Huma Abedin’s Emails are Next Up

Posted on by

State Department to release Huma Abedin email trove

Politico: The State Department has agreed to process for public release an archive of 29,000 pages of emails longtime Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin sent or received on a private account while working as deputy chief of staff to Clinton from 2009 to 2013.

Abedin turned over the collection of emails to State last year at the agency’s request following the controversy over the disclosure of Clinton’s exclusive use of a private email account while secretary of state. Unlike Clinton, Abedin had an official email account, but she was among senior officials asked to provide any work-related messages in their personal accounts after State officials became concerned that the agency did not have copies of all the official records it should.

State has been releasing portions of Clinton’s email trove on a monthly basis in connection with a court order, a process that is expected to conclude Jan. 29. That process has led to release of some emails Clinton and Abedin exchanged.

At a court hearing in September, a Justice Department attorney said State had no plans to process for release all of the emails submitted by Abedin and other top aides such as Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and Director of Policy Planning Jake Sullivan.

However, a legal filing Monday in a lawsuit brought by the conservative group Judicial Watch indicated State has acceded to a request to process all the emails Abedin turned over, except for news articles and summaries.

“The parties have agreed that State will produce to Judicial Watch responsive, nonexempt records from within the recently received documents, excluding news clippings/briefings contained therein,” said the court filing (posted here).

The schedule the two sides agreed to has the disclosure of the records overlapping significantly with Clinton’s presidential campaign and will have the State Department ramping up release of Abedin’s private emails just as the agency winds down its disclosure of Clinton’s messages.

The agency has agreed to begin turning Abedin’s personal-account emails over to Judicial Watch in March at a rate of at least 400 pages a month, with releases complete by April 2017. U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell adopted the proposed schedule as an order later Monday.

“This is just an orderly way of getting these records, subject to court oversight,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview Monday. “This is a review of each of those documents.”

In all the cases, the former officials or their lawyers selected the potential federal records from among the broader set of personal and work-related officials in the private accounts.

Fitton said the group wants to check Abedin’s messages against Clinton’s to see if the former secretary’s aide may have deemed some emails to be official that Clinton did not turn over to State.

“Obviously, she was as close an aide as you could have had to Mrs. Clinton. If Mrs. Clinton didn’t keep records she should have or destroyed or deleted them, maybe we can find them through Ms. Abedin. And Ms. Abedin’s activities are also controversial,” the conservative activist said.

An attorney for Abedin did not immediately respond to a request for comment. *** But more about Huma’s lawyer….Miguel Rodriguez……

Breitbart: Top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s lawyer for the email investigation has a glaring conflict-of-interest in the case: he was an Obama administration “point person” on Benghazi who dealt with classified information and exchanged redacted emails with Hillary Clinton.

Miguel Rodriguez of the Washington law firm Bryan Cave is part of Abedin’s big-money legal team and is already handling communications with the government on her behalf during the scandal.

But Rodriguez brings some personal baggage to his role as Abedin’s counsel, as first noted by blogger Ron Brynaert.

Before joining Bryan Cave, Rodriguez served as deputy assistant secretary at Hillary Clinton’s State Department; then he was President Obama’s legislative director, where he became a “point person” on the administration’s Benghazi response.

“Once the attack piqued the interests of lawmakers, there were dozens of hearings, some of them classified,” the Washington Post reported in March 2013. “Senators and representatives had reports to review and questions they wanted answered about Benghazi. With the integrity and reputations of both Obama and Clinton on the line, Rodriguez emerged as a behind-the-scenes point person, colleagues said.”

Hillary Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines told the Post that “Miguel was not just in the thick of it; he was at the forefront of it. It was just an around-the-clock effort, and we leaned on Miguel as if he never left State.”

On October 28, 2010, Rodriguez pinged Abedin on a group email with subject line “Baby,” which Abedin forwarded to Hillary with the line “Fyi.” That entire email was completely redacted in the State Department’s ongoing release of some Clinton emails.

