You Want To Give The FBI The Right To Kill You AND Crack Your iPhone?

When I was growing up, the FBI was personified by Efrem Zimbalist Jr., and the Highway Patrol by Broderick Crawford.

The G Men and the State Troopers were there to keep us safe from bank robbers and people who would commit carnage on our nation’s highways.

And no little boy in the 50s and 60s would ever think anything different.

We trusted them, and we believed they were the good guys because, for the most part, they were.

They have lost that luster in many cases, and much of what has happened is reflected in the FBI’s ongoing attempt to force Apple to write an entirely new piece of software to hack one of its iPhones, ostensibly to “help” them in the investigation of a now dead terrorist.

It all gets down to who you trust, and frankly, it is an interesting juxtaposition to see Donald Trump complaining about Apple’s actions in this case when his candidacy has been boosted and supported by many of the people who no longer trust the Federal Government to do the right thing. And, as smart as I believe Trump is, he’s being badly misinformed in this case.

Back when I was growing up, it took some research if you wanted to commit a federal crime. There were maybe a few thousand violations of the law which would possibly qualify for the FBI’s attention. Robbing a federally insured bank was a mainstay. So was kidnapping across state lines.

Today, because some clown in Congress is always crying, “There ought to be a law!” there are nearly 5,000 acts for which the FBI can investigate and arrest you. If you mistakenly import wood from a country on Barack Obama’s list, as did the Gibson Guitar Company, you can be a target as they were.

So, before we get all high and mighty about Apple’s “duty” to assist the FBI, let’s put this question in a different form.

Sure, we want to make the world safe from terrorism.

But what if the FBI was—two years after the fact—investigating Cliven Bundy and his guests who made the Bureau of Land Management stand down in 2014? And what if they wanted to hack THEIR iPhones to get evidence against them? (Was the FBI carrying Harry Reid’s water there?)

Or…what if you told your bank a fib on your last Mastercard application and that application only existed and was encrypted in YOUR iPhone? (Yes, you can go to prison for that.)

In point of fact, the FBI can lie to you all day long with no legal consequence; but if you lie to them, you can go to prison. That’s the law. Ask Scooter Libby.

Now do you see the problem?

And that’s only one of a number of problems.

The second problem here is that what this little Federal Magistrate in California has ordered Apple to do is to write a piece of software which doesn’t exist.

Writing software is like writing this column. Could that Magistrate order me to write a column? I think not.

The third problem is that once that software is written, the genie is out of the bottle.

Which returns us to the issue of who do you trust.

This is, after all, the same FBI which orchestrated the killing of one Lavoy Finicum recently in Oregon by the Oregon Highway Patrol. He was killed because he did not comply with the “commands” of law enforcement.

These folks are not Efrem Zimbalist Jr. and Broderick Crawford. Do you really want to give them the right to shoot you dead for not obeying their “commands” AND the right to peer into your most private information which you carry with you every day?

Truth be told, I carry an aging iPhone 5, and I had not password-protected it.

Until I discovered that the FBI couldn’t crack Apple’s encryption software.

Now, I’m much more impressed with my iPhone than I used to be..

But, if Apple caves, I’ll find a new phone which is manufactured by a company which won’t.

Rush Limbaugh: FBI Wants More From Apple Than Just The Terrorist’s iPhone Data

Video Transcript:

RUSH LIMBAUGH: Here we have the [San Bernardino] terrorist’s cell phone and law enforcement wants in it. And find out what else might be planned, who else might be involved and it’s very tough to stand up for citizen’s privacy rights when the FBI and the White House, “Hey it’s just that one phone! Don’t panic here! All we want is that one phone!” But that’s not all they want.

Some in the media are attacking Apple for not cooperating.

BO DIETL: But let’s face one thing, this is national security. This is not the first time this is going to come up. We’re not talking about having everyone have the capability – me as a private investigator, I shouldn’t have the capability where I can breach into people’s phones. – but this is national security.

LT. COL. RALPH PETERS: Tim Cook is a complete phony. This is not about privacy rights of law abiding Americans. This is about Apple selling a lot of iPhones to really, really bad people. This is absolutely shameful. The federal government did everything right – got the court order. And Tim Cook is acting like Hillary Clinton – above the law, better than the rest of us.

Limbaugh goes on to explain the FBI isn’t after just one phone.

LIMBAUGH: The best way that I have found to explain to people what’s going on here: instead of this being a cell phone in possession of a dead terrorist, or a dead terrorist’s cell phone, think of it as a safe in the terrorist’s house. And the government says, “No, no, no. We just want that one safe. We just want the government, we just want the safe company to crack that one safe. We want them to give us the combination to that one safe.” And everyone says, “Well what’s wrong with that!? The terrorists are dead. Who knows what’s in that safe? Let’s go in there and get it.” But that’s not what they’re asking for. What the FBI is asking for is for the manufacturer – the safe company – to give them the combinations of every safe they have made and will make. That is essentially what the government – the FBI –  is asking of Apple. Give us the key that will allow us to crack any phone. Now they aren’t saying that but that’s going to be the end result if the FBI wins this. This is the federal government making a move on a private corporation and this was a strategically planned – this was a specifically chosen event by the FBI. In fact I don’t even think what’s on this phone is the real target for the FBI and the government. I think it’s just the way they’re getting in.

