Bush admin: Never mind, the sky isn’t falling

Since the expiration of the poorly-named Protect America Act, the White House and its allies have gone to great lengths to argue that we should be absolutely terrified. Those mean ol’ Democrats in Congress have refused to give the president everything he wants, and the consequences, they’ve claimed, will likely be catastrophic. Congressional Republicans even created their own ad on the subject, “with the very straightforward message that the Dems will get us all killed by the gun-waving Muslims.”

Well, as it turns out, I have good news and bad news. The bad news is, the administration and Republicans on the Hill appear to have been proven wrong. Again. The good news is, the sky still isn’t falling.

The Bush administration said yesterday that the government “lost intelligence information” because House Democrats allowed a surveillance law to expire last week, causing some telecommunications companies to refuse to cooperate with terrorism-related wiretapping orders.

But hours later, administration officials told lawmakers that the final holdout among the companies had relented and agreed to fully participate in the surveillance program, according to an official familiar with the issue.

The closer one looks, the more it appears the administration’s fear-mongering was unfounded. Who would have guessed?

The LAT report had some especially helpful details.

A day after warning that potentially critical terrorism intelligence was being lost because Congress had not finished work on a controversial espionage law, the U.S. attorney general and the national intelligence director said Saturday that the government was receiving the information — at least temporarily.

On Friday evening, Atty. Gen. Michael B. Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence J. Michael McConnell had said in an unusually blunt letter to Congress that the nation “is now more vulnerable to terrorist attack and other foreign threats” because lawmakers had not yet acted on the administration’s proposal for the wiretapping law.

But within hours of sending that letter, administration officials told lawmakers on the House and Senate intelligence committees that they had prevailed upon all of the telecommunications companies to continue cooperating with the government’s requests for information while negotiations with Congress continue. […]

“Unfortunately, the delay resulting from this discussion impaired our ability to cover foreign intelligence targets, which resulted in missed intelligence information,” Mukasey and McConnell added.

Government officials declined to comment on how much intelligence data may have been lost or how serious it might have been.

One Democratic congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter, expressed skepticism that any significant gap had existed, noting that existing rules permit continued monitoring of known terrorists and their associates.

“This is serious backpedaling by the DNI,” said one Democratic congressional official said of McConnell. “He’s been saying for the last week that the sky is falling, and the sky is not falling.”

Something to consider the next time McConnell and the White House try to scare the bejeezus out of us.

And finally, Jay Rockefeller, Patrick Leahy, Silvestre Reyes, and John Conyers — the Democratic chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees — had an op-ed in the WaPo today on the subject:

[O]ur country did not “go dark” on Feb. 16 when the Protect America Act (PAA) expired. Despite President Bush’s overheated rhetoric on this issue, the government’s orders under that act will last until at least August. These orders could cover every known terrorist group and foreign target. No surveillance stopped. If a new member of a known group, a new phone number or a new e-mail address is identified, U.S. intelligence can add it to the existing orders, and surveillance can begin immediately. […]

In the remote possibility that a terrorist organization that we have never previously identified emerges, the National Security Agency could use existing authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to track its communications. Since Congress passed FISA in 1978, the court governing the law’s use has approved nearly 23,000 warrant applications and rejected only five. In an emergency, the NSA or FBI can begin surveillance immediately and a FISA court order does not have to be obtained for three days. […]

So what’s behind the president’s “sky is falling” rhetoric? It is clear that he and his Republican allies, desperate to distract attention from the economy and other policy failures, are trying to use this issue to scare the American people into believing that congressional Democrats have left America vulnerable to terrorist attack.

But if our nation were to suddenly become vulnerable, it would not be because we don’t have sufficient domestic surveillance powers. It would be because the Bush administration has done too little to defeat al-Qaeda, which has reconstituted itself in Pakistan and gained strength throughout the world. Many of our intelligence assets are being used to fight in Iraq instead of taking on Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization that attacked us on Sept. 11 and that wants to attack us again.

The president may try to change the topic by talking about surveillance laws, but we aren’t buying it.

Neither should anyone else.

Secretary of Homeland Security Emily Litella could not be reached for comment.

  • If my football team was winning a game by 23,000-5, I don’t think I’d say the referees (the FISA Court judges) were biased against us.

  • the good news also is that all weekend long, this story never made it past page five in the newspapers i read. last year it would have been headline news. maybe, just maybe, the american public is tired of hearing the bush administration cry wolf…..

  • Yeah, it’s always believable when the Democrat media mouthpieces at the LA Times and the Washington Post report on something because it is always…well, always… slanted towards something.

    Oh, yeah. It’s slanted towards Democrats. You know, the clowns who don’t believe national security is actually important. And they have media mouthpieces willing to spew their BS by putting in such “balanced” headlines as, “White House backtracks on claims of lost intelligence”. And then of course, you have these prominent “national security lions” (the correct word would be kittens in the case of Leahy, Reyes, and Conyers) chastising the administration.

    You know what’s missing? The truth. The reason the PAA was enacted in the first place was because some FISA judge ruled that two people who are communicating exclusively in foreign countries, but whose communication goes through a U.S. hub, is now considered the equivalent of a local phone call and requires “probable cause” before a warrant allowing new communications to be maintained. This is what is happening now that the PAA has expired, this is what McConnell and others have been warning about. And this is what is not being reported by the Democrat media, or these congressional Democrats more interested in getting increased campaign funds from ambulance-chasing shysters.

    They are lying.

  • If a telecom company isn’t “cooperating,” the government only needs to get a warrant to compel that cooperation.

    If the government is unable to get that warrant from the compliant FISA courts, then something must be very, very wrong with the request.

    If the PAA is vital to America’s national security, why did Bush refuse to accept its extension? Because he wants The Terrorists to win? How about it, SteveIL?

  • Yeah, it’s always believable when the Democrat media mouthpieces at the LA Times and the Washington Post report on something because it is always…well, always… slanted towards something.

    Well, how about the most right-wing paper in the country, the Washington Times? As you can see there, they say the same thing.

    Plus, they quote an analyst from the Cato Institute — you know, one of the bedrock thinktanks of the conservative movement? – and he agrees as well.

    Timothy Lee, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, said the last time Congress overhauled FISA — after the September 11 terrorist attacks — President Bush praised the action, saying the new law “recognizes the realities and dangers posed by the modern terrorist.”

    “Those are the rules we’ll be living under after the Protect America Act expires this weekend,” Mr. Lee added. “There’s no reason to think our nation will be in any more danger in 2008 than it was in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006.”

    I guess the liberal bias is everywhere! It’s in right-wing newspapers like the Washington Times! It’s in right-wing foundations like the Cato Institute!

    Well, either that, or the White House was lying.

  • Someone ought to tell “unterchimpenfuhrer von Bu$h” that “Bu$hylvanian ScaryThingSpeak” (the preferred language of the fearmonger) just doesn’t seem to work any more.

    330 days and two hours until that blithering howler monket is gone, people—that’s 7,922 hours—or 475,320 minutes—or 28,519,200 seconds.

    And counting….

  • It’s funny that morons like STeveIL have the privilege like any other right wing nut to review extremely sensitive and classified information. Information that is so secret and sensitive that it is routinely denied to Democrats who actually sit on the intelligence committee.

    That must be the reason why those room temperature IQ conservatives have the right to see/read something intelligent people are not allowed to: they will see the worst case scenario unfold in front of their eyes.

    Classified information from Cheney’s man sized vault: Late model Toyota Prius seen driving through a traffic light when it was orange before it turned red, two blocks away from the Pentagon. On closer examination, the surveillance tape showed a bumper sticker mocking President Bush. Raise the terror alert, announce a press conference, declare imminent danger. Because the democrats were unwilling to give Bush everything he wanted, the PAA expired and we were unable to listen in on the cell phone conversation happening in that suspiciously green looking car. From the bumper stickers it was easily surmised that the driver was a disaffected citizen. Who knows what terrible things she was discussing at the moment. We will never know, but we are sure that important intelligence about her shopping habits have now made it that Al Quada is winning. The Democrats are to blame.