Rodriguez advised top Clinton staffer Jacob Sullivan in July 2010 on a hearing chaired by Sen. Bob Menendez regarding the Libyan “Lockerbie Bomber,” and Sullivan forwarded Rodriguez’s advice to Clinton.

“I asked who they think Menendez might want to call as a witness. They said Tony Blair. I laughed. They didn’t,” Rodriguez wrote.

Rodriguez offered advice to a Clinton State Department spokesman in a November 24, 2009 email that was forwarded directly to Clinton through her top aide Cheryl Mills.

“Our nominations wallah — perhaps you have met him already, Miguel Rodriguez — agrees with my gut that, if you are announced before the trip next week, you should probably send someone else in your place,” State Department official Matthew Rooney wrote to former Clinton State Department spokesman Ian Kelly. “Even though your day job gives you every reason to go, as soon as you are public you want to avoid any gesture that a Senator could interpret as presuming advice and consent.”

A representative for Rodriguez at Bryan Cave did not provide a comment for this report.

 

 

 

Obama Broke the Middle East Alliance and Equilibrium

Posted on by

Imagine what the Obama administration is leaving as unfinished terror business for the next president and further, imagine what more can happen for the rest of 2016.

Shall we begin with HizBu’llah?

Russia Is Arming Hezbollah, Say Two of the Group’s Field Commanders

On the Syrian battlefield, Vladimir Putin’s planes and special forces work ever more closely with the Party of God—labeled ‘terrorist’ by Washington.
DailyBeast – BEIRUT — Lebanese Hezbollah field commanders with troops fighting in Syria tell The Daily Beast they are receiving heavy weapons directly from Russia with no strings attached. The commanders say there is a relationship of complete coordination between the Assad regime in Damascus, Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia. At the same time they say the direct interdependence between Russia and Hezbollah is increasing.

The United States and the European Union have both listed Hezbollah as a terrorist organization with global reach and accuse it of serving Tehran’s interests. But there is more to it than that. Organized, trained, funded, and armed by Iran with Syrian help after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, it initially gained fame for suicide bombings hitting Israeli, French, and American targets there, including the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut where 241 American servicemen were killed in 1983.

Hezbollah is directly receiving long-range tactical missiles, laser guided rockets, and anti-tank weapons from Russia.

Badran/FDD: In response to the crisis in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, following the latter’s assault on the Saudi consulate and embassy in Iran, the Obama administration has taken to the media to unleash a furious rebuke. But the administration’s condemnation was not aimed primarily at Tehran; instead it’s been largely directed at America’s longstanding ally: Saudi Arabia.

Administration officials have charged that, by executing radical Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, the Saudis have exacerbated sectarian tensions in the region and jeopardized U.S. policy in Syria. “This is a dangerous game they are playing,” an unnamed U.S. official told the Washington Post. “There are larger repercussions,” including damage to “counter-ISIL initiatives as well as the Syrian peace process.” This is a common thread that runs through the administration’s briefings against the Saudis, which reveals the White House’s backing of Iran’s regional position over and against the traditional U.S. alliance system.

The claim that the Saudis were damaging the supposed Syrian “peace process” sounds surreal on its face. But it is quite revealing, not just about how the White House defines success, but also about its overall policy in Syria.

The administration believes it has achieved a critical diplomatic feat by bringing Iran into the diplomatic talks over Syria and that this constitutes a major breakthrough in itself. “The United States has succeeded in leading the international effort to bring all sides together to try to bring about a political resolution inside of Syria,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a briefing after the Saudi-Iranian spat. The way the administration sees it, for a true discussion to take place, all so-called “stakeholders” in Syria must be gathered around the table in order to reach a settlement.