Apple’s CEO Just Told The FBI To Get Lost In A BIG Way… This Will Get Interesting…

FBI officials are faced with a problem and believe Apple Inc. can help.

During the investigation of the terror attacks in San Bernardino, Calif., the FBI uncovered an iPhone belonging to the shooter. After 10 failed attempts to unlock the phone, FBI techs fear the contents of the phone will be erased.

They have reached out to Tim Cook, CEO of Apple to assist in accessing the encrypted data of the phone.

In response to the request, Cook issued a letter to Apple customers explaining his refusal to provide assistance.

Cook says that the iPhone, as well as other smartphones are an essential part of peoples lives, holding substantial amounts of information, from personal and financial data, to photos and personal contacts.

According to Cook, this info has to be protected from those wishing to access it illegally and Apple feels a duty to protect this information. Encryption, he explains, has become an important tool in keeping information safe, as well as protecting personal safety.

The letter also expresses Apple’s shock and outrage at the mass shooting, condemning the terrorists, and assuring readers that Apple has done their part, within legal bounds, to assist the FBI with their investigation.

Cook stated that he has great respect for the FBI and feels that they have good intentions. However, he believes the FBI’s recent requests to build a backdoor to access the data on the iPhone is a step too far. The letter explained this kind of access is not something that Apple has currently, and is too dangerous to create. “While the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control,” Cooke wrote.

He believes it would set a dangerous precedent. Not only would it force Apple to make it easier to gain access to information, but could extend to building software capable of intercepting messages, access personal records or taking over other functions of the phone.

On Tuesday, Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym of the Federal District Court for the district of Central California, ordered Apple to provide reasonable technical assistance to the FBI in unlocking the phone.


WATCH: What Former Obama Intel Chief Just Called On Hillary To Do Is The LAST Thing She Wants To Hear

For the sake of the nation, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton should “step down,” former Defense Intelligence Agency chief Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn said Friday.

Flynn noted that if he had done what Clinton has done with classified emails, “I would have been out the door, and probably in jail.”

Flynn appeared on CNN’s The Lead Friday and said former Secretary of State Clinton should suspend her campaign until the FBI investigation of her use of a private email server has concluded. So far, the investigation, which has been ongoing for months, has found 22 emails so sensitive that even redacted versions will not be released, as well as dozens of other emails marked classified.

Flynn said Clinton was aware of what she was doing, and is being treated in a manner far different from anyone else.

“If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail,” said Flynn, who cited a “lack of accountability, frankly, in a person who should have been much more responsible in her actions as the secretary of state of the United States of America.”

Flynn said the case is straining scarce resources.

“In all 50 states, we have Islamic State cases ongoing — and I know the FBI is just overwhelmed with white collar crime, child pornography cases, transnational organized criminal cases. And now we have to put another 100 agents on this case of Hillary Clinton,” he said.

“If she were to step down and the nation would allow itself to back down a little bit, and let this investigation run its course with her not in the limelight and making this such a big, big deal, I really do believe that the severity and the number of resources that are applied — despite what the outcome is,” he said.

Host Jake Tapper commented that Clinton’s defenders say the issue is that emails marked classified may not have been so when Clinton saw them.

“This over-classification excuse is not an excuse,” Flynn said. “If it’s classified, it’s classified.”

h/t: IJ Review



Something Huge Was Missing From The Democratic Debate That Says All You Need To Know

Two important topics were missing from Thursday night’s Democratic presidential debate in Milwaukee in light of recent developments: The State Department Inspector General’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation, and the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Neither of the PBS moderators, Judy Woodruff or Gwen Ifill, chose to broach either subject. Breitbart reports that Woodruff contributed to the Clinton Foundation last year.

According to a Washington Post report published Thursday morning, “Investigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking documents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it.” (See video below.)

“The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons,” the Post added. 

Regarding Clinton’s use of an unsecured, private email server as secretary of state, the FBI filed a letter last week in federal court confirming the bureau is actively investigating the matter.

Despite Clinton’s assurances to the contrary, over 1,600 emails containing classified information have been discovered, some deemed “top secret” as well as “Special Access Programs” material, which is more sensitive then “top secret.”

Based on exit polling from the New Hampshire primary earlier this week, these topics are relevant for discussion at a debate. Sen. Bernie Sanders won the contest convincingly, 60 percent to 38 percent for Clinton. CNN exit polling found  honesty was the most important factor to voters in deciding who they would support in the Democratic primary; 34 percent listed it as most important, and of those 92 percent went for Sanders and 6 percent chose Clinton.

At a debate moderated by MSNBC last week, the former secretary of state sought to quash concerns the FBI investigation into her past conduct would in any way inhibit her bid for the presidency, saying she was “100 percent” certain nothing would come of it.

The Chicago Tribune’s editorial board published a compelling piece entitled Hillary Clinton and the FBI Primary last week, arguing the bureau will likely cast the deciding ballot of her candidacy. “In that election the FBI gets the only vote: Whether it thinks she should be prosecuted, or cleared, for her handling of government email outside of State Department protocols.”

h/t: Fox News