    Next step, is to ‘leak’ this information to the Right wing nuts and the result is: SteveIL postings.

    Next…

  • If the PAA is vital to America’s national security, why did Bush refuse to accept its extension? Because he wants The Terrorists to win? How about it, SteveIL? Excuse me, but you have it reversed. Both Houses of Congress have to pass a bill before the President can either sign it or veto it. The correct question is why didn’t the Democrat “leadership” in Pelosi’s Keystone Kongress bother to call for a vote on the Senate version of H.R. 3773, which passed the Senate by a 2 – 1 margin, the one that a majority of those who represent the American people in the House would have voted for? Even had the 21-day extension passed the House, there’s no guarantee that it would have even gotten beyond cloture in the Senate, regardless of what Bush was going to do.

    So I ask again; why didn’t the Democrat “leadership” in Pelosi’s Keystone Kongress bother to vote on the Senate version of H.R. 3773? Because they want The Terrorists to win? How about it, OkieFromMuskogee?

  • So I ask again; why didn’t the Democrat “leadership” in Pelosi’s Keystone Kongress bother to vote on the Senate version of H.R. 3773? Because they want The Terrorists to win?

    Simple. They’d already voted on HR 3773 and passed it. Then the Senate gutted the House bill, replacing everything after the enabling clauses with the language of S 2248, which went entirely against what the House majority wanted. Since the House didn’t buy Bush’s obvious bullshit about how not passing the bill with the new telecom immunity added would kill us all — bullshit exposed by the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the LA Times, etc. etc. — there was no need to pass this bill when the original version of HR 3773 was what they wanted.

    Now that I’ve answered your question, maybe you can respond to mine — is the Washington Times a left-wing rag now, or was Bush lying?

  • TR said, “Well, how about the most right-wing paper in the country, the Washington Times? As you can see there, they say the same thing.” No they don’t. They report what others have said. I’ve read the piece. It is exactly what it is: an article that reports this as news. Add to it that the headline in the Washington Times is “Analysts say FISA will suffice”, and that is what was written.

    The LA Times piece, however, has a headline called “White House backtracks on claims of lost intelligence”. Yet when reading the article, both the AG and the DNI say:

    “Unfortunately, the delay resulting from this discussion impaired our ability to cover foreign intelligence targets, which resulted in missed intelligence information,” Mukasey and McConnell added.

    And then goes on to quote an anonymous congressional Democrat official:

    As a result, all of the nation’s telecommunications companies are now providing all of the intelligence requested by the administration, even without the new law.

    “This is serious backpedaling by the DNI,” the Democratic official said of McConnell. “He’s been saying for the last week that the sky is falling, and the sky is not falling.”

    Where is the backpedaling by the White House? There was an actual delay stated by what I quoted Mukasey and McConnell were reported to have said, as I had shown above. But the premise of the headline and the piece is that because of what was said by an anonymous source, now the White House is backpedaling or backtracking. Where?

    And that’s the difference. The Washington Times wrote an article that reported the news. The LA Times wrote an opinion piece masquerading as an article that reported the news. That is utterly deceitful, and par for the course for the Democrat media.

  • Shorter SteveIL –
    If Our Glorious Father George W. Bush (who can do no wrong) has to follow the rule of law, the terrorists win. I’ve pissed my pants.

    Hey SteveIL – BOO!
    Ha! Now he has to change his diaper.

  • #15 SteveIL — Be sure to change the tinfoil on your head at least once a day.

    #16 Shorter SteveIL –
    If Our Glorious Father George W. Bush (who can do no wrong) has to follow the rule of law, the terrorists win. I’ve pissed my pants.

    Hey SteveIL – BOO!
    Ha! Now he has to change his diaper.

    Oh, how will I ever recover from such insight, logic, and such withering rhetorical “firepower”? I don’t even think Cicero could withstand such debating “skills”, let alone a little ol’ flatearther like me.

    /sarcasm off

  • Comments are closed.