The administration’s self-congratulation aside, it’s worth exploring what this means in practice. By declaring Iran a legitimate “stakeholder,” the White House is not only saying that Syria is a recognized Iranian sphere of influence, but it also is recognizing Iran’s “stake” as legitimate. In fact, President Obama stated explicitly last month that the solution in Syria should be one that allows the Iranians to ensure “that their equities are respected.”

This begs the question of what, exactly, is Iran’s “stake” or “equities” in Syria? The answer is straightforward: Iran’s interest is to maintain a logistical bridge to Hezbollah through which it could supply the group with missiles and arms, thereby enabling it to continue to threaten U.S. allies like Israel and destabilize the region. The White House’s legitimization of Iran as a stakeholder in Syria risks licensing Iran to continue arming Hezbollah.

But this was hardly the only cost of President Obama’s policy. The key for safeguarding Iranian interests in Syria is ensuring the continuity of the Syrian President Bashar Assad regime. And so, in order to obtain Iranian “buy-in,” the administration abandoned what’s supposed to be the main objective in Syria, which is the removal of Assad and his regime. Assad, the administration now concedes, gets to stay on for an indefinite period as part of an indeterminate “transitional period.” In other words, when it comes to Syria, not only did Obama force Iran down his allies’ throat — he also fully endorsed its position.

Now, to top it off, the administration is attacking the Saudis for supposedly jeopardizing a process designed to safeguard Iran’s unchanged objectives in Syria. As the White House sees it, the Saudis’ only job is to bring the Syrian opposition to the table essentially to sign a surrender. What’s more, as part of this process, Iran, which has underwritten and partaken in Assad’s mass slaughter, gets a say in determining which opposition groups are listed as terrorists.

When it comes to the case of Nimr, the radical Saudi Shiite cleric, the administration has applied the same core premise of its Syria policy — that Iran has legitimate “equities” in Arab countries that should be “respected.”

Since his execution, the administration has made a point of repeatedly disclosing that it had tried to intervene with the Saudis not to go ahead with Nimr’s execution. The administration is now saying that the Saudis were told that the Iranians would react negatively to Nimr’s execution. Hence, the Saudi decision, the administration is saying, was a wanton provocation of Iran.

The underlying premise of the administration’s position is not only that Iran has a legitimate claim to represent Arab Shiites but also that since it has claimed Nimr, a Saudi, as a protégé, the Saudi government should not touch him. Therefore, the message the administration was effectively sending the Saudis was that Iran has a say in domestic Saudi affairs.

The truth is that the Obama administration has been aligning with Iran’s regional position for a while now — certainly since the beginning of the Syrian revolution. With the nuclear deal now in hand, and with a year left in President Obama’s term, the White House is becoming explicit about this major shift in the historic U.S. position in the region.

The president’s position on the Saudi-Iranian row is a public announcement that his administration is dissolving its traditional alliance system, along with the regional order it had underwritten for decades, and embracing Iran instead.

*** The blame actually goes deeper on the migrant crisis:

Former Obama Adviser Dennis Ross: U.S. Inaction in Syria Led to Refugee Crisis and ISIS

Amb. Ross/Tower: The Obama administration’s failure to address the brutality of the Iran-backed regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria led to a “vacuum” that allowed “a humanitarian catastrophe, a terrible refugee crisis, a deepening proxy war and the rise of ISIL in Iraq and Syria” to occur, Dennis Ross, a former White House adviser to President Barack Obama, wrote in Politico on Sunday.

Ross explained that the administration’s failure to act stemmed from a reluctance to repeat the mistakes that the United States made during the Iraq War, but added that Syria was different from Iraq, as Syria would involve aiding “an internal uprising” against Assad rather than an American invasion. According to Ross, Assad had turned the uprising against him into a sectarian conflict in the hope that his Alawite sect and other Syrian minorities would have a stake in his survival.

Soon, thereafter, it was transformed into a proxy war largely pitting Saudi Arabia and Turkey against Iran. A vacuum was created not by our replacing the Assad regime but by our hesitancy to do more than offer pronouncements—by overlearning the lessons of Iraq, in effect. And, that vacuum was filled by others: Iran, Hezbollah and Iran’s other Shia militia proxies; Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar; Russia; and ISIL. Unless the U.S. does more now to fill this vacuum, the situation will spin further out of control.

Ross observed that the vacuum in Syria was part of a greater American retreat in the Middle East, which “has helped to produce the increasing competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia.” Without fear of American action, he argued, Qassem Soleimani– the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps elite Qods Force– was transformed from a “shadowy figure” to one who was present at seemingly every major battle in Iraq and Syria. Eventually, given Iran’s continued aggressiveness and America’s passivity, Saudi Arabia sought to push back against Tehran on its own.

While Ross argued that the growing Iranian-Saudi tensions were not likely turn into a hot war, he noted that the escalation hurts efforts to address the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria. In addition, without the U.S. taking an active role in the Middle East, Russia actively entered and further complicated the fray. Until Moscow agrees to pressure Assad “to respect a ceasefire, stop the barrel bombs, and permit the creation of humanitarian corridors” to deliver food and aid to non-ISIS opposition groups, Ross wrote, there is no hope of getting Saudi Arabia or other Sunni nations to join the fight against ISIS.

In order to address the vacuum, Ross suggested that the U.S. take a number of steps to regain control of the situation without getting too deeply involved. These include putting “troops on the ground, including deploying spotters for directing air attacks, embedding forces with local partners perhaps to the battalion level, and using special operations elements for hit-and-run raids.”

 

In 2014, Ross noted that the administration’s growing closeness to Iran was concerning American allies in the Middle East. For “the Arabs, the fear is that the deal with come at their expense,” he explained. His recent suggestion that the administration must somehow restrain Iran’s client, Assad, before it can exert any influence in Syria demonstrates that this fear still remains intact.

Obama Road-blocked 113 Terror Investigations

Posted on by

Obama Admin Stonewalling Investigation Into 113 Terrorists Inside United States

Kredo/FreeBeacon: Leading senators on Monday petitioned multiple Obama administration agencies to stop stonewalling a congressional investigation into the immigration histories of at least 113 foreign-born individuals implicated in terrorist operations after legally entering the United States, according to a copy of the letters.

The latest investigation comes just days after the Washington Free Beacon disclosed that an additional 41 foreign-born individuals who legally entered the United States had been arrested for planning a number of terror attacks.

(41 names are here posted by Senator)

Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) disclosed Monday that they had been pressuring the Obama administration for months to disclose the immigration histories of these foreign-born individuals implicated in terror plots.

Agencies including the Departments of State and Homeland Security have stonewalled these efforts, declining since mid-2015 to provide Congress additional information. This move has prompted speculation among lawmakers that the administration is withholding information to prevent the exposure of major gaps in the U.S. screening process for new immigrants.

“The American people are entitled to information on the immigration history of terrorists seeking to harm them,” Cruz and Sessions wrote to the secretaries of State and Homeland Security and the attorney general.

Similar requests for information issued sent in August and again in December have not been answered by the administration

The letter cites a recent Free Beacon report detailing that an additional 41 foreign-born individuals had been snagged on terrorism-related charges since 2014. The disclosure of these previously unknown accused terrorists brings the total number of foreigners brought up on terrorism charges to 113.

Sessions and Cruz note that at least 14 of those foreigners accused of terrorism were granted legal entrance to the United States as refugees.

“Many more came through other immigration programs,” they wrote. “A number of immigrant terrorists were even approved for citizenship. Others are the U.S.-born children of foreign migrants whose presence in the country would not be possible but for the immigration of their parents.”

Many of these recently implicated foreigners have been caught by authorities planning terrorist attacks on American soil, while others were found to be involved in efforts to provide funding and material to ISIS, according to an internal list of migrant terrorists codified by congressional sources and viewed by the Free Beacon.

