tax dollars to bring on some new staff people with expertise in talking down etc etc etc instead of shooting down.

And getting rid of trigger happy and perhaps racist law enforcement should be a priority.

But there is a point here.
The term "Defund the Police" was the one that grew legs.
As awful as Democrats are about messaging, the far Left is a thousand times worse and it's mostly due to their own arrogance because they assume everyone "gets it" and they don't care about selling a message to the rest of the country, only their bubble.

Defund the Police is maybe THE STUPIDEST SLOGAN EVER invented because in reality it DOESN'T mean "getting rid of police", but nothing changes the fact that it's horrible optics and a massive failure in messaging.
Democrats don't often hire well paid think tank consultants and sad to say, it is time they goddamn well started to.

We need to HAVE a Democratic version of Frank Luntz, only ours needs to be honest and ethical, but he/she needs to be a sharp minded wordsmith who can put together compelling messages and sound bites that connect to reality.

 

[independentusa]

Leave it to republicans to protect criminals no matter that hard evidence may be on the table.
This dude has no ethics. The FBI is not going to advise Hawley on anything they know a moron when one is before them.

I believe he is afraid of what they will find when they delve into his cell phone records. Remember the fist raise to those who eventually rioted.

 

[calamity]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

Of course

 

[RaleBulgarian]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

Did some research on this and it appears that the FBI could be within their legal right to access cell phone tower records, for up to six days, without any warrant.

SCOTUS ruled in Carpenter v. United States that authorities must obtain a warrant for cellphone tower records for any period 7 days or more.

As with virtually all SCOTUS cases, the pdf is a long read, but a portion of Chief Justice Roberts’ comments, in writing for the majority directly relates to the current topic;

“[W]e need not decide whether there is a limited period for which the Government may obtain an individual’s historical CSLI free from Fourth Amendment scrutiny, and if so, how long that period might be. It is sufficient for our purposes today to hold that accessing seven days of CSLI constitutes a Fourth Amendment search.”

Summary: The Supreme Court Rules in Carpenter v. United States

On Friday, June 22, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated opinion in Carpenter v. United States, holding that a warrant is required for police to access cell site location information from a cell phone company—the detailed geolocation information generated by a cellphone’s communication...

www.lawfareblog.com

Loading…

www.supremecourt.gov

 

[trouble13]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

They should put the exact same effort into finding them as they put into finding the people who rioted over the summer.

 

[ttwtt78640]

But there is a point here.
The term "Defund the Police" was the one that grew legs.
As awful as Democrats are about messaging, the far Left is a thousand times worse and it's mostly due to their own arrogance because they assume everyone "gets it" and they don't care about selling a message to the rest of the country, only their bubble.

Defund the Police is maybe THE STUPIDEST SLOGAN EVER invented because in reality it DOESN'T mean "getting rid of police", but nothing changes the fact that it's horrible optics and a massive failure in messaging.
Democrats don't often hire well paid think tank consultants and sad to say, it is time they goddamn well started to.

We need to HAVE a Democratic version of Frank Luntz, only ours needs to be honest and ethical, but he/she needs to be a sharp minded wordsmith who can put together compelling messages and sound bites that connect to reality.

The post to which you replied is no better since it said “let’s reallocate the tax dollars to bring on new staff to...” which also means fewer police officers. Obviously, you can’t reallocate the pay of (fire or terminate?) existing personnel with less specialized training (education?) to hire (bring on new staff?) even the same number of personnel with more specialized training (education?).

The fact is that no amount of spin about “reimagining“ things ends up getting more and/or better trained (educated?) law enforcement personnel using the same (or less) funding. What “defund the police” really means is “let’s grow the power and expense of government, hope for change and we’ll figure out the details of the new plan later”.

 

[The AntiDonald]

I can smell the desperation through the interwebz, sad, just sad...

Did Obama spend weeks claiming the election was stolen, that tRump won by massive voter fraud? Did Obama stage a rally to rile up the lemmings up to take back the election and march to the Capital???

But once again a tRumper tries to change the topic- the FBI has and will continue to pursue law breakers using cell phone information. I know it hurts the rabid right to see the same techniques they applaud when used on others, but are shocked and question the legality when used against tRump insurrectionists.

Try addressing the topic of the thread. You want to push more rabid right lies start your own thread... ✌

I think the republicans are worried that their own cell phones may be caught up in communications with the insurrectionists. Evidence of that is Josh Holley grilling the FBI director in the hearing, wanting to know about the means used to collect data. He was worried about Geo-Tracking. He knows more about the whole fiasco then he's letting on and doesn't want to get caught.

 

[Slartibartfast]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

Please read the fourth amendment. The FBI has a warrant which satisfies the due process requirement.

 

[notquiteright]

I think the republicans are worried that their own cell phones may be caught up in communications with the insurrectionists. Evidence of that is Josh Holley grilling the FBI director in the hearing, wanting to know about the means used to collect data. He was worried about Geo-Tracking. He knows more about the whole fiasco then he's letting on and doesn't want to get caught.

Yeah those partisan tRump fluffing numbnuttz set off a fire that is going to burn many of them. What was meant to be a show of strength to enforce their political demands has blow-up in their rabid right faces. Social media-which they decry as limiting their 1st Amendment rights- is now going to show how ignorant they were when using that right and I imagine the FBI will be knocking on a few Congressional doors.

Insurrection isn't a gambit that can be lost. It's winner take all, loser takes a fall....

Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch... ✌

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

For all I know you are not actually a Democrat but might be working for the Chinese.

Yeah that must be it.

