Not a good week for administration spying revelations

When we learned earlier this week that the Pentagon has been spying on law-abiding, anti-war protestors, it was more than a little disconcerting. But learning that the Bush White House quietly allowed the National Security Agency to spy on Americans, on U.S. soil, without getting a warrant, is even worse.

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible “dirty numbers” linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.

“This is really a sea change,” said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. “It’s almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches.”

Not anymore.

It appears we have John Yoo, a former official in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, to thank for this; Yoo told the White House that warrantless NSA eavesdropping “could be seen as infringements of individual liberties,” but are “justified” in the war on terror.

You may recall Yoo from the torture-memo stories — he was the one who, as Salon’s Tim Grieve noted, “opined that the president has virtually limitless power in the time of war.”

Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies at George Washington University, told the Washington Post that the secret order may amount to the president authorizing criminal activity.

The law governing clandestine surveillance in the United States, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, prohibits conducting electronic surveillance not authorized by statute. A government agent can try to avoid prosecution if he can show he was “engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction,” according to the law.

“This is as shocking a revelation as we have ever seen from the Bush administration,” said Martin, who has been sharply critical of the administration’s surveillance and detention policies. “It is, I believe, the first time a president has authorized government agencies to violate a specific criminal prohibition and eavesdrop on Americans.”

Atrios noted this morning that this is “the test” for conservatives. I agree. Partisan allegiance aside, if you’re not bothered by the White House sanctioning the NSA to spy on Americans, without an easily-obtained warrant, there’s just no hope.

I-M-P-E-A-C-H

Say it with me. Congress, are you listening?

  • The article says the NYT sat on the story for a year to do “additional reporting” and cleared it with the WH to make sure there was no “information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists”.

    And those officials gave the final go-ahead just in time for this outrage to be buried under news of the Iraqi elections.

    Dammit, New York Times, couldn’t you make your abject toadying just slightly less obvious?!!?

  • I agree that this is a test for conservatives. But, I think that they have been tested again and again over the last five years and very few have passed. (My threshhold for passing is extremely low–merely an acknowledgment that Bush has done something wrong.)

    I’m always hopeful as it is the only way to survive this Administration, but I won’t hold my breath for a conservative revolt.

  • Is anyone ever going to get around to
    questioning the idea that terrorism is the
    worst scourge to ever scour the face of
    the earth in the first place? The State
    Department’s own reports on terrorism
    can be found here:

    http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/

    I’ve examined these reports in detail,
    and I am baffled. It just doesn’t seem
    like terroism as ever been one of the
    great global problems, although the
    invasion of Iraq seems to have
    exacerbated it.

    We all seem to accept the administration’s
    line that 9/11 changed everything, but I
    don’t see the evidence. Sure, it was the deadliest,
    most damaging act of terrorism in history,
    and on our soil, but our reaction seems totally
    out of proportion to the underlying threat. To
    say that the world is in grave danger because of
    a few thousand terrorists worldwide seems
    ridiculous to me, but apparently there are very
    few who concur.

    We also don’t seem to care what the root causes
    of terrorism are. We just seem to want to beat
    the crap out of somebody for it.

    All this to say that I don’t think these stories will
    go anywhere, because Americans believe that
    terrorism is such a monumental threat to our
    security that they’ll accept these transgressions
    on our civil liberties. Even torture – a recent
    poll revealed that 61% of Americans believe
    it is justified under the right conditions.

    Yes, I agree – 9/ll changed everything, but not
    for the reasons Bush would have us believe.

  • And if you want more of John Yoo’s bizarro-scary thought process, be sure to read David Cole’s review of Yoo’s recent book in the New York Review of Books. That an administration which promotes an “originalist” reading of the constitution would take steps to essentially turn the president into a king – against every intention of our founding fathers – makes for some fascinating mental gymnastics on Yoo’s part.

  • I agree with Michelle. Conservatives and their media lackeys, with very few exceptions, will turn a blind eye to this latest scandal.

    Remember, it isn’t an impeachable offense unless it involves a Democrat and extramarital consensual sex.

  • Screw this being a “test for conservatives” – this is a test for all Americans.

    Will this be a story more than 30% of Americans will care about – hell, even KNOW about?

    I hope I’m wrong here, but I think a large number of people are not going to have a problem with this.

  • Bob Barr – normally a man who irks me but who on this issue is right on – must be having puppies over this latest administration stunt.

  • GMF is really on point. Screw the shitty GOP politicians–they are gonna do what they always have done. This is a test of the public. And the sad thing is that I think i agree with GMF that many of our fellow citizens will not have a problem with this. They are simply ignorant and afraid. Right in the GOP sweet-spot.

  • And I gotta say, is it only me, but with the many clear restrictions/violations of our civil rights, with the whole torture and Abu Ghraib embarrassments, with the unlimited detentions, the draining of the government fisc, the loss of US military lives and Iraqi civilian lives etc. etc. etc., who has “won” since 9/11? Sure seems like old OBL is kicking some Bush butt here, and I’m told he isn’t even that active these days.

  • hark is right on. We have to start putting this in context, yes 9/11 was the most damaging terrorist attack in history but it still amounted to only 1/10th of the number killed annually by drunk drivers. Are you willing to waive the Bill of Rights to fight The War on Drunk Drivers? To spend $500 Billion dollars on the TWDD? Of course not, because it’s an over reaction. We’ve got to start challenging this “9/11 changed everything” mantra. It’s just a campaign slogan.

  • Comments are closed.