Archive for category: emptywheel

This Eric Lichtblau article provides a lot of dots that have been, heretofore, missing in our picture of the surveillance they’ve got us under. It’s no surprise the government has been using data mining on not just suspects themselves, but also on their friends and associates–a virtual "Friends and Families" plan of surveillance.

The documents indicate that the Federal Bureau of Investigation usedsecret demands for records to obtain data not only on individuals itsaw as targets but also details on their “community of interest” — thenetwork of people that the target in turn was in contact with.

But given the description, it’s more clear now why the Administration refused all meaningful oversight of the minimization they’re doing on their warrantless wiretapping. You can’t really collect a "community of interest" and at the same time be claiming you’re eliminating all data on those not directly targeted.

Further, the article explains why Alberto Gonzales got all squirmyearly this year when SJC asked him for information on National SecurityLetters. They were still trying to hide these communities of interest,so Gonzales didn’t want to provide much information on the program. Andmeanwhile, they were trying to bury the program.

The government official who spoke on condition of anonymity said theF.B.I. recently stopped asking the telecommunications companies for thecommunity of interest data. The exact time of and reason for thesuspension is unclear, but it appears to have been set off in part bythe questions raised earlier this year by the inspector general’sinitial review into abuses in the use of national security letters.

Brad Schlozman remains unresponsive on a few of the questions he (finally) returned to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Take this question that asks for very specific details about any conversations he had with Mike Elston about indictments in WD MO:

Did you speak with Michael Elston regarding any other indictments filed while you were U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri? If so, which indictments?

Mr. Elston, who is a former federal prosecutor and appellate chief in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, and I are personal friends and we spoke about various cases from time to time. I am certain that, given his position as chief of staff to the Deputy Attorney General, Mr. Elston spoke with many U.S. Attorneys about their cases and other matters affecting U.S. Attorneys’ Offices.

I guess Shorter Schloz doesn’t understand what the question "If so, which indictments" means. Because he sure dodged answering that very specific question.

Unfortunately, when they get around to asking Schloz about indicting Democratic politician Katheryn Shields, they only ask Schloz about whom he consulted on the timing of the indictment–not the indictment in general.

Marty Lederman points to this excerpt from Jack Goldsmith’s book at Slate. Goldsmith explains he only saw Alberto Gonzales disagree with David Addington once–and that Bush ended up siding with Addington.

Addington’s hard-line nonaccommodation stance always prevailed when thelawyers met to discuss legal policy issues in Alberto Gonzales’ office.During these meetings, Gonzales himself would sit quietly in his wingchair, occasionally asking questions but mostly listening as thequerulous Addington did battle with whomever was seeking to "go soft."It was Gonzales’ responsibility to determine what to advise thepresident after the lawyers had kicked the legal policy matters around.But I only knew him to disagree with Addington once, on an issue Icannot discuss, and on that issue the president overruled Gonzales andsided with the Addington position.

Logically, Goldsmith suggests that Addington literally always prevailed in these discussions. In the nine months or so Goldsmith attended these meetings, Gonzales only advised a position Addington didn’t support once. And Addington still won that battle.

This suggests Addington–or more likely Cheney–was able to present his view to Bush directly. Which suggests that, in this case, at least, Gonzales’ purported role as a filter on these legal decisions was illusory.

And boy would I like to know what the subject Read more →

I’m thrilled with the news that George Bush just gave Barry Jackson a promotion.

Yesterday, President Bush named Barry Jackson to be Peter Wehnher’s replacement to run the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives.Jackson was the major White House strategist behind Bush’s failedSocial Security privatization ploy, and was one of the White Houseemployees discovered to be using RNC email accounts to e-mail an associate of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

That’s because just about all the people involved in politicizing our government–Sara Taylor, Monica Goodling, Kyle Sampson, and, of course, Rove–have already left the Administration. So even if Scott Bloch’s Office of Special Counsel investigation into Hatch Act violations finds that the political briefings held throughout the government finds that those were, in fact, violations, there’s no real punishment, since the normal punishment is simply firing the person responsible.

So I’m glad for Jackson’s promotion. It’ll give us the satisfaction of firing somebody for treating our government like the Soviet state.

As I suspected, Judge Burns was none too impressed that Tommy K’s daughter bought Phillip Halpern’s long-lost uncle’s house with the ensuing benefit to Halpern of precisely nada.

Halpern, who had last seen his uncle in 1999, said in court papers hehad no knowledge of the deal and did not benefit in any way from it,and removing him or the office was not warranted.

On that matter, Burns agreed. He said the claim of a conflictwas tenuous and could not serve as a basis for removing Halpern or theoffice.

So John Michael’s stated purpose for the motion to throw out his indictment has failed–Burns refused to throw out the indictment or even throw Halpern off the case. As to his probable intended purpose–to expose as much information about the shady crook that is Tommy K as possible to suggest there’s something fishy about his plea deal? That seems to be having more success.

Moreover, Granger said that Kontogiannis has been on vacation in Greecethis summer. Since pleading guilty, Kontogiannis has been free on abond, but surrendered his passport to federal authorities and wasallowed to travel out of the country only if accompanied by federalagents, or with their permission.

Burns seemed intrigued by that revelation, Read more →