So $150 million of our money is going to a government facility in lower Manhattan where representatives of Wall Street firms get to sit alongside the New York Police Department and spy on your basic law-abiding citizens. Written by Pam Martens on Counter Punch:

According to newly unearthed documents, the planning for this high tech facility on lower Broadway dates back six years. In correspondence from 2005 that rests quietly in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s archives, NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly promised Edward Forst, a Goldman Sachs’ Executive Vice President at the time, that the NYPD “is committed to the development and implementation of a comprehensive security plan for Lower Manhattan . . . One component of the plan will be a centralized coordination center that will provide space for full-time, on-site representation from Goldman Sachs and other stakeholders.”

At the time, Goldman Sachs was in the process of extracting concessions from New York City just short of the Mayor’s firstborn in exchange for constructing its new headquarters building at 200 West Street, adjacent to the World Financial Center and in the general area of where the new World Trade Center complex would be built. According to the 2005 documents, Goldman’s deal included $1.65 billion in Liberty Bonds, up to $160 million in sales tax abatements for construction materials and tenant furnishings, and the deal-breaker requirement that a security plan that gave it a seat at the NYPD’s Coordination Center would be in place by no later than December 31, 2009.

The surveillance plan became known as the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative and the facility was eventually dubbed the Lower Manhattan Security Coordination Center. It operates round-the-clock. Under the imprimatur of the largest police department in the United States, 2,000 private spy cameras owned by Wall Street firms, together with approximately 1,000 more owned by the NYPD, are relaying live video feeds of people on the streets in lower Manhattan to the center. Once at the center, they can be integrated for analysis. At least 700 cameras scour the midtown area and also relay their live feeds into the downtown center where low-wage NYPD, MTA and Port Authority crime stoppers sit alongside high-wage personnel from Wall Street firms that are currently under at least 51 Federal and state corruption probes for mortgage securitization fraud and other matters.

In addition to video analytics which can, for example, track a person based on the color of their hat or jacket, insiders say the NYPD either has or is working on face recognition software which could track individuals based on facial features. The center is also equipped with live feeds from license plate readers...read on

For most people, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is a national embarrassment, a pimple on the ass of American history. But to hear him tell it, the man George W. Bush called "Fredo" is a victim of partisan warfare. And the lesson he apparently learned in Washington is not that he politicized the Bush Justice Department, but that he didn't politicize it enough.

Those are among the head-shaking takeaways in a brief but revealing interview in Esquire titled, "Alberto Gonzales: What I've Learned." The man who repeatedly lied to Congress about the U.S. prosecutors purge, President Bush's illegal program of domestic surveillance and regime of detainee torture was just an innocent bystander caught in the political crossfire:

"I think 90 percent of what happened to me is politics, pure and simple. It's tough to knock out a president. But if you can get someone who is viewed as close to the president, then that may be a good thing."

As it turns out, this Gonzales declaration of victimization pales in comparison to his self-described martyrdom a year ago. In December 2008, the former AG complained to the Wall Street Journal that the scorn and derision heaped upon him was undeserved:

"What is it that I did that is so fundamentally wrong, that deserves this kind of response to my service?"

"For some reason, I am portrayed as the one who is evil in formulating policies that people disagree with. I consider myself a casualty, one of the many casualties of the war on terror."

Of course, perhaps the biggest casualty in Alberto Gonzales' own war on terror was the truth. In January 2007, the Attorney General delivered the Big Lie about the entire U.S. prosecutors purge scandal to the Senate Judiciary Committee:

"I would never ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or that in any way would jeopardize an ongoing investigation."

But as he acknowledged to Esquire this week, Gonzales' real lament about the U.S. attorneys firings is that the Bush White House wasn't political enough. After the Republican losses in the 2006 midterm elections, Gonzales suggested, the Bush administration's error was that it simply couldn't get away it:

"We should have abandoned the idea of removing the U. S. attorneys once the Democrats took the Senate. Because at that point we could really not count on Republicans to cut off investigations or help us at all with investigations. We didn't see that at the Department of Justice. Nor did the White House see that. Karl didn't see it. If we could do something over again, that would be it."

