Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

WillyT

(72,631 posts)
Tue Jan 7, 2014, 05:18 PM Jan 2014

Whoa, And... Oopsie... 'The Danger of NSA Spying on Members of Congress' - TheAtlantic [View all]

The Danger of NSA Spying on Members of Congress
An executive-branch agency has been empowered to store revealing information about the communications of everyone in the legislature.

Conor Friedersdorf
Jan 6 2014, 12:00 PM ET

<snip>

Should anyone doubt how much mischief could come from spying on even one member of Congress, let's look back at the story of former Democratic Representative Jane Harman and what happened when the NSA intercepted and transcribed one of her telephone calls. That's right: There's a known instance in which a legislator's private communications were captured by the NSA, though it's a complicated story, and there isn't any conclusive evidence that the NSA did anything wrong. In fact, the NSA's apparent blamelessness is what makes this story particularly instructive: It shows that intercepting congressional communications has a high cost even when it's done innocently, inadvertently, and defensibly.

The story begins with the NSA surveilling two Israeli nationals suspected of being spies. Unbeknownst to them, their phone calls were being recorded by the NSA–and one day, a conversation with Harman got swept up in the ongoing wiretap. No one on the call knew it was being recorded.

"One of the leading House Democrats on intelligence matters was overheard on telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency agreeing to seek lenient treatment from the Bush administration for two pro-Israel lobbyists who were under investigation for espionage," the New York Times reported on April 20, 2009, following up on a story broken by Congressional Quarterly's Jeff Stein.

Let's assume the NSA wiretap was totally legitimate. As Marcy Wheeler noted at the time, it seems to have been approved by a court as part of a long-running investigation, and "the investigation–and the wiretaps–were the classic, proper use of FISA: for an intelligence investigation targeting suspected agents of a foreign power operating in the US ... We all better hope the NSA listens closely to conversations between powerful members of Congress and suspected spies, and that when they make quid pro quo deals, that conversation gets looked at much more closely."

But the story doesn't end there. Congressional Quarterly reported that a criminal case against Harman was dropped because she was a useful ally to the Bush Administration:

Justice Department attorneys in the intelligence and public corruption units who read the transcripts decided that Harman had committed a “completed crime,” a legal term meaning that there was evidence that she had attempted to complete it, three former officials said. And they were prepared to open a case on her, which would include electronic surveillance approved by the so-called FISA Court ...

First, however, they needed the certification of top intelligence officials that Harman’s wiretapped conversations justified a national security investigation ... But that’s when, according to knowledgeable officials, Attorney General Gonzales intervened. According to two officials privy to the events, Gonzales said he “needed Jane” to help support the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to be exposed by the New York Times.

Harman, he told Goss, had helped persuade the newspaper to hold the wiretap story before, on the eve of the 2004 elections. And although it was too late to stop the Times from publishing now, she could be counted on again to help defend the program.

He was right.

On Dec. 21, 2005, in the midst of a firestorm of criticism about the wiretaps, Harman issued a statement defending the operation and slamming the Times, saying, “I believe it essential to U.S. national security, and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities.”


More: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/the-danger-of-nsa-spying-on-members-of-congress/282827/




41 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The NY Times sat on the story for the 2004 election underpants Jan 2014 #1
And Pressured To Do So By A Democrat No Less... WillyT Jan 2014 #3
Blackmail/extortion is how politicians are kept in line notadmblnd Jan 2014 #2
That is exactly how this story reads, blackmail. PowerToThePeople Jan 2014 #5
J. Edgar Hoover on steroids. (n/t) spin Jan 2014 #9
J Edgar Hoover with supercomputers Octafish Jan 2014 #23
About a year ago I reread George Orwell's novel, "Nineteen Eighty-Four" ... spin Jan 2014 #29
Outstanding book that detailed where the world was heading. Octafish Jan 2014 #40
"The Last Gasp of American Democracy" an excellent read that summed up where ... spin Jan 2014 #41
Links are helpful things WilliamPitt Jan 2014 #4
Oops... WillyT Jan 2014 #7
I do remember this event. 2banon Jan 2014 #6
shhhhh, you can't talk about Israeli crimes in GD. Whisp Jan 2014 #17
the sibel edmonds story is all about spying on congress too questionseverything Jan 2014 #8
K&R Solly Mack Jan 2014 #10
More powerful than tha Stasi. Disturbing. grahamhgreen Jan 2014 #11
what I find disturbing is what Harman did... Whisp Jan 2014 #19
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jan 2014 #12
Anytime... Uncle Joe, Anytime... WillyT Jan 2014 #34
... spanone Jan 2014 #13
K&R It is not that there is no difference between the parties, Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #14
From Wikipedia malaise Jan 2014 #15
For those who are pro-Snowden, anti-NSA and super pro Hillary: Whisp Jan 2014 #16
He is the President and the State Department is part of the Executive Branch neverforget Jan 2014 #18
I want shit to change too. Whisp Jan 2014 #20
It's way to early for me to get worked up about the 2016 primaries. Hillary is not neverforget Jan 2014 #24
Are we "there" yet? bvar22 Jan 2014 #21
Every politician, every judge, every cop, every prosecutor. What could possibly go wrong. Scuba Jan 2014 #22
It's remarkably dishonest reporting from a conservative writer at the now-conservative Atlantic struggle4progress Jan 2014 #25
And Sometimes... The Left And Right Find An Issue They Can Agree On... This Is One Of Those Times. WillyT Jan 2014 #26
Did anyone ever verify Stein's story? struggle4progress Jan 2014 #28
BTW... AGAIN... The Messenger Is Attacked... WillyT Jan 2014 #27
Friedersdorf's resurrecting a five year old story alleging unethical behavior by Harmon struggle4progress Jan 2014 #30
Well... WillyT Jan 2014 #31
Yet another April 2009 story based on Stein's CQ report can't provide additional evidence to us: struggle4progress Jan 2014 #32
Yes, Yes... Let's Look Forward And Not Backward... WillyT Jan 2014 #35
And You... Being On Democratic Discussion Board... WillyT Jan 2014 #36
I spent much of the Bush era pissed at Harmon -- but that's a separate issue. struggle4progress Jan 2014 #37
It's become like watching the "Godfather" Movie ....the way KoKo Jan 2014 #33
it's not happening--you think you know better than our rulers?! MisterP Jan 2014 #38
Hoover it all up and blackmail each and every one of us with our The Second Stone Jan 2014 #39
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Whoa, And... Oopsie... 'T...