Cruz and Sessions are requesting that the agencies in question fill out a chart that includes only partial information about the 113 accused terrorists.

A senior congressional aide familiar with the investigation said the soaring rate of immigration is taking a toll on the U.S. security establishment.

“The cost of high rates of Muslim immigration are clear: enormous security challenges combined with vast expenses to track and convict those here attempting to wound Americans,” the source said.

The letter comes amid a debate over immigration and an Obama administration plan to boost the number of refugees granted residence in the United States. Under the administration’s plan, an additional 170,000 new migrants from Muslim-majority countries will enter the country in 2016.

As these agencies continue to ignore requests for information, the senators blasted the Obama administration for “continuing to stonewall the request even after a follow-up letter was sent subsequent to the San Bernardino terrorist attack.”

The administration has still not provided senators further information about the immigration histories of the two attackers who went on a shooting spree late last year in San Bernardino, California.

After the attack, it was discovered that both had legally immigrated to the United States, despite expressing support on social media for ISIS.

Last week, the Justice Department indicted two Iraqi refugees living in the United States legally of conspiring to provide material support to ISIS.

Additionally, a Philadelphia police officer was ambushed by an assailant sporting “Muslim garb and wearing a mask,” according to local reports. It was later determined that the individual had pledged allegiance to ISIS.

More Lawsuits Filed Against Obama

Posted on by

Legislation has been introduced to fix the stonewalling of FOIA requests by the Obama administration. That text is found here.

Introduced in House (02/02/2015)

FOIA Oversight and Implementation Act of 2015 or the FOIA Act

This bill makes changes to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to provide the public with greater access to information disclosable under such Act.

The bill requires agencies, in administering FOIA, to: (1) make information disclosable under such Act available to the public in an electronic, publicly accessible format; and (2) make available to the public records of general interest that inform the public of the operations and activities of the government or that have been requested three or more times.

The Office of Management and Budget is directed to ensure the operation of an online request portal that allows a member of the public to submit a FOIA request for records to any agency from a single website.

The bill establishes a presumption of openness by prohibiting an agency from withholding information otherwise disclosable under FOIA unless: (1) the agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would cause specific identifiable harm to an interest protected by an exemption to FOIA, or (2) disclosure is prohibited by law.

The duties of the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) are expanded to require: (1) mediation services to resolve disputes between agencies and persons making FOIA requests; (2) annual reports on the activities of OGIS that are available in an electronic, publicly accessible format; and (3) annual public meetings on the review of agencies’ FOIA policies, procedures, and compliance.

The bill requires annual agency FOIA reports and the annual reports on FOIA of the Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Information Policy (OIP) to be made available in an electronic, publicly accessible format.

Agencies are prohibited from assessing search or duplication fees if they have failed to comply with a statutory deadline for a FOIA response and did not submit a written notice to the requestor justifying the fees requested.

The role of the Chief FOIA Officer at each agency is expanded to require officers to serve as the primary agency liaison between OGIS and OIP and to complete annual compliance determinations that review agency regulations, fee assessments, use of exemptions, dispute resolution services, and the timely processing of FOIA requests.

The bill establishes a Chief FOIA Officers Council for developing recommendations for increasing compliance and efficiency, disseminating information about agency experiences, identifying initiatives to increase transparency and compliance, and promoting performance measures to ensure agency compliance with FOIA requirements.

The Inspector General of each agency is required to: (1) periodically review compliance with FOIA requirements, including the timely processing of requests, assessment of fees and fee waivers, and the use of FOIA exemptions, and (2) make recommendations to the agency head, including recommendations for disciplinary action.

Record Number of FOIA Lawsuits Filed Against Obama

DailyCaller: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) complaints filed in federal court have skyrocketed under President Barack Obama despite his promise to have “the most transparent administration ever,” according to a comprehensive analysis by a Syracuse University research unit.

