There were many loud howls and cries regarding the PATRIOT Act and various provisions therein that allowed law enforcement to do all sorts of “give us this info and keep quiet about it, trust us, we’re the government” kinds of things. Critics worried about abuse, about over-use of such powers, and about accountability. Supporters insisted that, no, such powers would only be used sparingly, for very good reasons, and under strict internal controls that would ensure there would never, ever be abuse. And, as
a sop, they promised that at least the number of time such new powers were used would be rigorously reported to Congress.
Whether you believe the government is a bunch of crypto-fascists or bumbling idiots (or both), you won’t be surprised by the latest news.
The FBI underreported how often it used the USA Patriot Act to force businesses to turn over customer information in suspected terrorism cases, according to a Justice Department audit.
One government official familiar with the report said shoddy bookkeeping and records management led to the problems. The FBI agents appeared to be overwhelmed by the volume of demands for information over a two-year period, the official said. “They lost track,” said the official who like others interviewed late Thursday spoke on condition of anonymity because the report was not being released until Friday.
The FBI in 2005 reported to Congress that its agents had delivered a total of 9,254 national security letters seeking e-mail, telephone or financial information on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents over the previous two years. Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine’s report says the number of letters was underreported by 20 percent, according to the officials.
Remember, these are basically demands for information — any information — that the FBI claimed were critical to important terrorist investigations. Bank records. Sales records. Phone records. Data records. Library records. Absolutely must-have info — as characterized by PATRIOT supporters — of a wideranging nature that, one would think, would therefore be tracked with the greatest of care. And, of course, these investigations were so important, the data collected so critical to
fighting the terrorists, that recipients of these national security letters are forbidden by law to even tell anyone — their clients, their management, their lawyers — that they received them. Which is why critics managed to force the FBI to at least report on the numbers being issued, since there was no other way to know how the power was being used. Simple book-keeping, inadequate to protecting the populace, but at least it’s something.
Or, a vague approximation of something, since the FBI seems to have lost track of — or decided not to report on — 20% of the inquiries. Feel safer now?
I mean, this isn’t trivial bean-counting. If the FBI cannot be trusted to keep track of these requests, how can they be trusted to keep track of the data they’re requesting? Or, for that matter, the criminals and terrorists that they’re supposed to be in pursuit of in the first place? I mean, if the FBI lost track of 20% of the names of people they wanted to arrest, wouldn’t that be a cause for concern?
Fine’s audit also says the FBI failed to send follow-up subpoenas to telecommunications companies that were told to expect them, the officials said. Those cases involved so-called exigent letters to alert the companies that subpoenas would be issued shortly to gather more information, the officials said. But in many examples, the subpoenas were never sent, the officials said.
“We need the info right now — we’ll follow up with the paperwork in a bit, we promise …”
And, of course, with the possibility of getting all sorts of private, personal, confidential data, only the threat of bloody terrorism and a demonstrable need to obtain such info could warrant use of such power. National security letters and the power to issue them was granted only because this data was urgently needed to fight terrorists, outweighing conventional processes such as court orders and the like. So surely there was plenty of oversight, and these letters weren’t issued except in the most dire and
appropriately vetted situations, right?
The 126-page report by inspector general Glenn Fine said in some cases agents had failed to get the proper authorisation to obtain personal data. In others they sought the data in non-emergency situations. “We believe the improper or illegal uses we found involve serious misuses of national security letter authorities,” it concluded.
And, not surprisingly …
Fine conducted the audit as required by Congress and over the objections of the Bush administration.
Because, of course, why should we be worried that the profound, invasive, far-reaching powers of the PATRIOT Act are being abused or misused? Trust us — we’re the government.
UPDATE: AP story, with more details. The actual report.