Archive for category: emptywheel

This will be interesting. The Dems are trying to prevent Chertoff from implementing his big brother satellite domestic spying program on October 1.

We are so concerned that, as the Department’s authorizing Committee,we are calling for a moratorium on the program until the manyConstitutional, legal and organizational questions it raises areanswered.

Today’s testimony made clear that there is effectivelyno legal framework governing the domestic use of satellite imagery forthe various purposes envisioned by the Department. Without this legalframework, the Department runs the risk of creating a program that –while well-intended – could be misused and violate Americans’Constitutional rights. The Department’s failure to include its PrivacyOfficer and the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer before thisJuly, almost two years after planning for the NAO began, only heightensour sense of concern. Privacy and civil liberties simply cannot remainan afterthought at the Department.

We ask that you provide theCommittee with the written legal framework under which the NAO willoperate, the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the NAO –particularly those SOPs that will be used for requests by State, local,and tribal law enforcement, the privacy and civil liberties safeguardsthat will accompany any use of satellite imagery, and an analysis ofhow the program conforms with Posse Comitatus. Read more →

No, seriously. The GAO’s report on DHS is really important evidence that Bush has done very little to make this country more safe. But I’m most struck by the fact that the DHS people quoted are making exactly the same complaint the military did last week, when GAO reported that Iraq has met few of its benchmarks (for the record, DHS seems to be doing somewhat better than Iraq, making at least moderate progress in 6 of 14 benchmarks, whereas Iraq has made at least moderate progress in 7 of 18.

Then again, Iraq has a civil war raging

Both agencies, however, are complaining that the GAO is being unfair because it dares to give failing grades, because it refused the change failing grades, and because it used outdated reports largely because the agency in question wouldn’t give GAO the current ones. Here’s the DHS hack:

DHS Undersecretary for Management Paul A. Schneider said that the GAOshould have graded the department higher on 42 of 171 directives. TheGAO relied on a flawed methodology that "fails to accurately reflectthe Department’s progress in many specific program areas," he said in aformal 42-page response.

Schneider also said investigators relied on outdated reports, appliedvague, shifting and inconsistent grading standards, and set up anunfair, "pass-fail" approach to assessing a spectrum of progress thatshould be expected to take many years.

"The GAO Report treats all of the performance expectations as if theywere of equal significance," Schneider said. "In contrast, theDepartment uses a risk-based approach to consider its overallpriorities," adding that the DHS has met 37 of 50 objectives insecuring transportation modes, which were targeted in the 2001 attacks.

And here’s the Administration on its Iraq benchmarks.

Josh and his reader ask WTF is up with Arlen’s support for Larry Craig.

TPM Reader BR wonders about Arlen: "What the hell isSpecter thinking? Is he trying to destroy the Republican party? Nothingcould be worse for them then drawing this out or attracting any furtherattention to the situation. Or did Specter offer friendly encouragementnot thinking Craig would take him seriously? Certainly a bizarredevelopment. I hope he does reconsider though, and that LaRoccoforcibly removes him next year."

Hard to say.  I don’t think it could have been quite the misunderstanding theory BRbroaches. Because Specter did make a statement a couple days ago sayingthat he hoped Craig could fight the charges and be able to remain inthe senate. At the time it struck me as a bizarre comment — even byArlen Specter standards — because after all Craig had just resigned,or so we thought. But now it all fits together. What Specter wasthinking with regards to the GOP, that I really can’t say.

But, as Josh alludes, I think this is just more of Scottish Haggis’ typical behavior. Remember that when faced with a black or white decision on anything, Arlen always attempts to find some legal gimmick that will allow the issue Read more →

Glenn highlighted a part of the Jeffrey Rosen on Jack Goldsmith article that I wanted to return to:

[Goldsmith] shared the White House’s concern that the Foreign IntelligenceSurveillance Act might prevent wiretaps on international calls involving terrorists.But Goldsmith deplored the way the White House tried to fix the problem, whichwas highly contemptuous of Congress and the courts. “We’reone bomb away from getting rid of that obnoxious [FISA] court,” Goldsmithrecalls Addington telling him in February 2004. [my emphasis]

Since I raised the question of why this piece got published early, I’ll point out one other timing detail.

The government just submitted a response to the ACLU’s motion to have the FISA Court’s two adverse rulings released. The whole debate is one that may free up documentation about the FISA program sooner rather than later, since the FISA Court technically owns the rulings in question, unlike almost all the other documents people have requested or FOIAed. The FISA Court is no doubt currently considering the government’s argument while it waits for the ACLU’s response, due on September 14.

You know–the FISA Court? The one Addington deemed "obnoxious"?

While I don’t think the ACLU motion is the reason for the early release of the Goldsmith article, I Read more →

You’ll recall that the AIPAC defendants called Condi and Stephen Hadley to testify about how they routinely leak classified information. Well, the government claims that these two, at least, don’t have to testify.

 

Secretaryof State Condoleezza Rice and other senior intelligence officialsshould not be forced to testify about whether they discussed classifiedinformation with pro-Israel lobbyists, federal prosecutors argued in aclosed-door court hearing Friday.

Two former American IsraelPublic Affairs Committee lobbyists facing espionage charges havesubpoenaed Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, DeputyNational Security Adviser Elliott Abrams and several others to testifyat their trial next year.

If their testimony is allowed by U.S.District Judge T.S. Ellis III, the trial could offer abehind-the-scenes look at the way U.S. foreign policy is crafted.

(Note, it’s unclear whether the government is claiming just Hadley and Rice don’t have to testify, or whether they’re making the same claim for the others who have been subpoenaed, including Richard Armitage and Anthony Zinni.)

Basically, the Administration is arguing it should be able to keep its strategy of using A1 Cut-Outs secret. By A1 Cut-Out, I’m referring to the Administration’s practice of leaking classified information to a journalist–usually at the NYT and, until she was gone, often to Judy Miller–who then publishes it on the front page of the paper. The Administration then points to that story, pretending that they don’t know the information remains highly classified. The Administration famously did this with the aluminum tubes story, but it comes in really handy when you’re trying to drum up wars against countries whose names have four-letters starting in "Ira."