McConnell spins his new surveillance power
Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, gave an interview to the El Paso Times on his new warrantless surveillance powers. A superficial reading of the transcript (and this associated article, via Newscoma) might suggest that all is well and good, and that Americans' rights are being protected.
Not surprisingly, closer examination reveals that it's just more spin.
McConnell leaves the distinct impression that this new law is related to wiretapping only; he talks endlessly about monitoring communications "on the wire" versus "wireless" modes, and the complicity of companies like Verizon and AT&T in that monitoring. He goes to great lengths to make it all sound so innocuous and necessary.
He fails to acknowledge that the law goes way beyond wiretapping, and could include business records, physical searches, and "trap and trace" devices. Anonymous Liberal is all over the language of the statute, noting that it does not limit itself to telecommunications:
Moreover, just because the bill doesn't specifically mention business records or physical searches or "trap and trace" surveillance doesn't mean that its language doesn't cover them. Section 105B authorizes "the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning persons reasonably believe to be outside the United States." That's incredibly broad language. And the definition of "foreign intelligence information" is itself incredibly broad; it includes anything that "relates to . . . the national defense or the security of the United States" or "the conduct of the foreign affairs of the United States."
[...]
The fact is, though, there is nothing in this new bill that limits its application to surveillance of telecommunications. Quite the contrary. The language in section 105B is straightforward and very broad, and can reasonably be interpreted to apply to all sorts of acquisitions. And, by its clear terms, section 105B applies "notwithstanding any other law."
Furthermore, as [Andrew McCarthy of National Review] knows all too well, the DOJ is not in the habit of interpreting statutes in ways that unnecessarily circumscribe the powers of the executive branch. Right now there are lawyers at the OLC writing memos interpreting this new law, and as sure as the sun sets in the West, they will read the law in whatever way puts the maximum amount of power in the hands of the executive branch. To suggest otherwise is to insult everyone's intelligence.
McConnell's interview includes an obvious piece of scare-mongering which should be a red flag to anyone reading the transcript; he says that public discussion and debate over this issue will result in Americans being killed. So, here he sits, being interviewed by a reporter, when this exchange occurs:
Q. So you're saying that the reporting and the debate in Congress means that some Americans are going to die?
A. That's what I mean. Because we have made it so public.
Doesn't his granting that interview then make McConnell a traitor?
This administration is caught in a tailspin of its own making, and no amount of apologetics from wingnut editorialists or lies told by its officials will set it right.