As a writer with openly progressive opinions living overseas, I would be surprised if my emails and telephone calls to Our Kid – a poli-sci professor who studied in Madrid and wrote her PhD on Spanish terrorism – have not been monitored by the US government. It’s been a long-standing joke between us to wave hello to the lonely NSA guy in the basement listening in on our conversations. But a new ABC report confirms what has long been suspected – it’s no joke. NSA officials have intentionally intercepted, listened to and passed around the phone calls of hundreds of innocent U.S. citizens working overseas, including journalists and international aid workers including the International Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders, even when it was definite the calls were not related to anything to do with national security, while the government misled the American public about the scope of its surveillance activities. But rather than listening for possible connections to suspected terrorists, it seems what really interests those NSA guys with headphones down in the basement is… sex.

According to Adrienne Kinne and David Murfee Faulk, two former military intercept operators who worked at the giant National Security Agency (NSA) center in Fort Gordon, Georgia, for years intercept operators listened in on hundreds of phone calls from American soldiers in Baghdad’s Green Zone as they talked to their spouses, girlfriends, and family about ‘personal, private things with Americans who are not in any way, shape or form associated with anything to do with terrorism.’ Intercept operators assigned to a special military program at the NSA's Back Hall at Fort Gordon would routinely share salacious phone calls that had been recorded, and gossip about it during breaks. ‘ “Hey, check this out, there's good phone sex or there's some pillow talk, pull up this call, it's really funny, go check it out.” It would be some colonel making pillow talk and we would say, “Wow, this was crazy”.’

‘The American public is led to believe that the NSA is eavesdropping on calls where one party is a member of al Qaeda, but in reality the NSA is monitoring and collecting the personal communications of innocent Americans,’ said James Bamford, who first interviewed the former intercept officers for his book, ‘The Shadow Factory,’ due out next week. ‘What's worse, once a telephone number or e-mail address gets picked up, it stays in the system. Every communication from the number or address is picked up, monitored and stored permanently.’

Continue reading »

With the anniversary of the September 11 attacks once again upon us, Bush's Law of Bin Laden is also again on display. That is, in the Bush playbook, the threat posed by Osama Bin Laden is directly proportional to the threat to the President's own political standing.

At the White House on Wednesday, press secretary Dana Perino played down the Bin Laden danger to her lame-duck boss' flatline political standing, if not to the American people:

Q: But Osama bin Laden is the one that - you keep talking about his lieutenants, and, yes, they are very important, but Osama bin Laden was the mastermind of 9/11 -

PERINO: No, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the mastermind of 9/11, and he's sitting in jail right now.

But back in January 2006, President Bush was singing a much different tune. Trying to fight back against the growing public outcry over his illegal domestic wiretapping program, President Bush used the Bin Laden bogeyman during remarks at the National Security Agency. Bush lashed out at his critics:

All I would ask them to do is listen to the words of Osama bin Laden and take him seriously. When he says he's going to hurt the American people again, or try to, he means it. I take it seriously, and the people of NSA take it seriously.

Continue reading »

Senator Feingold took to the Senate floor today and, with the help of Sen. Arlen Specter, challenged his colleagues to wrap their minds around what granting retroactive telecom immunity would mean for the rule of law, and wondered how they could be voting on such a thing when 70 members don't even have access to the evidence of alleged impropriety.

Download | play Download | play

"This is an amazingly inappropriate use of legislative interference, a push by this administration, and Senators should take a real hard look at whether they want to be associated with such an attack on the rule of law."

Glenn Greenwald has more:

Once passed by the Senate, the FISA bill will then immediately be sent by the Democratic Congress to an eagerly awaiting and immensely pleased President Bush, who will sign it into law, thereby putting a permanent and happy end to the scandal that began when -- in December, 2005 -- he was caught spying on the communications of American citizens in violation of the law. The only real remaining questions are (a) whether Bush will host Steny Hoyer and Jay Rockefeller at a festive, bipartisan White House signing ceremony to celebrate the evisceration of the Fourth Amendment and the rule of law, and (b) whether Bush, when he signs the bill into law, will append a signing statement decreeing that even its minimal restraints on presidential spying are invalid.

Extended version of Senator Feingold's remarks below the fold:

Continue reading »

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), who along with Russ Feingold has been the fiercest defender of Constitutional rights, took to the floor last night to deliver a two-hour impassioned speech in defense of the rule of law, and offered a scathing critique of the sham FISA bill about to become law.

