Leahy Threat Update

Fred Fielding, the White House Counsel, responded on August 20th with the same old Bush tripe: National Security, Executive Privilege, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. Will Leahy follow through? Not likely. As of now, he has only committed to suggesting contempt charges before the Senate Judiciary Committee when Congress goes back in session. The best coverage I've seen is from The Jurist, a publication of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

Ignorance is Strength: German Sociologist Arrested for Membership in Terrorist Organization

I'm not clear on all the details yet, but Andrej Holm was arrested on July 31st under § 129a StGB” (German Penal Code, section 7 on ‘Crimes against Public Order’). He is a sociologist at Humboldt University in Berlin and does work on cities, which is apparently part of the trouble. That he uses the word 'gentrification' in his work is among the evidence given for his membership in a terrorist organization. Here is a mainstream media piece on it:

Deutsche Welle (in English).

The Latest NYT Apologia for the Sell-Out Dems

From the New York Times

WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 — At a closed-door briefing in mid-July, senior intelligence officials startled lawmakers with some troubling news. American eavesdroppers were collecting just 25 percent of the foreign-based communications they had been receiving a few months earlier.

Congress needed to act quickly, intelligence officials said, to repair a dangerous situation.

More later.

Leahy Sets Another Meaningless Deadline

As TPM reports, Patrick Leahy, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has set another deadline for the administration to ignore without consequences. Leahy originally subpoenaed the documents regarding the legal basis of the--now completely legal by act of Congress--warrantless wiretapping programs on June 27th, 2007. August 20th is the new date on which nothing will happen.

09/11/2007 Attempt to Organize a General Strike

It is too bad that the 9.11 truth people are the ones who are starting to organize this. There are, of course, multiple other reasons to go on strike on 09.11.07, some of which are listed on their flyers. But, the site is worth a look anyway.

And there you have it...

This is what happened:

The 227 to 183 House vote capped a high-pressure campaign by the White House to change the nation's wiretap law, in which the administration capitalized on Democrats' fears of being branded weak on terrorism and on a general congressional desire to act on the measure before an August recess.

Here are the details:

The bill would give the National Security Agency the right to collect such communications in the future without a warrant. But it goes further than that: It also would allow the interception and recording of electronic communications involving, at least in part, people "reasonably believed to be outside the United States" without a court's order or oversight.

[snip]

In a sole substantial concession to Democrats, the administration agreed to a provision allowing the legislation to be reconsidered in six months.

[snip]

Under the administration's version of the bill, the director of national intelligence and the attorney general can authorize the surveillance of all communications involving foreign targets. Oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, composed of federal judges whose deliberations are secret, would be limited to examining whether the government's guidelines for targeting overseas suspects are appropriate. The court would not authorize the surveillance.

But, wait, if a significant number of calls from somewhere else are routed through the US, isn't it at least possible that some domestic calls are routed through other countries? If true, can't basically all calls, emails, web-postings, etc. be monitored without a warrant?

Even if this isn't true, we are now entirely dependent on assurances from the executive--and if history shows anything, it shows them to be trustworthy--that the "reasonably believed to be outside the United States" clause will not be abused. But, we don't just have to trust the executive, but two guys in particular: Alberto Gonzales, who can't tell the truth even when he's trying and the director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell, who, if Democrats are to be believe--a big if, I admit, given their (triumphant?) return to their pre-Iraq blind adherence to "OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF"--just pulled the rug out from under the Senate Democrats who thought they had a deal, which would have at least given the secret FISA court a role more significant than listening to stories from AG and MM.

When the original warrantless surveillance program was revealed, one FISA judge resigned in protest. Hopefully, there will at least be some symbolic protest here.

Just in case it still matters, here's the 4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Reichstag, Oh, I mean Senate passes FISA reform

I wonder if Chertoff's gut feeling and the stepped up Capitol police presence has scared the Senate into capitulation. Ridiculous.

The bill which just passed the Senate requires the administration to "describe" the procedures to the (secret) FISA court:

From Reuters:

Offered by Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, no relation to the national intelligence director, the bill would allow the administration to continue the warrantless surveillance but require it to describe to a secret federal court the procedures it uses in targeting foreign suspects.

The Senate defeated, on a 45-43 vote, a Democratic alternative, which would have placed tighter controls on the spying and provided for independent assessments of the attorney general's implementation of the measure.

FISA Court already said this was illegal

Two things to note from today's Washington Post.

1.

