9:02 PM 1/14/2019 - "Trump" - Google News: Trump's AG nominee: Mueller should be allowed to finish work - ABC News | "trump under federal investigation" - Google News: Trump: 'I never worked for Russia. It's just a hoax' – live updates - The Guardian | Politics: Democratic delegation’s trip to Puerto Rico becomes a target for Trump
- Get link
- Other Apps
Saved Stories
"As Attorney General, my allegiance will be to the rule of law, the Constitution, and the American people," Barr said. "That is how it should be. That is how it must be. And, if you confirm me, that is how it will be, and I have not given him any, other than that I would run the Department with professionalism and integrity."
...
"Barr's June memo to top Justice Department officials criticized as "fatally misconceived" the theory of obstruction that Mueller appeared to be pursuing. He said presidents cannot be criminally investigated for actions they are permitted to take under the Constitution, such as firing officials who work for them, just because of a subjective determination that they may have had a corrupt state of mind."
"As Attorney General, my allegiance will be to the rule of law, the Constitution, and the American people," Barr said. "That is how it should be. That is how it must be. And, if you confirm me, that is how it will be, and I have not given him any, other than that I would run the Department with professionalism and integrity."
...
"Barr's June memo to top Justice Department officials criticized as "fatally misconceived" the theory of obstruction that Mueller appeared to be pursuing. He said presidents cannot be criminally investigated for actions they are permitted to take under the Constitution, such as firing officials who work for them, just because of a subjective determination that they may have had a corrupt state of mind."
Saved Stories - None  |
|---|
| "Trump" - Google News: Trump's AG nominee: Mueller should be allowed to finish work - ABC News |
Trump's AG nominee: Mueller should be allowed to finish work ABC News
President Donald Trump's nominee for attorney general will tell senators "it is vitally important" that special counsel Robert Mueller be allowed to complete his ...
|
| "trump under federal investigation" - Google News: Trump: 'I never worked for Russia. It's just a hoax' – live updates - The Guardian |
Trump: 'I never worked for Russia. It's just a hoax' – live updates The Guardian
President denies to reporters he ever worked for Russia and rejects Republican senator Lindsey Graham's proposal to reopen government.
|
| Politics: Democratic delegation’s trip to Puerto Rico becomes a target for Trump |
“What I saw was an island that still needs a lot of help,” said Rep. Mike Levin as Democrats defended a trip that examined the continuing effects of Hurricane Maria.    |
| "trump as danger to National Security" - Google News: Mike Pompeo's long, strange tour through the Mideast - CNN |
Mike Pompeo's long, strange tour through the Mideast CNN
What a long, strange trip it has been. US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, flew from the US to Jordan to Iraq to Egypt to the United Arab Emirates to Qatar to ...
|
| Lawfare - Hard National Security Choices: Today's Headlines and Commentary |
The current partial federal government shutdown is now the longest in modern U.S. history, reportsthe Wall Street Journal.
Over the weekend, President Trump threatened to “devastate” Turkey economically should it attack U.S. Kurdish partners in Syria following U.S. withdrawal and urged Turkey to create a 20-mile safe zone. He also urged the Kurds not to “provoke” Turkey, Russia, Syria or Iran. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu responded that nothing could be achieved by threatening Turkey and that strategic partners should refrain from communicating with each other over social media, saysReuters.
The Daily Beast reports that a U.S. intelligence report states that the Kremlin sanctioned Maria Butina’s campaign to infiltrate the National Rifle Association.
The U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia has said that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Both leaders agreed, according to the statement, on the need for sustain de-escalation in Yemen and adherence to the Sweden agreements regarding the cease-fire.
Attorney general nominee Bill Barr has said in written testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee that Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be allowed to complete his investigation. The statement noted that it is “very important” to communicate the investigations findings to Congress and the public, reports the Washington Post. Barr’s confirmation hearings will take place on Tuesday and Wednesday.