 

[RAMOSS]

The FBI is using cell phone information to determine who might have been involved in the riot on the 6th. At least one legislator feels the is is violation of civil rights . The present use is only to determine who was using their phone on that date and where they were during the riot. If sufficient evidence can be found against a person, then and only then can the FBI or other lawe enforcement agencies get the actual calls or texts. So, should he FBI be able to use the cell phone information they have against those involved?

Yes, particulary the cell phone data from the internal boosters within the capitol building itself. that goes directly to the government and is owned by the government already.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Did some research on this and it appears that the FBI could be within their legal right to access cell phone tower records, for up to six days, without any warrant.

SCOTUS ruled in Carpenter v. United States that authorities must obtain a warrant for cellphone tower records for any period 7 days or more.

As with virtually all SCOTUS cases, the pdf is a long read, but a portion of Chief Justice Roberts’ comments, in writing for the majority directly relates to the current topic;

“[W]e need not decide whether there is a limited period for which the Government may obtain an individual’s historical CSLI free from Fourth Amendment scrutiny, and if so, how long that period might be. It is sufficient for our purposes today to hold that accessing seven days of CSLI constitutes a Fourth Amendment search.”

Summary: The Supreme Court Rules in Carpenter v. United States

On Friday, June 22, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated opinion in Carpenter v. United States, holding that a warrant is required for police to access cell site location information from a cell phone company—the detailed geolocation information generated by a cellphone’s communication...

www.lawfareblog.com

Loading…

www.supremecourt.gov

I may be incredibly wrong about this but from what I can gather, if you access a Federal Government asset, property or facility, you are agreeing to be bound by Federal Government regulations, particularly those that affect your right to USE OF same.

For instance, your 2A rights are pretty much sacrosanct, but upon entering a Federal Government facility you are agreeing to abide by federal prohibitions against carrying a weapon on their premises without prior authorization unless you are bona fide law enforcement.

The nationwide cellular telephone system is mostly comprised of publicly owned corporate infrastructure for use by private individuals, however if I am not mistaken, telecommunications infrastructure in official use by the Federal Government is owned BY the Federal Government and merely contracts WITH the public telecom infrastructure for colocation and connection purposes, and therefore my gut is telling me that accessing Federal Government owned telecom infrastructure is the same as entering a Federal Government facility.

If you've ever used a smart phone to access WiFi inside a Federal Government facility, such as the VA Hospital, you have to click AGREE to a page that specifically lays out the fact that your activities may be monitored and even recorded by the government before you're able to use the data connection.

Seems like Uncle Sam has every right to access records of activities by any person that has entered their premises and all such complaints about 4A and what not amount to lack of awareness of the way that Uncle Sam provides Federal Government services to members of the public.

But I could be wrong.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Yes, particulary the cell phone data from the internal boosters within the capitol building itself. that goes directly to the government and is owned by the government already.

They aren't just boosters. The govt actually owns and maintains its own cellular system. You're actually accessing cell "towers" (not just towers, but any internal telco exchange equipment) that are owned and maintained by Uncle Sam.

This goes way back into ancient history because back in the old Ma Bell days, the government actually owned and maintained completely separate MILITARY telephone systems called AUTOVON and AUTOSEVECOM.

The "children" of these entities are the Defense Switched Network and the Defense Red Switch Network. There's much more but it's not relevant to this thread.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I think the republicans are worried that their own cell phones may be caught up in communications with the insurrectionists. Evidence of that is Josh Holley grilling the FBI director in the hearing, wanting to know about the means used to collect data. He was worried about Geo-Tracking. He knows more about the whole fiasco then he's letting on and doesn't want to get caught.

That is exactly what that's about.
He's caught, he knows he's caught and he's engaging in even more Trumper theatrics to create a smokescreen for the benefit of his constituents.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

I may be incredibly wrong about this but from what I can gather, if you access a Federal Government asset, property or facility, you are agreeing to be bound by Federal Government regulations, particularly those that affect your right to USE OF same.

For instance, your 2A rights are pretty much sacrosanct, but upon entering a Federal Government facility you are agreeing to abide by federal prohibitions against carrying a weapon on their premises without prior authorization unless you are bona fide law enforcement.

The nationwide cellular telephone system is mostly comprised of publicly owned corporate infrastructure for use by private individuals, however if I am not mistaken, telecommunications infrastructure in official use by the Federal Government is owned BY the Federal Government and merely contracts WITH the public telecom infrastructure for colocation and connection purposes, and therefore my gut is telling me that accessing Federal Government owned telecom infrastructure is the same as entering a Federal Government facility.

If you've ever used a smart phone to access WiFi inside a Federal Government facility, such as the VA Hospital, you have to click AGREE to a page that specifically lays out the fact that your activities may be monitored and even recorded by the government before you're able to use the data connection.

Seems like Uncle Sam has every right to access records of activities by any person that has entered their premises and all such complaints about 4A and what not amount to lack of awareness of the way that Uncle Sam provides Federal Government services to members of the public.

But I could be wrong.

A very good point that was a central feature in Carpenter v. United States.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion. In it, he explained that the nearly universal use of smart devices required a change to “third party doctrine” that previously allowed for certain electronic surveillance/information gathering techniques without a warrant.

You can read his opinion in my previous post. Basically, Roberts explained that the ubiquitousness of the miniature wireless computers constantly working, running various programs/apps even when we aren’t aware, including finding and connecting with cell towers, creates an electronic record of all of our movements which, without appropriate legal scrutiny and approval (warrant) is a violation of our 4th amendment protections.