Now ensconced in the law school at Texas Tech, Alberto Gonzales claims "I'm proud of that record," while sighing that "I don't believe my life's work should be solely defined by four years in the White House and two years as attorney general." But in all likelihood, the poster child for Bush administration incompetence and corruption will be recalled for statements like this:

"Senator, that I don't recall remembering."

(This piece also appears at Perrspectives.)

If nothing else, Republican Senator John Cornyn is an irony producing machine. During the Terri Schiavo affair, the former Texas Supreme Court Justice was at the forefront of the GOP campaign to intimidate and threaten judges. Now after his fierce defense of President Bush's regime of illegal NSA domestic surveillance, Cornyn is comically warning that the Obama administration has launched a sinister "data collection program" to promote health care reform.

Back in December 2005, Cornyn dismissed the New York Times' revelations of the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping program. Regurgitating the same "Give Me Death" defense offered by colleagues Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Jeff Session (R-AL), Cornyn sneered:

"None of your civil liberties matter much after you're dead."

Alas, that was then and this is now. Now, there's a Democrat in the White House, one who's trying to overcome Republican obstructionism on health care reform.

When the Obama White House on Tuesday asked Americans to help fight the disinformation campaign ("If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov"), Cornyn was quick to suggest a dark plot was afoot. As The Hill reported:

"By requesting citizens send 'fishy' emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email, addresses, IP addresses and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House," Cornyn wrote in a letter to Obama. "You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program."

Cornyn asked Obama to cease the program immediately, or at the very least explain what the White House would do with the information it collects.

"I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure speech that is deemed 'fishy' or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests," Cornyn said.

Of course, this is just the latest data collection myth spawned by the right-wing noise machine this week.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (1001)

PLAYS: (2911)

Embed

CSPANjunkie's video highlights the outrage members of Congress felt after learning what Dick Cheney was up to with the CIA.

And there's a lot of speculation going on about what possible CIA program Dick Cheney was trying to hide from Congress. Trusting the WSJ when it comes to the Bush administration is like trusting the Yanks to win against the Angels in Anaheim. (I was due for a bad baseball analogy.)

TIME magazine has a few sources that make a case that's a bit more believable.

It is the biggest mystery in Washington at the moment. Here's what our colleague Bobby Ghosh says his sources are telling him:

Speculation abounds about the nature of the secret program Dick Cheney asked the CIA to keep from the Congressional oversight committees. The most sensational reports suggest it was plan to find and kill top Al Qaeda leaders – like the covert Israeli campaign to take out the perpetrators of the Munich killings.

But two former ranking CIA officials have told TIME that there's another equally plausible possibility: The program could have required the Agency to spy on Americans. Domestic surveillance is outside the CIA's purview -– it's usually the FBI's job – and it's easy to see why Cheney would have wanted to keep it from Congress.

Both officials say they were never told what was in the program, and that they're only making calculated guesses. But their theory gibes with other reports, quoting ex-CIA officials, that say the program had to do with intelligence collection, not assassinations.

“People may want this to be about hit squads bumping off shady Saudis in Geneva, but that's very unlikely,” says one official. “More likely, it was a plan to spy on some suspicious American citizens or organizations, without telling the FBI.”

A third CIA official who is familiar with details of the program says it was deemed unworkable and cancelled in 2004.

With Cheney's love of spying, this makes perfect sense since catching and killing terrorists just like Jack Bauer is something that any member of Congress would have signed off on in a heart beat. Spying and keeping secrets is Darth Cheney's MO and when he sends his daughter out to defend him only sends up more red flags.

Digby writes:

This is something so far off the charts that even the wingnuttiest wingnuts distanced themselves from it:

Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the House intelligence committee, said last week that he believed Congress would have approved of the program only in the angry and panicky days after 9/11, on 9/12, he said, but not later, after fears and tempers had begun to cool.

