WP: Judges on Surveillance Court To Be Briefed on Spy Program

[usregimechange]

The presiding judge of a secret court that oversees government surveillance in espionage and terrorism cases is arranging a classified briefing for her fellow judges to address their concerns about the legality of President Bush's domestic spying program, according to several intelligence and government sources.

Several members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said in interviews that they want to know why the administration believed secretly listening in on telephone calls and reading e-mails of U.S. citizens without court authorization was legal. Some of the judges said they are particularly concerned that information gleaned from the president's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to gain authorized wiretaps from their court...

Other judges contacted yesterday said they do not plan to resign but are seeking more information about the president's initiative. Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who also sits on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, told fellow FISA court members by e-mail Monday that she is arranging for them to convene in Washington, preferably early next month, for a secret briefing on the program, several judges confirmed yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122102326.html

[doublethink]

1. Great.

K&R.

[seafan]

2. Uh oh, George. n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

8. I hope so

I thought the guy resigning was a big clue. I'm glad they're getting on this!

[stepnw1f]

3. He Stepped Down to Become a Witness

Sweeeeeet! Buh bye GOP!

[usregimechange]

4. Yep, be sure to read the whole article guys, ACLU invloved now.

[kansasblue]

5. card carrying

The American Civil Liberties Union formally requested yesterday that Gonzales appoint an outside special counsel to investigate and prosecute any criminal acts and violations of laws as a result of the spying effort.

[havocmom]

7. Yessss!

[FreedomAngel82]

10. Oh really?

Wow. I didn't know that. I just heard it was in protest.

[jim3775]

6. I'm willing to bet bush has started spying on the judges now. n/t

[Pachamama]

9. OMG! Judge Kollar-Kotelly is the same judge on Sibel Edmonds & Plame Cases

That is just a little to coincidink for me....And given some of her rulings on the Sibel Edmonds case, makes me very very uncomfortable....

Wow! Seriously.....this just seems too weird to me...

Thoughts anyone? :eyes:

[usregimechange]

11. Doesn't look good for them but legally complicated.

[Pachamama]

14. Kollar-Kotelly appointed by Rehnquist to FISA Court in 2002 for 7 yr appt

Those cases are complicated and I believe that Judge Kollar-Kotelly may be the PNAC Judge that they have in place for a reason....seriously....to make sure that they have "control" over the Judicial branch rulings....

Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly

Judge Kollar-Kotelly was appointed to the United States District Court in May 1997. She received a B.A. in 1965 from The Catholic University of America and a J.D. in 1968 from Columbus School of Law, The Catholic University of America. Following law school, she served as law clerk to Judge Catherine B. Kelly of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. From 1969 to 1972, Judge Kollar-Kotelly was an attorney in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and then served as the chief legal counsel to Saint Elizabeths Hospital until 1984. She was appointed Associate Judge of the D.C. Superior Court in October 1984, and served as Deputy Presiding Judge of the Criminal Division from 1995 until her appointment to the federal bench. Judge Kollar-Kotelly has been a Fellow of the American Bar Association, a founding member of the Thurgood Marshall Inn of Court, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University School of Medicine in a joint teaching program on mental health and the law, and chair of the Board of the Art Trust for Superior Court. Judge Kotelly was appointed by Chief Justice Rehnquist to serve as a member of the Judicial Conference Committee on Financial Disclosure from June 2000 through May 2002, and in May 2002 Chief Justice Rehnquist appointed Judge Kotelly to serve as Presiding Judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court , which is a 7-year appointment.

On Edit: I do want to note that upon further research of her record, this woman sure gets around! I knew I recognized her namee but couldn't remember from where: The Microsoft Antitrust ruling! Also, I did find one interesting ruling she had which gives me hope - however that said, my intuition warning system is going off on her!