Download | play Download | play

"Mr President, I had hoped that I would not have to come to the floor under these circumstances again. I've fought this with everything I have in me. Today we are being asked to pass the so-called compromise that was reached by some of our colleagues and approved by the other body, the House of Representatives. I'm here this evening to say that I will not and I can not support this legislation. This legislation goes against everyhting I've stood for, everything this body ought to stand for in my view."

I'm somewhat of a CSPAN junkie, but Dodd's sincere respect and concern for this country's sacred principles and his passionate defense last night of those principles was the most uplifting yet depressing thing I have ever seen; uplifting because it proved to me that there are leaders out there who still give a damn, but depressing because, with rare exceptions, he is alone. When the history of the Bush years is written and future generations look back and wonder how we sank so low, how an abject failure like George W. Bush successfully transformed our national character, at least we can look back to times like these and know that there were some true patriots sounding the alarm.

Glenn Greenwald sums up the floor speech thusly:

Continue reading »

Senator Russ Feingold joined Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! Tuesday to speak out about the reprehensible FISA "compromise" brokered by House Leader Steny Hoyer. Feingold has always been the most articulate and outspoken voice on Constitutional liberties, and he sure didn't hold back.

Download | play Download | play (h/t Heather)

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: It's not even a fig leaf; it's a joke. It does not in any way prevent the ruling from that court, basically automatically, of immunity, because it just involves saying, "Look, they've got a piece of paper from the government." This is nothing but Democrats trying to pretend that they're doing something here. They are doing nothing. They're giving in. [Missouri Republican] Senator Kit Bond is basically giggling at the fact that the Republicans and the administration got essentially everything they want on this. It's sadly a great failure on the part of the Democratic majority that was elected in 2006 primarily to get us out of Iraq, but also significantly to protect the Constitution of the United States. This is not a proud moment.

Do you hear that, Democrats? The GOP is laughing at your craven weakness. Hell, your approval numbers are higher with Republicans than they are with the people who put you in power to supposedly protect their rights. Do what you were elected to do and filibuster this bill until the real intelligence gaps are closed and the telecoms are compelled to prove they didn't violate federal law by helping the most unpopular President in American history spy on us.

When, precisely, did it become unfashionable (even taboo) to stand strong on protecting core American values? Have we really allowed George Bush to fundamentally alter the character of our country? Be sure to tune into CSPAN-2 tomorrow to see whether or not there are any true leaders in the Democratic party willing to fight the good fight.

Across the pond in Britain, Prime Minister Gordon Brown is trying to push legislation through Parliament that would dramatically increase government detention and surveillance powers (Sound familiar?) The only difference is that over there, politicians from both parties are defiantly rising up in protest, with Tory MP David Davis going so far as to resign his seat in order to run for re-election on a platform of protecting civil liberties.

Over at Salon, Glenn Greenwald chronicles the fascinating developments and challenges Congressional Dems to grow a spine and stand up to the Bush administration's blatant overreaches on the new FISA "compromise."

When the history of the post 9/11-era in America is written, it will record that our country was ruled by an administration as radical as it was contemptuous of our laws and basic liberties, but was also aided and abetted every step of the way by a putative "opposition party" too craven and/or supportive even to attempt to impede any of it, let alone succeed in doing so. The very few times when certain of its members tried to take principled stances of the type Britain is now witnessing -- such as Feingold's vigorous opposition to Bush's illegal spying program, the Military Commissions Act, and excesses of the Patriot Act -- the Democratic Party leadership itself intervened to quash them and ensure they failed.

Wouldn't it be nice to have leaders in our own government who were willing to protect the rule of law and our cherished civil liberties from the tyranny of fear mongering?

If Senator Obama truly wanted to prove himself as a leader and strongly rebuke the past 8 years of privacy abuse and lawlessness, he would use his standing as presumptive nominee to rally Democrats (and some honest Republicans) to propose a new bill that closes any real "intelligence gaps," but demands that the telecoms defend their conduct in a court of law to determine whether or not they broke the law. That shouldn't be a controversial proposition. The telecoms can't break the law just because the President told them they could.

This is a perfect opportunity to expose the criminality of the Bush administration and salvage the remaining privacy rights we have left. All we need are courageous leaders willing to go to the mat over it.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Edmund Burke
Irish orator, philosopher, & politician (1729 - 1797)

In his eternal quest for the Republican presidential nomination, the supposed maverick John McCain has repeatedly reversed long-held positions and compromised purportedly core principles. From the Bush tax cuts, the religious right and immigration reform to overturning Roe v. Wade, proclaiming Samuel Alito a model Supreme Court Justice and bashing France (just to name a few), McCain changed sides as changing political conditions dictated.

