home

Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Nation

Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr has a new column in Time Magazine on how Bush's warrantless NSA surveillance program damages the U.S.

Let's focus briefly on what the President has done here. Exactly like Nixon before him, Bush has ordered the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct electronic snooping on communications of various people, including U.S. citizens. That action is unequivocally contrary to the express and implied requirements of federal law that such surveillance of U.S. persons inside the U.S. (regardless of whether their communications are going abroad) must be preceded by a court order.

....The Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the assertion that a President may conduct electronic surveillance without judicial approval for national security, noting in 1972 that our "Fourth Amendment freedoms cannot properly be guaranteed if domestic security surveillances may be conducted solely within the discretion of the Executive Branch."

Barr makes the point that cannot be repeated often enough: today it's al-Qaida, tomorrow it could be us:

Tomorrow, it may be your phone calls or e-mails that will be swept up into our electronic infrastructure and secretly kept in a growing file attached to your name. Then everyone you contact could become a suspect, a link in an ever lengthening chain that would ensnare us all in the files of the largest database ever created through unlimited electronic spying that touches every aspect of our lives.

Hat tip Patriot Daily.

< Witnessing an Execution | Medical Marijuana Approved in R.I. >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:09:46 PM EST
    Bedfellows, meet strangeness. But good in this case. And probably indicative of a much broader base of disagreement with the President than he wants to believe.

    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#2)
    by wg on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:45:15 PM EST
    Really galling here is that the administration decided to ignore requirements of FISA, a statue which, any way you look at it, is a cold war monstrosity designed to give the government as much secret powers as possible. For starters, the FISA court issues "warrants" which are anything but standard US warrants. a) there is no contesting them at any time, b) they enter your place surreptitiously, c) there is no reporting on how they were executed to the issuing court thus precluding any judicial oversight of their execution (standard for normal US warrants) and d) their targets are never notified. All files are forever sealed in the FISA court. There is a misconception that FISA does not apply to US persons (citizen/green card holders). That is not true. The law deals with agents of foreign powers and US persons can easily be declared by the FBI/USA as such. Mayfield was an agent of a foreign power for the purposes of FISA according to the US Attorney (Immergut Oregon) application to the FISA court. (Patriot Act provides for sneak and peek searches too but these are inconvenient to the government, sooner or later the target has to be notified, so USAs prefer FISA.) US persons enjoy a slightly better protection under FISA - any application to FISA must show probable cause to believe that their activities "may" or "are about to" involve a violation of the criminal statutes. For non US person no suspicion of anything specific is required for FISA court to authorize surveillance/searches. FISA specifically forbids courts from meddling on spying on foreign powers. That is no surveillance of them requires any warrant. Note that you don't have to be a foreign entity (e.g. Japanese embassy communicating with its home government) to be "foreign power" per FISA. Domestic institutions qualify too if suspected of supporting terrorism or practicing sabotage. The FBI apparently uses this to monitor various ecology groups in the U.S. w/o having to go through the FISA court. And all this was not enough for the Bush administration.

    So riddle me this then - how is any NSA surveillance legal at all then? If the NSA monitors transmissions from nation A, there's not necessarily a way to tell beforehand where those transmissions are going to. Given that this is all automated, how do you propose that they do surveillance of foreign subjects?

    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#4)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:14:47 PM EST
    So riddle me this then - how is any NSA surveillance legal at all then?
    Uhh, gee, you go to a judge, get a warrant, get the tap. If you don't have time do the tap, and get the warrant later ... just not 3 years later.

    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:52:36 PM EST
    Say what you will about Barr, but he's always been on the side of civil liberty. It's good to see him speaking out. He believes in liberty...and that's enough.

    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 09:10:39 PM EST
    kdog, he's not into liberty when it comes to reproductive rights. among others. on this, tho, i'll take his support.

    Re: Bob Barr: Presidential Snooping Damages the Na (none / 0) (#7)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 09:57:15 PM EST
    JR, They have three days after surveillance to get a rubber stamp from the secret FISA court. And then it's retroactively made legal. They just refuse to do even that.