Mandy Rice-Davies Applies*

The FBI, aka the bastard child of J. Edgar Hoover is claiming that ending their spying powers under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would lead to a catastrophe.

As the expiration date for the Feds' Section 702 surveillance powers draws closer, FBI Director Christopher Wray has warned a US Senate committee that his agents may not be able to stop the next major cyberattack if lawmakers allow the contentious spying authorization to lapse.

"It would be absolutely devastating if the next time an adversary like Iran or China launches a major cyberattack, we don't see it coming because 702, one of our most important tools, was allowed to lapse," Wray told the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Wray has previously said that 97 percent of the FBI's technical intelligence on malicious "cyber actors" in the first half of this year was obtained via Section 702 searches.

"Or with everything going on in the world, imagine if a foreign terrorist overseas directs an operative to carry out an attack in our own backyard, but we're not able to disrupt it because the FBI's authorities have been so watered down," he said Tuesday.

………

And while it's supposed to be used to fight crime and prevent terrorist attacks, it has also been abused by the FBI to conduct warrantless surveillance on US citizens including protesters, campaign donors, and elected officials.

The FBI has been abusing Section 702 since it was created.

The catastrophe that the FBI fears is that they will not be able to abuse the civil rights of Americans with impunity because it makes their jobs a little bit easier.

The contentious rule is set to sunset at the end of 2023 unless lawmakers renew — or reform — the FISA amendment. Meanwhile Wray and the rest of the intelligence community have been lobbying politicians to keep the snooping powers intact and renew Section 702, as it stands, before the year's end.

 Let it expire.  There is no reason to kow tow to the whims of lazy cops.

^*Well they would say that, wouldn't they?