ICYMI: Last Weekend on Lawfare
Matthew Kahn shared a special edition of the Lawfare Podcast in which Benjamin Wittes spoke with Carrie Cordero, Chuck Rosenberg, David Kris, Jack Goldsmith and Susan Hennessey about the New York Times's report that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation of Donald Trump after the president fired FBI Director James Comey in May 2017.
Quinta Jurecic shared a primer by former FBI General Counsel Jim Baker providing an overview of counterintelligence.
David Kris discussed why the details of the Times revelation may have been shocking, but the FBI’s actions described in the report were likely unavoidable.
Jack Goldsmith questioned the legal basis for, and prudence of, treating the president as a national security threat.
Seth Jones explored the history of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Email the Roundup Team noteworthy law and security-related articles to include, and follow us on Twitter and Facebook for additional commentary on these issues. Sign up to receive Lawfare in your inbox. Visit our Events Calendar to learn about upcoming national security events, and check out relevant job openings on our Job Board.
|
| Trump: report FBI investigated him as possible Russian agent is ‘insulting’ | US news |
The FBI launched an investigation into whether Donald Trump had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests – and Trump went to extraordinary lengths to conceal from his own administration the details of his conversations with Russian president Vladimir Putin, according to two bombshell reports.
The New York Times reported on Friday that law enforcement officials were so concerned about Trump’s behavior after he fired James Comey as FBI director that they launched a counterintelligence investigation into whether he was acting as a Russian agent, either intentionally or unwittingly.
According to another report by the Washington Post, Trump has taken unusual steps to conceal the contents of his discussions with Putin. After meeting with the Russian president in Hamburg in 2017, the Post reported, Trump took his interpreter’s notes and instructed him not to disclose what was discussed to other US officials.
On Saturday night, Trump was asked by a Fox News host whether he had ever worked for Russia.
“I think it’s the most insulting thing I’ve ever been asked,” he said.
He did not give a yes or no answer.
As for his conversations with Putin, he said: “I’m not keeping anything under wraps, I couldn’t care less.”
On Sunday, Democrats said the latest revelations raise serious questions about Trump’s relationship with Putin and Russia.
“Why is he so chummy with Vladimir Putin – this man who is a former KGB agent, never been a friend to the United States, invaded our allies, threatens us around the world, and tries his damndest to undermine our elections?” Senator Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said on ABC’s This Week.
“Why is this President Trump’s best buddy? I don’t get it.”
Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, said it was suspicious that Trump has “parroted” the policies of Putin.
“I do think it’s curious that throughout that whole summer when these investigations started, you have Vladimir Putin policies almost being parroted by Donald Trump,” he said on CNN’s State of the Union.
“You had Trump say only nice things about Putin – he never spoke ill about Russia. The Republican campaign doctrines softened on Russia and decreased their willingness to defend Ukraine.”
Warner said the US government still does not know what took place in Trump’s meetings with Putin, including another in Helsinki last summer where Trump appeared to embrace Putin’s claim, rejected by US intelligence, that his country had nothing to do with an interference effort in the 2016 election.
“The American government does not know what was discussed between Trump and Vladimir Putin in that frankly pathetic, embarrassing encounter,” Warner said.
Republicans defended the president, saying the US during his administration has imposed tough sanctions against Russia in response to its interference campaign during the 2016 election and its aggression in Ukraine.
“We’ve been very tough on Russia,” House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “Look at the sanctions that we have taken with this administration. I know this administration and I know this Congress is very tough on Russia and we will continue to be so. But I want this president to be able to build a relationship, even on a person level, with all the world leaders.”
Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican senator and chair of the homeland security committee, said he had only heard “innuendo” about Trump’s interactions with Russia, not any evidence of improprieties. He said there were legitimate reasons to want to guard the president’s conversations with Putin.
“This is not a traditional president,” he told CNN. “He has unorthodox means, but he is president of the United States. It is pretty much up to him in terms of who he wants to read into his conversations with world leaders. He was burned by leaks in other areas and he was pretty frustrated.”
