Mediaboss Marketing

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The secretive court also notes a change for the better under President Trumps team.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authorizes two courts to provide judicial review for U.S. intelligence agencies when their activities require them to monitor people on U.S. soil. One is FISC, and the other is the court that hears appeals from FISC decisions, the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR). The benches of FISC are comprised of federal judges from regular federal trial courts throughout the nation, and three appellate judges from around the nation comprise the bench of FISCR.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) recently declassified an April 26, 2017, ruling from FISC, detailing violations of Fourth Amendment rights during the final year of the Obama administration.

The problems dealt specifically with Section 702 of FISA. This provision of federal law, found at 50 U.S.C. 1881a, contains minimization procedures for U.S. citizens whose information is scooped up by the intelligence community while those agencies are conducting FISA surveillance. These safeguards minimize the burden on civil rights caused by the intrusion of the federal government into citizens lives.

The Fourth Amendment commands:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Writing the 99-page opinion for FISC, Judge Rosemary Collyer castigated the Obama administration for failing to follow the Section 702 procedures designed to ensure that the government does not violate Americans civil rights as it is performing work that is vitally important to national security. Collyer declared that the previous administrations cavalier violations of Section 702s requirements created a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.

Collyer sharply criticized the National Security Agencys inspector general and the NSAs Office of Compliance for Operations for their institutional lack of candor, signaling that in addition to ignoring legal constraints, the Obama administration was not being honest with the court about its violations of federal law.

Under President Trump, the NSA decided on March 30 that it would stop certain collection activities that FISC was then reviewing. Collyer noted this change for the better in her opinion, and adding that the court granted approval of the amended certifications and accompanying targeting and minimization procedures.

The court also criticized the FBI, faulting the domestic agency with distributing raw FISA information to a wide array of individuals associated with the bureau, including private contractors who did not need access to the information.Collyer noted that this unwarranted practice had also ceased under the Trump administration, with the FBI curtailing its dissemination of raw intelligence on April 18.

Parts of the opinion were redacted to safeguard other relevant facts.

Ken Klukowski is senior legal editor for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @kenklukowski.

See the article here:
Court Criticizes Obama Admin for Illegal Spying on US Citizens - Breitbart News

Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has a tough task when he visits the White House this week: Convince President Donald Trump to advance trade ties that blossomed under the Obama administration.

To do so, Phuc plans to highlight all the U.S. jobs his nation supports through imports of American goods like airplanes, engine turbines and maize. Vietnam respects Trumps exit from a Pacific trade pact agreed to under Barack Obama, and the two sides are working on new mechanisms to boost bilateral trade, Phuc said in an interviewwith Bloomberg Televisions Haslinda Amin.

Vietnamese imports from the United States have increased significantly, Phuc said during the May 27 meeting at his office in Hanoi. We will sign billions of dollars worth of deals with American firms and import lots of meaningful high-value products from the United States that will help create American jobs."

Vietnamese Prime Minster Nguyen Xuan Phuc discusses the Vietnamese economy. He speaks with Bloombergs Haslinda Amin.

Source: Bloomberg)

Vietnamwants its former enemy more engaged in the region to balance relations with China -- its neighbor, main trading partner and top geopolitical threat. Phuc is betting that promises of American jobs -- Trumps primary campaign pledge -- will persuade him to focus more on the strategic benefits of closer trade and security ties.

Relations between the U.S. and Vietnam have strengthened in the four decades since a war that killed almost 60,000 American servicemen and probably more than 1 million Vietnamese. Trade between the nations reached $47 billion last year from almost nothing in 1994, when former President Bill Clinton lifted a trade embargo.

In recent years the U.S. and Vietnam have found common ground over worries about China, which has used its increased military muscle to assert control over disputed reefs in the South China Sea. Vietnam fought a border war with China in 1979 and remains suspicious of its neighbor, despite its similar Communist political system and growing trade ties.

The role of the U.S. in the region is important -- that is indisputable, said Tran Viet Thai, a deputy director general at the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam in Hanoi, where the countrys diplomats are trained. We want to be more than friends. We want to be partners with the U.S.

Hanois leaders want to reduce Vietnams economic dependence on China while further integrating with global markets, including the U.S. China accounted for 21 percent of Vietnams total international commerce in 2016, nearly double from a decade earlier, while the U.S. accounted for about 14 percent.

The Obama administration made the Trans-Pacific Partnership a priority in part to counter Chinas economic leverage in Asia. He also expanded security ties: The U.S. lifted a ban on lethal arms sales, started joint naval drills and sent two warships to the Cam Ranh Bay naval base for the first time in decades.

Trump signaled this month that hell continue to press China on its territorial claims. His administration handed over six Coast Guard patrol boats to Vietnam and drew a rebuke from Beijing for conducting a so-called freedom of navigation operation near a China-claimed reef in disputed waters.

