I wasn’t so disturbed by the news that DNI Mike McConnell had decided to reverse the recent practice of producing unclassified Key Judgments from an NIE … until I read Scott Horton’s take on it.
Michael McConnell started his first two months on the job with asolid record for candor and accuracy.
Okay. This will serve as a summary of my analysis of the SSCI report on their FISA bill and to show how the SSCI managed to convince themselves to give retroactive immunity to the telecoms. Thus far, I have shown that:This report suggests that the Authorization to Use Military Force was central to the enactment of Bush’s illegal warrantless wiretap program.The report claims they need to give telecoms immunity because, since
Back from my pancake and sausage-inducted coma! Mmm pancakes. I’ve got just two more points about this SSCI report, then I’ll let it drop and go clean the house.
A lot of people have been asking why Sheldon Whitehouse voted for the SSCI bill on FISA, even though it offers the telecoms retroactive immunity.
Mr. emptywheel has started on the pancakes, finally, but I’ve got time for one more post.
According to public reports, Bush has threatened to veto SSCI’s FISA bill as written. That’s because of an amendment submitted by Ron Wyden which requires the Administration to obtain a FISA warrant if they want to wiretap an American overseas.
Nope. Mr. emptywheel hasn’t made me my pancakes yet.
SSCI’s report on the FISA Amendment uses remarkable logic for their justification for retroactive immunity.
It argues that, because the Administration has invoked State Secrets in all the suits against the telecoms, the poor telecoms cannot mount any kind of defense–cannot even prove their innocence, in the case of companies that refused to participate in the warrantless wiretap program.
I’m going to have a whole slew of posts on this SSCI report on their FISA bill(you’ll all be hoping mr. emptywheel gets up and distracts me withpancakes, no doubt). In this post, I want to show the language thereport uses to privilege the Authorization to Use Military Force. In it’s description of the basis for the program, the report depicts the warrantless wiretapping program as distinctly military.
TheNSA program was described
Laura links to a CQ story based on this SSCI report on FISA. As Starks noted in his CQ article, the report reveals that the telecom companies did not have the requisite approval from the Attorney General for the period following the hospital confrontation; rather, they had White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales’ approval.
The committee’s published report on legislation (S 2248) that wouldrewrite the rules for government surveillance states thattelecommunications companies participating
I believe it was just the other day when I was saying it was more urgent to implement whistleblower protection than to write a new journalist shield law. This doesn’t change my opinion in that regard.
This summer the House Judiciary Committee launched an effortto collect tips from would-be whistleblowers in the Justice Department.The U.S.
Chrisc, who thankfully made it safely through the San Diego fires, didn’t let them distract her from the matter at hand: the Wilkes trial. Mark Geragos took the opportunity of a big natural disaster to sneak his client onto the stand to testify–apparently taking the government by surprise. I’ll review a few of the details, but I’d like to compare the account of Seth Hettena and that of Allison Hoffman.
According to the NYT, the White House has very generously allowed the entire SJC to view the documents justifying the domestic wiretapping program–at least that’s what Tony Fratto says.
The White House on Thursday offered to share secret documents on the National Security Agency’sdomestic surveillance program with the Senate Judiciary Committee, astep toward possible compromise on eavesdropping legislation.
