Well, they're liberal commie pro-terrorist traitors, so they're getting what's coming to them.

[/wingnut]

A senior federal law enforcement official tells ABC News the government is tracking the phone numbers we call in an effort to root out confidential sources.

And what's wrong with that? Leaking confidential information is ILLEGAL and harming national security. "Journalists" who listen to the confidential information are accomplises to crimes and therefore also criminals. What's wrong with collecting the phone numbers of criminals who are damaging our national security? Are you going to be defending the rights of child predators next?

If this is true, heaven help us. If they're tapping or tracking the media whom they despise, everyone else is fair game.

Will the kewl kids notice that their phones are being watched and their secrets are about to be compromised? Aside from outing precious confidential sources, maybe that little fling mr. kewl kid is having with ms. (not his spouse) kewl kid is now known at the NSA? Oops.

Time to monitor the Corner over NRO. Jonah Goldberg reads this story and suggests there may be some justification for this alleged snooping. IF this story is true, I'd bet the ranch that the National Review does cook up some excuse for this.

Leaking confidential information is ILLEGAL and harming national security.

So you agree Dick Cheney and Karl Rove should be put behind bars?

Good. Thanks for agreeing.

The right wing in this country conflates dissent with enemy action. Once you define that the left/press are the traitorous 'enemy within', there is nothing to stop the use of the NSA and military against US citizens.

As somebody on Greenwald's blog pointed out, the danger is not so much that the average citizen has much to hide from NSA ears, but that this power will ultimately be used against important media outlets and politicians.

Nice to see that reporters are on the scene.

Child predators have the same rights you do, Al.

Warrants? We don' need no stinkeen warrants!

It's about time the press realizes they're in a war with the Bush WH, and the Bushies are playing dirty. Shades of Watergate, enemies' lists, etc.

The sooner they realize what they're up against and take off the kid gloves, the better for our entire country.

I was reading one of the American Girl books with my 8-year-old girl. It gives an oversimplified picture, but it did show how the conflict between Patriots and Loyalists divided people at that time.
People like Al aren't patriots, they are loyalists, the enemies of the patriots. They will defend any action of King George, and they will justify any loss of liberty in the name of security.

Nixon destroyed his administration with his zeal to stamp out leaks and punish his political enemies.

Now that ABC is reporting http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html that the surveillance program is tracking down journalists' sources, I assume we can expect the following headlines:

1) Surveillance Program Sparks Bush Rebound
2) Democrats Fail to Capitalize on NSA Revelations
3) Congress Sees Spying Program 'Fatigue'
4) Washington Post Implicated in Terrorist Investigation
5) Spying Program: Scandal or Our Liberal Bias?
6) Bush Gets Tough on Leakers
7) Hearings on Phone Call Monitoring Could Hamper National Security
8) Bloggers Get Shrill Over NSA Hoo-Haw
9) Benefits of Tapping My Phone Mixed\Liberal 'Overreaction' Misses Complexity (Joe Klien, Thomas Friedman, Joe Lieberman)
10) Reporting Wrongdoing Dangerous in Time of War

FISA, I believe, can only deal with Foreign Intelligence, not domestic calls. Shouldn't this require a regular warrant?

Lawless and out of control.

Note to those who support Bush whatever he does:

Would you really want these sorts of powers in the hands of a Democrat?

Be honest with yourself, at least. If you would have found such power objectionable in the hands of Bill Clinton, then you cannot, in good conscience, justify such power in the hands of ANY president, regardless of party or circumstance.

in good conscience

You're assuming they have a functioning conscience.

Thanks Derelict, you posted my thoughts before I could.

Just a wave to all the NSA folks checkin in to make sure "We the people..." are all warm & comfy

Hi Folks !!! (Wavy Wave) & don`t forget to call home now and then

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - H. L. Mencken

Can we just take a moment to point out that anybody using their personal phone to leak information to the press is an idiot???

Mudge - I believe you may have a HUGE point.

哈尔滨机票|哈尔滨特价机票
哈尔滨机票
哈尔滨特价机票

Would you really want these sorts of powers in the hands of a Democrat?

They are assuming no Democrat will ever occupy the White House again. If the GOP loses in '08, they expect W to declare martial law rather than let one of the hated "liberals" rule.

The other significant fact of this piece, if it turns out the information was acquired by the phone record turnover reported by USA Today, is the total lie of the data's "anonymized" nature. Kevin, you called bullshit on this already, but this could be the proof, a mere one week later.

The domestic spying issue was always pretty easy to figure out: of course they are.

They're the old Nixon team (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush Sr., Rove). They spied then, and they spy now. We know they're already sicc'ing local police forces on dangerous groups such as Quaker peace activists. We know that Mr. Hayden couldn't even get the 4th amendment correct. And we know that they're desperate.