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close ally of the president, was more forceful, telling Fox News Sunday: “I am going to ask the FBI director: ‘Was there a counterintelligence investigation opened up regarding the president as being a potential agent of the Russians?’ I find it astonishing.
“If this really did happen, Congress needs to know about it. How could the FBI do that? What kinds of checks and balances are there?”
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did not answer specific questions about whether he was aware of the FBI counterintelligence work when he directed the CIA.
“The notion that President Trump is a threat to American national security is absolutely ludicrous,” he told CBS.
|
| Indicting and Prosecuting a Sitting President - Lawfare |
Indicting and Prosecuting a Sitting President Lawfare
Hard cases make bad law, and Americans should be very wary of contorting constitutional rules to ensnare a uniquely corrupt official.
|
| Palmer Report: America, we have a problem |
During the past week, several bombshell reports have come out in the New York Times and Washington Post about “President” Donald Trump and his interactions and potentially work for Russia. Palmer Report has provided extensive analysis of these developments. Perhaps the term for the important and vital work that the press does in this nation every day, despite being attacked as the “enemy of the people,” is “Faker News.” They are revealing the faker in the White House with each and every article they publish.
What is equally disturbing in the whole Trump acting in concert with Russia story line is how the feckless Republicans in Congress have been in coming to Trump’s defense. Senator Lindsey “Kompromat by the kilogram” Graham’s first reaction to the news that the FBI had started an investigation into possible relationships between Trump and Russia was to attack the messenger, the FBI, stating: “If this really did happen, Congress needs to know about it. How could the FBI do that? What kinds of checks and balances are there?”
Graham also insisted that Congress would not subpoena the interpreter to testify, claiming such action would chill future presidential meetings with foreign nations. However, missing in that analysis is that this “president” is being investigated for committing crimes against the United States, and such meetings of illegality should not be conducted – and if they are, they should see the light of day.
Senator Ted Cruz, not to be outdone, responded to the reports of the FBI’s serious investigation by somehow suggesting Trump was tougher on Russia and Putin than Obama (details apparently still forthcoming, given there is bupkis to support that assertion): “If you compare objectively, President Trump’s policies to Russia compared to President Obama’s policies to Russia — by any measure, President Obama was much easier, was much more gentler on Russia.”
Finally, Representative Jim “Gym” Jordan told 60 Minutes on Sunday night that he has never seen a president attacked more than Trump, ignoring that Congress issued about a hundred subpoenas to President Obama and his administration, and not a single one to Trump in the two years Republicans controlled it. Something is affecting the feckless GOP and it is more than fear of being primaried, or of rebuking Trump. With so many being blind sycophants, one must consider what their exposure is, and from whom they might be exposed.
The post America, we have a problem appeared first on Palmer Report.
|
| "trump under federal investigation" - Google News: Trump: 'I never worked for Russia. It's just a hoax' – live updates - The Guardian |
Trump: 'I never worked for Russia. It's just a hoax' – live updates The Guardian
President denies to reporters he ever worked for Russia and rejects Republican senator Lindsey Graham's proposal to reopen government.
|
| Trump: report FBI investigated him as possible Russian agent is 'insulting' | US news |
The FBI launched an investigation into whether Donald Trump had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests – and Trump went to extraordinary lengths to conceal from his own administration the details of his conversations with Russian president Vladimir Putin, according to two bombshell reports.
The New York Times reported on Friday that law enforcement officials were so concerned about Trump’s behavior after he fired James Comey as FBI director that they launched a counterintelligence investigation into whether he was acting as a Russian agent, either intentionally or unwittingly.
According to another report by the Washington Post, Trump has taken unusual steps to conceal the contents of his discussions with Putin. After meeting with the Russian president in Hamburg in 2017, the Post reported, Trump took his interpreter’s notes and instructed him not to disclose what was discussed to other US officials.
On Saturday night, Trump was asked by a Fox News host whether he had ever worked for Russia.
