So Which Member of Congress Was Being Spied On By The NSA?
By Susie Madrak Friday Apr 17, 2009 4:30amI don't know about you, but I always thought they were spying on Congress members, so this doesn't come as a complete shock. (Oh, and Spencer Ackerman does the legwork to narrow the field.)
The big story of the day will be this one in The New York Times reporting that the National Security Agency intercepted private emails and calls of Americans beyond the limits set by Congress.
But this detail buried in the article is particularly interesting. Seems a member of Congress was under surveillance:
And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.
The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact — as part of a Congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 — with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman’s conversations, the official said.
The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.
Really? Note that there was an active attempt by the NSA to wiretap a member of Congress. Who was it? Seems worth finding out.
Login or Register to post comments.
Can't think of which congressman, Kucunich, Paul, McKinney?
But the first name that came to my mind was Spitzer. I know he wasn't a congressman, but there was a lot of speculation wiretapping is how he was brought down.
Were the NSA operating as an arm of the Bush Junta? In which case the victim could be a left-wing peacenik.
Or were they operating on the principle of actually seriously trying to defend the country? In which case it might be someone who has other loyalties. (Like say, Lieberman.)
Teddy Kennedy or perhaps Barack Obama?
... probably at Bachman's insistence.
Does NSA ever spy on NASA?
Only the nose knows.
My guess is Hillary. I bet the Republicans were going to have to run against her.
Why only spy on one when your are recording all conversations?
I guess they only chose to listen to one? BS. They've listened to more than one on more than one occasion.
I'm surprised that businesses are still using the telephone and internet to transmit sensitive material. Would you put your secret through those wires and expect it to stay confidential?
Short answer: All of them. Did we not notice Dick Cheney was Emperor?
The only person NOT being spied on was dickie-boy. Remember when he had his home pixelated on Google maps? How nice of the US Geological Survey to do that for him.
Now that Joe Biden and his family are in residence, it has suddenly become 'unpixelated'. Very peculiar.
Poor Joe.
How did they get the smell of all the dead bodies out of the VP's residence?
The industrial-sized fans must be whirring non-stop.
But if it was just one, I am betting on Ellison. Durn'd turerists.
It sure would be nice to have more details on the "why" of this attempt to tap whoever it was. This was after bush had been installed in the office for the second term. So I doubt they would be going after Kerry. Beyond that and reading the lists of those who went on these trips, I just don't know.
If they had good info why didn't they just go to the court to try to get permission to do this?
That it was Keith Ellison, the Muslim Congressman?
But of course they did wiretap all of Congress over the past 8 years. Probably members of the Judiciary as well. Never mind all of the rest of us...
If he was on one of those trips, my money would most likely be on him
From Wiki: "Because of Ellison’s campaign position calling for an investigation for the impeachment of President George W. Bush, his appointment to the Judiciary Committee (which has jurisdiction on these matters) was hailed by those seeking to have the president impeached."
but now I'm thinkin it's more likely that they were spying on Hillary and or Obama.
Sorry LNM the correct answer is ALL of them. All the congressmen are being spied upon. Tough, tricky question.
Play again?
Sure why not!
you know he was in it up to his eyeballs with the American Turkish institute and AQ Khan
..they spied on everybody! There was no accountability. Under W, we sacrificed LIBERTY for Securi..oh wait, no we didn't. We just sacrificed Liberty; we aren't more secure.
... Isaac'd be dead.
"What?!?!?! GOD TOLD ME TO KILL HIM, SO I DID! What're y'all looking at me like that for?!?! Din't y'all hear me? GOD TOLD ME TO DO IT!"
What, it's only a travesty and a crime when a member of Congress has their rights trampled?
Spying on one, ten, all of 'em ... what's the difference?
The wiretaps were and are and always will be ILLEGAL. They violated the existing FISA statutes, and disregarded the 4th Amendment, substituting the far less stringent 'reasonable suspicion' in place of 'probable cause.'