Of course they're spying - the question is what is the most effective thing for the rest of us to do about it?

ADDRESS COMPLAINTS TO:

Who's the person running the NSA's data collection program?

James M. Cusick, assistant deputy director of the NSA for data acquisition. He's Mr. Data Acquisition. He's the specialist in charge of building collection systems that can acquire vast amounts of data, and his unit is the one that is running this program.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/05/15/aid_interview/print.html

MR. JAMES M. CUSICK
922 VANDERWOOD ROAD
BALTIMORE, Maryland 21228-1326
U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY
SENIOR EXECUTIVE
07/06/2004 500.00
TOTAL CONTRIBUTION 1000.00

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:MSucjNYnIUUJ:herndon2.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00386987/131995/sa/ALL/13+%22James+M.+Cusick%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=21

Mr James Cusick
Civil Servant
Us Defense Department RNC
$500 922 Vanderwood Rd (map)
Baltimore, MD 21228 1.68 miles
39.28985
-76.74031

MR. JAMES M CUSICK
CIVIL SERVANT
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE George W. Bush
$500 922 VANDERWOOD RD (map)
BALTIMORE, MD 21228 1.68 miles
39.28985
-76.74031

http://fundrace.org/neighbors.php?type=loc&addr=922+Vanderwood+Rd.&zip=21228&search=Search+by+Location

Why do they need to tap our phones to find leakers?

All they need to do is ask George Bush what he declassified.

Hey, can't let the Valerie Plame leaker get away!
Bug everyphone and mobile linked to the NYT for the next 3 years. Can't miss out on a chance to get Rove.

:)

Hey, can't let the Valerie Plame leaker get away!
Bug everyphone and mobile linked to the NYT for the next 3 years. Can't miss out on a chance to get Rove.
Posted by: McA

fitz has WARRANTS, you ignorant dipshit, and is going through legal channels.

I know these subtleties are lost on random malaysian wogs with minimal understanding of american governance, but they are, nevertheless, important.

What makes you think Al isn't a child predator himself? He certainly has the requisite cold-bloodedness and narcissism.

Geez, Nixon's corpse must be turning green with envy in its grave.

If the Plumbers had been able to do this sorta stuff, they'd have never been caught breaking into DNC HQ at the Watergate, because they wouldn't have needed to physically be there.

Wonder if anyone's gonna interview Gordon Liddy, and ask him what he and his compatriots could have done then if they'd had this technology?

Nads, not to defend McA in any way (see my post in thread below re criminally insane), but what's with the "wog" stuff, especially given your many excellent posts on the subject of race and ethnicity?

If you think about it the NSA pattern recognition program is potentially far more effective at finding whistle blowers and other leakers than professional terrorists.

The President must have derived his power in this case from the congressional resolution announcing the well known "WON*."

*War on News.

Nads, not to defend McA in any way (see my post in thread below re criminally insane), but what's with the "wog" stuff, especially given your many excellent posts on the subject of race and ethnicity?
Posted by: shortstop

I am the product of a former british colony who has several relatives who perceive themselves to be whiter than white (or at least wish they were), and the pejorative "western oriented gentleman" has been applied to many a lot closer to me than mca. It's something I grew up with that was meant to be offensive in a very specific way.

mca is a classic example of a nonwhite who is absolutely ACHING to be as racist and imperialist as those who've kept him and his people servile. self-hating doesn't begin to describe it.

and, fair or not, former colonials get to call sellouts in our midst meaner words than do the imperialists! ;)

But criticism taken ... there are probably more eloquent ways to point this out. None so succinct, but I have a large vocabulary.

Republican = fascist.

Just admit it, oh ye republicans who support this administration.

Don't worry.

It won't be long before they're spying on the "loyalists" too.

Gotta keep Hastert and Little Lord Lindsey and Al, et al., in line.

Think Trotsky...think Mexico...think ice axe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky

thr writes, The right wing in this country conflates dissent with enemy action.

No, we know the difference between dissent and enemy action. Reporting in a critical way on the White House is proper dissent.

Leaking classified information is not.

And the Left can hardly complain about leaks, given the pompous editorials from the NYT, etc. on the PlameNameBlameGame. You demanded that the government prosecute leakers. Congratulations, you got what you asked for.

There is an investigation of the recent CIA leaks. I'm reasonably certain that's being done in accordance with the law. As someone else above notes, that doesn't require a FISA warrant, as Kevin suggests. It's a standard investigation and so regular warrants, etc will be required.

As will a grand jury. Won't that be fun.

I kind of think that the press already knows that Bush could be spying on their conversations with CIA or other members of the Bush administration and that the press doesn't use a cell phone or email for stories that get people fired.