A total of 498 FOIA lawsuits were filed in 2015, the highest number since 2001, the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse study made public Wednesday. The 421 suits filed in 2014 previously held the highest annual total.

The most recent two-year total represents a 54 percent increase over the total of 595 FOIA lawsuits filed in 2009 and 2010. See the accompanying chart below.

 

FOIA Lawsuits by TRAC

The FOIA requires federal departments and agencies to make available requests of all official documents, not covered by a handful of exemptions such as for law enforcement, privacy and protection of commercial secrets. When requested documents aren’t made available as required by law, requestors often go to federal court seeking a judicial order to compel production.

“The 919 FOIA cases filed in the period fiscal year 2014 – 2015 also far outnumber those filed during the last two years of the previous Bush administration. There were only 562 such matters filed during fiscal year 2007 – 2008, yielding a 64 percent increase for the most recent period,” TRAC said announcing the results of its analysis.

The Syracuse University research unit was founded by former New York Times investigative reporter David Burnham in 1989.

A total of 2,609 FOIA lawsuits were filed during Obama’s administration from 2009 to 2015, compared to 2,091 filed during the Bush administration from 2002 through 2008. The highest annual total of the Bush years was 387 in 2005.

“This is the most transparent administration in history,” Obama said in 2013 during a Google Plus Fireside Chat. “I can document that this is the case. Every visitor that comes into the White House is now part of the public record. Every law we pass and every rule we implement we put online for everyone to see.”

Obama did begin posting information to the Internet about White House visitors but only after a lawsuit was filed by the nonprofit government watchdog Judicial Watch.

Critics have frequently reminded Obama of his transparency claim, a fact TRAC noted, “the administration’s record has been a contentious matter ever since President Obama’s first days in office, when both he and Attorney General Eric Holder made sweeping claims about the ambitious FOIA policies they would follow in the years ahead.”

“In a short memorandum to the heads of all Executive Branch departments and agencies, the president said the Freedom of Information Act ‘should be administered with a clear presumption: in the face of doubt, openness prevails.’”

TRAC also cautioned, however, that an increase in the number of FOIA lawsuits being filed isn’t necessarily an indicator of less government transparency during a particular presidential administration.

“Because of possible changes in public attitudes about the public’s right to obtain government records, its willingness to challenge government’s failure to provide transparency, as well as changes in the Freedom of Information law and case law, the increase in federal FOIA court filings does not necessarily mean that the current administration is more or less secretive than those of the past,” TRAC said.

“But the rising counts well may indicate that this administration has not lived up to the ambitious open government promises made when President Obama first came to the White House,” TRAC said.

 

 

Your Threat Score, Yup, Yours

Posted on by

The new way police are surveilling you: Calculating your threat ‘score’

FRESNO, Calif. — While officers raced to a recent 911 call about a man threatening his ex-girlfriend, a police operator in headquarters consulted software that scored the suspect’s potential for violence the way a bank might run a credit report.

The program scoured billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and the man’s social- media postings. It calculated his threat level as the highest of three color-coded scores: a bright red warning.

The man had a firearm conviction and gang associations, so out of caution police called a negotiator. The suspect surrendered, and police said the intelligence helped them make the right call — it turned out he had a gun.

As a national debate has played out over mass surveillance by the National Security Agency, a new generation of technology such as the Beware software being used in Fresno has given local law enforcement officers unprecedented power to peer into the lives of citizens.

Police officials say such tools can provide critical information that can help uncover terrorists or thwart mass shootings, ensure the safety of officers and the public, find suspects, and crack open cases. They say that last year’s attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., have only underscored the need for such measures.

But the powerful systems also have become flash points for civil libertarians and activists, who say they represent a troubling intrusion on privacy, have been deployed with little public oversight and have potential for abuse or error. Some say laws are needed to protect the public.