This is just like the right-wing kooks whining about how DHS is now spying on THEM. Shock! Horror! OMG! Spying on Congress!
Color me surprised. Not. Welcome to the hell you (as in Congresscritters and media alike) helped create, hope you enjoy your stay.
I know Kucinich wasn't part of one of the "delegations" (or at least I haven't seen him listed as one of those), but he did both travel to Lebanon and Syria, meeting with a variety of officials, and one could make up any connection direct or indirect to a questionable contact.
my guess would be the admin was spying on any, even republicans, if they spoke out of the interest of the WH or contributors.
Was this before or after Pelosi first said impeachment was off the table?
... that she knew that she, or another Democratic member of Congress, was the subject of such surveillance, and that a threat had been made or implied, and this was her concession.
Of course, all that really means is there's someone else in government who's a blackmailer.
It would have been a career killer to have a story come out in the press that she had been investigated for having some contact with someone who was under investigation for having terrorist ties.
They couldn't put that out there without making some attempt to prove it to be true, even if it wasn't. Just the suggestion would be enough for the right to chew on with their mouths open.
I'm just mentally free wheeling about all this.
The old song and dance: 'I can't make a difference if I'm not there to make a difference.'
Political self-preservation won out over the rule of law.
.....It would have been a career killer to have a story come out in the press that she had been investigated for having some contact with someone who was under investigation for having terrorist ties.....
Ooooooohhhhhhh, I wonder what kind of contact it was? Juicy or not juicy?
Non Supervised A-holes.
...Did this Congressman get caught on some international wiretap talking to a suspected terrorist? Which led to further wiretapping in the US? If so, then what is wrong with this action in the name of National Security?
Absolutely nothing.
But we're not sure of the entire story.
It's against the law.
First, any of the domestic wiretaps, international calls or not, were done without warrants. Then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made the weak excuse that filing warrants took too much time, even though FISA had provisions for a delay of up to 72 hours.
You can't justify further wiretaps on the basis of a wiretap you shouldn't have been conducting in the first place. This, too, is a key element of 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and the difference between probable cause and reasonable suspicion.
....IF the CIA/NSA/FBI had overheard the Sept. 11th terrorists talking about their plan, legal or illegal, then they shouldn't pursue this further? WHAT IF, we found out that Bush was part of this heinous act? Should they keep it secret, because in your eyes it was an illegal act? If it was illegal, then how many people are in jail because of it?
While I understand the paranoia that stems from this, but unfortunately we do live in a different world since Sept. 11th. Quite frankly, I could care less if someone is listening to my conversations.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin
Warrants exist to protect the innocent from the abuse of power. That's a fundamental principle of our government, due to the abuses of the British Crown.
If you are following the law pertaining to warrants, there's not a problem. You present your case for 'probable cause' to the judge, and the warrant is granted. In fact, the FISA Court has a very generous record on granting warrants after the fact.
But the case you suppose, that the CIA/NSA/FBI would magically happen upon such evidence and be unable to act upon it, simply doesn't exist, because of the provision for retroactive warrants. You simply can't engage in domestic surveillance and/or ignore the standards of probable cause.
Surely, you're not arguing that your Constitutional rights are only in place when it's convenient to the government to observe them?
And, frankly, the only thing that changed on 9/11 was that America wet its pants and decided the only way to protect themselves was to disregard the laws and principles that saw us safely through 225 years.
This whole 'Post 9/11 Mentality' is nonsense. It's drivel I expect from a losing football coach in the middle of a crappy season.
If you don't mind people listening to your conversations, I trust you've taken down your drapes, send all your correspondence on post cards, and have no locks on your doors.
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." -- Cardinal Richelieu
"....IF the CIA/NSA/FBI had overheard the Sept. 11th terrorists talking about their plan, legal or illegal..."
This whole thing is a non-debate: The fact is that FISA has refused only 4 requests for warrants between 1979 and 2001. But for Bush, the very notion that a Court should have any say in what he wanted to do was way too much to bear. Thin skin and deep-rooted emotional insecurity will do that to lesser people.