But I also think the press needs to realize that Bush is not a friend of democracy. Their rallying to him has cost the media dearly. Judith Miller wasn't the only sell out who went amok. Most the press is more concern with access that with facts. That's is why newspapers have lost a lot of readership as more people read blogs and want tough questions of this administration rather than blinding quoting Bush and company.

once again, Steve White proudly represents the RIGHT by willfully conflating WHISTLEBLOWING with Leaking for Character Assassination, to support a lie.

There is an investigation of the recent CIA leaks. I'm reasonably certain that's being done in accordance with the law.

Not in accordance with whistleblower protection laws.

I'm reasonably certain that's being done in accordance with the law.

What is the basis for your reasonable certainty?

I was going to compose a comment on this outrage, but then I discovered-- though hidden behind NYT's Select Firewall, a blogger quoted a Fair Use morsel-- that Bob Herbert has said what needs to be said already:
"So we've kidnapped people and sent them off to be tortured in the extraordinary rendition program; and we've incarcerated people at Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere without trial or even the right to know the charges against them; and we're allowing the C.I.A. to operate super-secret prisons where God-knows-what-all is going on; and we're listening in on the phone calls and reading the e-mail of innocent Americans without warrants; and on and on and on. The Bushies will tell you that it is dangerous and even against the law to inquire into these nefarious activities. We just have to trust the king. Well, I give you fair warning. This is a road map to totalitarianism. Hallmarks of totalitarian regimes have always included an excessive reliance on secrecy, the deliberate stoking of fear in the general population, a preference for military rather than diplomatic solutions in foreign policy, the promotion of blind patriotism, the denial of human rights, the curtailment of the rule of law, hostility to a free press and the systematic invasion of the privacy of ordinary people."

and, fair or not, former colonials get to call sellouts in our midst meaner words than do the imperialists! ;)

Can't argue with that, since it's my philosophy too. Thanks for receiving my comment so levelly.

What is the basis for your reasonable certainty?

Posted by: lib on May 15, 2006 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINK

Why silly, the president said its ok and he has lawyers and everything checking stuff out.

Why silly, the president said its ok and he has lawyers and everything checking stuff out.

And just like Britney, Steve "trust[s] the president. I really do."

I know I feel better.

I usually only indulge in conspiracy theories in the privacy of my own home (not so private I imagine) but this suggestion that journalist phone records are being surveilled combined with the forthcoming announcement that the Mexican border will soon have a strong military presence makes me very very nervous. As tempting as it might be to dismiss the latter as mere politics, and pathetic at that, just pause for two seconds to ponder what it might mean. Both Vincente Fox and Stephen Harper are peeved. Why? Because a country only puts military on a peaceful border for one of two reasons -- if it is anticipating an attack or preparing to invade. OK maybe there is a third -- it is wanting to increase internal military presence. None of these reasons should make anyone comfortable.

Hey, Al, if they're gonna do the job right, the NSA is gonna have to monitor the records of congressional dems, too. Because who is more likely to get a call from a whistle blower?

"thr writes, The right wing in this country conflates dissent with enemy action. "

"No, we know the difference between dissent and enemy action. Reporting in a critical way on the White House is proper dissent."

- Steve White.

Steve,

If you don't know the difference between reporting and dissenting, then your republican handlers have been entirely successful in brainwashing you.

A reporter could report on someone's dissent, but a news article can not be dissent, unless it is opinion. Do you understand the difference between columns and stories and editorials? Presenting facts is non-political, even if the consequences of such revelations are very political.

Your brain appears to have been mismanaged with great skill.

"Originally, it was a takeoff on 'polliwog' and was used to denigrate inexperienced recruits."

Not, I think. There was a Black Sambo-like series of books about the Golliwogg that is generally assumed to be the source of THIS use of "wog."

"Your brain appears to have been mismanaged with great skill."

Actually, Republicans have an incredible capacity for self-deception.

As always, apply the Clinton Test - if this were Clinton doing this, what would be your reaction, wingies?

This isn't a roadmap to totalitarianism, this is totalitarianism.

This surveillance program includes computer connections.

What websites did you look at on July 10th, 2002? They can get that for you.

oh Nads,

so you mean like, Michelle Malkin

Never pegged you for a fascists, Steve White.

THis could be misinformation planted to water down other wiretapping that has already been discovered.

I had completely forgotten but Steve Benen over at the Carpetbagger Report reminds me of that whole incident at MSNBC with Andrea Mitchells questioned to James Risen that asked if Christiane Amanpour had been monitored.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7417.html

Democracy died in December 2000.

The corpse has been slowly rotting ever since.

The stench coming out of the administration is beyond apalling.

Now the vaporous wisps are finding their way into our collective noses.

Sure stinks doesn't it?

In America you get food to eat
Won't have to run through the jungle and scuff up your feet
Climb aboard little wog, sail away with me...

