U.S. must release domestic spying documents.
By on Feb 16th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
U.S. must release domestic spying documents.
In response to a lawsuit by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to produce or identify all documents related to President Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program within 20 days.
UPDATE: Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) says “he has worked out an agreement with the White House to change U.S. law regarding the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program and provide more information about it to Congress.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Excellent start.
February 16th, 2006 at 3:54 pmWow, do I see a light at the end of this dark tunnel?
February 16th, 2006 at 3:59 pmwoo! or can they appeal this ad infinitum?
February 16th, 2006 at 4:01 pmDoes that include the scraps of the hundreds they’ve undoubtedly already shredded?
February 16th, 2006 at 4:01 pmSorry to sound cynical, but I seem to remember a federal judge also ordered Cheney to release his notes from his secret energy task force.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:02 pmWe’ll only see the light at the end of the tunnel if the Justice Department complies. However, in the words of the great Jesse Jackson, “Keep Hope Alive!” Here’s hoping this is the beginning of the end.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:02 pm“Wow, do I see a light at the end of this dark tunnel?” – - It’s probably a 20-ton locomotive bearing down on you.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:03 pmDo they have all 20 of those days to file an appeal? Or do they have less than that?
Because if they can appeal it, they will. And if they can’t appeal, they’ll ignore it and wait for another order from the judge. At some point, the judge is going to get sick and tired of the delays and order someone to be put in jail. I wonder who that will be? The President? The Attorney General? The people who filed the lawsuit?
February 16th, 2006 at 4:04 pmHopefully this is a bonifide fight between the Courts and the Criminals.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pmThe Courts are irrelevant. They made themselves irrelevant the moment they said the 10 commandments cannot be hung in government buildings. Besides Cheney has secret executive order 666 that says he doesnt have to comply by any judges orders because he has inherent vice presidential powers.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pmNational Security exemption! It is not in the best interests of the American people to reveal that they are being screwed, conned and “sold into Eqypt” by their beer-guzzling, rifle-toting overseers.
This will get bagged on appeal. But then we can shout “cover-up”…so it won’t be a total loss.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pmWayne A. Schneider,
I would go with Alberto Gonzales if the Justice Department doesn’t comply.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pm20 days to shred away.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:10 pmWhy is the legislature taking so long in making it illegal to file a FOIA request? I guess they are just too busy debating how many of our rights to take away and for how long.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:11 pmGiven the way the administration has responded to FOIA requests,I’m surprised the Justice Dept. didn’t ask for ten cents a page.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:14 pmAn appeal is likely but there was no mention of consolidating this suit with the others. I thought I’d read the ACLU had also filed along with individuals,including Christopher Hitchens. Was that suit in a different district?
Once it starts up the appellate chain,there’s only one court at the top of the chain. I wonder if Alito would break from the pack?
It won’t be as much fun as guessing whether Cheney was drunk but it’ll do.
“Without offering specifics, [Sen] Roberts said the agreement with the White House provides “a fix” to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act…”
Right. I’ll bet $1 the “fix” is more freedom to do as they damn well please.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:20 pm#13–on day 21….”what docs? We have no idea what you’re talking about…come take a look for yourself…see? nothing here!”
February 16th, 2006 at 4:24 pmRoberts? Are you joking? He’d coronate Bush in an ermine cloak if he thought he could get away with it.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:24 pmSo if the law is “fixed”, does that mean the breaking of the law that has been going on so far still a crime?
And it seems to me that having to “fix” this law is an indirect admission that the law was not being followed.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:26 pmPat Roberts is a Dork anyway.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:26 pmFor the love of God, where is Hinkley when you need him?
February 16th, 2006 at 4:28 pmChanging the law after the Fact?
February 16th, 2006 at 4:31 pmBut will GW make another “Signiing Statement” Saying he won’t abide by it??
