Obama has all my phone data!

big-brother-is-watching-you4June 6, 2013

For years I’ve had a Verizon phone. Now it turns out President Obama’s regime grabbed all my phone data without a warrant, and without notifying me.

Am I one of those conservatives and libertarians the IRS has been hassling? Or because I’m another journalist it wants to hassle, as it has AP? No. Big Brother Barack just took everybody’s data:

“Barack Obama’s administration is collecting the telephone records of tens of millions of American customers of Verizon Communications, under a top secret court order.

“The order — signed by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court — compels Verizon to give the National Security Agency details of all telephone calls made by its customers within the US and from foreign locations into the US for three months from January 19 to April 25.”

So they have records of everybody I called in my work as a journalist. I write mostly about California. But I also write about the Obama regime and its attacks on our liberties, like this one.

The Fourth Amendment is clear:

“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.”

No warrant was issued by Big Brother Barack. I have committed no crime. I’m not even suspected of committing a crime (unless relentlessly criticizing government now is a crime in Americka). Yet the Obama regime perpetrated an “unreasonable” search and seizure of my “papers and effects,” without any “probable cause” whatsoever, and certainly without a “Warrant” issued by a judge.

To be fair, if that’s possible, this whole illegal regime was set up by Republican President George W. Bush when he panicked after 9/11 and shredded the entire Bill of Rights with the unconstitutional USA PATRIOT Act, better called the USA TRAITORS’ Act because it betrays America’s sacred heritage of liberty; and with the Military Commissions Act.

When it came out, I read Obama’s 2006 book, “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.” A former professor of constitutional law, he wrote about restoring the civil liberties lost in the Bush years.

In office, he has done the opposite, taking the violations of liberty up a notch.


Write a comment
  1. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 6 June, 2013, 14:26

    Don’t worry because Senator Feinswine assures us that it was necessary and routine and she says most Amerikans want these policies to keep the Homeland safe. Seig Heil to Homeland Security. Everyone knows that innocent people have nothing to hide and therefore no need for 4th Amendment protection. Don’t be concerned about your terrorist government. Instead, you should obsess over the Al Qaeda boogieman. Quick kids, look under the bed and in the closet, Al Qaeda could be hiding there!

    Now be good little drones and stop worrying about you’re silly constitutional rights. Leave that sort of stuff to your masters in government. After all, they know what’s best for you, just like mommy.

    Reply this comment
  2. stolson
    stolson 6 June, 2013, 15:35

    Protect us in USA from terrorists? Why then collect USA citizens data? How about securing the borders to protect us from al Qaeda and illegals with nice big drug cartel machine guns? This police state and swat teams and drones and police going kill crazy plus homeland insecurity claiming they can detain you without warrants is NUTS.
    It makes a banana republic look good. How long has this been planned and who is the shadow group behind this and WHY?
    Don’t expect any help from congress or senate–they are bribed politicians.

    Reply this comment
  3. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 6 June, 2013, 19:39

    Drones are aloft!

    Reply this comment
  4. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 6 June, 2013, 20:08

    Alternatively, John, since your cell phone uses public airways to transmit and receive calls, and Verizon happens to have a lease from the government to use those public airways for their own profit, you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

    Even then, unless the government attempts to use the information you claim was taken in violation of the 4th Amendment against you in a criminal matter putting your personal liberty in jeopardy, you have no legal standing to challenge such a data collection.

    Reply this comment
  5. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 6 June, 2013, 20:23

    “….since your cell phone uses public airways to transmit and receive calls….”

    That’s just plain idiocy.

    I presume that also applies to your land line, as they too are licensed by the PUC?

    Reply this comment
  6. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 6 June, 2013, 20:35

    Doomers it is over for you……

    Reply this comment
  7. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 6 June, 2013, 22:49

    As our resident Fascist you never cease to amaze me Skippy. A few corrections are in order though. The airwaves don’t belong to the “public”, they belong to the Federal government. There is no legitimate reason for this, what with the nearly endless bandwidth in digital spectra and new technology these days. The entire broadcast spectrum could be auctioned off for private ownership without any legitimate fear of a natural monopoly resulting. And even if a private monopoly were to result, that is still better than this thuggish and totalitarian government monopoly that you Regressives seem to desire so ardently.