Many visible signs that characterized the totalitarian regimes of the past will be absent from a country under such a rule in the 21st century, given the current state of commmunication and computer technologies. So no matter how egregious the government intrusions into our personal lives and how arbitrary its decisions to go after one person rather than the other, the supporters of such a rule will always be able to scoff at any suggestion of the existence of totalitarianism in their midst and their claims will sound believable to a large number of citizens whose understanding of fascism has been achieved primarily by watching the Nazi brownshirts and Stalins' thugs in oversized overcoats in the Hollywood movies.

The scariest thing I found on that link was the comments. Are these folks serious? They have no idea what the first amendment was written for. Every day I become more afraid for the future of this nation as a democracy. How can people who think this way have the unmitigated gall to try to force democracy on another country if they dont believe in the concept for this country.

It's possible, of course, that this is being done via a warrant issued by the FISA court.

ianal but Nope, no way you could get away with calling a journalist an "agent of a foreign power", even if he works for a multinational media conglomerate... The FISA court accepts a lot, but not this.

But I don`t see why they cant get the data under the pen register court order for criminal investigations. Remember how this administration has dusted of the espionage act (the aipac case http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/05/unprecedented_aipac_prosecutio.html)? Remember, its the journalist and aipac people that leak/spy, not the feds that give them the classified stuff. And leaking is illegal because its spying... And suspicion of a crime along with evidence, say a newspaper article, gets you a court order.

And with the NSA stuff they launder the collected "evidence", if they even have something they can use. They claim it came from an informer or something. Doing that with reporters when things get to a trial is a good way of shooting onself in the foot. Remember that everyone at the times, post and baltimore sun are gonna work to figure out how they learned about a source. An old fashioned court order gets you evidence you can use in court, both against the journalist, and more likely, against the source.

Once again, folks, you seem to be missing some elementary facts.

The current data collection of phone records is legal. So says the USSC from years ago, and so says federal law. As was noted in the USSC (don't have the citation handy, doing this from memory), collecting information about the origin of a phone call, the connection, and the length of time on the line is like looking at the outside of an envelope -- you get the postmark, address and return address. In neither case do you get the content.

From the standpoint of national security, it's pretty clear that by using computers to collect and sift the data, it becomes useful to build patterns that allow you to detect terrorists or spies -- if a known terrorist calls party A, and party A calls party B, to party C, etc., over time the patterns of the calls tells you something.

This is called (in the trade), signals analysis. It's been going on ever since intel agencies and militaries discovered its usefulness -- that was before WWII. The NSA and CIA have beenn doing this for decades. The differrence is now, confronted with a terrorist organization that has some assets within the U.S., they're using domestic phone records to find them. This is legal, and they asked -- not commanded, asked -- the phone companies for assistance, which they had a legal right to do. As you know, one company said no (which they had a right to do).

Someone abovve asked how I'd feel if President Clinton was doing this. Answer: if the goal was to root out a terrorist organization that had assets within our country, then godspeed and get on with it already.

This should be apolitical: foreign terrorists within our country have no expectation of or right to constitutional protection. If signals analysis of domestic phone calls, linked to data that shows how foreign terrorists are using those calls to direct their operations, is useful, then use it.

Dismayed Liberal writes, If you don't know the difference between reporting and dissenting, then your republican handlers have been entirely successful in brainwashing you.

It's always amusing for me to see how progressives think that the opposition must always have 'handlers'.

A reporter could report on someone's dissent, but a news article can not be dissent, unless it is opinion.

Obviously you haven't been reading the NYT lately; much of their 'news' stories, particularly their 'news analysis' stories, are thinly-disguised opinion. Their right, of course.

A reporter has the right to report, but not to reveal classified information. There is no exception in the law for 'whistleblowing', though progressives find the notion romantic. Revealing NSA operations is a major problem with real potential to compromise how we deal with terrorism.

And that said, you can't seriously demand that the leakers of Valerie Plame's name be punished and then excuse those who leaked the NSA operations, or the CIA airplane operations. Whatever the merits of the Plame case (I'm still waiting for an indictment on someone for something other than perjury), revealing intel operations is far more damaging.

Which has been the point for the NYT and the progressive community, of course.

The current data collection of phone records is legal. So says the USSC from years ago, and so says federal law.

Actually, federal law explicitly prohibits the disclosure of those records except in narrow circumstances which it is, at best, quite doubtful were met.

The relevant Supreme Court decision (cited in previous discussion of this issue) was issued before that law existed, and stated that there was no legal expectation of privacy that would present a Fourth Amendment issue. However, one could argue that the factual circumstances have changed, and that the statute creates a legal expectation of privacy which might create a Fourth Amendment interest, or perhaps more productively alternative that it creates a proprietary interest that cannot be taken away without due process under the Fifth Amendment.

It appears very likely that the disclosure by the telcos was illegal, and its quite possible that the government action in soliciting that illegal disclosures was unconstitutional.

Hi, great site