But over the past two weeks, McCain's rapid fire, acrobatic flip-flops have produced whiplash, at least for voters. 10 times since the beginning of June, McCain has retreated from, upended or just forgotten positions he once claimed as his own. On Social Security, balancing the budget, defense spending, domestic surveillance and a host of other issues so far this month, McCain's "Straight Talk Express" did a U-turn on the road to the White House.

Continue reading »

The Bush administration has repeatedly invoked the state secrets privilege, a doctrine that was adopted in the McCarthy era, that was originally meant to be used only in exceptional circumstances. Since 2001, however, the Bush Administration has repeatedly abused the privilege in attempts to cover up potentially embarrassing or illegal activities in cases involving warrantless wiretapping and other aspects of the NSA's domestic spy program, kidnapping, aka 'extraordinary rendition', and torture, just to name a few. They have relied on it not only to silence critics and whistleblowers, but also to use it as a shield to go after them like they have to James Risen, Sibel Edmonds and many others. Just this week it's come out that they once again have invoked it in an attempt to keep the details hidden in the case against Thomas Kontogiannis, one of the convicted bribers of Republican congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, where the executive branch has asserted that once they deem something classified, the "courts are virtually powerless to review or disagree."

It's way past time Congress steps in to put a stop to it.

Electronic Frontier Foundation:

Now, Congress may finally be ready to act to rein in these abuses. On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider S.2533, the State Secrets Protection Act, which would bring much needed judicial supervision that could help eliminate bogus state secrets claims, while carefully protecting legitimate interests in national security.

If one of your Senators is on the Judiciary Committee (see below), then you're uniquely positioned to encourage the Committee to approve this legislation and make a real difference in fighting government secrecy! Contact them now and tell them to support the State Secrets Protection Act.

Continue reading »

Much to everyone’s surprise, House Democrats simply wouldn’t budge when the Bush administration demanded that Congress pass a permanent “Protect America Act” — with retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies. The law expired, the president threw a fit, and lawmakers broke for a two-week spring recess.

Despite claims that congressional inaction was responsible for increased threats against Americans, and despite demands that the president would never accept a compromise on surveillance power and telecom immunity, the White House indicated recently that the Bush gang might be willing to chat with Democratic leaders after all.

Just a few days ago, The Hill reported that House Republicans, who had been shouting that the sky was falling as a result of the PAA’s expiration, have apparently decided to accept the status quo and turn their attention elsewhere.

House Republicans are poised to shift their focus from national security to the economy, hoping to rally opposition to what they claim are Democratic plans to raise taxes amid the economic downturn.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) is expected to announce Thursday that the House GOP floor emphasis will transition away from passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and earmark reform to “stop the tax hike.”

Given this, it’s worth pausing to wonder if House Dems just won the FISA/immunity fight. Glenn Greenwald makes the case that Republicans failed on this one.

Making the case yesterday for why the House should pass the Cheney/Rockefeller bill (aka the Legalize-our-Illegal-Conduct Act), Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez Michael Mukasey teared up while shamelessly exploiting the victims of 9/11.

(h/t ThinkProgress)

Download | play Download | play

Glenn's got the full deceitful quote and some questions for AG Mukasey, who he says has "conclusively proven himself to be an exact replica of Alberto Gonzales."

Good news! The Gavel:

The House has just passed the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3773, to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence, and for other purposes, by a vote of 213-197-1. The revised House legislation to amend FISA grants new authorities for conducting electronic surveillance against foreign targets while preserving the requirement that the government obtain an individualized FISA court order, based on probable cause, when targeting Americans at home or abroad. The House bill also strongly enhances oversight of the Administration’s surveillance activities. Finally, the House bill does not provide retroactive immunity for telecom companies but allows the courts to determine whether lawsuits should proceed

Our Blue America fundraising push was awesome because some Bush Dogs flipped back to reality and voted for this bill including Boswell.

Continue reading »

Donate if you can to our new FISA page. The Blue Dogs for retroactive Immunity are stomping their feet and writing letters to Nancy Pelosi:

In a January letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, 21 Blue Dog Coalition members made it known they supported granting immunity to the telecoms, and urged Pelosi to move quickly to pass the Senate version of the bill. (The 21 members who signed the letter are listed below.)

Members of the Blue Dog Coalition were integral in the passage of the highly controversial Protect America Act (PAA), a Republican-backed bill that greatly expanded spy powers in August 2007. The PAA was allowed to expire in February in the face of stark warnings from the Bush administration.