Those moves will help ease concerns within Vietnam that Trump will seek to placate China in the South China Sea for cooperation in pressuring North Korea over its nuclear program, according to Alexander Vuving, a Vietnam political analyst at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Hawaii.

The Trump administration is very interested in advancing the relationship with Vietnam because it sees the strategic role Vietnam places in Asia, he said.

In the interview, Phuc deflected a question on whether Vietnam seeks a stronger U.S. presence in the South China Sea. The Philippines, a country that had previously aligned with Vietnam in opposing Chinas claims, has recently sought direct talks with China over disputed territory in the waters.

We would need to discuss together with the stakeholders to make sure that all parties will benefit from whatever action that we decide to take to ensure peace in this area, Phuc said of the South China Sea.

Phuc was more expressive on the need to form a consensus with the U.S. on trade. Vietnam had stood to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of the TPP until Trump pulled out, and suddenly found itself on a list of 16 nations that he called cheaters" for contributing to the bulk of Americas trade deficit.

Phuc, who will be the first Southeast Asian leader to visit Trumps White House, pushed back against that categorization. He said that Vietnam doesnt artificially lower the prices of catfish and shrimp -- important commodities in southern U.S. states that formed part of Trumps base.

We dont cheat. Theres no cheating of any kind of products that we export to the United States, Phuc said. And we have all the proof to prove it.

Phuc sought to emphasize the positive aspects of trade, and touted the merits of globalization and huge opportunities for the two sides to cooperate in sectors like energy, infrastructure, finance and the digital economy. He declined to say directly if Vietnam planned to enter bilateral trade talks with the U.S., even as he expressed optimism over Trumps commitment to economic liberalization.

I hope that the U.S. will continue to step up its cooperation agendas, especially in trade, thus contributing to prosperity in the region and the world, he said. There remains enormous untapped potential for economic cooperation.

Original post:
Vietnam's PM Wants to Convince Trump to Keep Obama-Era Trade Ties - Bloomberg

(CNN)Today, I admire Donald Trump. His remarks made in the aftermath of the terror attack in Manchester captured the mood in Britain perfectly. Terrorists are not soldiers, not even murderers -- they are "losers." And this tragic event validates Trump's initiative of uniting the world against terrorism. Suddenly, he feels like a serious international leader.

Trump to Meet the Pope at Vatican 06:40

That's why Trump's appearance at the Western Wall in Jerusalem was important too -- and quite emotional. Trump has made a commitment to Israel that clears up any doubt left by Obama. Critics will sniff that this shows his own lack of imagination, or the influence of neoconservatives.

But what is the alternative? To isolate the only properly functioning democracy in the region -- a friend to the West struggling to survive against the odds?

Moreover, Israel's experience and intelligence is critical to the defeat of ihadist terrorism. Which brings us to the final strand of Trump's Middle East tour.

Trump on ISIS: Obliterate this evil ideology 01:07

The greatest fear I had of Trump's foreign policy was that he might bleed popular American dislike of Islam into an all-out conflict with it. But, as he observed in his speech, the greatest victims of Muslim violence are Muslims -- so there are plenty of Muslims for America to ally with.

Trump's warmest reception has been among Muslims and Jews. He may find the Christians are a harder audience. When he visits Pope Francis on Wednesday, he meets a seasoned diplomat with his own sense of strategic priorities: tackle global warming, compel Europeans to take more refugees, defend Christian's overseas.

Yet any tensions between Francis and Trump will surely be overshadowed by the terror attack in Manchester. Israelis and Saudis speak bluntly about the threat posed to civilization by radical jihadists; Europeans retreat behind platitudes. It's good for all three to be rallied by a president who wants to emphasize what everyone has in common, which is a vulnerability to terror.

Read more:
On tour abroad, Trump does what Obama should have

Tabitha Garcia talks to ESSENCE about her political 5-year-old and the adorable video that made her internet famous.

Five-year-old Taylor James has always been curious. Recently, for example, she was obsessed with why elves make toys with their hands if they have magic.

RELATED: Subscribe to ourdaily newsletterfor the latest in hair, beauty, style and celebrity news.

But her affinity for asking questions made her famous this week after a video of her asking her mother about the election went viral. This all started because she wanted to know, 'where did Barack Obama go?' And 'where is the presidents house.' She is still mad, her motherTabitha Garcia, 30, captioned the video.

RELATED: These Celeb Moms & Their Kids Are Instagram's Most Stylish

RELATED: 5 Adorable Social Stars Show Us The Coolest Kid 'Dos

I did not prompt her with any of this, Garcia tells ESSENCE, explaining that the conversation started after they drove by a house that had Taylor wondering if it was where the commander-in-chief lives. My daughter asks me thousands of questions ALL of the time.

