WP: Ex-Justice Lawyer Rips Case for Spying

[UpInArms]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/08/AR2006030802360.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email

A former senior national security lawyer at the Justice Department is highly critical of some of the Bush administration's key legal justifications for warrantless spying, saying that many of the government's arguments are weak and unlikely to be endorsed by the courts, according to documents released yesterday.

David S. Kris, a former associate deputy attorney general who now works at Time Warner Inc., concludes that a National Security Agency domestic spying program is clearly covered by a 1978 law governing clandestine surveillance, according to a legal analysis and e-mails sent to current Justice officials.

Kris, who oversaw national security issues at Justice from 2000 until he left the department in 2003, also wrote that the Bush administration's contention that Congress had authorized the NSA program by approving the use of force against al-Qaeda was a "weak justification" unlikely to be supported by the courts.

The criticism represents an unusual public dissent by a former administration official over the legality of the domestic spying program, which allows the NSA to intercept international communications involving U.S. citizens and residents without warrants. The program, approved by President Bush in October 2001, was first revealed publicly in media reports in December and has been the focus of furious political battles since then.

...more...

[KoKo]

1. Kick and Recommend....We have to hope more whistle blowers keep

blowing the alarm signals until all the people wake up.

[sabra]

2. keep this one kicked!

:kick:

[crikkett]

3. kick n/t

[Roland99]

4. Related article >>>>>

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20060309/index.htm

Washington, D.C., March 9, 2006 - The Justice Department official who oversaw national security matters from 2000 to 2003 e-mailed his former colleagues after revelation of the controversial warrantless wiretapping program in December 2005 that the Department's justifications for the program were "weak" and had a "slightly after-the-fact quality" to them, and surmised that this reflected "the VP's philosophy that the best defense is a good offense," according to documents released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the Electronic Privacy Information Center and joined by the ACLU and the National Security Archive.

David Kris, the former associate deputy attorney general who now serves as chief ethics and compliance officer at Time Warner, e-mailed Justice Department official Courtney Elwood on 20 December 2005 his own analysis of the controversy, writing that "claims that FISA simply requires too much paperwork or the bothersome marshaling of arguments seem relatively weak justifications for resorting to Article II power in violation of the statute." The subject line of the e-mail was "If you can't show me yours."

On 22 December, after reading the Department's talking points as forwarded by Elwood, Kris commented that the Department's approach "maybe… reflects the VP's philosophy that the best defense is a good offense (I don't expect you to comment on that :-))."

On 19 January 2006, Kris wrote Elwood that the Department's white paper was "professional and thorough and well written" but that "I kind of doubt it's going to bring me around on the statutory arguments."

[MissMillie]

5. Just like with the case for going to war in Iraq...

They accept only the opinions that agree with them, and disregard the rest.

[underpants]

6. No kidding-I could have told you that

all the blustering is simply PR to convince the sheeple that no crime was committed. PRE writing of history.

[Shipwack]

7. Alas, the sad thing is that Kris's opinion matters not...

The thing that matters is whether the arguments are enough to convince the Supreme Court.... I have no doubt in my mind how the last two appointed Justices are going to vote....

Of course, even if they do declare it illegal, what makes anyone think that Bush would start obeying the law all of a sudden? He's the unitary war president, remember? Chosen champion of the people and protector of America by the grace of God, etc, etc...

At best, he'll change the name of the program and shuffle it someplace elsewhere in his administration, like he did with the Carnivore spying/data-mining program. At worst, he'll simply ignore the Supreme Court or ram a bill through congress.

[cain_7777]

8. Old News

Most of Bushco's reasoning is illegitimate. It's hard work, hard work to make an unconstitutional thing look legal, and obviously too hard for Bushco.

[0007]

9. Professional wrestling has more class than these assh0les.

Also yesterday, the Bush administration said that it will provide a briefing on the NSA program to a new subcommittee of the Senate intelligence committee but that details of how the new panel will conduct any further oversight have yet to be worked out.

Creation of the seven-member subcommittee is part of a plan by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), committee chairman, that helped persuade Republicans this week to reject proposals for a Senate panel investigation of the NSA program.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the new subcommittee will receive the same briefing the administration has provided in the past to the "gang of eight" congressional leaders, though the new group will not be allowed to share what it learns with other members of Congress.

Roberts and other Republicans on the committee also have endorsed a legislative proposal by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) that would provide a statutory basis for the NSA program. It would permit warrantless surveillance of calls between the United States and another country for 45 days, after which the government could cease the eavesdropping, seek a warrant, or explain to Congress why it wants to continue without a warrant.