Former DOJ Insiders Who Fought Spying Ask Senate to Pardon Snooping Telcos

[sabra]

Source: WIRED

Former Justice Department insiders who waged a quiet battle to trim back a Bush Administration spying program they thought was over the legal line joined forces Tuesday with the Administration, which is seeking retroactive immunity for telecoms that allowed the nation's spies to data mine Americans' phone records and helped the government target Americans for warrantless email and phone wiretapping.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, and former Office of Legal Counsel attorneys Patrick Philbin and James Goldsmith - all Republicans who fought the White House in 2004 over the scope of the Administration's warrantless wiretapping program - sent a letter (.pdf)Tuesday to the Senate Judiciary committee arguing that the nation's telecoms deserved to be freed from class action lawsuits accusing them of violating the nation's privacy laws.

When corporations are asked to assist the intelligence community based on a program authorized by the President himself and based on assurances that the program has been determined to be lawful at the highest levels of the Executive Branch, they should be able to rely on those representations and accept the determinations of the Government as to the legality of their actions. {...} If immunity is not provided, it is likely that, in the future, the private sector will not provide assistance swiftly and willingly, and critical time in obtaining information will be lost.

The letter is quite powerful given it is signed by the program's former critics who endured Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card's humanity-challenged Intensive Care Shakedown. Still, one must note that these careful lawyers are only saying that the government told the participating telecoms that the Administration thought that its conduct was legal; not that the telecoms' participation was legal. Nor do they say that the telecoms were ordered to participate. If that were the case, this fight would have been over years ago.

...

Though Ashcroft did not note it in the letter, his lobbying firm has represented AT&T since 2006.


Read more: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/former-doj-insi.html

---

PDF letter: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/ashcroft_goldsmith_comey_and_philbin_to_pjl1.pdf

[Kagemusha]

1. ...So if the government says it's legal, and is lying, the telecoms should be immune.

Not just immune, but immune from having to present their case that the government made such assertions in a court of law, which the govt would attempt to fight the whole way.

[OnyxCollie]

2. I didn't read it that way.

The way I see it, the telecomms are being offered immunity so that they may be questioned (as Monica Goodling had.) Monica confessed to breaking laws to hire people, and exposing Gonzo's witness tampering.

Rather than giving telecomms time to destroy evidence as they hold up litigation, (and yes, giving them a break from bankruptcy), this may expose the wiretapping for the crime it truly is. It may be the only way to proceed on this.

I would condone this action ONLY if it resulted in deep, serious investigations, ultimately leading to long convictions of Bushco.

[Kagemusha]

3. There's no way immunity would lead to that.

Because it is not for that purpose that the administration seeks immunity. The administration seeks immunity to protect itself from the telecoms defending themselves, and from the govt protecting itself making the telecoms' legal defense in court difficult and thus rupturing their symbiotic relationship.

[OnyxCollie]

4. Yeah, I had read Goldsmith's letter

and posted. I just read the WaPo article and can see now how immunity would fail to provide anything useful.

Just when I was starting to believe Goldsmith was an alright guy...