You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 1460

PLAYS: 243

(Not too terribly far off the mark)

At the height of Cold War paranoia and subversives seemingly everywhere, the question over whether or not to make Wiretapping a legal procedure got a lot of attention in the 1950s.

So in 1956, part of its American Forum series, the question was posed to a Senator and Congressman - both Democrats, but one casually known as a Dixiecrat.

Emanual Celler (D-New York) favored Wiretapping but only in cases of National Security (the definition of National Security got a bit loose and fuzzy by 2002) while E.L. Forrester (D-Georgia) wanted everything wiretapped. Forrester, it should be noted was one of the early signers of the Southern Manifesto from the Alabama Council of Conservative Citizens . . .nuff said.

Emanual Celler: “I simply want to make wiretapping per se` a crime in the federal courts when it’s done across state lines. And in that sense, every wiretap would be illegal, except . . and the exception would be in the interests of national security. I would surrender some privacy and the right of privacy in the interests of preservation of our great nation and in the interests of national security. So that where the federal officials are running down malefactors against our espionage laws or sabotage laws or Atomic energy act or National security laws, I will say ‘alright, wiretap’ and use that evidence in the court, But anything beyond national security, I know I would say no, I would interdict that."

E.L. Forrest: “Now of course I wouldn’t agree with you. I would say that the states should have some laws on the subject. And that evidence of wiretapping should be admissible in courts. Now let me show you what you’re doing - Now I say to you that it is completely possible that a man could, in his own home here in the city of Washington, by using his telephone as his agent, that he could carry on all over the world a conspiracy dealing in narcotics. His agent in Atlanta could sit in his own home and he could talk to him on the phone, he could tell him to meet a plane and to go down and take the narcotics off of the plane – all right. Now that agent in Atlanta could call the messenger boy, over there in his own home and tell him to go down and meet that plane. What you’re doing, you are just giving the criminal a one way street and you’re not giving the police officer any opportunity to catch him.”

And so it went in 1956. The relentless dilemma.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 816

PLAYS: 518

("The Olive Has Been Talking . . . ")

It seems wiretapping has been a popular subject in legal circles for quite some time, if this special edition of Meet The Press from November 17, 1957 is any indication. This roundtable discussion features New York State Supreme Court Justice Miles McDonald, District Attorney of Richmond County New York John Braisted and the infamous Roy Cohn on the subject of the use or misuse of the Fifth Amendment and the use and misuse of wiretaps.

All interesting stuff, considering it's 1957 and the world seemed much simpler then . . .or not.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 242

PLAYS: 7

(Attorney General Edward H. Levi - you wonder what he'd have to say today)

". . .for example some of the alleged instances of misuse of the FBI over previous periods have involved directions from the White House, often from low ranking officials, given orally and couched in terms of law enforcement of national security. They involve such matters as surveillance at a political convention, investigations of a newsman unsympathetic to the administration cause, or the collection of information on political opponents. The proposed guidelines require that the request be made or confirmed in writing, specify those who may make requests, require the official initiating the investigation be identified, the purpose of the investigation stated among certain routine areas, and where a field investigation is initiated, an attestation that the subject has given consent".

Attorney General Edward H. Levi (1975-1977) addressing the American Bar Association convention in Montreal in 1975. Post-Watergate, post-Nixon. Listening to this address, I wondered what Levi would have to say about Roberto Gonzalez and the shambles the judicial system had become - falling very far from the "high moral ground" we had been so tenuously placed. I was struck by Levi's mention of the "ambiguous nature" of our Constitution as part of the genius of it. But all it of seemed to be based on an assumption it would never be manipulated to fulfill an agenda of fear. The unscrupulous placed in charge to find loopholes in order to justify immoral behavior and the degree in which those behaviors are carried out.

(photo found here)

As more secret memos from the Bush Administration are revealed we find that it took only two weeks for the former president and his lawyers to plot the subversion of the Constitution and the rule of law:

The Justice Department released nine legal opinions showing that, following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Bush administration determined that certain constitutional rights would not apply during the coming fight. Within two weeks, government lawyers were already discussing ways to wiretap U.S. conversations without warrants.

The legal memos written by the Bush administration's Office of Legal Counsel show a government grappling with how to wage war on terrorism in a fast-changing world. The conclusion, reiterated in page after page of documents, was that the president had broad authority to set aside constitutional rights.

The memos reflected a belief within the Bush administration that the president had broad powers that could not be checked by Congress or the courts. That stance, in one form or another, became the foundation for many policies: holding detainees at Guantanamo Bay, eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without warrants, using tough new CIA interrogation tactics and locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges. Read on...

We've known about the secret memos for years, but it still sent a shiver down my spine to actually read them. I applaud President Obama for making these memos public so that the citizens of the U.S. and the world can begin to understand what happened during those dark years in our history and to insure that never again will any president of any political party abuse their powers this way again.

To read all of the secret memos in their entirety click here.

Via Skimble, a most interesting theory:

I have yet to see this reported anywhere, but an anonymous commenter named trademonster on an investment forum said this (notice the dates):

01-09-06 06:49 AM
I've heard that SEC is going to shut down Madoff financial and all of their hedge funds for SEC violations. Can anyone confirm this?

And this:

01-14-06 02:52 PM
I actually got some update and found out that it's Spitzer's office doing the investigation not SEC. But I don't know what the scope of the investigation is.

Suddenly Spitzer's dalliances with a hooker don't seem quite as fundmentally important to the financial health of this country.

We need people who understand the system to police it. No matter how sanctimonious or egomaniacal you may find him, Spitzer understands the financial system. If these posts are true, somebody in power was more interested in the the details of Eliot Spitzer's transactions than Bernard L. Madoff's. They were obviously more interested in killing the watchdog than in catching the billionaire burglar.

And via Corrente, something even more interesting from Michael Isikoff's Newsweek story about the FISA whistleblower:

[Under the secret and illegal "Stellar Wind" program of domestic warrantless surveillance,] NSA was also able to access, for the first time, massive volumes of personal financial records—such as credit-card transactions, wire transfers and bank withdrawals—that were being reported to the Treasury Department by financial institutions. These included millions of "suspicious-activity reports," or SARS, according to two former Treasury officials who declined to be identified talking about sensitive programs. (It was one such report that tipped FBI agents to former New York governor Eliot Spitzer's use of prostitutes.) These records were fed into NSA supercomputers for the purpose of "data mining"—looking for links or patterns that might (or might not) suggest terrorist activity.

Lambert asks an important question: How did the suspicious activity report on Spitzer's financial transaction get from the NSA to the FBI?

He also notes the convenient timing, because Spitzer at the time was looking into the monoline insurance companies - another important piece of the Wall St. crash.

Was the Bush administration using illegally obtained information to take down political enemies? Oh, I think it's a safe bet. And do you suppose they were deliberately trying to keep Spitzer from exposing extensive Wall St. fraud?

What do you think?