Does that sound like something about killing Al Qaeda or spying on Muslims in America? They did that anyway. This is something else.

In other words, the only way possible a program like this might have been contemplated was when Americans were utterly terrified. You can count on Cheney to be consistent when it comes to playing the fear card.

Who ever could have guessed that an NSA analyst would look at someone's personal emails for their own purposes? (And of course, how certain are we that they weren't working for someone else?) I guess we should assume that there's an audience for anything we say or do!

A secret NSA surveillance database containing millions of intercepted foreign and domestic e-mails includes the personal correspondence of former President Bill Clinton, according to the New York Times.

An NSA intelligence analyst was apparently investigated after accessing Clinton’s personal correspondence in the database, the paper reports, though it didn’t say how many of Clinton’s e-mails were captured or when the interception occurred.

The database, codenamed Pinwale, allows NSA analysts to search through and read large volumes of e-mail messages, including correspondence to and from Americans. Pinwale is likely the end point for data sucked from internet backbones into NSA-run surveillance rooms at AT&T facilities around the country.

Those rooms were set up by the Bush administration following 9/11, and were finally legalized last year when Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act. The law gives the telecoms immunity for cooperating with the administration; it also opens the way for the NSA to lawfully spy on large groups of phone numbers and e-mail addresses in bulk, instead of having to obtain a warrant for each target.

The NSA can collect the correspondence of Americans with a court order, or without one if the interception occurs incidentally while the agency is targeting people “reasonably believed” to be overseas. But in 2005, the agency “routinely examined large volumes of Americans’ e-mail messages without court warrants,” according to the Times, through this loophole. The paper reports today that the NSA is continuing to over-collect e-mail because of difficulties in filtering and distinguishing between foreign and domestic correspondence.

If an American’s correspondence pops up in search results when analysts sift through the database, the analyst is allowed to read it, provided such messages account for no more than 30 percent of a search result, the paper reported.

The NSA has claimed that the over-collection was inadvertent and corrected it each time the problem was discovered. But Rep. Rush Holt (D-New Jersey), chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, disputed this. “Some actions are so flagrant that they can’t be accidental,” he told the Times.

Three years after the New York Times first revealed the Bush administration's program of illegal domestic surveillance by the NSA, whistleblower Thomas Tamm has acknowledged his role in making public the President's lawbreaking. In its expose Sunday, Newsweek details how the former Justice Department official came to discover the White House's violations of the FISA law and reluctantly decided to turn to the Times. Whether or not Tamm is ultimately arrested for his revelations, the same voices in President Bush's amen corner that rallied to the defense of Scooter Libby will renew their call for the prosecution of both Tamm and the New York Times.

Tamm's public admission comes 18 months after the FBI first raided his home, confiscating personal files and computers. At the very moment the Democratic Congress in August 2007 was voting to codify President Bush's years-long criminal surveillance of American citizens, the net was closing around the man who helped bring it to the nation's attention.

While at the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR), Tamm stumbled upon the existence of Bush's program of warrantless eavesdropping on the international phone calls and emails of Americans which began just after the 9/11 attacks. The administration was not merely circumventing the legal requirement for approval by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts, but subsequently laundering the intelligence gathered to "get legitimate FISA warrants - giving the cases a judicial stamp of approval."

In the spring of 2004, a frustrated Tamm finally took action:

When Tamm started asking questions, his supervisors told him to drop the subject. He says one volunteered that "the program" (as it was commonly called within the office) was "probably illegal."

Tamm agonized over what to do. He tried to raise the issue with a former colleague working for the Senate Judiciary Committee. But the friend, wary of discussing what sounded like government secrets, shut down their conversation. For weeks, Tamm couldn't sleep. The idea of lawlessness at the Justice Department angered him. Finally, one day during his lunch hour, Tamm ducked into a subway station near the U.S. District Courthouse on Pennsylvania Avenue. He headed for a pair of adjoining pay phones partially concealed by large, illuminated Metro maps. Tamm had been eyeing the phone booths on his way to work in the morning. Now, as he slipped through the parade of midday subway riders, his heart was pounding, his body trembling. Tamm felt like a spy. After looking around to make sure nobody was watching, he picked up a phone and called The New York Times.

