lily
08-01-2007, 10:40 PM
Hurry up and pass this before thinking about it and the let Gonzales run it! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20075751/site/newsweek/)
Behind the Surveillance Debate
A federal judge's secret ruling restricting the intelligence community's
surveillance powers helped spur a Capitol Hill bid to grant Bush new
authority.
Web exclusive
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
Aug. 1, 2007 - A secret ruling by a federal judge has restricted the U.S.
intelligence community's surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas and
prompted the Bush administration's current push for "emergency" legislation
to expand its wiretapping powers, according to a leading congressman and a
legal source who has been briefed on the matter.
The order by a judge on the top-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
court has never been publicly acknowledged by administration officials—and
the details of it (including the identity of the judge who wrote it) remain
highly classified. But the judge, in an order several months ago, apparently
concluded that the administration had overstepped its legal authorities in
conducting warrantless eavesdropping even under the scaled-back surveillance
program that the White House first agreed to permit the FISA court to review
earlier this year, said one lawyer who has been briefed on the order but who
asked not to be publicly identified because of its sensitivity.
The first public reference to the order came obliquely this week from House
Minority Leader John Boehner—one of a number of senior Republicans who have
been leading the White House-backed campaign to persuade Congress to rush
through an expanded eavesdropping measure before it leaves for August recess
at the end of this week.
He and other GOP leaders have said that the country will be at a greater
risk of a terrorist attack if Congress doesn't act immediately—and they have
accused Democrats of "playing politics" by balking at some of the provisions
the administration is seeking.
"There's been a ruling, over the last four or five months, that prohibits
the ability of our intelligence services and our counterintelligence people
from listening in to two terrorists in other parts of the world where the
communication could come through the United States," Boehner said on an
interview with Fox News anchor Neal Cavuto.
"This means that our intelligence agencies are missing a wide swath of
potential information that could help protect the American people," Boehner
added. "The Democrats have known about this for months."
Boehner's description of the scope of the ruling appears to focus on one key
feature of the surveillance program—the large-scale tapping without warrants
of telecommunications "switches" located in the United States; they are used
to rout international calls even when both parties are overseas. But there
are indications the ruling has in some instances interfered with the
National Security Agency's ability to intercept phone calls where one of the
parties is in the United States, as well.
Under President Bush's original executive order creating the surveillance
program after the September 11 attacks, the NSA eavesdropped on such calls
(including those with at least one party inside the country) without seeking
specific warrants from the FISA court.
But last January, partly in a bid to quell criticism from Democrats and
civil liberties groups, the administration agreed to submit the entire
surveillance program to the FISA court for review. Much about the process
has never been explained publicly. But at some point after the new program
began, one of the FISA judges—who, by rotation, was assigned to review the
program for periodic updates—concluded that some aspects of the warrantless
eavesdropping program exceeded the NSA's authority under the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act, the basic 1978 law that governs eavesdropping
of espionage and terrorist suspects, said the lawyer who had been briefed on
the ruling. The judge refused to reauthorize the complete program in the way
it had been previously approved by at least one earlier FISA judge, the
lawyer said, adding that the secret decision was a "big deal" for the
administration.
It was only after that ruling that Director of National Intelligence Mike
McConnell this spring began urging Congress to pass an emergency "fix" that
would clarify and specifically grant the NSA authority to tap switches based
in the United States without review by the FISA court. The administration
effort has accelerated in recent weeks—and won the support of key Democratic
leaders—amid warnings from the intelligence community that the country is
facing greater risk of a new terrorist attack due in large part to the
resurgence of Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
Congressional aides (who asked not to be identified talking about ongoing
negotiations) said today that Democratic and Republican leaders of the
intelligence committees met until late Tuesday night trying to reach an
agreement on a short-term measure that would grant some of the enhanced
authority—including the ability to tap telecommunications switches without
warrants—that the administration is seeking. One stumbling block that has
emerged: the administration's insistence that Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales be given an expanded role to oversee the program—a particularly
controversial move at the moment, given new allegations that the embattled
attorney general has misled Congress about legal disputes over the
surveillance program. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the Senate Intelligence
Committee chairman, said today in a statement that he has "become convinced
that we must take some immediate but interim step" to expand surveillance,
but that the administration proposal to grant Gonzales greater authority "is
simply unacceptable."
In a conference call with reporters today, Sen. Kit Bond, a Missouri
Republican and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, lashed
out at Democrats because they are resisting language in the administration
proposal that would give Gonzales a new oversight role over the program.
"The Democrats don't trust anybody in the administration," Bond said when
asked about the objections to expanding Gonzales's role. "They didn't like
Scooter Libby, they don't like Karl Rove and most of all they don't like
President Bush. I don't care who they like. We need to keep our country
safe."
But Bond declined to respond when asked if it was a federal judge who
created the alleged intelligence "gap" in the first place. "I can't comment
on why this has occurred," Bond said, after checking with an aide about
whether he could respond to a question about a ruling by a FISA judge. "But
the director of national intelligence [McConnell] has said we are
significantly burdened in capturing foreign communications. It is a
significant new burden."
