Senators Focus on Wiretapping Program ~ WSJ notes....

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ( Todays Free Feature ) ^ | January 18, 2006; | NEIL KING JR. Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Senators Focus on Wiretapping Program

Legality of President's Moves
Will Be the Crucial, but Hard to Answer,
Issue at Hearings

By NEIL KING JR.

Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
January 18, 2006; Page A4

WASHINGTON -- Senators will have scads of questions when they open hearings on President Bush's wiretapping program. But the pivotal one -- Is it legal? -- will be hard to answer.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to hold hearings early next month, followed by a possible closed round of questioning within the Senate Intelligence Committee. The legality issue likely will be center stage in both venues, with Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez set to argue that Mr. Bush has the right to authorize the National Security Agency to conduct widespread wiretaps outside legal channels. Later, Congress may weigh proposals to tighten or loosen the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which has governed domestic wiretaps since 1978.

Yet the hearings won't yield what critics of the program are seeking: a binding decision on whether Mr. Bush broke the FISA law. For that, lawyers across the U.S. are pursuing a range of efforts to bring the matter before a judge. Their goal is a court ruling, possibly within weeks, to uphold or strike down the government's eavesdropping program.

Getting quick legal clarity in the courts, though, may also prove tricky.

Two civil lawsuits filed yesterday -- one in Detroit by the American Civil Liberties Union and another in New York by the Center for Constitutional Rights -- opened another front in the battle, and showed some of the hazards that lie ahead.

[darkwing104]

But in both cases, the plaintiffs have no evidence that they were caught up in the NSA program. Without evidence of harm -- or what is called legal standing -- neither case is likely to go far.

When did facts or proof ever matter to libs.

[carlr]

Senators will have scads of questions when they open hearings on President Bush's wiretapping program. But the pivotal one -- Is it legal? -- will be hard to answer.

And therefor the point of having hearings would be?

[rellimpank]

--and why will the purported Republidum majority allow it to be turned into an anti-Bush circus, as I am sure they will--?

[peyton randolph]

Let's hope the wiretaps are legal under Scottish law. That should satisfy Snarlin' Arlen the RINO traitor.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

LOL!

[The_Victor]

I'm probably the only one annoyed by this, but the NSA program was not a wiretap. It was a satellite communications intercept. No alligator clips/recording devices/forwarding transmitters were used. < / analretention >

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Reference material from Hugh Hewitt's Blog:

The NSA Intercepts and the President's Authority to Order Surveillance of Al Qaeda's Communications with Tts Agents in America

*******************************

The NSA Intercepts and the President's Authority to Order Surveillance of Al Qaeda's Communications with Tts Agents in America

by Hugh Hewitt

Glenn Reynolds has some new links on the subject of surveillance of Al Qaeda when it contacts its operatives in the United States.

Background posts:

First post on the New York Times story, which ran on 12/16/05.

The president's response on December 17.

Presidential Power, Part I.

Presidential Power, Part II.

Presidential Power, Part III

Presidential Power, Part IV

Presidential Power, Part V.

Presidential Power, Part VI

Presidential Power, Part VII

The Department of Justice points and authorities.

Powerline's John Hinderaker's comprehensive review of the authority to conduct surveillance of Al Qaeda communications with its agents in the United States.

My interview with University of Chicago Law School Professor Cass Sunstein on the president's authority to order the surveillance.

Read it all before the hearings begin.

Or you could trust MSM, John Kerry and Al Gore to explain it all for you.

[xcamel]

And Clintoooons spying on domestic Americans because they were considered enemies to his administration? Eschelon ?? Carnivore ?? Waco ?? Ruby Ridge?? OKC Bombing cover up?? Elian Gonzales?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I like it that the MSM uses the term wiretap....just indicates out untechnical they are......and behind the times....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Instapundit link:

January 18, 2006...The coming NSA Hearings

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The Volokh Conspiracy Blog:

ACLU Files Suit over NSA Surveillance Program:

************************************************

From the ACLU's press release:

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program. The program is disrupting their ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship, and engage in advocacy.

The complaint is available here. The causes of action are the Fourth Amendment, the First Amendment, the Administrative Procedure Act, and a general right against the operation of executive actions alleged to violate the separation of powers.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

From the JustOneMinute Blog:

*********************************************************

Connecting The Dots - Booooring...
January 17, 2006

*********************************************************

The NY Times delivers the latest on the NSA warrantless eavesdropping program - it generated far too many dead-end leads to be useful to the FBI.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 - In the anxious months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month.

But virtually all of them, current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans.

"Virtually all" were useless?  Uh Huh.  And since, to pick an odd example, most New York City cops go through a day without making an arrest, I guess they are virtually useless.
Or, as an even more bizarre analogy, I guess seatbelts in automobiles are virtually useless, as are airbags.

The article does provide some useful perspective:

.........

********************************************

See link for the rest..........

**********************************************

Another bit

*************************************

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Connecting The Dots - Booooring...:

» ACLU Lawsuit Against NSA Is Weak from Stop The ACLU
Another hat tip to AJ Strata Certainly folks that knowingly correspond with known and suspected terrorists should know they are taking a risk, and that such treasonous actions comes with consequence. It is obvious that the ACLUs case is weak.... [Read More]

[p23185]

But in both cases, the plaintiffs have no evidence that they were caught up in the NSA program. Without evidence of harm -- or what is called legal standing -- neither case is likely to go far. When did facts or proof ever matter to libs.

They just want all the attention the MSM gives them - helps the masses to feel Bush is spying on everybody and then write the Congresscritters and demand Impeach Bush and Cheney and Impeach and Demand Censure for Bush-Cheney Misconduct

[Ben Hecks]

I'm probably the only one annoyed by this, but the NSA program was not a wiretap.

The "wiretap" description annoys me also. What's ironic is that many foreign countries have the capability to eavesdrop but no one seems to be concerned with them.

[sgtbono2002]

Because they are a pack of yellowbellied cowards.

[Cobra64]

My Dad served as a Commander in the US Navy in the South Pacific during WWII; and he told me of this:

http://www.usnewsclassroom.com/resources/activities/war_reporting/timeline/ww2-censor.html

In light of what the NSA is doing today, any comments?

[xzins]

The effort is to tie this use of power by the President to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. My sense is that we are very nearly at a separation of powers donneybrook.

The President is clearly acting in his capacity as Commander in Chief in a conflict that has Congressional authorization.

Giving the benefit of the doubt regarding treason to Congress, some in Congress are uncomfortable with any wiretaps, ever, for any reason unless authorized by Congress.

That strikes me as an unwarranted power grab on their part.

My guts tell me that it's insane for any country to allow their enemies in the conflict freely to communicate within that country's borders, with that country's citizens, or with that country's military.

That is so insane that it could not have rationally been the point of any law designed to prevent an overbearing government from invading citizen privacy.

[phillyfanatic]

Kenneth Timmerman today reminded listeners that this so-called spying on Al Q was a Duh moment and any questioning of it by Dems should be ignored and explained in the simplest lingo to the rest of America via the State of the Union and other Pub propaganda efforts. Of course we tap them and of course we should profile them.

[loveliberty2]

"I like it that the MSM uses the term wiretap....just indicates out untechnical they are......and behind the times...."

Yes, and with that kind of inability to relate to technological advances in telecommunications, it is easy to understand why Democrats rely on such ignorance to perpetuate the mythical image of a President of the United States patiently holding a phone to his ear while he eavesdrops on John Q. Public's telephone conversation with his broker.