Continue reading »

The McSame campaign releases a campaign commercial on the importance of domestic surveillance.

Good Girl Roxie: 8 million Americans are "potential suspects" in an illegal domestic surveillance program

TPMCafe: Liberal pundits offer an unprecedented apology.

Bring It On! A bad day to be a climate-change denying Christian creationist?

The Washington Independent: Burger King to tomato pickers: Have it your way

Pensito Review: One guy who won't ready for any 3 AM phone calls.

OFF THE BEATEN PATH: IFC, Fact-esque, The Edge of the American West, The Root

MSNBC's morning host Alex Witt brought on Col. Jack Jacobs on Friday to discuss the FISA debate and served up White House talking points very nicely. (h/t Bob F)

JACOBS: There are something like 30 or 40 pending lawsuits already against the telecommunications industry, internet service providers and so on for cooperating with the government and um, violating their privacy. They’re not going to participate any more—the telecommunications industry with the government if they can’t be protected and so Mukasey’s saying there are conversations we could have listened to, information we could have received, but we didn’t get it because nobody’s cooperating.

WITT: So does this mean the terrorists, who were certainly aware of this situation right now, that they got this open window and they’re able to communicate?

JACOBS: They do indeed. They do, indeed. And there are other ways they can take advantage of this situation too, not just this law. But this is a big stumbling block in getting information, which we can use to protect ourselves. It’s a big fight and it will continue and this is an election year, don’t forget, so it’s got partisan overtones you’ll continue to hear about.

Are you flipping kidding me? The amount of fearmongering and misinformation is sickening. Let's be clear: the telecoms want to be immunized from prosecution from violating the privacy of AMERICANS. Not terrorists. Do you really think that al Qaeda will instruct one of their minions walk into court and file suit against AT&T? How stupid do they think the American people are? Wait, don't answer that.

The ACLU has issued a press release scolding the White House for playing politics with the domestic surveillance bill.

FDL:

The FISA bill (S. 2248) mark-up is set for tomorrow morning in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The business meeting is set for 10 am ET - am waiting to hear whether C-Span will be covering it, but I've put in a request. Here's hoping...

In the meantime, I thought we could spend the day constructively nudging on two very important issues: (1) no telecom immunity and (2) no basket warrants.

The ACLU has a lot of information on FISA, including a section-by-section analysis of the bill and a one page summary sheet. Useful stuff.

We put together quite a list of ways to phrase opposition to the current FISA legislation's most odious provisions - you can find the full compendium here. (My personal favorite was Prairie Sunshine's "Democracy = Rule of Law, not Lawless Rule.") Please call and FAX the offices of the Senate Judiciary Committee members regarding their obligation to uphold the rule of law, the Constitution, and the will of the people not just the rule of George. Via OldCoastie, here is a link to efax, which allows you to FAX them for free.

Christy has compiled names and numbers at FDL.

Things aren't going well, thanks to our LieberDems Schumer, Feinstein (what a surprise!) and Whitehouse. We need to get loud, people.

From an email from an ACLU rep.:

The Democratic Judiciary Committee staff is floating substitution language that would make the government responsible for illegal activity committed by the telecom companies.

Congress must reject any attempts to provide immunity to those that broke the law. If the government assumes legal responsibility for lawbreaking for the telecoms, the companies will be let-off the hook for their illegal actions. It also means the taxpayers will be responsible for any damages. The ACLU strongly and firmly opposes the substitution, which is, in essence, telecom immunity.

If this substitution language gets enacted, we know that the government will stop the lawsuits by arguing: states secrets, executive privilege, and sovereign immunity in order to stop the people from having their day in court against the telecom giants.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to mark up the domestic surveillance legislation tomorrow morning.

And the House is expected to vote tomorrow too, although it is not yet clear exactly what they are voting on yet.