“I think it’s the most insulting thing I’ve ever been asked,” he said.
He did not give a yes or no answer.
As for his conversations with Putin, he said: “I’m not keeping anything under wraps, I couldn’t care less.”
On Sunday, Democrats said the latest revelations raise serious questions about Trump’s relationship with Putin and Russia.
“Why is he so chummy with Vladimir Putin – this man who is a former KGB agent, never been a friend to the United States, invaded our allies, threatens us around the world, and tries his damndest to undermine our elections?” Senator Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said on ABC’s This Week.
“Why is this President Trump’s best buddy? I don’t get it.”
Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, said it was suspicious that Trump has “parroted” the policies of Putin.
“I do think it’s curious that throughout that whole summer when these investigations started, you have Vladimir Putin policies almost being parroted by Donald Trump,” he said on CNN’s State of the Union.
“You had Trump say only nice things about Putin – he never spoke ill about Russia. The Republican campaign doctrines softened on Russia and decreased their willingness to defend Ukraine.”
Warner said the US government still does not know what took place in Trump’s meetings with Putin, including another in Helsinki last summer where Trump appeared to embrace Putin’s claim, rejected by US intelligence, that his country had nothing to do with an interference effort in the 2016 election.
“The American government does not know what was discussed between Trump and Vladimir Putin in that frankly pathetic, embarrassing encounter,” Warner said.
Republicans defended the president, saying the US during his administration has imposed tough sanctions against Russia in response to its interference campaign during the 2016 election and its aggression in Ukraine.
“We’ve been very tough on Russia,” House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “Look at the sanctions that we have taken with this administration. I know this administration and I know this Congress is very tough on Russia and we will continue to be so. But I want this president to be able to build a relationship, even on a person level, with all the world leaders.”
Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican senator and chair of the homeland security committee, said he had only heard “innuendo” about Trump’s interactions with Russia, not any evidence of improprieties. He said there were legitimate reasons to want to guard the president’s conversations with Putin.
“This is not a traditional president,” he told CNN. “He has unorthodox means, but he is president of the United States. It is pretty much up to him in terms of who he wants to read into his conversations with world leaders. He was burned by leaks in other areas and he was pretty frustrated.”
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close ally of the president, was more forceful, telling Fox News Sunday: “I am going to ask the FBI director: ‘Was there a counterintelligence investigation opened up regarding the president as being a potential agent of the Russians?’ I find it astonishing.
“If this really did happen, Congress needs to know about it. How could the FBI do that? What kinds of checks and balances are there?”
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did not answer specific questions about whether he was aware of the FBI counterintelligence work when he directed the CIA.
“The notion that President Trump is a threat to American national security is absolutely ludicrous,” he told CBS.
|
| Do not shed your crocodile tears for your beloved FBI, our dear Not Exactly The Big (Maybe, Medium?) Brother Barak! They are your Baby now. You own them... - M.N. - 8:35 AM 1/14/2019 |
 Do not shed your crocodile tears for your beloved FBI, our dear Not Exactly The Big (Maybe, Medium?) Brother Barak! They are your Baby now. You own them and their "Obama's FBI" History, documented by the ACLU, among your other leftist "allies". I do think that you, Your Para-Socialist Majesty, should be investigated too, and very thoroughly. You and Trump are just the two sides of the same coin, and I believe, that both of you are, indeed, the New Abwehr's babes; both probably unwitting, but the degree and the quality of this "unwittingness" have to be explored, examined, and determined. The FBI's "Dishonesty and Corruption", as Gregg named them aptly, may be "endemic", and chronic but these problems, it seems to me, were exacerbated greatly during the Obama Presidency, and this period, in retrospect, might be viewed as the times of the War on the FBI by the New Abwehr and the other opponents. Michael Novakhov 1.14.19  "Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation." I agree with you, Gregg. Now we have to think what to do about it. And then we will have to do something. - M.N.Gregg Jarrett: An FBI that is corrupt and dishonest -- Latest reports ...
