For that reason, Gen. Hayden's confirmation hearings would be certain to entail a (hopefully aggressive) examination as to his overseeing and defending the NSA warrantless eavesdropping program (Sen. Feingold is on the Intelligence Committee, which by itself guarantees at least some worthwhile and probing questions). As the Times put it this morning:
General Hayden, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, would also face serious questions about the controversy over the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program, which he oversaw and has vigorously defended.
Any event which forces further public discussion, debate and examination of the administration's lawbreaking is a good thing, in my view. Many administration supporters boastfully predicted that this scandal would be all wrapped up and easily tossed aside by now, and yet the opposite is clearly happening -- with the various judicial proceedings challenging the NSA program, Sen. Specter's ongoing investigation and promised new hearings, Sen. Feingold's still pending Censure Resolution, and increased media attention being paid to these lawbreaking issues. This scandal is far, far away from being resolved, and is still quietly though inexorably growing.
Having said that, it is highly illustrative of this administration's mindset that they believe that the best candidate to direct the CIA is the individual who oversaw and vigorously defended the administration's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens. Isn't he the last person who ought to be put in that position?
The smart money will be on a "recess appointment!"
ReplyDeleteIf it is going to be a 'recess appointment', what kind of timeframe are we looking at?
ReplyDeleteMy prediction is that Hayden will be nominated to the Senate, but will take office on a recess appointment at the next congressional recess. Hayden will never have to stand for a hearing before he begins as CIA Director.
ReplyDeleteMay one Senator block the "recess" bell?
ReplyDeleteAlthough I would love to believe the Bush cult would only make recess appointments in proper circumstances, the Bushies and propriety appear to be mutually exclusive.
My limited understanding is that the declaration (if that is the term) of "recess" in the Senate requires unanimous consent.
What rules of Senatorial procedure would allow "breaks" even if one Senator blocked unanimous consent for recess?
In other words, what tools in the Senatorial rule book would allow a Feingold or Jeffers to protect against another stealth appointment without blocking the other Senators' vacations?
As a citizen, I believe in taking public responsibility for my public statements. As a typist, I'm rather inept - hence I goofed on checking the proper box on my post about "May one Senator block the 'recess' bell?"
ReplyDeleteGood idea or bad, I'm responsible for inflicting upon this very learned discourse.
Pursuant to David Shaughnessy's suggestion, I am going to request that Paul Rosenberg get this information pronto over to Nancy Pelosi.
ReplyDeleteBiopolymers and biodegradable smart implants for tissue regeneration after spinal cord injury.
Of course this implies the Democrats' medical problem is a spinal cord injury rather than a birth defect. I guess that's a point open to debate.
I go with birth defect, myself.
And I bet Nancy Pelosi doesn't read her mail.
Whatever Happened to Congress?
ReplyDeleteTo me, one of the most interesting spectacles in our society is watching uniformed military officers like General Michael Hayden, former head of the National Security Agency, sitting in front of Congress, testifying. It happened the other day. Hillary Clinton asked him: Tell us at least approximately how many [NSA warrantless spying] interventions have you made? "I'm not going to tell you" was his answer. Admiral Jacoby, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was asked directly about a year ago, are we still paying Ahmed Chalabi $340,000 a month? And his reply was, "I'm not going to say."
At this point, should the senator stand up and say: "I want the U.S. Marshall to arrest that man." I mean, this is contempt of Congress.
*snip*
We could end the way the Roman Republic ended. When the chaos, the instability become too great, you turn it over to a single man. After about the same length of time our republic has been in existence, the Roman Republic got itself in that hole by inadvertently, thoughtlessly acquiring an empire they didn't need and weren't able to administer, that kept them at war all the time. Ultimately, it caught up with them. I can't see how we would be immune to a Julius Caesar, to a militarist who acts the populist.
*snip*
I don't see the obvious way out of our problems. The political system has failed. You could elect the opposition party, but it can't bring the CIA under control; it can't bring the military-industrial complex under control; it can't reinvigorate the Congress. It would be just another holding operation as conditions got worse.
*snip*
Nemesis was the Greek goddess of vengeance. She also went after people who became too arrogant, who were so taken with themselves that they lost all prudence. She was always portrayed as a fierce figure with a scale in one hand--think, Judgment Day--and a whip in the other
TE: And you believe she's coming after us?
Johnson: Oh, I believe she's arrived. I think she's sitting around waiting for her moment, the one we're coming up on right now.
Short version: The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
Whatever Happened to Congress?
