HOT: FBI Director Backtracks, Admits Apple iPhone Litigation Will be Precedent!

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey seems to have quickly reversed course to admit the obvious — that the February 16 magistrate judge’s order for Apple to help the US government breach an iPhone’s security, including encryption, is as much about establishing precedent for more court orders as it is about the government trying to obtain information connected to one phone related to the December 2 mass murder in San Bernardino, California.

On Sunday, Comey issued a statement that started with this declaration: “The San Bernardino litigation isn’t about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message.” Then, on Thursday, Comey backtracked from this assurance by testifying before the US House Intelligence Committee that the order and appeals arising from the order “will be instructive for other courts.”

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Did the FBI Intentionally Bumble the San Bernardino iPhone Investigation?

Over at We Meant Well, always-interesting writer Peter Van Buren provides a funny rundown of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)’s blunders he suggests prevented it from accessing information on an iPhone connected to the December 2 San Bernardino, California killings. The FBI sure does look like the Keystone Cops with Van Buren’s tale of mistakes that put the FBI into a situation where, to uncover encrypted information from the iPhone, it has to depend on a US magistrate judge ordering Apple, the phone’s manufacturer, to create a means to breach the phone’s information security.

But, is there something more sinister taking place behind the scenes? Governments are renowned for incompetence, so you cannot rule out, barring more information, that a series of blunders did occur. At the same time, blunders in this instance would create a situation that sure is convenient for a US government intent on ensuring it can obtain access to everyone’s encrypted information. The blunders, after all, provided the FBI with a reason to seek the court order in a case where the facts are quite advantageous for the government.

US government lawyers intent on breaking down technological privacy protections should be expected to focus their efforts on a case with facts that would allow their arguments to appeal most to judges in courtrooms as well as to Americans more generally. What facts are better as a starting point for demonstrating the need to require companies to create backdoors to overcome information security than that a backdoor is necessary to uncover information connected to the phone of a terrorist responsible for mass murdering his coworkers at a holiday party?

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

The Apple Court Order and the Obama Administration’s Anti-Privacy Push

In the fall of 2015, American privacy supporters were relieved that draconian legislation requiring companies to create backdoors for the US government to overcome encryption of individuals’ private information did not make its way through Congress. In fact, the Obama administration then represented that it would both stop seeking such legislation and refrain from otherwise pressuring companies to provide the government with backdoor access to customers’ encryption-secured information.

However, everything is not as the Obama administration desired the public to believe. It appears that the Tuesday court order demanding that Apple breach an iPhone’s built-in privacy protections so the government can access the secured information is a materialization of the executive branch’s stealth “plan B” effort to obtain its anti-privacy objectives via other means.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Judge Napolitano Applauds Apple’s Tim Cook for Defending the Constitution

Judge Andrew Napolitano, in a new Fox Business interview with host Stuart Varney, said he applauds Apple CEO Tim Cook for “defending the Constitution” by resisting a United States magistrate judge’s order that Apple aid the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in breaching Apple encryption that protects the customers.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Ron Paul Rewind: All US Supreme Court Justices are Good and Bad

With the death last week of United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, there is much discussion of whether Scalia was good or bad on the court and whether President Barack Obama and the next president will nominate good or bad people for the court. If you value the protection of liberty, however, it is clear that none of the current or recent justices are on your side and that Obama and the next president are unlikely to appoint anyone who is either.

Ron Paul summed up the situation well in a 2011 Fox News presidential debate. He said regarding the justices, “they are all good and they are all bad.” While they all defend liberty sometimes, Paul noted that none of them consistently defends both personal and economic liberty.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Has Turkey Just Started WWIII?

The violence in Syria has been devastating for years. New military actions in the country by the Turkish government threaten to escalate the situation into a much larger war.

Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity Executive Director Daniel McAdams wrote about the most recent developments in the RPI Weekly Update sent out via email early this morning. Because of the great importance of sharing McAdams’ Syria comments with the largest audience possible, those comments from this morning’s email are posted below as well.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Hillary Clinton Top Aides May Testify Against Her in Clinton Emails Case

Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano said in a Thursday Fox News interview that the United States Department of Justice will likely seek to make deals with individuals who were top aides to Hillary Clinton so those aides will testify against her if there is a prosecution of Clinton for failure to adequately protect government secrets while she was US Secretary of State.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Not-So-Convincing Anti-Second Amendment Arguments

Ken Womble has written convincingly regarding legal matters, including the desirability of prosecuting cops who lie about other cops’ killings. However, Womble, in a Monday Mimesis Law article, provides several not-so-convincing arguments for repealing the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution while keeping in place other constitutional provisions Womble lists — “freedom of speech, assembly, due process, voting, etc.”

Womble provides three arguments in support of his conclusion. First, he says that the right to keep and bear arms is distinguishable from other rights mentioned in the Constitution because, “[i]n our nation’s almost 240 years of existence, the 2nd Amendment is the only time our leaders have granted a constitutional right to possess tools.”

When you think about it, this is not much of a distinction. The freedom of speech that Womble seeks to distinguish from the right to bear arms would be of much less value without the ability to use microphones, telephones, video cameras, audio recording equipment, radio and TV, the internet, means of transportation, and many other tools. Indeed, listed rather redundantly in the First Amendment is the freedom of the press along with the freedom of speech. A major tool of the press is the printing press and its modern analogues such as a computer providing word processing, video editing, and website posting capabilities. Say you print your communication on paper, then you can use additional tools, such as trucks to transport the printed communication and distribution bins from which people can pick up the printed communication.

Tools do not play a major role in the exercise of only the freedom of speech and its cousin the freedom of the press. Tools also permeate the exercise of the other rights Womble lists. Assembly uses the tool of a suitable room in which people can meet, along with other tools including microphones, loudspeakers, chairs, and tables. And the tools of speech and press can be used to alert people about a future assembly or about what occurred at a past assembly. Due process would be tough if a defendant were deprived of access the tools with which to conduct legal research and to draft and submit legal briefs. Imagine voting without any tools — no ballots and voter rolls, for example.

Continue reading at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.