Fox News-2 hours ago
New York Times: FBI opened counterintelligence probe on Trump to investigate ... Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The latest proof comes in a New York Times report that the FBI initiated an investigation in May of 2017 into whether President Donald Trump was serving as a covert Russian agent. The accusation itself was ludicrous on its face. But from a legal standpoint, the FBI's probe constituted an egregious abuse of power. The Bureau had no probable cause, no evidence, and no reasonable suspicions. They investigated Trump because they could. They defied the law, ignored or perverted facts, and debased the integrity of a heretofore-respected law enforcement agency.
|
| "Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation." I agree with you, Gregg. Now we have to think what to do about it. And then we will have to do something. - M.N. |
"Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation." I agree with you, Gregg. Now we have to think what to do about it. And then we will have to do something. - M.N.Gregg Jarrett: An FBI that is corrupt and dishonest -- Latest reports ...
Fox News-2 hours ago
New York Times: FBI opened counterintelligence probe on Trump to investigate ... Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Dishonesty and corruption are endemic at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The latest proof comes in a New York Times report that the FBI initiated an investigation in May of 2017 into whether President Donald Trump was serving as a covert Russian agent. The accusation itself was ludicrous on its face. But from a legal standpoint, the FBI's probe constituted an egregious abuse of power. The Bureau had no probable cause, no evidence, and no reasonable suspicions. They investigated Trump because they could. They defied the law, ignored or perverted facts, and debased the integrity of a heretofore-respected law enforcement agency.
Why did these rogue officials commit such an outrageous act of malfeasance? In a word, vengeance. Already incensed that Trump had defeated their preferred candidate, Hillary Clinton, they grew furious when the president fired Director James Comey on May 9, 2017. In reaction, they sought retribution. What better way to avenge Comey's firing than to launch a counterintelligence investigation of Trump under the false pretense that he committed treasonous acts for the benefit of the Kremlin and at the direction of President Vladimir Putin. Absent credible proof, information could be manipulated to frame Trump while a compliant media would gobble up the leaks and report the damaging charge. The election results could then be undone when the president was driven from office.
To readers of my book, "The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme To Clear Hillary Clinton And Frame Donald Trump,” this comes as no surprise. As detailed therein, Comey and his faithful confederates at the Bureau twisted facts and contorted the law to absolve Clinton of all criminal acts she most certainly committed in the mishandling of her classified emails while Secretary of State.
On the same day Comey exonerated Clinton, his FBI was furtively meeting with the author of the fictitious anti-Trump "dossier" funded by Clinton and the Democrats. Although nothing in the phony document was true or ever verified, the FBI used it as a pretext to commence and advance a malicious investigation into whether Trump "colluded" with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election. They also exploited the "dossier" as the basis to gain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign, concealing the truth from the intelligence court and deceiving the judges.
Over the next ten months, the FBI failed to corroborate anything in the "dossier." Bureau agents uncovered no evidence that Trump had somehow conspired or coordinated with Russia to influence the election. Then came the firing of Comey for just cause. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Comey's direct boss, volunteered to author a memorandum recommending his termination for multiple acts of misconduct and serious violations of Justice Department and FBI rules in the Clinton case. Six former Attorneys General and Deputy Attorneys General from different eras and both political parties endorsed his termination. Comey was canned for reasons that were entirely merited and had nothing whatsoever to do with the Russia probe. The president was constitutionally authorized to take such action, which Comey confirmed in a letter to his colleagues at the FBI.
As I noted in my book, "Almost immediately, demands for impeachment of President Trump were heard in the corridors of Congress. The liberal media were crazed with excitement over the prospect that the president had obstructed justice in trying to block the Russian investigation. In truth and in law, neither scenarios were remotely rational."
