Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Rep. Jane Harman Focus In Yet Another Warrantless Wiretap Scandal

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Mon Apr 20, 2009 01:12 PM
from the irony-makes-head-asplode dept.
Many different sources are talking about the latest scandal surrounding the warrantless wiretapping program. Incriminating evidence against California rep. Jane Harman was apparently captured some time ago on a legal NSA wiretap. However, Attorney General Gonzales supposedly intervened to drop the case against her because (and this is where the irony meter explodes) Bush officials wanted her to be able to publicly defend the warrantless wiretap program. "Jane Harman, in the wake of the NSA scandal, became probably the most crucial defender of the Bush warrantless eavesdropping program, using her status as 'the ranking Democratic on the House intelligence committee' to repeatedly praise the NSA program as 'essential to US national security' and 'both necessary and legal.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] News: Will Obama's DOJ Intervene To Help RIAA? 546 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Cloud, a Pennsylvania case in which the RIAA's statutory damages theory — seeking from 2,200 to 450,000 times the amount of actual damages — is being tested, the US Department of Justice has just filed papers indicating that it is considering intervening in the case to defend the constitutionality of such awards, and requesting an extension of time (PDF) in which to decide whether such intervention 'is appropriate.' This is an early test of whether President Obama will make good on his promises (a) not to allow industry insiders to participate in cases affecting the industry they represented (the 2nd and 3rd highest DOJ officials are RIAA lawyers) and (b) to look out for ordinary citizens rather than big corporations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by nicolas.kassis (875270) on Monday April 20, @01:13PM (#27648345)
    We should boycott all forms of communications!
  • Treason (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dan667 (564390) on Monday April 20, @01:14PM (#27648365)
    Rep. Harman should be investigated for treason. AIPAC should be investigated for treason.
    • Re:Treason (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Darundal (891860) on Monday April 20, @01:21PM (#27648511) Journal
      So should those who knowingly let them get away with it.
    • Re:Treason (Score:5, Informative)

      by DrLang21 (900992) on Monday April 20, @01:34PM (#27648735)
      How exactly does this qualify as treason under the US Constitution?
      From the US Constitution Article III Section 3: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."
      • beat me to it (Score:5, Informative)

        by Shakrai (717556) on Monday April 20, @01:40PM (#27648831) Journal

        Thank you. I'm getting sick and tired of hearing people drop the 'T' word without any idea of what it actually means. It's this kind of stupidity that makes me think the Framers were correct to define Treason within the Constitution so it couldn't be used for political purposes.....

        • Re:beat me to it (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Compholio (770966) on Monday April 20, @01:58PM (#27649091)

          Thank you. I'm getting sick and tired of hearing people drop the 'T' word without any idea of what it actually means. It's this kind of stupidity that makes me think the Framers were correct to define Treason within the Constitution so it couldn't be used for political purposes.....

          Maybe some people consider those that threaten our liberties to be our enemies... Seems reasonable to me.

      • Re:Treason (Score:5, Insightful)

        by bobdehnhardt (18286) on Monday April 20, @01:42PM (#27648875)

        You're spot on target. This wasn't treason, it was standard political quid pro quo. Admittedly, it's sometimes hard to tell the two apart....

        Dems may call it treason because she turned her back on the party line. But that's personal. IANAL, but to me, this looks like obstruction, maybe tampering with evidence. Not treason.

        • Re:Treason (Score:5, Informative)

          by rpillala (583965) on Monday April 20, @02:20PM (#27649523)

          I don't remember very many prominent Democrats opposing the NSA's illegal spying program. In fact many prominent Democrats were in favor. I remember a lengthy and uncompromising campaign against these kind of things by Chris Dodd (D-CT), but I also remember that Harry Reid (D-NV) decided to ignore the hold that Dodd placed on the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Ignoring holds placed by Senators is not generally done. And then a lot of Democrats voted to end debate on the amendments to the act. I think you're giving the Democratic party too much credit for opposing the lawlessness of the Bush administration. They don't oppose lawlessness per se.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20, @03:23PM (#27650641)

        Since when has false flag specialist Israel really been the US ally, as opposed to treating the US as her bitch, because of traitors like this cretin in the article and other traitors in big business, big media, and big finance and big government? They sure as hell ARE traitors. Just because they claim they aren't doesn't make it so once you look at the real data.

            Why the hell should we be supporting a racist apartheid nation? I never supported racist south africa, and nor do I support Israel, they have been a plague and have put the world at peril for nuclear confrontation for decades now, all so that some European settlers can claim land that isn't theirs. If they had a beef with Germany over their particular holocaust, which is just ONE OF MANY that happened during the war, why the hell didn't we demand Germany give up some territory for some new zionist nation? The Germans are the biggest hypocrites out there now about this. Their old biblical claim to "greater zion" is pure hogwash, freaking fantasy land and I can't believe anyone on this forum falls for it.

          Here's just a few references to get you started on some sorely neglected education that you need about those false "allies" who are really the biggest threat to the security of the US, USS Liberty attack [gtr5.com]-this is called levying war, get it? and don't believe the official dual nation coverup story, listen to the actual survivors and dudes who lived through it. And go ahead and google "9-11, dancing Israelis"-for more levying war, and "khazars" for a little more in depth historical background of what lying toads they are. Shrewd yes, technologically capable, yes, smart yes, but also lying sneaky deceitful skunks and jerks.

        People who put the interests of some other nation over their own ARE traitors, fullstop. If they claim to be US citizens but work for another nation-traitors. That includes Israel-firsters, including those loony brainwashed flat earth snake handling Xians who are dreaming of Armageddon and some huge conflagration to bring about the Rapture, and just the normal economic traitors, then those jerk off big businessmen who are China-firsters, and so on.

        Traitors. You can't have it both ways, either loyal to your own nation first, or you are a traitor and a liar and a hypocrite.

        Israel, history of false flag operations [google.com]

    • Re:Treason (Score:5, Informative)

      by DJRumpy (1345787) on Monday April 20, @02:28PM (#27649669)
      Here's an excellent in-depth article on who did who..er..who did what.

      http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page1.html [cqpolitics.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20, @01:18PM (#27648433)

    If nothing else, this Jane Harmon scandal is going to continue to undermine the USA's credibility as an "impartial" mediator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Regardless of what Jane Harmon may have done, it's rather shocking that AIPAC has enough pull in congress to be able to hold out committee chairmanships as bribes.

  • by amiga3D (567632) on Monday April 20, @01:21PM (#27648493)
    This is why the warrantless wiretap program should be done away with. When you operate in secret the things found will be used to blackmail. Instead of being used to further the goals of justice it's used to further the goals of those in power.
  • by Skyshadow (508) * on Monday April 20, @01:23PM (#27648527) Homepage
    Using illegally gathered information to effectively blackmail politicians? Ah, that takes me back to the good 'ol days -- J Edgar would be proud.

    I wonder how well Robert Mueller pulls off a sun dress...
  • Not warrantless. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wiredog (43288) on Monday April 20, @01:30PM (#27648681) Journal

    DoJ had a warrant, apparently it was part of the AIPAC investigation.

    No, the fishy part is that the Bush admin apparently blackmailed her into supporting the warrantless program.

    Also, you have the Executive branch doing that ot a member of the Legislative.

    This could get really interesting...

    • by spun (1352) <loverevolutionary@yahoo. c o m> on Monday April 20, @01:25PM (#27648593) Journal

      The point is that this was NOT illegal. Agents were investigating foreign operatives using warrentless wiretapping. They caught the foreign operatives bribing a congresswoman. The Bush administration declined to press charges because said congresswoman supported warrantless wiretapping.

      • retroactive FISA (Score:5, Informative)

        by kmahan (80459) on Monday April 20, @01:34PM (#27648737)

        As I understand it they went to FISA to get a retroactive warrant. A nice little provision of the law.

        • by spun (1352) <loverevolutionary@yahoo. c o m> on Monday April 20, @01:33PM (#27648727) Journal

          Who says it was illegal? We may WISH it were illegal, we may get it declared illegal, it may in fact be unconstitutional, but the fact is, the agents performed what was at the time a LEGAL warrantless wiretap against foreign agents and happened to catch them bribing a congresswoman. They tapped FOREIGN AGENTS IN ISRAEL. There is no US law against tapping foreign phone lines.

        • by sampson7 (536545) on Monday April 20, @01:41PM (#27648859)
          There is nothing wrong with wiretapping so long as the wiretap is approved by the judicial branch of government. In this case, the NSA sought and received a warrant from the US Foreign Intelligence Survailence Court ("FISA"). Once the executive branch (the NSA in this case) has a warrant, they are legally entitled to record the conversations.

          In this case, the underlying article reports that: "What is new is that Harman is said to have been picked up on a court-approved NSA tap directed at alleged Israel covert action operations in Washington." Key words are "court-approved."

          The Fourth Amendment states that:

          The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

          Once the executive branch has convinced a judge that probably cause exists, and the judge has issued the warrant, there is nothing preventing the executive branch from using that information in court.

          Now there is a real question as to whether wire tapping a member of congress (who herself was not under investigation) is a good idea, but that's not really the issue. I'm actually somewhat sad to hear about this as Jane Harmon is/was a very competent and thoughtful member of congress -- particularly on port security issues.

    • no, in fact TFA says that's not the implication at all. Harman has been a long-time supporter of the warrantless wiretapping program.

      The (newly revealed) crime is Antonio Gonzalez using his authority to halt a criminal investigation into a key political ally of the Bush administration.

      The original crime is Harman offering a quid-pro-quo with a foreign agent. Which, by the way, was captured on a legally requested wiretap.