A federal intelligence court judge earlier this year secretly declared a key element of the Bush administration's wiretapping efforts illegal, according to a lawmaker and government sources, providing a previously unstated rationale for fevered efforts by congressional lawmakers this week to expand the president's spying powers.

2. Apparently FOX news viewers are allowed to hear classified info so long as it comes from a republican:

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) disclosed elements of the court's decision in remarks Tuesday to Fox News as he was promoting the administration-backed wiretapping legislation. Boehner has denied revealing classified information, but two government officials privy to the details confirmed that his remarks concerned classified information.

My favorite Scooter Libby Ad Hominem

Scooty Puff Junior

Just remember: "Scooty Puff Jr. suuuucccckssss!"

Because sometimes, a secret court just isn't good enough

So as the debate over FISA reform heats up, the administration actully has the audacity to ask for revisions that would allow the AG to approve wiretaps without review by the FISA court.

From the Wapo:

On Friday, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell submitted a proposal to Congress that asked for the authority to intercept without a court order any international phone call or e-mail between a surveillance target outside the United States and any person in the United States.

Yesterday, the administration updated its proposal by saying that the attorney general and the director of national intelligence could authorize such surveillance and that the guidelines on what constitutes an overseas target be subject to some court review. But the surveillance could begin before the court review and the oversight would be limited.

And the democrats, as I posted yesterday are bending over backwards to get something, anything passed. So long as Gonzales is not given sole discretion:

The proposal, according to House and Senate Democrats, would permit a secret court to issue broad orders approving eavesdropping of communications involving suspects overseas and other people, who may be in the United States. To issue an order, the court would not need to identify a particular target overseas, but it would have to determine that those being targeted are "likely," in fact, overseas.

If a foreign target's communications to a person inside the United States reaches a "significant" number, then an court order based on probable cause would be required. It is unclear how "significant" would be defined.

Under a sunset provision, the authority would have to be revisited in six months.

[snip]

The Democrats' proposal also would compel compliance by private companies.

It would also affirm that no court order is needed to eavesdrop on communications that begin and end outside the United States, even if routed through the United States.

Feingold seems to be the only dissenter on this via Daily Kos and his website:

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On the Proposed FISA Legislation

August 1, 2007

“We need to wiretap terrorists, and we should address the problem that has been identified with FISA with respect to foreign-to-foreign communications. But the administration’s overly broad proposal goes far beyond that and would leave critical decisions related to surveillance involving Americans entirely up to the Attorney General. The proposal from the Democratic leadership is better and involves FISA court review from the start. But it does not have adequate safeguards to protect Americans’ privacy. The bill should also include a 90-day sunset to ensure Congress has the chance to identify and fix any problems with this new proposal.”

McConnell Selectively De-Classifies in Order to Cover Gonzales' Ass

From the WaPo:

"The Bush administration's chief intelligence official said yesterday that President Bush authorized a series of secret surveillance activities under a single executive order in late 2001. The disclosure makes clear that a controversial National Security Agency program was part of a much broader operation than the president previously described."

In other words, since Gonzales is under fire once again, we are willing to admit that we've been spying in a lot more ways than you even thought. Since Gonzales said that the Hospital Room Coup wasn't about the "TSP," here's some other things it might be about, which we still won't tell you. But, we're watching you.

And, what I still don't understand is why these other activities aren't also a violation of FISA and since they were all authorized under one executive order, why the President isn't in jail.

This selective de-classification is also convenient in that it comes just as McConnell is also pushing for an "updating" of FISA. And guess what? The Democrats can't wait to look tough on terrorism and so are bending over backwards to pass it. It's like 9/11 all over again, in the sense that politicians are clamouring to do somethng, anything to look like they are doing something about terrorism. (or at least to be able to blame someone else if there is another attack on the "homeland" (my favorite throw back to Nazi Germany). From the NYT:

In the past few days, Mr. Bush and Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence, have publicly called on Congress to make the change before its August recess, which could begin this weekend. Democrats appear to be worried that if they block such legislation, the White House will depict them as being weak on terrorism.

“We hope our Republican counterparts will work together with us to fix the problem, rather than try again to gain partisan political advantage at the expense of our national security,” Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said in a statement Monday night.

So, to quote post festum from post 544:

But all this is window dressing: Bush directly intervened and took it upon himself to continue the operation of a program that the OLC -- the one and only voice that is always taken as dispositive in matters of law in the Executive Branch -- and that means that yet again Bush and several others are felons.