    But your claim of “public” ownership still doesn’t justify the Orwellian spying and snooping that you ProgBots seem addicted to. The 4th Amendment wasn’t repealed by the Federal Communications Act, although it did take a big junk out of the 1st Amendment, much to your demented satisfaction, I’m sure. Your claim that government regulation of the airwaves negates any expectation of privacy by users is without legal foundation and ridiculous on it’s face. Please quote me a law professor, any law professor, who asserts such nonsense, if you can.

    Furthermore, your claim that one would have to be arrested, prosecuted or incarcerated pursuant to this outrage before having a legitimate civil rights claim is just plain stupid. As an example, if the police break down your door in the middle of the night and ransack your home just as a training exercise and without any probable cause or warrant, your “logic” would suggest that unless they arrest and prosecute you, no 4th amendment violation occurred. That’s not just crazy, it’s CRAZY STUPID.


    Reply this comment
  8. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 7 June, 2013, 08:59

    Your argument is misguided, Dyspeptic, as is John Seiler’s in this particular matter. It’s clear that the NSA hasn’t searched anyone’s telephone for personal information under the FISA guidelines being used. What it is clearly doing is tracking the relationships of communication links, at least some portion of which are being used by the very people who would commit violent acts against our nation and its citizens here and abroad.

    The 4th Amendment protects you from UNREASONABLE search and seizure of your person, home, and personal effects. That arguably would not include records that you do not yourself own or have any property interest in, such as those held by your cell phone company. Since you do not own, possess, or control your cell phone records, it would be difficult to see how you possess standing over their seizure pursuant to a lawfully issued warrant for their contents by a federal court.

    If the police break down your door in the middle of the night and violate your 4th amendment rights, your available relief is two-fold: Any evidence they discover and attempt to use against you in a criminal matter can be suppressed by the court because of the violation. You may be able to make a 1983 Civil Rights claim if you can demonstrate that the police actions were clearly unsupported by law, but absent proof of perjury by the public officers seeking the warrant from the court, that would be a very long shot claim.

    Your scenario about the police breaking down your door “just for practice” doesn’t fit within the realm of reality, and clearly does not apply to the NSA activities in question.

    Reply this comment
  9. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 7 June, 2013, 09:02

    Sorry, jimmy, but the airwaves are clearly public property. As Dyspeptic notes above, they are “owned” by the federal government, but that ownership is in trust on behalf of their real owners, we American people.

    Reply this comment
  10. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 7 June, 2013, 11:05

    Skipping dog: I was talking about my Verizon land line. My cell is with Tmobile.

    As to the government using the information against me only on a “criminal matter,” according to the NDAA, which Obama signed last Dec. 31, 2012, I can be “disappeared” at his order alone, never to be heard from again — no charges, no trial, nothing.

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  11. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 7 June, 2013, 15:22

    The NDAA doesn’t give the military the authority to detain you or prosecute you before a military commission unless you are actively engaging in terrorist acts against the U.S. or are supporting terrorist groups.

    Even the right wing Heritage Organization doesn’t make such a claim.


    Reply this comment
  12. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 9 June, 2013, 18:49

    It warms the cockles knowing Big Sis is watching depressed malcontents….andl in Adelanto, Boron and Randsburg…and and…Poodle,Carp and Bunker Queen’s Cajon Pass truck stop!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Electric Car Cliche Watch!

Anthony Pignataro: Just for fun, see how many cliches, euphemisms, idioms and just plain hackneyed catch-phrases you can find in

Meg: Stop lying about Jerry and taxes

John Seiler: Meg Whitman continues running commercials based on disproved assertions about Jerry Brown and taxes. It’s especially grating that