In many instances, people have been unaware that the police around them are sweeping up information, and that has spawned controversy. Planes outfitted with cameras filmed protests and unrest in Baltimore and Ferguson, Mo. For years, dozens of departments used devices that can hoover up all cellphone data in an area without search warrants. Authorities in Oregon are facing a federal probe after using social media-monitoring software to keep tabs on Black Lives Matter hashtags.

“This is something that’s been building since September 11,” said Jennifer Lynch, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “First funding went to the military to develop this technology, and now it has come back to domestic law enforcement. It’s the perfect storm of cheaper and easier-to-use technologies and money from state and federal governments to purchase it.”

Few departments will discuss how — or sometimes if — they are using these tools, but the Fresno police offered a rare glimpse inside a cutting-edge $600,000 nerve center, even as a debate raged in the city over its technology.

An arsenal of high-tech tools

Fresno’s Real Time Crime Center is the type of facility that has become the model for high-tech policing nationwide. Similar centers have opened in New York, Houston and Seattle over the past decade.

Fresno’s futuristic control room, which operates around the clock, sits deep in its headquarters and brings together a handful of technologies that allow the department to see, analyze and respond to incidents as they unfold across this city of more than 500,000 in the San Joaquin Valley.

On a recent Monday afternoon, the center was a hive of activity. The police radio crackled over loudspeakers — “subject armed with steel rod” — as five operators sat behind banks of screens dialing up a wealth of information to help units respond to the more than 1,200 911 calls the department receives every day.

On 57 monitors that cover the walls of the center, operators zoomed and panned an array of roughly 200 police cameras perched across the city. They could dial up 800 more feeds from the city’s schools and traffic cameras, and they soon hope to add 400 more streams from cameras worn on officers’ bodies and from thousands from local businesses that have surveillance systems.

The cameras were only one tool at the ready. Officers could trawl a private database that has recorded more than 2 billion scans of vehicle licenses plates and locations nationwide. If gunshots were fired, a system called ShotSpotter could triangulate the location using microphones strung around the city. Another program, called Media Sonar, crawled social media looking for illicit activity. Police used it to monitor individuals, threats to schools and hashtags related to gangs.

Fresno police said having the ability to access all that information in real time is crucial to solving crimes.

They recently used the cameras to track a robbery suspect as he fled a business and then jumped into a canal to hide. He was quickly apprehended.

The license plate database was instrumental in solving a September murder case, in which police had a description of a suspect’s vehicle and three numbers from the license plate.

But perhaps the most controversial and revealing technology is the threat-scoring software Beware. Fresno is one of the first departments in the nation to test the program.

As officers respond to calls, Beware automatically runs the address. The searches return the names of residents and scans them against a range of publicly available data to generate a color-coded threat level for each person or address: green, yellow or red.

Exactly how Beware calculates threat scores is something that its maker, Intrado, considers a trade secret, so it is unclear how much weight is given to a misdemeanor, felony or threatening comment on Facebook. However, the program flags issues and provides a report to the user.

In promotional materials, Intrado writes that Beware could reveal that the resident of a particular address was a war veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, had criminal convictions for assault and had posted worrisome messages about his battle experiences on social media. The “big data” that has transformed marketing and other industries has now come to law enforcement.

Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer said officers are often working on scant or even inaccurate information when they respond to calls, so Beware and the Real Time Crime Center give them a sense of what may be behind the next door.

“Our officers are expected to know the unknown and see the unseen,” Dyer said. “They are making split-second decisions based on limited facts. The more you can provide in terms of intelligence and video, the more safely you can respond to calls.”

But some in Fresno say the power and the sheer concentration of surveillance in the Real Time Crime Center is troubling. The concerns have been raised elsewhere as well — last year, Oakland city officials scaled back plans for such a center after residents protested, citing privacy concerns.

Rob Nabarro, a Fresno civil rights lawyer, said he is particularly concerned about Beware. He said outsourcing decisions about the threat posed by an individual to software is a problem waiting to happen.