ReplyDeleteTo me, one of the most interesting spectacles in our society is watching uniformed military officers like General Michael Hayden, former head of the National Security Agency, sitting in front of Congress, testifying. It happened the other day. Hillary Clinton asked him: Tell us at least approximately how many [NSA warrantless spying] interventions have you made? "I'm not going to tell you" was his answer. Admiral Jacoby, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was asked directly about a year ago, are we still paying Ahmed Chalabi $340,000 a month? And his reply was, "I'm not going to say."
At this point, should the senator stand up and say: "I want the U.S. Marshall to arrest that man." I mean, this is contempt of Congress.
*snip*
We could end the way the Roman Republic ended. When the chaos, the instability become too great, you turn it over to a single man. After about the same length of time our republic has been in existence, the Roman Republic got itself in that hole by inadvertently, thoughtlessly acquiring an empire they didn't need and weren't able to administer, that kept them at war all the time. Ultimately, it caught up with them. I can't see how we would be immune to a Julius Caesar, to a militarist who acts the populist.
*snip*
I don't see the obvious way out of our problems. The political system has failed. You could elect the opposition party, but it can't bring the CIA under control; it can't bring the military-industrial complex under control; it can't reinvigorate the Congress. It would be just another holding operation as conditions got worse.
*snip*
Nemesis was the Greek goddess of vengeance. She also went after people who became too arrogant, who were so taken with themselves that they lost all prudence. She was always portrayed as a fierce figure with a scale in one hand--think, Judgment Day--and a whip in the other
TE: And you believe she's coming after us?
Johnson: Oh, I believe she's arrived. I think she's sitting around waiting for her moment, the one we're coming up on right now.
Short version: The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
Don't forget his insistance that the 4th Amendment does not call for probable cause. He went so far as to say "If there's any amendment we're familiar with, it's the 4th."
ReplyDeleteFirm in his wrongness, firm in his partisanship. Firmly the wrong man for the job.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteGlenn, There's an aspect to this story that is not getting much airplay. I tend toward jao's skepticism that the Congress will do much "investigating" of Hayden's actions re the NSA program(s).
ReplyDeleteI do hope that Feingold has some publicity-generating poop on Hayden--perhaps that'll at least make a blip on the MSM screen. Doubtful, though, that it will derail Hayden's confirmation.
The aspect to the Goss/Hayden story that I refer to involves several assumptions: Hayden is a Cheney man. Goss' abrupt resignation involves the fact that he was not living up to Bush's expectations. I suggest that this means that Goss wasn't as gung-ho about plans for how the CIA should interface with DHS as Bush/Cheney felt he needed to be.
With these assumptions in the background, Goss' strange exit is a set-up for Hayden's nomination. I suggest that Goss found working under the Bush/Cheney agenda simply more ethically problematic than he could have imagined. He was not willing to play along with the types of intelligence gathering/snooping/torture practices that Bush/Cheney have been pursuing for some time.
But getting rid of Goss was probelamtic for Bush/Cheney. Here was a guy who was a Republican fave and who was on a mission to clean up the CIA that most Reps, along with Bush, agreed with. But the clean-up itself didn't go far enough in Bush/Cheny's eyes.
From the earliest days, that supposed streamlining effort to improve the faults that led to bad info on Iraq was pure sideshow to keep our eyes off the real story: the alignment of the CIA with a radical DHS totalitarian-style agenda. The outlines of this agenda are quite unclear to us as of yet. They include warrantless wiretapping and arrests, rendition and torture, etc. I think, however, that the agenda is much more far-reaching and extreme than even these practices indicate.
Anyway, to get rid of Goss and install Cheney's man, Bush and Negroponte needed to create a smoke-screen. The Cunningham scandal was just what the doctor ordered. Under the impending scandal of whores, booze, and gambling stag parties, Bush/Cheney could get Goss to resign by threatening him with the stink of scandal attaching itself to his name and legacy.
Born at the Crest of the Empire suggests a further reason for Goss' exit. Crest ties up some of the loose ends in this possible scenario explaining Goss' exit:
[S]uddenly, maybe by side effect, Dick Cheney holds fairly direct sway over all the intel gathering in the US. ... (And I know that Goss wasn't particularly hostile to Cheney's viewpoint, but now we're looking at another level of devotion beyond the law. Michael Hayden managed and defended the dubiously legal NSA warrantless wiretapping which was Cheney's baby. John Negroponte famously managed the death squads in Central America, and you know Rumsfeld and Cambone.) [my emphasis]
Again, just some thoughts. Perhaps wild-assed. But behind the salacious and prurient headlines, in government scandals there is often much more than T&A. That appeals to the mass audience but the backstory may be hum-drum and less sexified but much more insidious in its implications for our freedoms.xnmhu
Cross-posted at The Disenchanted Idealist:
ReplyDeleteFor a few interrelated reasons, I have a very low opinion of Hayden.