October 20, 2004
Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rules on a lawsuit filed by three Kuwaiti detainees at Guantanamo: Mohammed Ahmed al-Kandari, Khalid Abdullah Mishal al-Mutairi, and Fawzi Khalid Abdullah Fahad al-Odah. She rules that detainees should be permitted to communicate with their lawyers without the government listening in on their conversations. She says the government's attempt to wire-tap detainee-attorney communications threatens to “erode bedrock principle” of attorney-client privilege. She says the government is defending its position with “a flimsy assemblage” of arguments. “The government has supplied only the most slender legal support for its argument, which cannot withstand the weight of the authority surrounding the importance of the attorney-client privilege.” The three Kuwaitis, Judge Kollar states, “have been detained virtually incommunicado for nearly three years without being charged with any crime. To say that their ability to investigate the circumstances surrounding their capture and detention is ‘seriously impaired’ is an understatement.” She does concede, however, that lawyers for the Guantanamo detainees are required to disclose to the government any information from their client involving future threats to national security.

[Wordie]

44. Do you have a source for the claim she is linked to PNAC? She sounds good

to me, from just reading the excerpt of her decision in the Kuwaiti case. She doesn't sound from just that small quote to be likely to go along with Bush's trampling of civil rights. I myself know nothing about her; the bio doesn't seem to have anything in it that sets off any huge alarms for me.

What is it specifically that concerns you?

[Pachamama]

57. She's a Clinton Judicial Appointee, but is considered Conservative

This isn't necessarily good or bad...it is what it is.

I am however a coincidence theorist and I also have very strong intuitions linking way back in my life that I have learned not to ignore.

I didn't say she was a member of PNAC...I suggested that this is a judge that was placed as part of the PNAC strategy. Rehnquist was a slime bag and I don't believe he did anything without a strategic reason. If you read the original post, as presiding judge of the FISA court, she KNEW about the secret spying program back in 2003....so why the sudden "urgency" or concern? If this was an issue to her, why didn't she address it two years ago?

Also, don't you think its a little coincidink that she happens to also be the judge on the Sibel Edmonds Case (both times, there was even a last minute switch) and also on the Plame case?

Just saying....coincidences can't be ignored....especially when they keep popping up... :eyes:

[Wordie]

61. It appears...

that to say she is a "PNAC Judge" certainly does seem to link her to them. That might not have been your intention, but it does come across that way. And as far as knowing ahead of time, didn't some senators know too, but could not say anything about it, because of secrecy concerns? I do have to agree, though, that the assignment of cases part does sound peculiar.

I'm not trying to defend her, really; I don't know of this judge myself, and perhaps you are right. I just guess there is so much that we apparently all didn't know about a lot of this that I'm inclined to reserve judgement until I know all the facts (if such a thing is even possible for the average citizen anymore).

I don't trust coincidences either; they make me start asking all sorts of pesky questions! At this point I don't think we have the answers.

[Pachamama]

64. If exact words matter...

I said in my original post she "may" be a PNAC Judge....emphasis on the word "may" and then I clarified why I thought this. In terms of knowing ahead of last week about this secret spy program that Bush has, the some Senators were only a few, including Bob Graham, Roberts, and Rockefeller (maybe one or two others) but certainly from Sen Rockefellers letter to the VP about his concerns, there is a significant difference between the little they knew (and without any authority to "authorize" it nor to intrepret it as non-lawyers and without an official review) but comparing their having been informed and their prior knowledge to the prior knowledge of the actual presiding judge on the FISA court are two different things. For starters, as the judiciary and head of this court, established for these specific purposes dealing with secret issues, she could have held a secret/closed door meeting (just as she will be now in January with the other members of this court) and addressed these issues and concerns from the beginning and ruled on it and most likely either put a stop to it or come up with a ruling that said in order to do it they needed to go back and have official congressional approval changing the FISA laws. Arguing that she couldn't say something sooner makes absolutely no sense, especially saying because of secrecy concerns. Everything they rule on is secret.