Taylors interest in the political process began when her pre-school set up a mock election between a pizza and a hamburger to teach the kids about voting. The school briefly touched on the two presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton but her interest was further piqued because Garcia watches CNN every day.

RELATED: 5 Ways To Empower Kids On Their Hair Care Journey

So after she learned about the two presidential candidates at school she began to ask questions about who they really were at home, the Houston-based teacher explained of her daughter.

And like many of us, Taylors emotions were strongly attached the the outcome of the election. She even became upset once she realized Clinton lost.

But Garcia has tried to stay away from the topic of politics when possible: We only talk about it because she brings it up, she said. We discussed Barack Obama a long time ago because I have a bobble-head Barack Obama at home and she wanted to know why I had a toy in my room. So I had to tell her who he was.

The animated pre-schooler, who apparently gets herenergy from her mama, has other things to keep her interested;she is currently keen on science, reading and spelling.

As for fame? It is better Taylor doesnt know about her new-found viral popularity.

I tried to tell her that a lot of people saw her video, but she cried because she thought I was saying people were laughing at her.

She added: I told her that people liked the video and thought she was smart. Then she stopped crying. After that I just let it go.

We doubt this is the last time we get to see Taylor flex her smarts!

See the article here:
Mother Of 'Marack Obama' Viral Sensation: 'My Daughter Asks Me Thousands Of Questions ALL Of The Time' - Essence.com

Last week, former CIA Director John Brennan testified before the House Intelligence Committee that the United States knew about potential Russian interference in the presidential election at least as early as last year. While well-publicized investigations are now ongoing about potential contacts the Trump campaign had with Russia, theres a critical question being ignored: Why didnt the Obama administration take steps to stop Russian interference in an American election?

As former chair of the National Security Agency and Cybersecurity Subcommittee of the House Intelligence Committee, I engaged in a bipartisan effort with Congressman Jim Himes (D-Conn.) to get the Obama administration to define what offensive and defensive actions were in the context of cyber warfare. Unlike conventional warfare, theres no front in a cyber war, so learning whether youre on offense or defense in a given situation is critical. For example, if there is a known threat, does NSA take steps to merely defend against the threat or actively seek to counteract that threat? Despite our efforts to discuss the issue with officials and amend bills on the floor to force the issue, the Obama administration continued to stonewall.

Had the Obama administration decided to clarify when to actively fight a threat and when to defend against one, we could have mitigated the threat of Russian interference in our election process. If the Obama administration had used the tools at its disposal, its entirely possible we wouldnt need the current investigations. They could have cut the Russians off at the pass.

A few weeks ago, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a mountain of documents related to the targeting and minimization procedures used by the NSA. Targeting is how we determine which potential foreign intelligence sources we are monitoring. Minimization is how we restrict the amount of information disclosed from the raw intelligence.

The documents revealed something very disturbing about the so-called Section 702 collection, which is one of the ways the NSA collects internet transactions. I was a big supporter of Section 702 collection while in Congress, but as with all legislation its only as good as the implementation. I was shocked to learn about the Obama administrations failure to follow Section 702s targeting and minimization procedures. Not surprisingly, the FISA court reprimanded the government about its lack of candor and the serious Fourth Amendment issue[s] presented by these Obama administration violations.

Beginning in 2011, the Obama administration cast a wider net than allowed by law. Instead of limiting searches to foreign agents who were targets of investigations, the administration searched for communications about those peoplemeaning Americans who only mentioned a foreign agent would have their communications accessed and analyzed without any warrant or probable cause. This is an obvious violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Further, these kinds of searches can result in the disclosure of the identities of U.S. citizens collected as part of the raw intelligence. The minimization procedures require the masking of the names of U.S. individuals who are incidental to a foreign communication. But we know from Susan Rice and others that the Obama administration repeatedly unmasked the identities of citizens found in raw intelligence.

Something I would have never imagined would occur in America resulted from this illegal use of intelligence: surveillance tools were likely used on our fellow citizens who were not suspected of a crime. While using methods designed to keep us safe, the Obama administration was trampling on the law and our constitutional rights. While refusing to do anything about the Russian threat they knew was coming, the Obama administration targeted the Trump campaign for surveillance.

We can all hope that no future administration, regardless of party, weaponizes intelligence-gathering against its own citizens for political purposes under the guise of public safety. And we can hope that in this new war where the battle is in binary code instead of bullets and bombs that no administration again violates the constitutional rights of Americans.

Lynn Westmoreland served in the U.S. House as a Georgia Republican from 2005-17.He headed the House subcommittee on the National Security Agency and Cybersecurity.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

More:
How did Obama's massive surveillance state fail to defend Americans against Russia? - The Hill (blog)