President Bush certainly sounded unequivocal Tuesday in assuring Americans that “we do not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval.” But it’s hard not to parse the words: Does he mean with a warrant, or some kind of tacit approval? Does it depend on the definition of “we” or “listen”? You have to hope this doesn’t come back to haunt him, as did his April 2004 assurance that “any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order.” And as so many have asked as each shoe has dropped about National Security Agency spying and data collection: Where is the congressional oversight? One crucial chance to answer that question will come Thursday, when the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., holds a confirmation hearing for Gen. Michael Hayden, who is Bush’s nominee to head the CIA and also the NSA’s former boss.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Heckler on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
22 Comments
Just one question on the confirmation hearing.
Will Hayden even be under oath?
And I notice that Roberts can sure expedite a hearing when he WANTS to. Did he forget about other hearings involving investigation?I wish he’d take a couple of those memory pills he keeps in his pocket.
Is this going to turn into another Rathergate? Seems that Bellsouth and Verizon deny that they were ever contacted by the NSA regarding phone records. Apparently USA didnt verify their story very well, or Bellsouth and Verizon are lying.
Who to believe…
Might be another Rovian plot to discredit the media.
I would not take bush’s word that night is dark and day is light.
After the news broke, what would Qwest be gaining by saying they had been approached, but had refused?
After the news broke, what would AT&T, BellSouth, and Verzon be gaining by saying they had never been approached?
Weight the two, then decide.
Uhmmm……..Uhhhh………,Customers?
So far, Roberts has been a loyal Bushie. I would hope though, now that the good ship Dubya is sinking fast, Roberts will have the good political sense to not grab hold of the anchor! It is absolutely necessary, now that the President’s approval rating is fast approaching his hat size, that these hearings be conducted fairly and honestly, and be given access to all needed material to arrive at the truth. Can Roberts do that? Lets hope so!
Rhonda has a valid point. I think, at the point, anything that can be nominally represented as legal (whether it is or not) is probably being done.
Some will say: well, yeah, don’t you want them to go after terrorists? Of course! But when everyone is a suspect, no one is. . .even the best databases are only as good as the information contained in them. I have seen situations where people’s credit ratings have been destroyed for have the same name as someone else—completely different SSN, not even the same middle initial! I’ve seen a man have his tax refund seized for having been associated with someone with a similar middle and last name.
I’ve also seen the TSA try to stop a 4-year-old from flying, de-pants a congressman and numerous other ridiculous incidents.
That the NSA may be more competent is little comfort because, again, if they really know what they’re doing then. . .why millions of people? Looks like simple laziness. . .or something far worse. . .
Of course not. Bush is a pathological liar.
Rage
“if they really know what they’re doing then. . .why millions of people? ”
What’s lazy is USA’s reporting on this. Based on what I’ve been reading I’m starting to think that it wasnt millions of people, it was a select few.(few being several hundred)
The carefully worded response from two of the three companies that participated leads me to believe something is going on, just not what USA reported. I think the NSA took the numbers of a few hundred suspects and checked the calling patterns of everyone they contacted. I think that this is much more focused than USA reported.
Wouldn’t it be fun to watch Bush put a puzzle together? He would just set the piece and then a couple of good whacks with his hammer and “bingo” it’s a fit.
That’s “Today’s White House” solving all of the problems as they come along.
Only they just say whatever it takes
{ Also Cal Thomas writing }.
I’m a hell of a lot closer saying the Jews did it.
…a select few…
Like the abc news reporters who helped break the story? Or the silly saps who disagree with bushco’s political jihad?
I agree heck, I bet the records that are REALLY scrutinized are only a few of the bush crime family’s most hated.
This report from the Congressional Research Service contends that a FISA type authorization is required for the phone records acquistion we think the NSA has been doing:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33424.pdf
I heard a recording of Hayden’s testimony where he was insisting that the term “probable cause” did not appear in the 4th Amendment. As the Amendent quoted in the above .pdf clearly outlines – the 4th Amendment contains the necessity of probable cause in searchs and seizures. It seems like if there is any amendment the head of the CIA or NSA should know about, it would be the 4th. So, was Hayden lying or ignorant???
“probable cause” …
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and siezures, shall not be violated, and no Warrents shall issue, but upon PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be siezed.”
It is generally agreed that electronic communication is equivalent to “papers”
In listening to the live Hayden testimony on NPR today, I learned that the full Intelligence Senate Committee was not told about the NSA program described in the “USA Today” article until yesterday.
Which then begs the question would the administration have ever told the full committee about the program if they had not been caught?
This administration, like a naughty child, is begging for oversight. As the Nanny might say, “Chimpy, go to your naughty chair.”
Having said the above, Hayden, with the exception of the “probable cause” error, sounded pretty impressive.
So did Ted Baxter on the Mary Tyler Moore show when he was speaking from cue cards, notes, or memorization.
Brian,I am sure Hayden was well prepped.
heheh brian
Interesting little tidbit from a reliable on-line source.
“In 1994 Sen. Pat “Leaky” Leahy co-wrote a law that forced telecommunications carriers to build convenient wiretap features into their networks enabling the kind of telephone records collection now at the heart of the controversy over the National Security Agency’s terrorist surveillance operation.”
“‘The secret collection of phone call records of tens of millions of Americans?” he exclaimed after USA Today blew the lid off the program last week. “Are you telling me that tens of millions of Americans are involved with al-Qaeda?”
But according to the Rutland Herald, Leahy was singing a different tune 12 years ago, when he was pushing the Senate to pass his bill, the Communication Assistance for Law Enforcement Act [CALEA].
However, heckler, that would still require a warrent under due process of law.
Rhonda, loved your editorial this morning, about Robertson and Brownback, and the ‘trust us’ administration.