I am somewhat familiar with this judge. She has an interesting history and I knew I recognized her name...I used to be at Microsoft and she was the judge who was eventually assigned and who ruled on the whole anti-trust issue. Mostly interesting from the fact that she had really no anti-trust or technical experience prior to the case. But the "coincidences" of her involvement in perhaps two of the biggest known cases that could pose problems for the Bush Administration (the Sibel Edmonds and Plame Cases) and now that she also overseas this major issue is just too too weird for me. Especially if you read some of her rulings related to why Sibel Edmonds' case could not go forward.

No, we don't have the answers yet, but I believe in due time we will...I believe when the truth does come out, its going to be shocking and is going to shake the foundation of our "democracy" to its core. Americans will probably not trust government or the system for decades to come and major changes will need to be implemented. Whether we will succeed in "saving the union" and our democracy will remain to be seen. I still have faith in good winning over evil and truth over lies and that justice will prevail. I still believe our Constitution is the greatest document ever. Lets see how many people want to uphold it and the law...

[Wordie]

68. I'm not certain about the secrecy provisions; would they apply to a judge?

I don't really know how they work, but I know in the case of Congress, those who were told were prevented from telling anyone else, so I was wondering if that might have been the case here too. Perhaps she was forbidden from telling anyone else. Of course, that pretty much indicates that she agrees with the Bush legal arguments in the case, I suppose, or at least that she wasn't willing to challenge them. Again, I feel a lot more info is needed.

As I think about this futher, I wonder about the other FISA judge who resigned on Monday. Did he do so because he did not like the idea of having ruled on cases without the full story on them, or was it something more specifically related to her, as the chief judge of the FISA court? Perhaps he will ultimately fill us in on what the hell is going on.

I think you and I are probably much more in agreement than not. I'm probably just a lot more cautious, is all.

[Pachamama]

70. I'm just so outraged and so tired of all the abuse of laws and lies from

these people...I thought I couldn't suffer from being more outraged and then this news came down...I've been so disgusted now for a week and I am just seething about it...

I'm want facts, but I don't trust these people one bit, so I'm as skeptical to their "truth" as they come. I question everything, but I don't believe these people know how to tell the truth. They are sociopaths.

[druidity33]

59. this deserves a thread

of its own. Regardless of what "side" she's on, i'd rather have seperate judges for these VERY IMPORTANT cases. Isn't there some sort of conflict of interest clause?

[cascadiance]

60. Yup she was the one that dropped the Microsoft Anti-trust case...

And the thing that stank about that case was that she ruled for Microsoft on the Friday before the following week being election week. Therefore it allowed the Rethugs to campaign simplistically to their minions that our government was "successful" in preserving our economic strength by not prolonging this case against Microsoft, and didn't allow ample time for those opposed to this ruling to have any kind of message given to voters the following Tuesday to explain to voters how damaging this decision was to our economy. The timing smelled heavily like it was an orchestrated event. And therefore it wouldn't surprise me if she were a "compromised" judge in other instances too! She smells like she's in corporations' back pockets! #!$&$@!!

[Patsy Stone]

16. She was the one who told them not to

bring the stuff to her anymore. I can't speak to the other cases, but if she doesn't believe it's legal, I'll let her try and prove it is if she wants to, but I think she knows it's not. Maybe she's in CYA mode, but the fact that she's speaking up says something to me.

[seafan]

12. Here are clues we already suspected. * is large-scale data-mining.

snip..

Bush administration officials believe it is not possible, in a large-scale eavesdropping effort, to provide the kind of evidence the court requires to approve a warrant. Sources knowledgeable about the program said there is no way to secure a FISA warrant when the goal is to listen in on a vast array of communications in the hopes of finding something that sounds suspicious. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales said the White House had tried but failed to find a way.

One government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the administration complained bitterly that the FISA process demanded too much: to name a target and give a reason to spy on it.

"For FISA, they had to put down a written justification for the wiretap," said the official. "They couldn't dream one up."

[usregimechange]

13. Then they should have sought to change federal law!

Instead of simply breaking it.

