Skip to comments.Obama: No Allegations NSA Is Trying to 'Listen in On People's Email'
Posted on 08/23/2013 6:19:15 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Obama: No Allegations NSA Is Trying to 'Listen in On People's Email' Daniel Halper August 23, 2013 7:21 AM
President Barack Obama defended the NSA surveillance program in an interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo this morning.
On the NSA surveillance program, Cuomo asked, "Are you confident that you know everything that's going on within that agency and that you can say to the American people, 'It's all done the right way'?"
"Yes, but what I've also said is that it can only work if the American people trust what's going on. And what's been clear since the disclosures that were made by Mr. Snowden is that people don't have enough information and aren't confident enough that, between all the safeguards and checks that we put in place within the executive branch, and the federal court oversight that takes place on the program, and congressional oversight, people are still concerned as to whether their e-mails are being read or their phone calls are being listened to," Obama responded.
CUOMO: Especially when they hear that they are and mistakes are made. You know, it shakes your confidence.
OBAMA: Well -- yeah, but I think it's important -- for example, this latest revelation that was made, what was learned was that NSA had inadvertently, accidentally pulled the e-mails of some Americans in violation of their own rules, because of technical problems that they didn't realize. They presented those problems to the court. The court said, "This isn't going to cut it. You're going to have to improve the safeguards, given these technical problems." That's exactly what happened. So the point is, is that all these safeguards, checks, audits, oversight worked.
Now, I think there are legitimate concerns that people have that technology is moving so quick that, you know, at some point, does the technology outpace the laws that are in place and the protections that are in place? And does some of these systems -- do some of these systems end up being like a loaded gun out there that somebody at some future point could abuse? Because there are no allegations, and I am very confident -- knowing the NSA and how they operate -- that purposefully somebody is out there trying to abuse this program or listen in on people's e-mail -- or...
CUOMO: You're confident in that?
OBAMA: I am confident in that. But what I recognize is that we're going to have to continue to improve the safeguards and, as technology moves forward, that means that we may be able to build technologies that give people more assurance, and we do have to do a better job of giving people confidence in how these programs work.
Nice weasel words, ‘no allegation’.
I am sure the Germans were confident in the SS too.
Pray for America to Wake Up
They don’t watch your phone calls either.
(However, they do read your emails and listen to your phone calls.)
: Because there are no allegations, and I am very confident — knowing the NSA and how they operate — that purposefully somebody is out there trying to abuse this program or listen in on people’s e-mail — or... “
Read that a couple times until you get it folks.
Didn't he or his editor catch that when they proofed it? I'm assuming they proofed it.
Nice attempt to weasel-word the issue, 0bama. "Listen" to email??? Lying POS.
Similar to Bill Clinton saying he and Paula Jones “weren’t alone in that hotel.”
This just in..”Large bridge over East River for sale..cheap...toll booths included. Make offer!”
Technology cannot outpace the law - I own a gun; the law state I cannot legally murder another person; when I upgrade to a phaser the law still applies. And had the program been written to comply with the law in the first place the information would not have been gathered and could not have accidently been abused. To my way of thinking the gathering of all metadata constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure.
Never palpitates telegrams, never listens to email, never gazes at your telephone call — not a single time.
This POS has lied to everyone he has encountered since he was about 10 years old.
He entered college with forged papers & claimed Foreign Aid.
He got grades in classes he didn’t attend.
He used the improper actions of getting SEALED divorce papers to get his opponent in the Illinois Senate elections to drop out, so he didn’t really ‘run’ against anybody.
He voted ‘present’ in a majority of the votes he made in the Illinois Legislature.
He entered the Congress from Illinois & continued to vote ‘present’.
He ran for President without a spit of expertise or experience for the job. He relied on voter fraud, propagated by his own organization ACORN and the media who would turn a blind eye to his obvious contradictions.
He spent 2 1/2 years campaigning for the Oval Office & lying over & over again to the US voters.
He has openly supported Muslim/Islam issues against the American citizens & their country.
He has run the country with Executive Orders rather than actually recognizing the importance & usage of the 3 branches of our government.
He has openly defied the Supreme Court & Congress.
How can anyone in this country believe a single word he says?
He has been lying his entire life.
51% of voters believed him. And when the Gay Boy is gone, we are still stuck with the 51%.
They speek very quietly.
Issue #1 ;It is the safeguards and checks put in by the Executive branch that concern the U.S. citizens.
Citizen concerns depend on 'trust', and you have proven to be a liar , and untrustworthy!
Issue #2: The Federal Court which you reference has already determined that those NSA actions were "UNCONSTITUTIONAL ".
Issue #3 : Congressional oversight by Nancy Pelosi - You have to be kidding me !!
Summary : Previous instances of Executive branch 'over-reach',combined with Executive branch safeguards , added to Federal court "UNCONSTITUTIONALITY",
and then congressional oversight ( as if there ever was such a thing ), and you wonder why people could be concerned ?
What could go wrong here ?
It doesn’t even require a semantic stretch as far as redefining ‘is’ to note that ‘read’ and ‘listen’ by the statists’ definition only applies to the actions of a human being - not a computer program.
So, all calls and emails are ‘screened’ by a computer, relevant portions are excerpted, and a report is created. Plausible deniability strikes again.
I have yet to hear one media type raise this obvious point.
Bonus comment: try this scenario - say a politician in the president’s party gets murdered; heck, make it a member of the family of a future president. Does anyone doubt that every tidbit in the NSA scrapbook would be combed through - without going through the messy FISA court? Does anyone believe that career bureaucrats wouldn’t instantly fold under pressure from their political bosses to execute such a search?
Remember the term of art early in the Clinton admin: ‘bureaucratic SNAFU’? That’s all the cover they would need. And Peter King would support it. (he’s one of many who shamelessly claim that congressional oversight is the same as public accountability)
Nice weasel words, no allegation.
At least we know Obama got something from his law school and that is how to use Weasel words...
THE FBI DIRECTOR SAID THAT THEY WERE YESTERDAY!