ThinkProgress Logo

Media

Wash. Times Pushes Surveillance Myths As “News”

By Judd Legum on Dec 22, 2005 at 10:02 am

The Washington Times has an article titled “‘Warrantless’ searches not unprecedented.” It demonstrates a startling degree of ignorance about the issue.

The opening sentence reads “Previous administrations, as well as the court that oversees national security cases, agreed with President Bush’s position that a president legally may authorize searches without warrants in pursuit of foreign intelligence.” That isn’t even the issue. The issue is whether the President can authorize electronic surveillance of U.S. persons without warrants. (No one disputes that it can do so abroad. That’s what it means to have an intelligence operation.)

It only gets worse from there. The article, written by Charles Hurt, claims that Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick testimony in 1994 supports administration’s legal position. But as I’ve explained in detail, Gorelick’s testimony was about the President’s authority to conduct physical searches, which weren’t covered by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act at the time of her testimony. The act was amended in 1995 to cover physical searches. Before and after the amendment, the Clinton administration complied with the law.

Hurt also steals a trick from the National Review’s Byron York and takes a sentence from a 2002 FISA court opinion out of context. (I explain how here.)

The article concludes with a long, and completely irrelevant, history of previous administration’s use of warrantless physical searches – all of which occur before the 1995 made warrantless physical searches illegal.

This is about following the law. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Security

FISA Judges: Bush Spying Program Threatens Legitimate Anti-Terrorism Investigations

By ThinkProgress on Dec 22, 2005 at 8:46 am

The Washington Post reports that FISA Court judges will soon convene to address the legality of President Bush’s domestic spying program.

The story contains an important point that strikes at the heart of the Bush administration’s case that the spying program benefited our national security. According to several FISA judges quoted by the Post, there are serious concerns that “legally suspect information” acquired through warrantless surveillance was used to obtain FISA warrants, potentially rendering the warrants illegitimate.

Two intelligence sources familiar with the plan said Kollar-Kotelly expects top-ranking officials from the National Security Agency and the Justice Department to outline the classified program to the members.

The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president’s suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

This possibility is entirely the fault of President Bush and his senior officials. They knew precisely what the rules were, they broke them, and as a result, they have jeopardized countless legitimate anti-terrorism investigations.

Politics

Executive iPod privileges:

By ThinkProgress on Dec 22, 2005 at 1:20 am

During Cheney’s flight home, “most of the electric outlets went on the fritz. Working passengers began lining up their laptops to share the power from a couple of working outlets – particularly the reporters who urgently needed to prepare their articles to transmit during a quick refueling stop in England. But when Cheney said his iPod needed to be recharged, it took precedence above all else and dominated one precious outlet for several hours.” (via First Draft)

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up