[Sydnie]

23. That is the heart of the matter, IMHO

They didn't have a target, per say. They were "phising" in hopes of catching something they could use to GET a warrant from this court. Imagine what they might have heard and how it could change the course of history because they found it out ... and I am NOT talking about overhearing terra-ist. I am talking about business insider info, religious insider info (some have to have a few skeletons in their closet, just by the sheer number of them out there), and political enemies as well.

They were "detecting" not "monitoring". That is where they jumped the shark. This court HAS to know that it was not right.

Also, didn't they investigate 75 or 95 warrants that they did issue and then they went back and told the government that they had overreached to get the warrant by telling the court false information to get the warrant in the first place? Wasn't that in 2003? If it was, then the presiding officer (the head judge there) had to know that they were already on a slippery slope even with the warrants that they were seeking.

[DoYouEverWonder]

36. Bush knows he can't get a court order to go fishing

especially since their fishing has nothing to do with al Ciada terrorists.

[Patsy Stone]

15. Does it seem that the Judicial Branch is pissed off?

I don't think they like the end run one bit...

[seafan]

17. Here's something weird: Kollar-Kotelly was told of this in 2002 when

she became presiding judge. And only now she is calling a classified meeting with the other judges about it. Something is strange about this.


snip--

As it launched the dramatic change in domestic surveillance policy, the administration chose to secretly brief only the presiding FISA court judges about it. Officials first advised U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth, the head of FISA in the fall of 2001, and then Kollar-Kotelly, who replaced him in that position in May 2002.

[usregimechange]

18. Well, the public knows now. ACCOUNTABILITY.

[seafan]

20. Oh, yes. I wonder if Judge Robertson quit because of * bypassing

the court in the first place, OR because he found out that their own presiding judge knew about it since 2002.... or both. This is getting interesting. Some kind of line has been crossed behind the scenes, I'll bet.



another snip-- (emphasis mine)

The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president's suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

I'll bet some of these people were so angry, the paint was peeling off the walls.

[Pachamama]

22. I agree something is amiss here....see my post above...

My intuition warning went off when I saw her name...at first, I wasn't sure why her name sounded familiar to me....turns out she is the very same Judge PRESIDING OVER THE PLAME CASE and SIBEL EDMONDS CASE!

If this program bothered her so much, one would think she wouldn't have waited 3 years to call a meeting....I also find it interesting that while she may be a Clinton Appointee as a Federal Judge, it was REHNQUIST who appointed her in 2002 to the FISA Court position.

I don't trust Rehnquist (even post mortem) and I believe that there was a reason for her appointment....

[seafan]

25. My cynicism meter is so off the scale these days.

These layers upon layers of secrecy by the *'s were all designed to avoid accountability for anything. I just hope there are some people left in positions of influence who will stand up and say "America is NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANY MORE!!"

And then nail these robber barons to the wall.

[feminazi]

55. Rehnquist appointed Judge Robertson too

I think they're all appointed to the FISA court by the Chief Justice.

[Straight Shooter]

19. This issue is not going away.

Too many people in America remember Nixon, they remember Hoover. This is what bush will be remembered for, this is his legacy at last ... spying on Americans.

[usregimechange]

21. And his Arrogance.

[truthout]

63. well i'm sure it will go away...

Now that it has been found out that both Clinton and Carter used the same thing.

Read:
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm << Carter electronic wiretapping

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12949.htm << Clinton physical searches

Quote from testimony in front of congress in 1994 when Democrats were in power:
"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes," Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 14, 1994, "and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General."

"It is important to understand," Gorelick continued, "that the rules and methodology for criminal searches are inconsistent with the collection of foreign intelligence and would unduly frustrate the president in carrying out his foreign intelligence responsibilities."

Clinton went on to break into US citizen and CIA spy Aldrich Ames' home without any warrants.

The NY Times story has the details which everyone seems to be missing.

<snip>Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications. <snip>

Seems that the Times without knowing it documented the procedures that follow President Carter's EO in 1979.

Wow....