Rep. Boehner is threatening to shut down the HOUSE at this moment over the bill because these crybabies aren't getting their way. From the comments: John Boehner and the Repubs have just brought a 4th motion to adjourn on the House floor, in yet another tantrum to “shut down the house” until their FISA BS is voted on.

Jane Hamsher says:

These are the same House members who do this again and again when it comes to any legislation that isn't horribly corporatist and regressive. They hold the Democratic party hostage, and can effectively passing legislation most any time they want to join with the Republicans to do so...

Glenn Greenwald writes: Targeting Bad Democrats

The only real prospect for changing any of that is to attach a political price, some form of meaningful punishment, when they do things such as vote to abolish habeas corpus or to vest new warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President or to grant amnesty to telecoms. That needs to be done even if it means weakening the bad Democrat in question. Last October, when six House Democrats announced that they would vote to sustain Bush's veto of SCHIP legislation, a group of blogs -- including FDL and C&L -- raised funds to run negative robocalls in the districts of all six, and five of the six ended up switching their position.

Howie has a great quote form John Hall (D-NY), twice endorsed by Blue America on FISA. And we were successful in our efforts on SCHIP. Here's what we did..... Jane set up a poll and the top two Bush Dogs picked will be the targets of our newest push against them so go and vote. We need your help in fighting back so please give what you can to our Blue America PAC against FISA page

We've had great success fighting against these Bush Dogs and will not back down now...

Continue reading »

The always hysterical Mr. Colbert hits another one out of the park with his "The Word," segment dealing with the fear-mongering Bush administration FISA battle. It's nice to see the writers back on their game.

Download | play Download | play (h/t the incredible Heather)

Colbert: The members of Donk-qaeda have used their House majority to block the renewal of the PAA. Which, as the name clearly states, empowers the NSA to tap your phones without a warrant. By not passing the PAA, the Demoncrats are placing in grave danger the safety of millions of innocent American dollars.

By using clips from classic horror movies like Silence of the Lambs, Nightmare on Elm Street and When a Stranger Calls, Colbert proves his point. The real purpose of the Protect America Act is actually to protect the Telecoms for participating in BushCo's illegal wiretapping endeavor by granting them retroactive immunity for violating our civil rights---Our Privacy. It all makes sense now. And don't pick up the phone!

President Bush tried his very best to scare the American people and distort the debate about illegal wiretapping at today's press conference by spewing falsehood after falsehood. It's genuinely hard to follow this man sometimes. First he starts off by saying that telecoms won't cooperate if they fear getting sued, but in the next breath says that the program is legal. So...the telecoms should have nothing to fear, right? Furthermore, the telecoms are obligated to comply with legal surveillance requests.

Download | play Download | play

Arguably his most deceitful ploy was playing the "trial lawyer" card, despite the fact that these lawsuits are being brought by groups like the EFF who are the the exact opposite of the bogeyman, ambulance-chasing, "gravy train" trial lawyers.

Does this man actually believe what he says or does he just has no problem lying to get what he wants? Or could it be something entirely different?

Download | play Download | play

While this video of the ad goes after Rep Nancy Boyda (D-KS) (btw, whose response so far has been really good), she is just one of many "Freshman Dems" targeted by this fear-mongering ad campaign so far. As the Minnesota blog Bluestem Prairie notes:

Other Freshman Dems targeted that we know of so far: Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy (CT); Carol Shea-Porter and Paul Hodes (NH); Jason Altmire (PA); Ron Klein and Tim Mahoney (FL); Gabrielle Giffords and Harry Mitchell (AZ); Jerry McNerney (CA); Melissa Bean (IL); Joe Donnelly (IN); ... Michael Arcuri and Kirsten Gillbrand (NY) ; Steve Kagan (WI). [...]

Defense of Democracies is affiliated with the non-profit, non-partisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focused on defeating terrorism and promoting democratic values.

The ad is similar to one posted last week by House Republicans on gop.gov, that also misleadingly blames the expiration of the "Protect America Act' on the Democrats. The fact is that "there is one reason, and one reason only, that the Protect America Act expired. Its name is “George W. Bush.”

Not surprisingly, the group The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies' list of "Directors, Fellows, Personnel" includes many PNAC-neocons like Kristol, Krauthammer, and Perle (a lot more on the group here). The list also includes, however, several prominent Democrats, which begs the question: Why would Democrats be affiliated with a group that would be running these ads?

Update: Begged question answered. mcjoan:

Who's behind the shadowy organization isn't entirely clear, but it is definitely an offshoot of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, an organization that until a few days ago listed among its board of advisors Donna Brazile, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA), Zell Miller, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY). Engel, Schumer and Brazile have all resigned from the board, with Brazile making this statement