NSA Times Three
The Wall Street Journal takes on the imperial Congress:
…[A] couple of GOP Senators forced the White House into conceding more Congressional oversight of wartime intelligence programs. Olympia Snowe of Maine and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska vowed to join Democrats in voting for a full-scale Senate probe of the NSA wiretaps unless President Gulliver bent to their wishes. Such a vote would have humiliated their Chairman, Kansas Republican Pat Roberts, at a minimum. But it would also have risked exposing intelligence sources and methods in a way that could have made the wiretap program less effective, if not entirely worthless.
Faced with this ultimatum from Lilliput, the White House agreed to let the Senate, and presumably also the House, set up a new subcommittee to oversee the NSA program. That means seven more Senators (and more in the House) will at any one time have to be briefed on the program, in addition to the eight Members of Congress who already are. Given committee rotation, this means dozens of more tight-lipped Members will have access to the details of one of the country’s most highly classified programs. Of course, none of them will ever leak.
It’s true that Mr. Bush at least prevented any expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), or any further intrusion by the courts into the President’s war-fighting power. But the White House did concede to bring the warrantless wiretaps under the current FISA process after 45 days at the discretion of the Attorney General. And rest assured that the pressure from Congress will be to prod Alberto Gonzales to move every such search under the FISA court’s purview.
We’d be less critical of this concession if Congress gave any indication that, having won this new power, it will behave more responsibly. But Congress is by definition a committee with diffuse responsibility and a penchant for running for cover in a storm. That’s what happened when the NSA wiretap story first leaked, and Senate Democrat Jay Rockefeller immediately joined the blame game even though he’d been briefed on the program for years as Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
AJ sees the new deal, however, as the possible death warrant of FISA:
If the FISC judges continue to resist considering NSA leads regarding possible terrorists in this country, they will be building the tomb for FISA itself.
Jon Swift finds the deal to be a modest proposal:
… * The President has agreed to spy only on very, very bad people.
* He has agreed not to spy on Americans except under extraordinary circumstances.
* He has promised not to bypass the courts and wiretap someone without a warrant unless he’s in a really big hurry.
* The NSA will try extra hard not to violate anyone’s civil liberties if they can help it…
“[A] couple of GOP Senators forced the White House into conceding more Congressional oversight of wartime intelligence programs.”
It’s not a concession: the Constitution specifically gives Congress the right to oversee the military (Article 1 Section VIII: Congress has the power “to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces”)
“Olympia Snowe of Maine and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska vowed to join Democrats in voting for a full-scale Senate probe of the NSA wiretaps”
The Journal does not believe in Congressional oversight?
“unless President Gulliver”
Typical WSJ ad hominem: if Congress fulfills its responsibilities, they are Lilliputians?
“bent to their wishes.”
Another ad hominem: “wishes” suggests that the objections to the NSA programs are capricious and not based in logic or reality
“Such a vote would have humiliated their Chairman, Kansas Republican Pat Roberts, at a minimum.”
Huh? By launching an inquiry into the NSA, the Chairman is humiliated?
“But it would also have risked exposing intelligence sources and methods in a way that could have made the wiretap program less effective, if not entirely worthless. ”
First, there can be closed door hearings. Secondly, Congress routinely discusses highly confidential information without adverse consequences (such as what the “black budget” for the CIA and special ops pays for). Finally, terrorists have known for years that their email and conversations are susceptible to interception. How does a Congressional inquiry into why the FISA requirements were not met reveal anything new to a terrorist?
“Faced with this ultimatum from Lilliput, the White House agreed to let the Senate, and presumably also the House, set up a new subcommittee to oversee the NSA program.”
The new subcommittee is a subterfuge: the Republican members of the committee are giving the President a free pass for ignoring FISA requirements, and the new committee basically tells the administration that they can continue to violate the law as long as they let Congressmen watch them do it.
“That means seven more Senators (and more in the House) will at any one time have to be briefed on the program, in addition to the eight Members of Congress who already are. Given committee rotation, this means dozens of more tight-lipped Members will have access to the details of one of the country’s most highly classified programs. Of course, none of them will ever leak.”
See above
“It’s true that Mr. Bush at least prevented any expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), or any further intrusion by the courts into the President’s war-fighting power. But the White House did concede to bring the warrantless wiretaps under the current FISA process after 45 days at the discretion of the Attorney General. And rest assured that the pressure from Congress will be to prod Alberto Gonzales to move every such search under the FISA court’s purview.”
Alberto Gonzales stiffed Congress and basically refused to answer any questions when he testified recently. What pressure does the Journal think Congress can bring to bear against the Justice Department?
“We’d be less critical of this concession if Congress gave any indication that, having won this new power, it will behave more responsibly.”
The President violated the law and Congress behaved irresponsibly? Huh?
“But Congress is by definition a committee with diffuse responsibility and a penchant for running for cover in a storm. That’s what happened when the NSA wiretap story first leaked, and Senate Democrat Jay Rockefeller immediately joined the blame game even though he’d been briefed on the program for years as Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee.”
The Journal neglects to mention that Rockefeller objected to the program and complained that the administration was not providing full details about the program.