[antonialee839]

71. Victoria Toensing tried to use this same argument on CNN.

Media Matters smacked her down and good.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200512220011.

[understandinglife]

24. SMACK!!! And that ball is still climbing long after it left the park ....

Peace.

[usregimechange]

26. Kick

[kentuck]

27. One judge suggested they simply disband the court...

<snip>
The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president's suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

[usregimechange]

29. Very Possible. It may wreck many of their cases.

[rfkrfk]

28. what statute was violated? n/t

[usregimechange]

30. 4th Amend and The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978

[Tarc]

41. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

The FReepers and other kool-aid drinkers are trying to distort all of this with "BUT BUT BUT CLINTON AND CARTER DID IT TOO!!!" nonsense when they signed executive orders authorizing warrantless searches. What they conveniently leave out is that both exec orders refer back to the provisions of the Act expresssly forbidding their use on American citizens.

[rodeodance]

31. George bypassed the judges, they got dissed also.

[burrowowl]

32. YES!

Go FISC Judges GO!

Several members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said in interviews that they want to know why the administration believed secretly listening in on telephone calls and reading e-mails of U.S. citizens without court authorization was legal. Some of the judges said they are particularly concerned that information gleaned from the president's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to gain authorized wiretaps from their court...

May the spoiled brat pyschopath (sociopath is to kind) be brought down! IMPEACH!

[Norquist Nemesis]

45. Am I reading this correctly?

"Some of the judges said they are particularly concerned that information gleaned from the president's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to gain authorized wiretaps from their court..."

Are some of the judges concerned they were spied on??? :wow: That is truly profound! I hope they also ask some hard questions about spying on any political opponent and/or their staffs as well! Particularly, Pres/VP candidates.

[kimchi]

56. I didn't get that at all.

It sounded to me like some of the info was used to get the FISA to approve wiretaps. Not sure why one would use illegal secret wiretaps to get evidence to use legal secret wiretaps, but that sounds to me like what it was. I can see why the judges would be upset. I hope they nail his ass to the wall on this.

[Divine Discontent]

33. this gets deeper and deeper folks!

I guess a lot of us will start to realize that come next Christmas, we just may be seeing someone else in the oval office... I know it's still unlikely at this point, but man, the pile of CRAP that's coming out of this white house STINKS like a pig rotting on a hot summer day!

[emulatorloo]

34. kick for morning crowd n/t

[boston bean]

35. Damn activist judges! Is this what bush means when he talks

of activist judges???

POOR GEORGE!

[stop the bleeding]

37. Excellent..... most excellent..... hmmmmmm

[Jim__]

38. Who's going to brief them?

Does anyone believe that the bush admin will give an honest briefing?

I don't believe anything the bush admin says.

[bush_is_wacko]

46. Bingo! It'll be as informative as the back of a cereal box...

The administration has been keeping information away from anybody that is not on board with them. Bush believes the executive branch has the power to run amok and do whatever it wants in the name of "terrorism". They have the right to classify any information they want to, so the judges will likely get a "briefing" full of buts, ands, and therefore's.

[madmark]

49. Ditto

[lonestarnot]

39. See! Court is not going to let them get away with this shit! Not no way

no how!

[The Stranger]

40. She is convening them for a "secret briefing"?

Are you fucking kidding me? Yet even more secrecy?

[Politicub]

42. Kafka lives

The secret court could convict any of us. Who would know if one of us was carted away to appear before it to respond to charges that are classified? And the details of the sentence would be classified, too, in the interest of national security.

This shit is scary. It boggles the mind that the GOP has followers. I guess they trust their leadership so much they can't fathom that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[Wordie]

43. Bush could have tainted ongoing investigations by not going to FISA!

If there were genuine threats in the material that was gathered by the extra-legal process that Bush used, and those who were responsible for those threats were prosecuted and convicted on the basis of the spy information, those convictions are now in jeopardy, because the evidence may have been obtained illegally!