The first is that a couple months ago, as the person responsible for "overseeing the day-to-day activities of the national intelligence program," he was unaware that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution mentioned "probable cause" (video).
Second, Hayden literally refused to answer if the NSA was "targeting us and people who politically oppose the Bush government, the Bush administration? Not a fishing net, but are you targeting specifically political opponents of the Bush administration?" (hat tip to Digby) That silence is a pretty clear indication that the answer is "yes."
Third, he vehemently opposed using a probable cause standard for domestic wiretapping even though that's what the law requires. He said that a "reasonable basis" standard was needed to intercept all the important terrorist calls even though the secret FISA Court will retroactively approve almost any wiretap and the Bush Administration (through a thoroughly scrubbed speech given by the man in charge of requesting wiretap warrants from the FISA Court) had sworn under oath that they were unaware of any cases in which a laxer standard would have been necessary. (Incidentally, they also said that a laxer standard could damage "our ability to conduct investigations that are vital to protecting national security [because] If we err in our analysis and courts were ultimately to find a 'reasonable suspicion' standard unconstitutional, we could potentially put at risk ongoing investigations and prosecutions.") In other words, Hayden is willing to tell blatant lies and violate crucial laws to protect the administration.
One of the most important roles for the new CIA director is going to be managing U.S. intelligence on Iran. That intelligence is going to be critical for U.S. security because, frankly, the situation in Iran is pretty scary. The CIA won't be able to do its job of informing the leadership of the actual situation so they can make realistic and effective policies if they have another Bush lackey manipulating the intelligence reports and lying to the media and the rest of the world like we had during the run-up to the Iraq war.
Another important role for the CIA in Iran is not using their covert military and paramilitary power to do something stupid (we all know how well it turned out the last time they tried that in Iran in 1953). Somehow, Hayden's record makes me think that he won't be particularly good in either role.
Glenn:
ReplyDeleteA new branch of the NSA Scandal - appointing Hayden as CIA Director
Reports have surfaced that the leading candidate to replace Porter Goss as CIA Director is Gen. Michael Hayden, who was the Director of the National Security Agency when that agency was ordered in October, 2001 by President Bush to begin spying on Americans without the warrants required by law. When the administration could no longer avoid answering the self-evident question as to why it was necessary to eavesdrop outside of the extremely permissive FISA framework, it was Gen. Hayden whom the administration sent out to give an explanation -- and the explanation Gen. Hayden gave was both incredible on its face and squarely contradicted by the administration's prior statements.
General Hayden gave a perfectly reasonable explanation that the NSA Program could not meet FISA's probable cause standards. The NSA Program surveils telephone and internet communications sent to and from telephone numbers captured from al Qaeda. As I explained on several occasions, mere possession of a telephone number does not provide the probable cause that the user of that number is a terrorist as required to get a FISA warrant.
The reason why Justice opposed suggestions to reduce the FISA standard from probable cause to reasonable suspicion is that Justice relies upon FISA warrants to gather criminal evidence and those warrants must meet the probable cause standard of the 4th Amendment to be admitted in a criminal proceeding.
Hayden gave a legally lucid and very reasonable defense of the NSA Program in his previous testimony before Congress. Expect more of the same if he is nominated. Let's have this testimony just before the elections so the voters are very clear on what party opposes listening in on al Qaeda telephone calls into this country.
Bart: this latest post by you just seals it. Sorry. I was getting kind of used to you.
ReplyDeleteBut now you reveal you're really a certain kind of Emperor. What do you think? The people here are not noticing what you are wearing?
You should admit defeat and just go home You were doing okay for a while.
That was then. This is now.
Bart said:
ReplyDelete"General Hayden gave a perfectly reasonable explanation that the NSA Program could not meet FISA's probable cause standards. The NSA Program surveils telephone and internet communications sent to and from telephone numbers captured from al Qaeda. As I explained on several occasions, mere possession of a telephone number does not provide the probable cause that the user of that number is a terrorist as required to get a FISA warrant."
And of course we only have the Executive branch telling us this and they would never lie to us, right Bart?
Former NSA intelligence agent Russell Tice condemns reports that the Agency has not been engaged in eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without court warrants. Tice has volunteered to testify before Congress about illegal black ops programs at the NSA. Tice said, “The freedom of the American people cannot be protected when our constitutional liberties are ignored and our nation has decayed into a police state.
The case of Samih Jammal, convicted with the help of the Patriot Act and FISA wiretaps of fencing stolen baby formula, sits on the fine line between the government's terrorism-fighting role and its duty to protect citizen's rights.
The WALL STREET JOURNAL reports the use of FISA warrants helped prosecuted Arizona grocery wholesaler Jammal, who was convicted of operating a baby formula theft ring.
AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls, and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker cooperating in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuit against the company.
Mark Klein, a retired AT&T communications technician, submitted an affidavit in support of the EFF's lawsuit this week. That class action lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco last January, alleges that AT&T violated federal and state laws by surreptitiously allowing the government to monitor phone and internet communications of AT&T customers without warrants.
Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are real too Bart, and Elvis posts on this board.
Gris Lobo said...
ReplyDeleteBart said: "General Hayden gave a perfectly reasonable explanation that the NSA Program could not meet FISA's probable cause standards. The NSA Program surveils telephone and internet communications sent to and from telephone numbers captured from al Qaeda. As I explained on several occasions, mere possession of a telephone number does not provide the probable cause that the user of that number is a terrorist as required to get a FISA warrant."
And of course we only have the Executive branch telling us this and they would never lie to us, right Bart?
Actually, this description is derived from several sources including the leakers and the media. Over 20 members of Congress from both parties have been fully briefed on the program and actually went to NSA to see it work. None of them claim that the NSA is running some sort of a vacuum over the telephones of thousands of US citizens like the traitor Tice claims.
Former NSA intelligence agent Russell Tice condemns reports that the Agency has not been engaged in eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without court warrants. Tice has volunteered to testify before Congress about illegal black ops programs at the NSA. Tice said, “The freedom of the American people cannot be protected when our constitutional liberties are ignored and our nation has decayed into a police state.
If the traitor Tice volunteers to testify without immunity, that is fine. They better not allow him to pull an Ollie North. Anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law.
The case of Samih Jammal, convicted with the help of the Patriot Act and FISA wiretaps of fencing stolen baby formula, sits on the fine line between the government's terrorism-fighting role and its duty to protect citizen's rights.
And your proof of this is what - his attroney's filings?
The WALL STREET JOURNAL reports the use of FISA warrants helped prosecuted Arizona grocery wholesaler Jammal, who was convicted of operating a baby formula theft ring.
FISA warrants are not involved in the NSA Program, remember?
AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls, and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker cooperating in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuit against the company.
This has been known since the Risen and the NYT revealed the means and methods of the NSA Program to al Qaeda. The NSA Program intercepts these calls at the communications trunks in the United States.
If the head of your country's electronic intelligence agency refuses to answer the simple question, "...but are you targeting specifically political opponents of [your] administration?", you might feel safer having an unencumbered intelligence service keeping you safe from your country's enemies, but you might not live in a free country.
ReplyDeleteBart said:
ReplyDelete"Over 20 members of Congress from both parties have been fully briefed on the program and actually went to NSA to see it work. None of them claim that the NSA is running some sort of a vacuum over the telephones of thousands of US citizens like the traitor Tice claims."
5 years after the fact Bart. Not to mention the fact that the full intelligence committees from both the House and the Senate have never been briefed as is required by law.
Of course no one is screaming in public about a vacuuming operation, all intelligence committee members have security clearances and are sworn to secrecy. What is being said in private in closed meetings we don't know.
"If the traitor Tice volunteers to testify without immunity, that is fine. They better not allow him to pull an Ollie North. Anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law."
Already convicted and put in front of a firing squad in your mind isn't he Bart? Without a single shred of evidence yet presented.
"Traitor Tice"
The case of Samih Jammal, convicted with the help of the Patriot Act and FISA wiretaps of fencing stolen baby formula, sits on the fine line between the government's terrorism-fighting role and its duty to protect citizen's rights.
"And your proof of this is what - his attroney's filings?"
It apparently is a matter of public record Bart. I haven't seen the actual case documents, only what has been reported about it.
I do find it a lot more credible than your statement that the NSA only listens to Al Qaida numbers backed only by unsupported statements from the Bush Admin who we know are often not truthful in their statements.
"FISA warrants are not involved in the NSA Program, remember?"
Yes I do remember, I also remember A. Gonzales saying that the Bush Admin does use Fisa when it suits them to do so.
"This has been known since the Risen and the NYT revealed the means and methods of the NSA Program to al Qaeda. The NSA Program intercepts these calls at the communications trunks in the United States."
Risen and the NYT didn't reveal means and methods to the best of my knowledge Bart. If you have evidence that it did please post it. The NYT article for sure didn't say anything about communications trunks.
The Administration sure knows how to throw Congressional Republicans under the bus. Hayden's nomination gives Dems their biggest, highest profile forum for attacking the Administration's eavesdropping, secret prison, and torture policies yet. Congressional Republicans running for reelection next fall want absolutely no part of this debate.
ReplyDeleteBoth Chambliss and Hoekstra have already attacked Hayden nomination and it's going to be uphill treading for the Adminstration from there.
Hayden's nomination is just another sign that the Administration is reeling.