In any case, spying on someone "because they can" as opposed to spying on a highly probable target are two entirely different things.
In the 2nd case, if the agents are worth their salary, they would have upgraded their surveillance while concocting a story line about how they found out about the plan.
Simple as that!
However, there's always been some lee-way for searching cars, due to their mobility.
I would think a similar finding would happen with our cell-phones.
Actually, when you're calling on a cell phone your transmitting your call for anyone to pick-up,
Much to newt gingrich's chagrin.
I'm trying to visualize a future in which the internet becomes a series of homing pigeons, each carrying with SD chips containing our communications from one to another. That way nothing is transmitted electronically though "the tubes" and we have our privacy back!
Anyone else with me?
....people are funny. They put so much online today...Facebook, Myspace, etc.....but they cry wolf when their privacy is violated.
Information is at our fingertips. If you want to pay a little bit, you can pretty much know everything about a person.
I got boogers on mine.
If you want to offer up information, that's fine. The government deciding it can pry into anything it wants, is not.
I believe all of us, in every nation, have been spied upon ever since the technology to make it easy has been around. Starting with the telephone.
We've always known not to talk about drugs on the phone (um... or so I've heard.)
of course it was kucininch , he was the only democrat the repigs didnt own! why would they spy on clinton or obama ? both were in the bag when the news whores selected them for us, kucinich and gravel were the only politicians fit for the presidency, when they couldnt dig up any real dirt on him they pulled that lame crap about ufos in the debates, it sucks to be ........you
... they're just pissed at Dennis for having the lovely (intelligent, charming, etc.) Elizabeth as his wife.
Screw the phone line they should have tapped her ass!
at LEAST since the late '60s, I know for a personal certainty.
The CIA has been doing operations inside the country, too...
Both were and are illegal.
But as Dick Cheney said: "So?"
I don't think that the phrase "a member of Congress" refers to anyone specific. It could mean that they were capturing email and communications of all members of Congress. Were they also capturing communications of people in the Executive Branch? That's not being focused on. The NSA was spying on EVERYONE!
I'd say it was Elison from Minnesota. You know, he's a muslim so that must mean he's hanging with a bad crowd.
... lets just say that any C.Critter who happened to be gettin' a lil NSA on the side would be very nervous/pliable ... explains the last 4 years ... (and Spitzer)
..... lets just say that any C.Critter who happened to be gettin' a lil NSA on the side would be very nervous/pliable ... explains the last 4 years ... (and Spitzer).....
My goodness real_earl, you make it sound like such a sordid affair!
That's the silly part, the notion that the NSA/CIA and all the other spook agencies aren't spying on ALL members of congress, plus the entire administration.
Who's gonna stop them. Me? You? The government?
Silly little people, to think privacy really exists...
one of the beauties of surveillance is you just have to THINK you are being watched ... then they don't even have to go to the trouble...
Shouldn't be too hard to figure out. How many Congressmen went on middle east missions during that time. Rule out Republicans and rank targets based on high probability of unseating Republicans.
.
R E M E M B E R:
The House Madame took accountability "off the table" while her Loyal lackeys stood there in silence.
.
The only reason that ever made any sense for Impeachment being off the table.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VLH...
The website (www.narus.com) is not available. However, its cache website is...(http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:f2qZy0NQ...)
This is the big kahuna. The actual equipment the NSA uses to spy on everyone. It captures all internet traffic, including all eMails. It also captures all voice calls (yes, analog is converted to digital) and knows absolutely everything about everything.
About Narus Inc.
Narus is the leader in real-time traffic intelligence for the protection and management of large IP networks, and is the only company that provides security, intercept and traffic management solutions within a single, flexible system. With Narus, service providers and governments around the world can immediately detect, analyze, mitigate and target any unwanted, unwarranted or malicious traffic. Narus provides its customers with complete, real-time insight into all of their IP traffic from the network to the applications. Combined with the ability to enable numerous actions, Narus customers have the ability to take the most appropriate actions quickly.
Login or Register to post comments.