(In response to questions that the Court will pose to Bush attorneys...)
The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president's suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

So, even if they did catch somebody who really was a genuine threat, Bush screwed it up. Feel safer, everyone?

[madmark]

47. Who's the briefing with? If its the admin I do not see how it will be

enlightening.

[baal]

48. OK , GUYS N GALS, TIME TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND HELP ME OUT !!!

I've been invited to appear on a local talk show to address the topic "Why was it OK for Carter and Clinton to carry out warrentless searches and surveillance, but not OK for Bush?"

I believe this president should be impeached for what he's done, but I admit I don't know how to answer this. The historical evidence seems to indicate both these presidents carried out aggressive warrentless searches. What do I say?
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12139.html

HELP....I'm not a good public speaker anyway and the host is a shark.

I shoulda kept my big mouth shut

[GardeningGal]

50. Read this thread, there's a lot of good information there.

Especially at message 8 and beyond.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2328716

[Up2Late]

54. Nothing against you personally, but Why, if as you say, you don't...

...know much about the FISA Law, Why are they having you on the show?
Most likely they are inviting you on to gang up on you to make you (and all Democrats and people who feel this is wrong) look stupid. Sounds like a "No win" situation for you.

I'd call them back an tell them to get someone else who understands the Bogus premise of this show you are talking about.

The issue is NOT Un-warranted searches, ALL previous FISA requests ARE unwarranted surveillance, but once you go to the FISA court, that's no longer the an Un-Warranted surveillance, because if approved, you now have a FISA Warrant.

The Fact that Bush made the call on his own, that he didn't need to follow the provisions of the FISA law is the Crime here.

Just the fact that the past Presidential record are available to be found in the Presidential Archives is proof that the Law was followed in the previous cases.

Also, isn't it curious that they are only pointing to Carter and Clinton? I bet Reagan and Bush I used this at least as much as the Democratic Presidents, unless they were not doing their jobs.

[truthout]

66. Yes Reagan issued an EO on this as well ...

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12333.htm

Read section 2.4

I'm just wondering why people are assuming the electronic surveillance was on US citizens communication within the US to another US location when the original NY Times story contradicts that?

Can anyone answer me that?

[truthout]

65. helping out...

You go but you say that Bush did exactly what Carter did according to Carter's EO (Executive Order). You also say what the NY Times reported in that it was communication from outside the country to people (not US citizens) inside the US (which follows the Carter EO). This will drive the host nuts probably.

Just say it's the truth (which it is) and you'll be fine.

[KAZ]

67. Don't fall for it people.

I'll grant you, a bit more creative.

[Up2Late]

51. The thing that's so amazing about this only briefing the ONE FISA judge...

...,is the fact that they don't seem to understand the the "FISA Court," just like when you refer to the "U.S. Supreme Court," :rant: the FISA Court is ALL of the Justices of the FISA Court, NOT just ONE or two of the FISA Judges! Are they That stupid that they don't understand what "The Court" means?

Just imagine the outrage and the backlash if they started referring to a briefing of Justice Scalia as "we briefed the Supreme Court," even though they told him he couldn't tell the other Justices on "The Court!" Would the current ReThug apologists still be defending that sort of abuse?:banghead: :rant:

[sidpleasant]

52. I liked this part of the article

"One government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the administration complained bitterly that the FISA process demanded too much: to name a target and give a reason to spy on it."

Why don't Bush and Gonzalez just ask the FISA court for a warrant like this:

TARGET: every resident of the United States
REASON: they might be terra - ists

[derby378]

53. Threatening to disband the court? Don't make me laugh

King George would simply say "Don't let the door hit you where the - uh, where - uh - don't make me break my foot off in your ass."

Then he'd assume the court's authority for himself. The judges would simply be doing him a favor.

[upperleftedge]

58. A Christmas wish...

"PEACE & IMPEACHMENT in '06"

[usregimechange]

62. kick

[Canuckistanian]

69. As it should be

ONE QUESTION, though.

Who's going to be the replacement for the judge who quit?