Who’s Kidding Who? We already have a Good law requiring congress to be informed: This Administration just choose to break it.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:32 pmTypical, just like corrupt senators and lobbyists, change the ‘ethics’ after the pooch has been screwed
February 16th, 2006 at 4:33 pmWe are INTELLIGENT vote for US for Senate!
We are in trouble WE FORGOT what we signed!
Yeh right, that card has been played, TOO many times.
Spineless worms.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:35 pmi hope the truth fairy left something under roberts’ pillow last night, because 99.9% of the time that man is so full of crap he’s choking on it
February 16th, 2006 at 4:36 pmThis is a dodge the bullet tactic. Retroactively making Bush’s actions legal to avoid impeachment.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:42 pmRemoveBush calling Hinkley, Hinkley are you out there????
February 16th, 2006 at 4:44 pmOh yeah, the Bush Administration will jump right on this to comply…uhuh..oh yeah you’ll see , now about the shooting by the vice president and the reason it was kept from the public…
February 16th, 2006 at 4:47 pmJust for clarity….. Replace Hinkley with Oswald…. I didnt want it to be real obvious.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:49 pmI don’t care about changing anything. What I care about is putting these bastards in jail for what they have already done.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:52 pmBegin Satire(Pat_Roberts);
February 16th, 2006 at 4:53 pmPat Roberts has a glowing resume. Just consult the following web page for confirmation:
http://roberts.senate.gov/
End;
He won’t do it. You watch. He’ll call them activist judges and claim executive authority and he won’t comply. It’s the arrogance of the critter, it’s in his nature.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:55 pmRegardless of what Roberts “fix” might be it still can not violate the constitution. So if the “fix” allows the president to work without probable cause (General Hayden, that happens to be in the constitution) then the law will be invalid.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:56 pmWhy would the administration be open to changing something they feel wasn’t broken in the first place? If the Democrats can hold onto a pair and grow a spine they should follow this reasoning along with demanding from the Senator from Kansas the final Phase 2 report showing what was done with the faulty information Bush was given. Demand the answers and don’t sway.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:59 pm#34 – Yeah but they are hoping that the ignorant people, like the trolls that come here, will buy the line and things will be forgoten.
The problem is that the law is pretty clear and what they are saying they are going to do now is what the law already states they have to do anyway. Such as informing committee members to such operations the WH is doing.
So there really are no modifications, other than extending the time for a warrant from 72 hours to 1 year, that can be done that does not already exist in law.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:01 pmOne other thing to ponder…even if the law was amended to make everything legal, it has still been illegal for the last 4 years.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:04 pmGiven the update by Pat Roberts, I won’t believe anything until I see it. But I can’t get any news now.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:06 pmWe have lost the CNN broadcast here in my part of Illinois. No Headline news, no Fox-TV either, MSNBC is on Olympics (no Hardball at 4PM) Other channels are ok, so I don’t know what’s happening. Local news is just that – all local.
My first thought was that Bush blocked the news channels.
I didn’t know Roberts could single-handedly change the law. Must be nice.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:08 pmCan anyone (TP?) tell us exactly how the ex post facto prohibition in the Constitution works? I know that they can’t retroactively make something illegal, but can they also retroactively make something that was illegal before legal?
If the President’s Warrantless Domestic Spying Program (we have to claim that title back) violated the Constitution before, can Congress pass a constitutional law that says the President’s actions are now constitutional? It doesn’t make sense.
I know that they can, and have before, passed laws that took away the court’s ability to review certain things. Do you think that’s how they’ll make the president’s illegal actions legal? By not letting any court have jurisdiction over them?
And finally, whether or not the President’s Warrantless Domestic Spying Program was legal, if it was unconstitutional, is there any law that Congress could pass that would take that fact (unconstitutionality) away legally? And if not, could the President still be impeached for it?
February 16th, 2006 at 5:10 pm#9 – Hopefully this is a bonifide fight between the Courts and the Criminals.
The Teflon Team (aka: BushCo) will find a way to not comply. Even if it involves breaking the law. The Teflon Team will continue to act as they choose.
Impeach Bush NOW!