Among those who were aggrieved over Comey's firing was his loyal lieutenant, Andrew McCabe, who became Acting FBI Director, as well as bureau lawyer Lisa Page and her paramour, Peter Strzok, a top counterintelligence agent. Page and Strzok were intimately involved in the "collusion" investigation and were virulently opposed to the president both politically and personally, as evidence by their numerous anti-Trump text messages.
In the eight-day period after Comey's termination, top officials at the FBI decided to take action. They would originate a counterintelligence investigation of Trump for being a foreign agent of Russia. Critically, they had no evidence or even reasonable suspicion to support their operation. They simply despised Trump and chose to misuse their positions of power in an illegal act of reprisal.
Once again, the FBI needed a pretext.They coalesced around the idea that Comey's firing might constitute obstruction of justice if it was intended to stop or impede the original Russian probe. In other words, the president must surely be a Russian agent if it can be shown that he wanted to halt the Russian probe. According to the New York Times, Trump made two comments that served the FBI's improper purpose. They are worth examining.
First, Trump wrote a letter to Comey thanking him for telling him three times that he was not under investigation. Comey later confirmed that he had, in fact, told the president he was not under investigation. Obviously, Trump wanted the American public to learn that he was not personally being investigated for Russian "collusion." Yet, Comey refused to disclose this truth. How this letter can, therefore, be viewed plausibly as obstruction of an investigation is baffling. Trump wanted to promote the truth, not conceal it.
Second, Trump gave an interview to NBC News two days after Comey was dismissed in which he made reference to the Russia investigation. How is this evidence of obstruction? It is not. As I explained in my book, "A rigorous reading of what Trump said confirms that his intent was not to interfere with or end the Russia investigation, but to place someone who was neutral and competent in charge." In fact, Trump told NBC that he might want to lengthen the investigation to get to the bottom of any wrongdoing. This is hardly evidence of a corrupt purpose to interfere in an investigation as the law of obstruction demands.
The FBI's illegitimate decision to begin an investigation of Trump as a Russian agent based on an obstruction premise was a false and fabricated excuse. This is shown by the testimony of McCabe who appeared before the Senate Intelligence committee after Comey was fired. He stated, "There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date." Days later, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told Congress, "There never has been...any political interference in any matter under my supervision in the Department of Justice." Six days before he was fired, Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee that no one had told him to stop something for a political reason. "It's not happened in my experience," he said.
Not only did these key people involved in the Russia case affirm that the president never interfered or obstructed, there was no other evidence that Trump was working for the Russians that would have justified the FBI's punitive decision to launch its investigation. Both Comey and Page testified before House investigators that by the time the director was fired and Special Counsel Robert Mueller was appointed there was no hard evidence of "collusion." The investigation had been running for ten months. Comey admitted, "In fact, when I was fired as director, I still didn't know whether there was anything to it." Nevertheless, top officials at the FBI opened their investigation of Trump in May of 2017 without sufficient evidence and in direct violation of FBI and DOJ regulations. They broke the law. And they did it to depose Trump.
The FBI was not alone in its attempt to remove Trump from office. According to another New York Times story, Rosenstein also sought retribution by proposing to secretly record the president in an attempt to gain some damaging information about him. He allegedly suggested that he and others wear hidden devices to record their conversations with Trump and discussed recruiting Cabinet members to remove him under the Constitution's 25th Amendment. Three top FBI officials confirmed various elements of Rosenstein's efforts to mount the equivalent of a palace coup. The Deputy Attorney General has consistently resisted requests by Congress to question him about his actions.
It is now undeniable that critical decisions made by senior FBI leadership were driven by political bias and personal animus, not sustainable facts or credible evidence. These powerful officials could not abide that Donald Trump had emerged, against their wishes, as the duly elected president of the United States. They could not accept that he had unceremoniously shown Comey the door. In an act of rank retaliation, they decided to abuse their positions of power to drive him from office. They invented facts and ignored the law to subvert our system of justice and undermine the democratic process. They compromised essential principles and betrayed the nation's trust. Their conduct was, and is, unconscionable.
