Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House Tries to Prevent Judge From Ruling on Surveillance Efforts
The New York Times ^ | 21 Dec 2013 | CHARLIE SAVAGE and DAVID E. SANGER

Posted on 12/21/2013 2:41:25 PM PST by Theoria

The Obama administration moved late Friday to prevent a judge in California from ruling on the constitutionality of warrantless surveillance programs authorized during the Bush administration, telling a court that recent disclosures about National Security Agency spying were not enough to undermine its claim that litigating the case would jeopardize state secrets.

In a set of filings in the two long-running cases in the Northern District of California, the government acknowledged facts that it had long held out to be secrets that would put the country at risk if they were to come out in court, including that the N.S.A. started systematically collecting data about Americans’ emails and phone calls in 2001, alongside its program of wiretapping certain calls without warrants.

But the government said that despite recent leaks by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor, that made public a fuller scope of the surveillance and data collection programs put in place after the Sept. 11 attacks, sensitive secrets remained at risk in any courtroom discussion of their details — like whether the plaintiffs were targets of intelligence collection or whether particular telecommunications providers like AT&T and Verizon had helped the agency.

“Disclosure of this still-classified information regarding the scope and operational details of N.S.A. intelligence activities implicated by plaintiffs’ allegations could be expected to cause extremely grave damage to the national security of the United States,” wrote the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr.

As a result, he said, he was continuing to assert the State Secrets Privilege, which allows the government to block information from being used in court even if that means the case must be dismissed.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: disclosure; nsa; snowden; surveillance; whitehouse

1 posted on 12/21/2013 2:41:25 PM PST by Theoria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Theoria

Now it’s BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH’s fault!


2 posted on 12/21/2013 2:43:56 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (Blog: www.BackwoodsEngineer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria
Hey, Clapper, weren't you the one under oath, telling Congress that your agency wasn't doing this????

At least, you "weren't intentionally doing it!"

Now you admit you are but that to answer questions about whether the people you are listening to are under "investigation" or not!!!

Liar, under oath lie - to Congress!!!!

3 posted on 12/21/2013 2:49:18 PM PST by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

Flack, target, ‘nuff said.


4 posted on 12/21/2013 2:50:34 PM PST by upchuck (My Internet addiction is so bad... it's alt of ctrl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

Yes, I noticed in scanning through it all the references and pointing to Bush’s administration.

Then I looked up to see the source, and ....

Voila! The NEW YORK TIMES of course!

And they never disclose how they could know all of the warrantless spying started under Bush. I know for a fact that the Bush people analyzed emails and phone records taken to Canada via RIM’s Blackberry smartphones because Canada allows for warrantless monitoring. But this was limited mostly to US government employees and contractors.

But since the end of Bush’s second term the domestic espionage program has been expanded beyond anything like what was started under Bush’s terms, and the rubber stamp warrants that exist are a fig leaf, a joke.


5 posted on 12/21/2013 2:59:30 PM PST by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Theoria
800 FBI files morphed into a key word searchable database of all telecommunications and emails among several billion people, of which 300 million are Domestic Americans protected from such a thing by our constitution.

As for the other countries the NSA is doing this to, war is an option.

An executive branch with a searchable database by key word is freakin scary stuff.

6 posted on 12/21/2013 3:11:33 PM PST by blackdog (There is no such thing as healing, only a balance between destructive and constructive forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria
How does this relate to Duck Dynasty???

Please stop wasting our time with such trivial issues. Nobody cares.

/sarc

7 posted on 12/21/2013 3:11:49 PM PST by Forgotten Amendments (I remember when a President having an "enemies list" was a scandal. Now, they have a kill list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zerosix

” Not Wittingly” - James Clapper, in congressional testimony.


8 posted on 12/21/2013 3:13:01 PM PST by blackdog (There is no such thing as healing, only a balance between destructive and constructive forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Theoria
The soviet style police state run by the foreigner in the WH has nothing to do with what Bush "authorized", yet there goes the NYT again blaming the right for the crimes of the domestic marxists.

They are not fooling anybody.

9 posted on 12/21/2013 3:15:32 PM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgotten Amendments

OMG. I just scrolled down:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3104158/posts

Clay Aiken’s comments on The Duck Dynasty thing. 54 comments so far. This thread might get a dozen.

We’re doomed. And it’s just what we deserve.


10 posted on 12/21/2013 3:19:04 PM PST by Forgotten Amendments (I remember when a President having an "enemies list" was a scandal. Now, they have a kill list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Theoria
"authorized during the Bush administration"

Everybody, all together now, whose fault is it?

11 posted on 12/21/2013 3:22:08 PM PST by Daaave ("I hear you knockin' But you can't come in")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

Put Clapper under oath in this judges courtroom.


12 posted on 12/21/2013 3:31:10 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

Prevent a judge from ruling? This is standard practice?


13 posted on 12/21/2013 3:34:55 PM PST by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theoria

14 posted on 12/21/2013 3:42:05 PM PST by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

Ntwit.


15 posted on 12/21/2013 3:45:11 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

The kittens are wearing red shoes. They are landing at LAX. I repeat..........The kittens are wearing red shoes.


16 posted on 12/21/2013 3:54:24 PM PST by blackdog (There is no such thing as healing, only a balance between destructive and constructive forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: abclily

The government has asserted that it can’t participate in the suit due to “state secret.” The judge will rule on that assertion.


17 posted on 12/21/2013 3:54:52 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: blackdog
Ah, yes. "Not wittingly."

Does that mean that the NSA did capture all of our phone calls/email against their will while trying to trap terrorists?

If that's so, what happened with the Boston bomber brothers, why did "we" not learn that they were planning mass murder at the Boston Marathon??????

18 posted on 12/21/2013 4:05:53 PM PST by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Theoria; All
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
19 posted on 12/21/2013 4:06:10 PM PST by QT3.14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

It’s been five years under Obama. If they wanted to dismantle and stop it, they could and would.
If they could say Bush enacted this Big Brother monitoring to secure their place as the better people, they would have done so years ago. Or they knew it was in place and ramped it up because they want a big (data) file on everyone.


20 posted on 12/21/2013 4:39:39 PM PST by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

“The least untruthful thing I could say ....”, you mean that James Clapper?


21 posted on 12/21/2013 6:17:01 PM PST by RetiredTexasVet (Some people might call it a confidence game or swindle, others call it ObamaCare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: blackdog
John has a long mustache.
22 posted on 12/21/2013 7:07:31 PM PST by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala
Pack my bags with twelve dozen Phoenician liquor jugs.
23 posted on 12/21/2013 8:06:14 PM PST by spokeshave (OMG.......Schadenfreude overload is not covered under Obamacare :-()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Then Obama could avoid any litigation based on ‘state secret’?

Isn’t this what he did with Fast and Furious?


24 posted on 12/22/2013 5:03:52 AM PST by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: abclily
-- Then Obama could avoid any litigation based on `state secret'?
Isn't this what he did with Fast and Furious?
--

Technically, he has to litigate the assertion of state secret, but yeah, if the government wins on that argument, then the plaintiff is out (and so are all similarly situated plaintiffs). Bush's DOJ did that when the government was sued under FISA. Plaintiff had actual evidence of being under surveillance without a warrant, the court ordered the plaintiff to not revel the evidence, and the evidence did not help plaintiff in the case - case was dismissed on state secret grounds. Turns out tthat the part of the law that fines the government for a surveillance violation is completely toothless.

I didn't follow the legal wranglings under Fast and Furious, but use of state secret would be a "natural" there because the government's actions were ostensibly international / foreign affairs.

25 posted on 12/22/2013 9:43:03 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson