Telecommunications Timewarp

When I beat up on Jason Leopold for some confusion in an article on domestic spying, I keyed on one detail. He was claiming Bush set up the program Risen and Lichtblau had revealed before 9/11.

Still, one thing that appears to be indisputable is that the NSAsurveillance began well before 9/11 and months before President Bushclaims Congress gave him the power to use military force againstterrorist threats, which Bush says is why he believed he had the legalright to bypass the judicial process.

But he based that claim on two things. (He also quoted former NSA encryption specialists who appeared to be referring to a different kind of surveillance.) A Slate article that quoted telecom executives saying the NSA started collecting call data before 9/11.

A former telecom executive told us that efforts to obtain calldetails go back to early 2001, predating the 9/11 attacks and thepresident’s now celebrated secret executive order.

And a Transitions 2001 document, dated December 2000, saying that NSA had to "live on the network."

The volumes and routing of data make finding and processing nuggets of intelligence information more difficult. To perform both its offensive and defensive missions, NSA must "live on the network."

I was particularly confused how a December 2000 document–from before Bush was President was evidence that Bush ordered domestic surveillance before 9/11.

I raise these details because I had a bit of deja vu when reading the Bloomberg article reporting a plaintiff’s lawyer stating:

"The Bush Administration asserted this became necessaryafter 9/11," plaintiff’s lawyer Carl Mayer said in a telephoneinterview. "This undermines that assertion."

Does Libby Get Rove's Testimony?

Augusto Pinochet Would Be Proud

Anatomy of a White House Smear, 3.7

Dick Starts to Sweat

Anatomy of a White House Smear, 3.4

Some Thoughts on Rove

Rove Will Not Be Charged

The NYT announces today that Karl Rove will not be charged in the Valerie Plame case. I’m still looking for a copy of Luskin’s statement, but it includes the following:

On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advisedus that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove.

[snip]

In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further publicstatements about the subject matter of the investigation. We believethat the Special Counsel’s decision should put an end to the baselessspeculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct.

Karl Rove won’t be frog-marched. But I’m not sure this means the case will end with Libby.

Greetings from Yearly Kos

image_print