February 16th, 2006 at 5:12 pmI am confused — if Bush is able to have the law changed now to his favor, won’t that mean he was operating illegally before the change?
February 16th, 2006 at 5:20 pmThe mere fact of changing the law to suit him, implies that he was out of the law previously, and therefore, couldn’t he be prosecuted?
Marie – Of course, but this won’t be pursued. The WH said many times that they had the authority and that they were conducting this legally, so if they were conducting this legally; Why do they need to change the law?
February 16th, 2006 at 5:24 pmYeh right, that card has been played, TOO many times.
Comment by mr ho — February 16, 2006 @ 4:35 pm
And yet the American people keep on falling for it. Reminds me of a dog we had when I was growing up. No matter how many times he didn’t get to ride in the car when he heard the keys jingle, he’d always come running to the door with high expectations every time.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:24 pmHe didn’t follow the law that was already in place, what makes people think that if they design a law just for him that he’ll follow that? Bullshit with a capital B
February 16th, 2006 at 5:24 pm9-11 IS THE ORIGINAL LIE ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS
February 16th, 2006 at 5:53 pmAND IT ALL GOES AWAY
5- You don’t sound cynical enough. Anything Roberts has anything to do with is as compromised as he is. Any agreement he may have with the White House is almost guaranteed to only benefit the Administration. Witness the chicanery regarding “Phase II.” Roberts has become a firewall for the administration. Expecting anything remotely honest from him is foolish.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:56 pmI wonder if Alito would break from the pack?
That was a joke, right?
February 16th, 2006 at 5:58 pmNo Headline news, no Fox-TV either, MSNBC is on Olympics (no Hardball at 4PM)
With the exception of Olberman, consider it divine intervention.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:04 pmI wonder if Alito would break from the pack?
That was a joke, right?
Comment by David — February 16, 2006 @ 5:58 pm
He already has. His first vote, he sided with the liberals and moderates. Of course Bush wasn’t in the case, so I’m sure that factors in completely differently…
February 16th, 2006 at 6:09 pmWhat you are seeing here is that Pat Roberts, idiat from Kansas, and further proof that Kansas should be done away with, has the power to act for, not only the Intelligence Committee in the senate, bur for the senate as a whole, and for all of the Amurkan people.
I suppose he was given that right by King George who merely called him up and said “Pat, why dont you come over and on behalf of the full senate and the Amurkan people, we will iron this whole thing out”.
Now, if they are going to make a law that Bush and Roberts can live with, does that not mean, as a previous poster eluded to, that they have been breaking the old law? Sure seems that way to me.
I think personnaly that it is time to get all of our shotguns out, get them oiled up and loaded with buckshot, and go after the whole damn bunch.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:10 pm#45, that’s only because you haven’t seen the change to the law yet! I think it’s called “Cheney’s Amendment”:
Section 1: Dick Cheney is allowed to do anything he wants.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:18 pmI think the fact that Sen. Roberts is tryng to “fix” the illegal spying program is proof that the program is illegal because if it’s legal why “fix” it
February 16th, 2006 at 6:28 pmPat Roberts is again the Bush waterboy. He will shut down any thought of investigating the illegal wiretapping/FISA with a “compromise” and he said, if the White House doesn’t back it up, he will force them to do so later. Or words to that effect.
Yeah, right — just like last November when the Democrats actually made Roberts look foolish because of a similar broken promise regarding pre-war intelligence failures.
It will be a cold day in hell before Roberts makes the White House do anything — instead, he will bluster for now, and when the time comes he will simply let it fall away.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:52 pmAren’t we still waiting for the Phase 2 of the pre-war intelligence report that Roberts promised in November?
Dems claim the inability to hold hearings ties their hands.
I think Dems should have pooled every damn dollar they have and bombarded the public with PSAs.
I think I’ve decided to vote independent from here on. Even if it means splitting the Dem vote and electing Repubs. The Hackett thing and the inability of the Dems to affect public opinion have worn me out.