Nabarro said the fact that only Intrado — not the police or the public — knows how Beware tallies its scores is disconcerting. He also worries that the system might mistakenly increase someone’s threat level by misinterpreting innocuous activity on social media, like criticizing the police, and trigger a heavier response by officers.

“It’s a very unrefined, gross technique,” Nabarro said of Beware’s color-coded levels. “A police call is something that can be very dangerous for a citizen.”

Dyer said such concerns are overblown, saying the scores don’t trigger a particular police response. He said operators use them as guides to delve more deeply into someone’s background, looking for information that might be relevant to an officer on scene. He said officers on the street never see the scores.

Still, Nabarro is not the only one worried.

The Fresno City Council called a hearing on Beware in November after constituents raised concerns. Once council member referred to a local media report saying that a woman’s threat level was elevated because she was tweeting about a card game titled “Rage,” which could be a keyword in Beware’s assessment of social media.

Councilman Clinton J. Olivier, a libertarian-leaning Republican, said Beware was like something out of a dystopian science fiction novel and asked Dyer a simple question: “Could you run my threat level now?”

Dyer agreed. The scan returned Olivier as a green, but his home came back as a yellow, possibly because of someone who previously lived at his address, a police official said.

“Even though it’s not me that’s the yellow guy, your officers are going to treat whoever comes out of that house in his boxer shorts as the yellow guy,” Olivier said. “That may not be fair to me.”

He added later: “[Beware] has failed right here with a council member as the example.”

An Intrado representative responded to an interview request seeking more information about how Beware works by sending a short statement. It read in part: “Beware works to quickly provide [officers] with commercially available, public information that may be relevant to the situation and may give them a greater level of awareness.”

Calls for ‘meaningful debate’

Similar debates over police surveillance have been playing out across the country, as new technologies have proliferated and law enforcement use has exploded.

The number of local police departments that employ some type of technological surveillance increased from 20 percent in 1997 to more than 90 percent in 2013, according to the latest information from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The most common forms of surveillance are cameras and automated license plate readers, but the use of handheld biometric scanners, social media monitoring software, devices that collect cellphone data and drones is increasing.

Locally, the American Civil Liberties Union reports that police in the District, Baltimore, and Montgomery and Fairfax counties have cellphone-data collectors, called cell site simulators or StingRays. D.C. police are also using ShotSpotter and license plate readers.

The surveillance creates vast amounts of data, which is increasingly pooled in local, regional and national databases. The largest such project is the FBI’s $1 billion Next Generation Identification project, which is creating a trove of fingerprints, iris scans, data from facial recognition software and other sources that aid local departments in identifying suspects.

Law enforcement officials say such tools allow them to do more with less, and they have credited the technology with providing breaks in many cases. Virginia State Police found the man who killed a TV news crew during a live broadcast last year after his license plate was captured by a reader.

Cell site simulators, which mimic a cellphone tower and scoop up data on all cellphones in an area, have been instrumental in finding kidnappers, fugitives and people who are suicidal, law enforcement officials said.

But those benefits have sometimes come with a cost to privacy. Law enforcement used cell site simulators for years without getting a judge’s explicit consent. But following criticism by the ACLU and other groups, the Justice Department announced last September that it would require all federal agencies to get a search warrant.

The fact that public discussion of surveillance technologies is occurring after they are in use is backward, said Matt Cagle, an attorney for the ACLU of Northern California.

“We think that whenever these surveillance technologies are on the table, there needs to be a meaningful debate,” Cagle said. “There needs to be safeguards and oversight.”

After the contentious hearing before the Fresno City Council on Beware, Dyer said he now wants to make changes to address residents’ concerns. The police chief said he is working with Intrado to turn off Beware’s color-coded rating system and possibly the social media monitoring.

“There’s a balancing act,” Dyer said.