Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is about to shock you. It is now 2006 and who knows what will happen from here on out but be prepared. You may be shocked and horrified at the words you are about to read.
Your Maximum Leader finds himself pretty much in agreement with his good friend the über-liberal Minister of Propaganda on the issue of FISA wiretaps by the Bush Administration. Much of the evidence that he has read so far leads him to believe that the Bush Administration violated the law by authorizing the NSA to monitor phone calls between Americans and people overseas who are suspected of being terrorists.
Allow your Maximum Leader to say a few things before going on.
First off… Not all the information is out there yet on this matter. So there may yet be facts revealed that might change your Maximum Leader’s mind. But that seems to be improbable the more he reads…
Secondly, your Maximum Leader will caution many of his liberal friends (but not the Minister of Propaganda specifically) to not rely on the whole “warrantless searches/wiretaps are illegal” blanket statement. He will point out that there are many instances where “the state” can do searches without a warrant. Too many commentators seem to be stuck on this point. No warrant this and no warrant that. Your Maximum Leader will admit that warrants are quite important to this case. But he encourages you to review the link and see how many legal situations there are in which “the state” doesn’t need to procure a warrant to conduct a search.
Having said that… As your Maximum Leader understands it monitoring phone conversations is a type of search which does require a warrant in pretty much all circumstances. This is to say that to monitor domestic phone conversations requires a warrant. If you live outside the US, or are travelling outside the US, then no warrant is needed for the US to eavesdrop on your phone conversations. (So Skippy, your Maximum Leader recommends you only communicate via sign language.)
Where the wiretaps/eavesdropping in question seems to have started to run afoul of US laws is where individuals overseas called people in the US. There may also be a few cases in which individuals using phones registered outside of the US were physcially in the US and making calls.
Now, when your Maximum Leader started to think about this post he really tried very hard to get his mind around all of the (thusfar reported) loopholes that might apply in this situation. But the more he thought about them the more he became convinced that the Bush Administration ordered illegal wiretaps. Perhaps the two most vexing parts of these story are these: the refusal of the Justice Department to approve the program, and the ease with which a warrant could be had.
First off, the Bush Administration went to the Justice Department to ask for confirmation of the eavesdropping. At the time John Ashcroft was in the hospital and his deputy James Comey was running Justice. When asked to approe the eavesdropping, Comey refused. Then Chief-of-Staff Andrew Card and Counsel to the President (now Attorney General) Alberto Gonzales went to the hospital to ask Ashcroft (on his sickbed) to overturn Comey’s determination. Ashcroft refused and backed Comey. This should have been first sign of something being amiss. When your political appointees, who heretofore had been generally accomodating in any and all requests relating to the fight against terrorist, refuse to approve or condone your plan to monitor phone calls you have a problem that needs serious rethinking.
Second, why not just go to the special court set up for the express purpose of getting warrants to eavesdrop? From the reporting your Maximum Leader has read pretty much every request is approved. Why wouldn’t you just go and get your battery of warrants? It doesn’t make sense.
Anyhow… Your Maximum Leader will continue to follow the story and opine further as circumstances warrant.
Carry on.
