[Infowarrior] - Attorney general mum on spy program court orders

Thu Jan 18 16:22:17 EST 2007

Attorney general mum on spy program court orders

By Anne Broache
http://news.com.com/Attorney+general+mum+on+spy+program+court+orders/2100-10
28_3-6151209.html

Story last modified Thu Jan 18 12:43:58 PST 2007

WASHINGTON--Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' appearance before a key U.S.
Senate committee Thursday yielded little new information about the Bush
administration's sudden revelation that it would seek court approval for its
domestic eavesdropping activities.

At a U.S. Department of Justice oversight hearing scheduled before the
government announcement on Wednesday, Senate Judiciary chairman Patrick
Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking Republican Arlen Specter said they were pleased to
hear that future activities associated with a controversial National
Security Agency operation known as the Terrorist Surveillance Program would
undergo review by judges on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court.
Alberto Gonzales Alberto Gonzales

But many critical questions about the scope and content of the court orders
remain unanswered, committee members said.

"To ensure the balance necessary to achieve both security and liberty for
our nation, the president must also fully inform Congress and the American
people about the contours of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
order authorizing this surveillance program and of the program itself,"
Leahy said.

Few, however, probed for those details at Thursday's hearing, where
questioning spanned everything from the Iraq war to violent crime statistics
to online child exploitation. Aside from Specter, no Republicans asked
questions about the surveillance activities, and some Democrats also focused
their inquiries elsewhere.

Although Specter said he was concerned about what shape the court orders
took, only one senator present directly posed that question. Sen. Chuck
Schumer (D-N.Y.) grilled the attorney general on whether the orders
described in his Wednesday letter (click for PDF) amounted to a blanket
warrant for the entire eavesdropping program or were tailored to particular
targets. Even Intelligence Committee members who had received closed-door
briefings didn't seem to have a good feel for that information, he said.

"If it's a very broad-brush approval--and again, because it's secret, we
have no way of knowing--it doesn't do much good," Schumer said.

Gonzales said he could reveal only that the orders "meet the legal
requirements" under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a 1978
law that governs eavesdropping when at least one end of the communications
is inside the United States.

Perhaps others were hoping the court itself would help shed light on its
activities. Specter and Leahy highlighted their joint request on Wednesday
to presiding FISA court judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly for copies of the
orders, which are typically kept confidential. According to Gonzales'
letter, an unnamed FISA court judge on January 10 issued orders that
authorized government wiretapping of communications when at least one end is
inside the United States and one of the communicants is likely to be a
member or agent of al-Qaida or associated terrorist groups.

Whether that information will be released to Congress--much less to the
public--remains uncertain. In a letter dated January 17 and distributed to
reporters Thursday, Kollar-Kotelly said she had no objection to furnishing
the documents to the committee but because classified information is
involved, she would have to refer their request to the Justice Department.

"If the executive and legislative branches reach agreement for access to
this material," she wrote, "the court will, of course, cooperate with the
agreement."

Pressed by Leahy on whether he would object to the court orders being shared
with Congress, Gonzales first said he'd have to take it up with his
"principals."

"Are you saying that you might object to the court giving us decisions that
you publicly announced?" Leahy asked. "Are we a little Alice in Wonderland
here?"

"I would say it's not my decision to make," Gonzales replied. He added that
he couldn't remember exactly what was in the orders but that they
undoubtedly include "operational details" that would need to be kept under
wraps.

Schumer, Specter and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) each questioned why the
Bush administration hadn't approached the court sooner if it had truly begun
exploring that option in spring 2005, as it said in its Wednesday letter.

"This is a very complicated application," Gonzales replied. "In many ways
it's innovative in terms of the orders granted by the judge. It's not the
kind of thing you just pull off the shelf. We worked on it a long time."