When William Barr takes office as our nation's next Attorney General, he must review their actions and present all evidence of wrongdoing to federal prosecutors and, if appropriate, a grand jury. When the people we entrust to enforce the law become the lawbreakers, they must be held accountable. No one is above the law.
Read the whole story
· · · · · ·
|
| Cambridge Analytica’s parent pleads guilty to breaking UK data law |
Cambridge Analytica’s parent company, SCL Elections, has been fined £15,000 in a UK court after pleading guilty to failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the national data protection watchdog, the Guardian reports.
While the fine itself is a small and rather symbolic one, given the disgraced political analytics firm went into administration last year, the implications of the prosecution are more sizeable.
Last year the Information Commissioner’s Office ordered SCL to hand over all the data it holds on U.S. academic, professor David Carroll, within 30 days. After the company failed to do so it was taken to court by the ICO.
Prior to Cambridge Analytica gaining infamy for massively misusing Facebook user data, the company, which was used by the Trump campaign, claimed to have up to 7,000 data points on the entire U.S. electorate — circa 240M people.
So Carroll’s attempt to understand exactly what data the company had on him, and how the information was processed to create a voter profile of it, has much wider relevance.
Under EU law, citizens can file a Subject Access Request (SAR) to obtain personal data held on them. So Carroll, a U.S. citizen, decided to bring a test case by requesting his data even though he is not a UK citizen — having learnt Cambridge Analytica had processed his personal data in the U.K.
He lodged his original SAR in January 2017 after becoming suspicious about the company’s claim to have built profiles of every U.S. voter.
Cambridge Analytica responded to the SAR in March 2017 but only sent partial data. So Carroll complained to the ICO which backed his request — issuing an enforcement notice on SCL Elections in May 2018, days after the (now) scandal-hit company announced it was shutting down.
The company pulled the plug on its business in the wake of the Facebook data misuse scandal, when it emerged SCL had paid an academic with developer access to Facebook’s platform to harvest data on millions of users without proper consents in a bid to create psychological profiles of U.S. voters for election campaign purposes.
The story snowballed into a global scandal for Facebook and triggered a major (and still ongoing) investigation by the ICO into how online data is used for political campaigning.
It also led the ICO to hit Facebook with a £500,000 fine last year (the maximum possible under the relevant UK data protection law). Although the company is appealing.
The SCL prosecution is an important one, cementing the fact that anyone who requests their personal information from a U.K.-based company or organisation is legally entitled to have that request answered, in full, under national data protection law — regardless of whether they’re a British citizen or not.
Commenting in a statement, information commissioner Elizabeth Denham said: “This prosecution, the first against Cambridge Analytica, is a warning that there are consequences for ignoring the law. Wherever you live in the world, if your data is being processed by a UK company, UK data protection laws apply.
“Organisations that handle personal data must respect people’s legal privacy rights. Where that does not happen and companies ignore ICO enforcement notices, we will take action.”
The Daily Beast reports that at today’s hearing, at Hendon magistrates court, the court was told that the administrators of Cambridge Analytica and its related companies had now provided relevant passwords to the ICO. Cambridge Analytica had previously failed to supply these passwords.
This means the regulator should be able to gain access to more of the data it seized when it raided the company’s London offices in March last year. So it’s at least possible Carroll’s SAR might eventually be fulfilled that way, i.e. by the regulatory sifting through the circa 700TB of data it seized.
However Carroll told TechCrunch he’s hoping for a faster route to get to the truth of exactly what the company did with his data, telling us there’s still “a March court event that could yield our end goal: Disclosure”.
The March 18 hearing will address concerns about insolvency and joint administrators, according to Carroll.
“Why would they rather plead guilty to a criminal offense instead of complying with disclosure required by UK DPA ‘98. What are they hiding? Why has it come to this?” he added.