Behind the Surveillance Debate
A federal judge's secret ruling restricting the intelligence community's
surveillance powers helped spur a Capitol Hill bid to grant Bush new
authority.
Web exclusive
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
Aug. 1, 2007 - A secret ruling by a federal judge has restricted the U.S.
intelligence community's surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas and
prompted the Bush administration's current push for "emergency" legislation
to expand its wiretapping powers, according to a leading congressman and a
legal source who has been briefed on the matter.
The order by a judge on the top-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
court has never been publicly acknowledged by administration officials—and
the details of it (including the identity of the judge who wrote it) remain
highly classified. But the judge, in an order several months ago, apparently
concluded that the administration had overstepped its legal authorities in
conducting warrantless eavesdropping even under the scaled-back surveillance
program that the White House first agreed to permit the FISA court to review
earlier this year, said one lawyer who has been briefed on the order but who
asked not to be publicly identified because of its sensitivity.
The first public reference to the order came obliquely this week from House
Minority Leader John Boehner—one of a number of senior Republicans who have
been leading the White House-backed campaign to persuade Congress to rush
through an expanded eavesdropping measure before it leaves for August recess
at the end of this week.
He and other GOP leaders have said that the country will be at a greater
risk of a terrorist attack if Congress doesn't act immediately—and they have
accused Democrats of "playing politics" by balking at some of the provisions
the administration is seeking.
"There's been a ruling, over the last four or five months, that prohibits
the ability of our intelligence services and our counterintelligence people
from listening in to two terrorists in other parts of the world where the
communication could come through the United States," Boehner said on an
interview with Fox News anchor Neal Cavuto.
"This means that our intelligence agencies are missing a wide swath of
potential information that could help protect the American people," Boehner
added. "The Democrats have known about this for months."
Boehner's description of the scope of the ruling appears to focus on one key
feature of the surveillance program—the large-scale tapping without warrants
of telecommunications "switches" located in the United States; they are used
to rout international calls even when both parties are overseas. But there
are indications the ruling has in some instances interfered with the
National Security Agency's ability to intercept phone calls where one of the
parties is in the United States, as well.
Under President Bush's original executive order creating the surveillance
program after the September 11 attacks, the NSA eavesdropped on such calls
(including those with at least one party inside the country) without seeking
specific warrants from the FISA court.
But last January, partly in a bid to quell criticism from Democrats and
civil liberties groups, the administration agreed to submit the entire
surveillance program to the FISA court for review. Much about the process
has never been explained publicly. But at some point after the new program
began, one of the FISA judges—who, by rotation, was assigned to review the
program for periodic updates—concluded that some aspects of the warrantless
eavesdropping program exceeded the NSA's authority under the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act, the basic 1978 law that governs eavesdropping
of espionage and terrorist suspects, said the lawyer who had been briefed on
the ruling. The judge refused to reauthorize the complete program in the way
it had been previously approved by at least one earlier FISA judge, the
lawyer said, adding that the secret decision was a "big deal" for the
administration.
It was only after that ruling that Director of National Intelligence Mike
McConnell this spring began urging Congress to pass an emergency "fix" that
would clarify and specifically grant the NSA authority to tap switches based
in the United States without review by the FISA court. The administration
effort has accelerated in recent weeks—and won the support of key Democratic
leaders—amid warnings from the intelligence community that the country is
facing greater risk of a new terrorist attack due in large part to the
resurgence of Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
Congressional aides (who asked not to be identified talking about ongoing
negotiations) said today that Democratic and Republican leaders of the
intelligence committees met until late Tuesday night trying to reach an
agreement on a short-term measure that would grant some of the enhanced
authority—including the ability to tap telecommunications switches without
warrants—that the administration is seeking. One stumbling block that has
emerged: the administration's insistence that Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales be given an expanded role to oversee the program—a particularly
controversial move at the moment, given new allegations that the embattled
attorney general has misled Congress about legal disputes over the
surveillance program. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the Senate Intelligence
Committee chairman, said today in a statement that he has "become convinced
that we must take some immediate but interim step" to expand surveillance,
but that the administration proposal to grant Gonzales greater authority "is
simply unacceptable."
In a conference call with reporters today, Sen. Kit Bond, a Missouri
Republican and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, lashed
out at Democrats because they are resisting language in the administration
proposal that would give Gonzales a new oversight role over the program.
"The Democrats don't trust anybody in the administration," Bond said when
asked about the objections to expanding Gonzales's role. "They didn't like
Scooter Libby, they don't like Karl Rove and most of all they don't like
President Bush. I don't care who they like. We need to keep our country
safe."
But Bond declined to respond when asked if it was a federal judge who
created the alleged intelligence "gap" in the first place. "I can't comment
on why this has occurred," Bond said, after checking with an aide about
whether he could respond to a question about a ruling by a FISA judge. "But
the director of national intelligence [McConnell] has said we are
significantly burdened in capturing foreign communications. It is a
significant new burden."