Just wait until the terrorist-obsessed goobers get their rights violated in an obvious way. There will be lynchins of Repubs.
February 16th, 2006 at 7:01 pm“Aren’t we still waiting for the Phase 2 of the pre-war intelligence report that Roberts promised in November?”
Comment by Marie — February 16, 2006 @ 6:52
Ah, cut him some slack. The issues involved dictate that he move carefully, and in secret; so the intelligence committee is tasked to meet once a month – on a moonless night in Senator Rubberstamp’s cornfield.
February 16th, 2006 at 7:05 pmPat Roberts is the sole person on this planet capable of making W look intelligent(If you exclude Dan Quayle, Gary, IRI and ma).
February 16th, 2006 at 8:26 pmNail these suckers to the wall!
February 16th, 2006 at 9:04 pm[...] [Permalink] No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTMLallowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]
February 16th, 2006 at 9:04 pmWalt you left out Rush and the whole Faux news crew, and Rick Santarum
February 16th, 2006 at 9:26 pmClif, you earned the touche’.
February 16th, 2006 at 9:50 pmWalt with all the blathering head wingnuts today with bushes few words a day he actually looks intelligent but if he tried to speak as much as they do he’d as they sayu remove all doubt.
February 16th, 2006 at 10:06 pmsen. p. roberts (no caps intentional) is a true American TRAITOR! He a liar of worst kind and deserves to be jailed for lying and disobeying his responsibilities as described in the rules of government. He has lied to us, his ultimate employers on more than one occasion- example 1 being his statement that he would begin phase two of his committees investigation and that was a lie! He had to be forced to state that he would start the investigation only after the dems shut down congress. AND THE LIAR HAS ONCE AGAIN LIED– still no activity. I could go on but why bother. This admin is staffed by the most corrupt, evil group of liars in the history of this once great nation and it is individuals like this piece of garbage-sen roberts that display just how far greed will drive an individual.
February 16th, 2006 at 11:05 pmhe belongs in jail but that is not going to happen – not at this point in history. How bloody sad.
billjpa@aol.com
For the latest news, key hearings, legal documents, statutes and other materials in the domestic spying scandal, see:
February 17th, 2006 at 1:15 am“The NSA Domestic Spying Resource Center.”
Back when I was a child, my father taught me that depending on the tool, you either worked with the tool or let it work for you. You let a belt sander do the work but you apply a bit of pressure with an orbital. A hammer is best employed by grabbing it by the base of the handle, but a wrench may be restrained by confined spaces. Never power saw without using a guard and a push stick. This lesson saved me from the fate of a near neighbor who has very short fingers on his left hand. Point is – You should not throw caution to the winds. This admin has.
February 17th, 2006 at 1:21 am#40: good questions. Congress can amend a law any time that it wants to allow the power. However, the amendment cannot be written in such a way that it can be read to retroactively make crimes committed under the original law disappear.
If the program is unconstitutional than no law allowing it can make it legal, i.e. constituional. An unconstituional law is not legal and the courts have the ability to review, upon challenge, any act of congress.
If the president’s program was unconstitutional in its execution or scope than there is nothing cangress can do to make it constitutional.
February 17th, 2006 at 12:03 pmThey cannot pass a law that strips an amendment to the constitution, they would have to allow challenges in the courts.
#66 Sure it can. They can retroactively quash convictions under previous law, grant blanket immunity, etc. For example, after the Civil War, they would not prosecute those who aided escaped slaves when it was illegal.
What they cannot do is make something a crime and prosecute a previous offense. For example, Ken Kesey could not be prosecuted for handing out LSD, because it was legal at the time.
February 17th, 2006 at 2:28 pmOur Privacy Is Secretly Going Away…
The ACLU may well be our only hope to contain the creeping loss of rights we are all experiencing. They’re mounting another petition and legal campaign. The Bush Administration keeps hoping the questions will stop about illegal spying on Americans, bu…
February 20th, 2006 at 12:09 am