“Testing the Subject Access Request in this way is an important exercise. Do regulators and companies really know how to fully execute a Subject Access Request? How about when it escalates to a matter of international importance?”
|
| Cambridge Analytica’s parent pleads guilty to breaking UK data law - TechCrunch |
Cambridge Analytica’s parent pleads guilty to breaking UK data law TechCrunch
Cambridge Analytica's parent company, SCL Elections, has been fined £15,000 in a UK court after pleading guilty to failing to comply with an enforcement notice ...
|
| Britain's ICO fines Cambridge Analytica for failing to comply with order - Nasdaq |
Britain's ICO fines Cambridge Analytica for failing to comply with order Nasdaq
Jan 9- Cambridge Analytica has been fined 15000 pounds for failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued in May, Britain's Information.
|
| Britain's ICO fines Cambridge Analytica for failing to comply with order - KFGO News |
Britain's ICO fines Cambridge Analytica for failing to comply with order KFGO News
(Reuters) - Cambridge Analytica has been fined 15000 pounds ($19120) for failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued in May, Britain's Information ...
 |
| Cambridge Analytica parent firm fined after ignoring data enforcement notice - Runcorn and Widnes World |
Cambridge Analytica parent firm fined after ignoring data enforcement notice Runcorn and Widnes World
SCL Elections Ltd admitted it failed to comply with a legal notice from the Information Commissioner's Office.
 |
| Cambridge Analytica owners fined $27,000 for refusing US data request - AppleInsider |
Cambridge Analytica owners fined $27,000 for refusing US data request AppleInsider
The firm best known for harvesting political data ignored a legal order to provide personal information when asked by a US academic. This contravenes UK data ...
|
| Cambridge Analytica Fined For Refusing To Give American Professor His Data 01/10/2019 - MediaPost Communications |
Cambridge Analytica Fined For Refusing To Give American Professor His Data 01/10/2019 MediaPost Communications
The parent company of Cambridge Analytica, President Trump's consultancy during the 2016 election, admitted Wednesday it violated a UK privacy law by ...
 |
| Facebook Users' Call For Cambridge Analytica Docs Granted - Law360 |
Facebook Users' Call For Cambridge Analytica Docs Granted Law360
Law360 (January 9, 2019, 8:24 PM EST) -- Under a New York bankruptcy judge's order, a group of Facebook users claiming Cambridge Analytica LLC misused ...
|
| Study claims Facebook tracks you even if you don't have an account or logged off - Tech News - The Star Online |
Study claims Facebook tracks you even if you don't have an account or logged off - Tech News The Star Online
Privacy International, a Britain-based organisation that promotes and defends the right to privacy worldwide, released a study which claims that Facebook ...
|
| Cambridge Analytica pleads guilty, hands over passwords - Fast Company |
 |
| How Facebook Could Be Affected by a Billion-Dollar Lawsuit - Hollywood Reporter |
How Facebook Could Be Affected by a Billion-Dollar Lawsuit Hollywood Reporter
What if law enforcement was outsourced to class action attorneys? Don't imagine. It's happening as the Cambridge Analytica scandal becomes Mark ...
|
| Cambridge Analytica Fined Over Facebook Scandal, Again 01/10/2019 - MediaPost Communications |
Cambridge Analytica Fined Over Facebook Scandal, Again 01/10/2019 MediaPost Communications
Cambridge Analytica has pleaded guilty to a charge of not assisting the ICO in its investigation into the Facebook scandal and has been fined GBP15,000 ...
|
| Trump & Brexit Votes Demonstrate Deepening Divides - National Review |
Trump & Brexit Votes Demonstrate Deepening Divides National Review
We have now had more than two clear years since the votes for Brexit and Trump. And although most Brexit voters dislike the tendency to link the events, the two ...
 |
| Note the timing: right before Putin’s the end of the year press conference, to give him something to… | ||
| Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:46:59 +0100
Note the timing: right before Putin’s the end of the year press conference, to give him something to brag about. This proves one more time that Trump IS NOT a Putin’s puppet! Now we got all sorted out!
|
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment