metadata is very informative and the quote-unquote metadata indicating all the people you contacted,contacted at a given time, how long you spoke to them, et cetera, et cetera, reveal your associations, reveal your behavior and the argument goes that knowing that this stuff lacks fourth amendment protection evil self edit you will self-centered. i think that's a strong argument. there are plenty of cases though where the same kinds of what we think of as privacy cases where the and same invasions don't have any communicative first amendment relative so think the fourth amendment should also stand on its own. that is, your argument shouldn't rely on the fact that there's a first amendment value at stake in order to get protection for information. the information should be protected as such independent of its communicative substance or meaning under the fourth. in fact, there's a section an article i published with the american university law review that the subsection is titled four plus one does not equal four. >> just looking at the cases in this area, my sense is the first amendmen

then there's the fourth amendment and metadata.k collection of americans telephone records did not constitute a search under the fourth amendment because information about who we call, when we call them how long we talk to them is information that we have shared with a third party. that's the telephone company. and as we all know by now the something called the third-party doctrine which says that any information that you voluntarily disclosed to a third party, you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that information. this doctrine which came about in the late 1970s has come under attack recently and is unlikely to survive. it simply does not square with the realities of life in the digital era. each one of us leaves a trail of digital exhaust about a mile wide. the e-mails that we share with our internet service providers, the text messages we share with our mobile phone companies, the financial data that we share with atms, the location data we are sharing with cell towers that surround us. these forced disclosure

then there's the fourth amendment and metadata. so the fisa court held that the bulk collection of americans telephone records did not constitute a search under the fourth amendment because information about who recall when we called them come how long we talk to them is information that we shared with a third party. that's the telephone company. and as we all know by now the something called the third-party doctrine which says that any information that you voluntarily disclosed to a third party, you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that information. this doctrine which came about in the late 1970s has come under attack recently and is unlikely to survive. it simply does not square with the realities of life in the digital era. each one of us leaves a trail of digital exhaust about a mile wide. the e-mails that we share with our internet service providers the text messages we share with our mobile phone companies, the financial data that we share with atms the location data we are sharing with cell towers that sur

has the metadata been used in any case? >> i am sure it has been because now basically all mail coverage is coming from this program. at least according to the 2015 story instead of the individual request for outside of the mail will be photographed everything is photographed then it just assembles later on. of that is just the way it is executed. >> that is correct as far as i know but what is interesting is it shows when i talked about in the first panel the way the nsa trickles down to other federal agencies so it starts with national-security collection then license plate readers in the da is broken in january to have a call record database that they place to iran because according to them it is a nexus to do drug trafficking. you think of other countries that our more significant like neighbors to the south. then you hear pro local law enforcement database or the biometric gore the dna. this is the world we live and to the evidence is gathered and why it is important for defense lawyers not just the broad contours but

metadata is very informative. a given time, how long you spoke to them, et cetera, et cetera, reveal your associations and reveal your behavior. and the argument goes that knowing that this stuff lacks fourth amendment protection, you will self-edit or self-sensore -- self censor. and there are privacy invasions don't have any commune cattive relevants. so i think the fourth amendment shouldn't stand on its own. it shouldn't rely on the fourth amendment value to get information. the information should be protected as such independent of its communicative substance or meaning under the fourth. and there was an article i published with the american university law review sub-section titled four plus one does not equal four. >> just looking at the cases in this area, my sense is the first amendment doesn't get you too far in a criminal context because you are engaged in somebody doing wrongdoing. >> allegedly. >> well, okay. allegedly. all my clients are innocent too, don't get me wrong. so you're dealing with a conte

the dragnet, this is the to 15 program, the metadata program. let's go over it.ly: this is information you collect? general alexander: the government propels internet service providers to provide, which has only numbers in it and no content. it has the to and from number, and the duration of the call. only those four things. her name is not in there. no content is in there. i will repeat, no names and no content. just numbers. let's say a case, there was actually a number in that communication. the fbi told nsa, that was his number and we now know he is talking to al qaeda. under the rules at the time nsa had to have proof to look into the database that it was associated with al qaeda. one of 35 people could then look into the database and go out to see who he was talking to appear they were able to see one of the people in new york had connections to other terrorists. all they saw was the numbers and the numbers resulted in somebody overseas known to be terrorists. nsa would then give at number two new york city, not knowing who was to the fbi. fbi could look th

. >> metadata in income packets. one thing we should not forget around the world there are now as many mobile subscriptions as there are people but not equally distributed. approximately half the people have a mobile phone equal parkts withpackets over sms and data plans. >> jake and i were just talking about, a lot of us have data phones it doesn't necessarily lead to the same prosperity that you can gain by a are broadband connection and a computer. >> absolutely i agree. but you have to start somewhere. again there are about a half a bill of thebillion that lives outside of any reach whatsoever. there is a lot of piece to happen and some countries are faster to do that than others. >> jake was talking about the technology can come from the fact that they can float a balloon to do that. is that going to help those on the wrong side of the digital divide? >> there are teams to attempts to do that, any attempt is good as long as it moves united states up the ladder. -- ploofs us up the ladders even first behind. but

kennedy: coming up, mitch mcconnell made a surprise move last night trying to rightly been the metadataou why that is a terrible idea if you love freedom and liberty, and i know you do.s of ts. prick up your ears because i know you'll want to hear that do. that need to be kept at 41 degrees. while being shipped to a country where it's 90 degrees. in the shade. sound hard? yeah. does that mean people in laos shouldn't get their vaccine? we didn't think so. from figuring it out to getting it done, we're here to help. kennedy: and liberty is not going anywhere. we have seen a lot of candidates that are in contention for the big job. increases security, they say, the mainstream logic says that you have to give up some of it. if you want to lose weight, you have the start by putting on a few pounds. and an entire generation. young people in europe to favor edwards noted and then do their counterparts here. a recent poll found 86% viewed them in a golden light and a robust 56% show love in the u.s. there are huge issues for millennialism they are not going away like every other age group, the

i don't want to use the word metadata but people are here, people are tweeting more messaging more, certain hours or around certain events. they can better form the advertisers and engagement. they get more revenues from those tabs then from the ads on whatsapp. -- because the ads are more contextual. even though the ads never show up on whatsapp. >> along the lines of things they own this is one of the , most data centric companies that has ever existed. facebook knows i did do it probably better than any other company with the possible exception of maybe google. so they are absorbing and digesting an extraordinarily complex and detailed data about users all the time. they slice and dice it a million ways and they will use it to make their product better. cory: thank you. bloomberg contributing editor david kilpatrick. a film festival this week. we will talk out to a director. we will be back with my partner emily chang right after this break. ♪ cory: virtual-reality purchased by facebook, the first use cases are coming out. a virtual-reality film based on the little prince came out of the

cory: i do not want to use the word metadata, but i do not have a better word.hey are gathering of mission about what users are doing. people are here, people are tweeting more. what's at, more messaging more. so they can better inform advertisers on facebook. so facebook is better with more engagement. more revenue, so the data is feeding facebook. >> that is true well beyond its own. but absolutely, it is one of the most data companies that ever existed. facebookto do it better than probably any other company with possibly the exception of maybe google. they are digesting an extraordinary complex detailed data against users. they slice and dice it a million ways. they use it to make the products better and try to get hooks into it more deeply. cory: all right. thank you. interesting conversation. a film festival this week, we will talk to the creative director and check out this with emily chang. ♪ cory: virtual-reality with big aspirations. the first use cases are coming out. based on a children passes classic premier film festival. emily chang and i watch th

the metadata program. emily: information you collect right?st: this is actually business information that the government compels internet services to provide. it has no content. it has the date and duration of the call. only those things. your name is not in there. no content. i will repeat, no names, no content. just numbers. what that is used for is let's say, there was actually a number in that communication in that public case. fbi told nsa, that is his number and we know he is talking to al qaeda. under the rules at the time, nsa had to have proof to look in the database, that that number was associated with al qaeda. one of 35 people could look into the database and go out to see who he was talking to. they waiver to see one of the people in new york had connections to other terrorists. all they saw was the numbers. the numbers resulted in somebody overseas known to be a terrorist. and if they would give that number to fbi -- an essay would give that number to fbi. the fbi could look that up. nsa's job was to connect guys from 9/11. not

he talks about privacy and pledged to end nsa collection of metadata, phone metadata that are all buttonst are straight aimed at that liberty community, thomas. >> stand by we want to bring in michael steele former chairman of the rnc and msnbc political analysts. how do you think rand paul did? he obviously made his intentions known ahead of the formal statement that he's running for the white house, which we just heard a short time ago. how do you think he did in introducing himself to those not familiar with him? >> i have to be honest i thought he did a masterful job. i thought this was a very well done launch for him. i thought the speech was very heavy on vision. and it really connected some very interesting pieces out there, the conservative elements within the party, the libertarian elements in a way that i think are going to be very interesting to get played out on the stage come the fall thomas, when he's standing there with a marco rubio or jeb bush and how they talk and interact with him. he's fearless and put a lot of that on the table. the way he talked about foreign policy,

look i'm not sure those accounts about how -- it was considered whether or not to end the bulk metadata collection under 215. i'm not surprised it was being considered. i think those programs should always be subject to a cause/benefit analysis. but i'll be interested to hear the follow-on reports as people reaction to that initial report about how serious that consideration was. that raises an interesting question. i think in the public debate you have the constitutionality and legality -- constitutionality, whether that collection fits under 215 whether that's stretching of the term relevance allows for that bulk collection. and then you've got the question about utility. the utility of the program. that's really on the executive branch to make that argument. and it's important that they make that argument to congress. really, this is important. and defining the "this ". what core of that authority do they really need? at some level i think that argument can be made because the question then, and i'm going back to my old slippery slope argument as an advocate for the government. in th

. >> the justice department, sell revealed it had been gathering metadata for calls to designated foreigns. they left a lot of unanswered questions. what we found in looking at it was that this is a program that was older than i expected and ended up being a lot broader than i expected. i guess it is no surprise overlooking that colombia and mexico, but 116 countries is a pretty expansive list. for a long time, they were keeping records of basically all calls from the united states for those places, at first, to try to find drug cartels and the network in the united states then a become a much more expansive thing. the case they revealed it was a guy charged with trying to export electrical equipment to iran. not a drug case at all. and the thing that really surprised me the most was that when the doj and the dea for said they have been doing this, a lot of people speculated well, here's another example of war on terror tactics that are being applied to domestic law enforcement. and it is actually the other way around. this started 9.5 years before september 11 in george h.w. bush's admin

55,000 pages from roughly 31,000 e-mails, and she produced that document in electronic form with any metadatamight surround that, or ability for it to be searched sufficiently for for your purposes, for example, but she sent that and he perform to the department of state leaving the remainder, which she said at her press conference on march march 10, were destroyed or deleted, probably the better word she used, and now the question becomes well, there's deletion, there's deletion. with a completely deleted or were they completely destroyed? anna eshoo is a fairly saying or it is said on her behalf of a house committee or subcommittee that they were indeed deleted in their entirety. now, what this amounted to is a founding is not an outright violation of the federal records act requirement, because the federal records act basic access to all agencies and all federal agency employees, hey you have an obligation to take some steps to preserve things for posterity, okay? and you can't preserve something that doesn't exist to begin with, so the first obligation under the federal records act is to

he does have more surveillance of metadata to show as in the case of jeffrey sterling to show what theontext word even if they don't testify. how they talk to him when they talk. actually, george w. bush have the same though, but he didn't use it. i'm left with something of a puzzle. host: you mentioned jeffrey sterling who is awaiting charges about efforts to sabotage the iranian nuclear program. on that list, the title of that list is obama and hot pursuit of leakers. talking about this government workers who have been charged for allegedly leaking classified information. waiting to chat with you in cortland ohio, on the line for democrats. guest: is interesting to note that in the jeffrey sterling case that all the facts leaked to george w. bush's term. he was investigated but not indicted under george w. bush. he was indicted under obama and has not been employed for five years because somebody under charge of the espionage act has trouble getting a job. host: good morning, sir. caller: i'm concerned we are going to far the other way. there are methods and sources being released th

they did not just look at all of the metadata for every cell phone they're intercepting and then it somehowflashed up on the screen and told them david coleman headley is a bad guy. >> you need someone to tell you or something to tip you off, to say that this guy, david coleman headley, is interesting. >> rotella: all along, there had been plenty of signs that headley was potentially dangerous, tips stretching back seven years. and just days after the mumbai attack, headley by then back with his family in chicago investigators were looking into another tip. it came to the fbi's philadelphia office from a woman who had known headley's mother. >> she sees these attacks on mumbai and she has a friend whose son may have been over in pakistan fighting and so she contacts us. and so our philadelphia division goes out and interviews headley's cousin. we talk to him, and he states that yes, you know, he is in pakistan, but knows of no information in terms of headley being involved in any plot. what we know now is headley was actually in chicago during that time frame. >> rotella: so what the cousin

carefulyou want to be in terms of extracting metadata into a wider trend. what that is going to reflect is changes in valuation. the u.s. dollar was stronger during that word heard, and that means the value of euro holdings declined. i think we want to see several quarters of real pullback before we call this a trend. angie: a very good point. we have to note the dollar strength and valuation. let's talk about u.s. dollar strength. it has turned into a weakness after that job report came out on friday. 100 way 6000 jobs added, very 00 jobsinting -- 126,0 added, very disappointing. how do you think this will play through four currency markets? i think the big risk in the short term is that the long on u.s. dollars at this point. with a into this report substantial dollar long, and i see a risk over the next several days that we will unwind or can holiday -- consolidate some of those positions. back and see the dollar dropped lower. probably the yen, the risk for of ourollar yen the one stronger views looking out over the course of this week. i do not think t

not just the text of the e-mail itself, but the metadata surrounding it and the server logs. if she did that and took that extraordinary step, and perhaps it would all be gone, but then the very taking of that step might be a basis for inferring intent and that would be more joe's area as to what she was taking great measures. joe: i hope you didn't give her any good ideas now. tom: let me say one thing factually about benghazi. it is white house or kennedy is such an important person. just remember who he was. joe: all those african bombings during the 90's, he was in charge of security. he got promoted after this disastrous. during his tenure to this day, during benghazi, ambassador stephen wanted security increased. he had 30 people and he wanted more. the country was a disaster. do you know what kennedy did? he reduced it from 38 to nine. nine security people. that is it. tom: we just obtain these records about mrs. clinton's top staff, cheryl mills, her executive assistant, which is an ambassador ranking in the state department. it is not what we traditionally understand

it technically eliminates a lot of the information through metadata in terms of best practices.it is hard to get the ship righted. we are getting there. i can speak for a number of records and information practitioners i have spoken with , it is hard for them to get attention. it is hard for them to talk to their superiors, let alone their ig's or the heads of those agencies and impress on them the importance of their work. it is largely gone unnoticed. it is a battle for people within the agencies to do the job they are hired to do because it is not something that has been looked at as important until secretary clinton's e-mails come to issue or the issues we saw -- the interests with the irs or the epa. pemex a good news headline and that brings to light -- that makes a good headline and it brings to light issues we have faced for a long time. until we pay more attention to this issue, we will see secretary clinton's coming up again. we will see these headlines. why haven't things changed? the directive goes a long way in doing that. one of the items that jason had not mention

it technically eliminates a lot of the information through metadata in terms of best practices.is hard to get the ship righted. we are getting there. i can speak for a number of records and information practitioners i have spoken with, it is hard for them to get attention. it is hard for them to talk to their superiors, let alone their ig's or the heads of those agencies and impress on them the importance of their work. it is largely gone unnoticed. it is a battle for people within the agencies to do the job they are hired to do because it is not something that has been looked at as important until secretary clinton's e-mails come to issue or the issues we saw -- the interests with the irs or the epa. that makes a good headline and it brings to light issues we have faced for a long time. until we pay more attention to this issue, we will see secretary clinton's coming up again. we will see these headlines. why haven't things changed? the directive goes a long way in doing that. one of the items that jason had not mentioned was the office of personal management was asked to put o

they collect that metadata and what if he looked at metadata and came back as money, sex and a little feel smarter shows when you watch it. but it's also mixed in with entertainment. how do you pick the topic? because the range is pretty bad. >> it's a bad range. thankfully nat-geo has 50 years of experience they are diligent everything should have three separate sources before they put it on the air. they specifically want to balance it out and not look at it with a cynical lens. so our sex episewed there was an uptick in stds in florida, the largest uptick in the country. it turns out to be a senior citizens community which is not something you'd expect. we did this beautiful segment. our producers found a 93-year-old man, sweet girlfriend both their spouses passed away. it's moron of a piece on their love for each other. they never had sex in middle school. they're not worried about pregnancy and they don't know about getting tested. so things like that that are universal and querky. i never would have thought something like that. something with pizza on a little moron universal as

keeping our nation safe and the president is clear that he believes we should end the section 215 metadata practice by creating an alternative mechanism to preserve the capability without the government being responsible for holding the bulk data. now i can tell you we are gratified that some of those reforms are included in a recent piece of legislation that has bipartisan support in both the house and the senate. and we're going to continue to review the text of that bill before we render a final judgment on it but it is encouraging that democrats and republicans in both the house and the senate that share the president's commitment to implementing those reforms have cod codified that into legislation. the deadline to renew the patriot act is coming up in about a month. we are hopeful that democrats and republicans can work together to articulate the changes that the president believes are necessary while at the same time preserving the capability of our law enforcement officials and our intelligence professionals to take the steps that are necessary to keep the american people safe. so

not just the text of the e-mail itself, but the metadata surrounding it and the server logs. if she did that and took that extraordinary step, and perhaps it would all be gone but then the very taking of that step might be a basis for inferring intent and that would be more joe's area as to what she was taking great measures. joe: i hope you didn't give her any good ideas now. tom: let me say one thing factually about the ghazi. it is white house or kennedy is such an important person. just remember who he was. joe: all those african commons during the 90's, he was in charge of security. he got promoted during this disastrous. there is his tenure to this day during benghazi, ambassador stephen wanted security increased. he had 30 people and he wanted more. the country was a disaster. do you know what kennedy did? he reduced it from 38 to nine. ever nine security people. that is it. tom: we just obtain these records about mrs. clinton's top staff, cheryl mills, her executive assistant, which is an ambassador raking in the state department. it is not what we traditionally under

he does have more surveillance of metadata to show as in the case of jeffrey sterling to show what thecontext was even if he doesn't testify. how they talk to him when they talk. actually, george w. bush have the same though, but he didn't use it. i'm left with something of a puzzle. host: you mentioned jeffrey sterling who is awaiting charges about efforts to sabotage the iranian nuclear program. on that list, the title of that list is obama and hot pursuit of leakers, talking about this government workers who have been charged for allegedly leaking classified information. garland is waiting to chat with you in cortland, ohio, on the line for democrats. guest: is interesting to note that in the jeffrey sterling case that all the facts leaked to george w. bush's term. he was investigated, but not indicted under george w. bush. he was indicted under obama and has not been employed for five years because somebody under charge of the espionage act has trouble getting a job. host: good morning, sir. caller: i'm concerned we are going too far the other way. there are methods and sources bei

there collecting metadata to my have for the last few years and are trying to be more informed in terms of security than just the apprehensions in and of themselves. the other thing we're looking at is the average weight procedure for marijuana. what about cocaine and heroin and methamphetamine? is not necessarily about the marijuana but understanding the illicit networks of the transnational crime that occur. the more you know about the individual networks and how they are exploiting vulnerabilities along the border the better prepared we believe we are to be able to our move our resources to those areas of higher risk. the average weight procedure tells us if the organization's organizations extent to which they are exploiting vulnerabilities. and what is different with each of these metrics and perhaps the apprehensions is that each one of these has a definitive trend line. it will either go up and down. we take a look at those mathematically something i don't do we look at those within the core doors and across each of the four core doors on the southern border to be able to wait an

i think what we have learned about the nsa's metadata collection program, sort of bold mass surveillance operation that was revealed as a result of the edward snowden weeks -- leaks. there is this concern about what the government knows about us and what they have access to. that debate is holding up -- especially the white house's efforts to move through the cyber security information sharing act that obama is pushing for an in favor of. because of those privacy concerns and because the revelations of the nsa, there are certainly privacy advocates who come out strongly against these bills. also many in the cyber security industry say that they are worried about the privacy protections that are in >> a quick note on the senate. they are in today. finishing up work on the human trafficking bill with an eye on the vote on the loretta lynch nomination to the attorney general. that is set for thursday. follow live coverage of the senate on our companion network c-span2. here on c-span the house coming in. they'll finish up work today on the bill establishing advisory boards to oversea the co

you could come in many different types of metadata ways, learn more about what they know. and they are also looking at at a next level to this with a certain set of questions could a teacher create connectivity that would satisfy that question or that construct such that you would have to ask these given questions that you could have a teacher created assessment to supply that information as well. it takes a really, i mean the path of least resistance and software doesn't necessarily make for better teaching and learning but when you get the these kind of went onto a problem as long as you these humanistic might at the same time the teachers and the learners who are close to it, i think there's interesting potential there. >> i just realize a lot of this is about how much can i know but it's not how much are you teaching me to think on how much are you using it to see what i'm saying? to think about it this way and in this way and then find out how you did and then bring that in pic is there anything that is developing that part? >> so in atmospheres of unlimited racers, t

but would address other authorities under which communications and metadata has been collected in bulk or could be collected in bulk. we're very much looking forward to that debate, which is going to happen soon and hopeful to come to the right result as far as that goes. finally, let me just address one topic which is not so futuristic. and how we are going to deal with government access request, vis-a-vis the internet of things. there are a lot of fundamental questions around the types of rules that ought to apply. and it isn't entirely clear as a threshold matter whether the electronics communications privacy act does apply. i would submit that for remote computing services like google in many respects, it will. that the type of information that is collected from internet of things devices, and you think about your nest thermostat or drop cam inside of your home. that would suggest a lot of detail about you about your habits in daily live and ought to be subject to the fourth amendment. ought to be subject to the warrant requirement. there are sort of questions about entities that m

there's been a lot of discussion around the bulk meta data program and the broader communications metadata program and the solution that has been offered is to require that the government use a specific selection term. it's part of the usa freedom act. it's also part of the on going discussions around surveillance reform legislation and there's been a lot of discussion about how to get that to the point where it doesn't permit bulk collection, where it doesn't open the door to the types of surveillance that we've seen in recent years and at the same time gives the government the flexibility, particularly in some of these cases and the hypothetical that ken raised so that where they can't, for example, use a very specific identifier, whether that be an e-mail address or a phone number, that they're able to obtain records that enable them to identify and thwart a terrorist attack. is the more the debate focuses on the use of that data, i think eat important to talk about miniization procedures. and what the usa freedom act, what we saw last year was that industry privacy advocates it will ad

i think what we have learned about the nsa's metadata collection program, sort of bold mass surveillanceon that was revealed as a result of the edward snowden weeks -- leaks. there is this concern about what the government knows about us and what they have access to. that debate is holding up -- especially the white house's efforts to move through the cyber security information sharing act that obama is pushing for an in favor of. because of those privacy concerns and because the revelations of the nsa, there are certainly privacy advocates who come out strongly against these bills. also many in the cyber security industry say that they are worried about the privacy protections that are in place in these bills moving through congress right now. host: house republicans have tried over the past few years to push to bills that are making their way through the house again this week. in fact, the house will take them up today and debate on these two pieces of legislation. last night, congressman jim langman came to the floor and talked about the bill. this is what he had to say. [video clip]

we section 215 of the patriot act, we saw in the snowden revelations that metadata on phones was being collected. we didn't know that when we passed the patriot act. we can take a look a few years down the road and making sure this this isn't being misinterpreted not in line with the constitution. this sunset is a critical piece of the bill. the bill's not perfect, but makes it a whole lot better and gives us a second bite at the apple should things be going wrong. and i appreciate your yielding. the chair: the gentleman from california has 1 1/4 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from south carolina has yielded. mr. nunes: i thank you madam chair. i'm prepared to close and i just say, i have to hate to oppose this amendment, they are offering it in good faith with good intentions, however, it's a voluntary program. cybersecurity is going to continue to be a -- an ever increasing problem, challenge, and last thing we want to do is put a backstop where citizens are afraid to share information because they are afraid of being sued by a trial lawyer down the road. i hate to oppose the a