The latest on Bush’s warrantless-search program

Snoopgate” has reached Day Six and, as with every preceding day, key bits of information keep trickling out.

Today, for example, we learn that the judge in charge of the FISA court is organizing a little get together with the Bush administration’s lawyers to find out why the president feels he can circumvent the legal process.

The presiding judge of a secret court that oversees government surveillance in espionage and terrorism cases is arranging a classified briefing for her fellow judges to address their concerns about the legality of President Bush’s domestic spying program, according to several intelligence and government sources.

Several members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said in interviews that they want to know why the administration believed secretly listening in on telephone calls and reading e-mails of U.S. citizens without court authorization was legal. Some of the judges said they are particularly concerned that information gleaned from the president’s eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to gain authorized wiretaps from their court.

But the WaPo report alluded to one tidbit that I hadn’t heard before — the administration wanted FISA court approval for the searches, but didn’t like what the court had to say.

Sources knowledgeable about the program said there is no way to secure a FISA warrant when the goal is to listen in on a vast array of communications in the hopes of finding something that sounds suspicious. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales said the White House had tried but failed to find a way.

One government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the administration complained bitterly that the FISA process demanded too much: to name a target and give a reason to spy on it.

Yes, how burdensome. Judges want to know who you’re spying on and why before granting a warrant. What kind of monsters do we let wear judicial robes?

Of course, the point is what happened next. The Surveillance Court wanted cursory information and the administration didn’t (or couldn’t) answer the questions. They then decided to do the surveillance anyway.

Refusing lawful requests from a court? Hmmm–could that be an impeachable offense by itself?

  • I don’t see spygate mentioned today in Yahoo’s
    top five stories in their standard lists of news
    sources for various categories.

    Naturally, Conyer’s Resolutions for censure
    of Bush and Cheney aren’t among the top
    five either. But nothing Conyers does ever
    resonates in the news world. Or even
    among Democrats.

    I don’t think spygate has legs from the
    perspective of the American people.
    You have to produce a victim, or it’s
    a yawner. “They’re only going after the
    bad guys – so what?” is the attitude.

    Find some poor old grandmothers that
    got hounded by the FBI, and maybe you
    get somewhere, but otherwise, I don’t
    think this one flies anymore than any
    other has.

    Liddy who?

    Oh, speaking of flying, that’s the latest
    cable news darling, according to an
    article I read this morning – sorry, don’t
    have the link. They cover flights with
    problems now, wall to wall.

    Sorry, got off topic a little. Morning
    grouch.

  • Have faith, Hark. Watergate, remember, was a side-bar issue for quite a while before blowing its top

  • Judges want to know who you’re spying on and why before granting a warrant.

    Cue GOP talking point “out-of-control activist judges”, 3, 2, 1…

  • 1000 out of 300 million people…oh the horror. and I bet of those 1000 some were even Muslims…

    Lefty supporting the low number again…

    sort of like a lefty supporting woman’s choice of abortion. “well Mr. GOP what happens if a girl is raped by her father?” that is why we need choice…meanwhile 43 MILLION abortions later (how many were from such a crime)…yet Lefty supports the Orwellian fantasy…

  • 1000 out of 300 million people…oh the horror. and I bet of those 1000 some were even Muslims…

    Lefty supporting the low number again…

    sort of like a lefty supporting woman’s choice of abortion. “well Mr. GOP what happens if a girl is raped by her father?” that is why we need choice…meanwhile 43 MILLION abortions later (how many were from such a crime)…yet Lefty supports the Orwellian fantasy…

    Comment by Baseball Fan — 12/22/2005 @ 9:24 pm

    You know what? ONE person spied on ILLEGALLY is too much. What is wrong with you? This country was founded on the very issues this subject raises. Here is something for you to ponder: I will take less safety for more freedom anyday. Period. It is wrong to torture for any reason WHATSOEVER even if it is my MOTHER who may be killed. Period. There are some lines that you just never cross because, when you do, you are forced to sell yourself further into the dark. Just like what happens with lies…you need more lies to cover the original one.

    Let me say this again: I will take the chance of less safety for more freedom anyday, just as our Founding Fathers did. This belief naturally leads to LESS government in our private lives.

    So I, my friend, am the REAL conservative here. You are just a spineless sheep willing to toss others overboard for your pretended safety. Wake up. The world is an unsafe place. Get used to it. It has always been that way. I want less government and more personal freedom. There is nothing more conservative than that. You are a poser.

  • Comments are closed.