By David Harsanyi, December 7, 2019

For years, Democrats have been warning Americans about the dangers of law enforcement metadata collections. They cautioned that communication giants were working in cahoots with law enforcement to undermine our privacy. They said that metadata snooping might one day be used to smear other politicians.

That was then. Today, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff not only employs the power of the surveillance state to smear his colleagues and press his political agenda, he has set a number of dangerous precedents by “unmasking” his political rivals in an effort to smear them with innuendo.

With the release of the House Intelligence Committee’s impeachment report this week, we learned that Rudolph Giuliani and his corrupt Ukrainian pal Lev Parnas, whose metadata Schiff had legally subpoenaed, were also exchanging calls with former The Hill columnist John Solomon, ranking Intelligence Republican Devin Nunes and the president’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow.

Setting aside legal concerns over client-attorney privilege, and norms of congressional behavior, the fact that a congressman leading an impeachment investigation would use his power in this way is a stark abuse of his authority. After all, none of those unmasked by Schiff were the target of the inquiry. As far as we know, in fact, none of their conversations were illegal. Most importantly, none of these calls were relevant to the case for impeachment.

Schiff’s defenders maintain that the congressman had merely targeted Parnas and inadvertently ensnared the others. This is a risible [as to provoke laughter--TM assist] excuse.

Let’s remember that one of the reasons Democrats voted to bar the National Security Agency from collecting warrantless bulk domestic metadata was that such efforts often ensnared third parties who weren’t under investigation. In 2015, in fact, Democrats, led by Bernie Sanders, held hearings to draw attention to the fact that warrantless metadata might one day be used against members of Congress.

Schiff knew exactly what he was doing. The calls he made public, which feature only times, dates and lengths, were meant to insinuate wrongdoing and bolster the Democrats’ impeachment case. It was exactly the type of abuse Democrats had warned us about.

Things have sure changed. These days, the same liberals who spent years warning us that FISA courts approved spying warrants far too easily, still see no problem with the Obama administration using courts to spy on the opposition party in the middle of a presidential election.

Not so long ago, liberal editorial boards around the country were airing concerns about “third-party doctrine” in the digital age. The government, they rightly cautioned, could obtain personal information — things like phone-call logs — without your knowledge or consent.

Today, not a single Democrat was concerned that AT&T simply handed over metadata to a partisan investigation without even feigning an attempt to protect consumer privacy.

Not so long ago, liberal cable hosts made the case that unrestrained domestic surveillance could lead to tyranny. Today, former CIA head John Brennan — who oversaw spying on the legislative branch and lied about it — and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper — who oversaw the largest domestic surveillance program in history and lied about it — are both welcomed on cable television, treated as heroes of the resistance.

The same people who only a few weeks ago claimed that it was a moral and patriotic imperative to protect the identity of a whistleblower who may bring down the president are now fine with a congressman unmasking the conversation of an adversarial journalist who isn’t under criminal investigation.

Then again, these days there’s no abuse of power Democrats find problematic, as long as that abuse aids them in their fight against Donald Trump.

https://nypost.com/2019/12/07/democrats-...-to-warn-about/