Let's connect a few dots.
- The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of individual's Internet activity without a court order if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation.
We'll unpack that in a moment, but since we're talking about giving FBI agents authority that used to be held by courts, consider this second dot:
- The Justice Department is investigating whether hundreds of FBI agents violated rules in taking a 2009 exam meant to ensure that they could follow aggressive new guidelines for terrorism investigations without intruding on Americans' privacy.
Connecting those dots should give you a jolt every bit as intense as the one you would get if you were foolish enough to short circuit the terminals on a fully charged Die Hard battery.
I'll admit I'm prejudiced. I don't trust the FBI. I don't believe they operate ethically or legally when it comes to political investigations. I'm not going bend your ear with the decades of experience I've had that leaves that bad taste in my mouth. I'm not going to burden you with a long list of people I've known who have suffered the indignity of having their privacy invaded, or their doors kicked in, or their careers destroyed because of the FBI's malfeasance.
I will remind you of one man, though, Bill Price. I can't say it better than Uncle did:
Trust me you do not know him - But you should, he went to jail for you, was hauled before Senate to "name names" and refused - for you, and basically gave up his otherwise comfy life fighting for you.
Who was it Bill fought -- and beat -- defending the First Amendment rights we are about to lose? The FBI. Actually, it was the agents who tapped his phones, and the public pay phones for several blocks around his house, broke into his house, and read his mail. Oh, and their bosses. And their bosses' bosses. All the way up the ladder to Mark Felt, the number two man at the agency. That's right, the same guy we later learned was "Deep Throat".
Bill fought them for years and finally won. But that didn't get him back his career. Hell, it didn't even get the FBI to change. Bill won his case and then-president Ronald Reagan swept it aside by issuing blanket pardons for Mark Felt and all his cronies.
Pursuant to the grant of authority in article II, section 2 of the Constitution of the United States, I have granted full and unconditional pardons to W. Mark Felt and Edward S. Miller.
During their long careers, Mark Felt and Edward Miller served the Federal Bureau of Investigation and our nation with great distinction. To punish them further -- after 3 years of criminal prosecution proceedings -- would not serve the ends of justice.
Their convictions in the U.S. District Court, on appeal at the time I signed the pardons, grew out of their good-faith belief that their actions were necessary to preserve the security interests of our country. The record demonstrates that they acted not with criminal intent, but in the belief that they had grants of authority reaching to the highest levels of government.
Four years ago, thousands of draft evaders and others who violated the Selective Service laws were unconditionally pardoned by my predecessor. America was generous to those who refused to serve their country in the Vietnam war. We can be no less generous to two men who acted on high principle to bring an end to the terrorism that was threatening our nation.
I won't comment on Reagan's cynical comparison of conscientous objectors with constitutional criminals. The record of his administration (and every Republican administration since) speaks for itself. Unfortunately, the excesses of the FBI in the 60s did not end with Watergate. They did not end with Iran-Contra. They did not end with the USAPATRIOT Act. They continue to this day. They haven't even changed some of the players.
Robert Mueller is the same guy who ignored and maligned people like Sibel Edmonds and Colleen Rowley. Hell, he promoted the guy who obstructed Rowley in the first place. Apparently, no one minded that because Mueller still has his job. The other day, he was being castigated by Senator Leahy, who expressed his "amazement" that there was widespread cheating by agents on a test designed to "ensure that agents are fully trained in knowing the scope and limitations of the FBI's authority." Mueller defended this with his boilerplate:
I am confident that ... we have put our workplace and our people in a position to fully know and understand the opportunities, but also the limitations of what we can do.
Technically, I suppose, that isn't a lie. You can be sure the FBI is fully aware of what technical limitations stand in their way, because we know legal limitations and ethical limitations aren't a big problem for these guys. As today's Washington Post article by Spenser Hsu noted
During the hearing, Mueller misstated the guidelines.
That's right, the guy who is supposed to be responsible for setting the tone at the FBI doesn't even know the guidelines he is supposed to be following. That is after the department's own inspector general accused the FBI of abusing its authority to gather intelligence without warrants in terrorism cases.
...agents improperly collected phone records from more than 3,500 numbers from 2003 to 2006 and that in some instances they cited nonexistent emergencies or used misleading language in applications to a court to authorize national security wiretaps.
Unlike Leahy, I am not going to pretend this "amazes" me. I'm not even going to pretend I'm shocked, SHOCKED! After all, full-bore ignorance of the Fourth Amendment didn't stop General Hayden from getting the top job at the CIA. I guess stomping on the Constitution while director of the NSA just proved he was qualified for the job.
Maybe you think I'm an alarmist; my hair is on fire and my panties are in a bunch for no good reason. Why would anyone but a conspiracy nut suspect the FBI, CIA, NSA, and DOD would work together to undermine constitutional rights? That's just crazy talk. Besides, we're not the ones who are going to be victimized here, right? Well let me add a third dot:
- Unbeknownst to most Americans, remote-controlled pilotless aircraft have been employed domestically for years now. They were first used as a national-security tool for patrolling America's borders, and then as a means of monitoring citizens.
That little tidbit comes from Nat Hentoff. If you didn't know who he was, you might discount him as a crank. After all, his syndicated column appears in places like WorldNewsDaily, and he cites the Rutherford Institute -- both of these sources are held in low esteem by anyone to the left of Orrin Hatch. But Hentoff is no crackpot. His journalistic career goes back to the Eisenhower administration. He was one of the founders of The Village Voice. Like Bill Price before him, Nat Hentoff is a staunch believer in the First Amendment. And he has the track record to back it up.
What pushed Hentoff into a frenzy isn't the domestic use of drones. That's not news to anyone who has been following this topic. He just became aware of Phantom Eye, the collaboration between Boeing and Ford to put eyes in the sky that can fly for days without stopping.
For all those who think I am overly critical of this administration, let me take this opportunity to applaud their push for hydrogen-powered vehicles. I just wish Ford would put that technology into a vehicle for Americans to buy before putting it into a vehicle for spying on Americans.
If this expansion of FBI authority had been sought by the Bush administration, it would have been rightfully condemned as a threat to the integrity of our republic. Bush would have easily ignored the opposition. As far as he was concerned, the Constitution was nothing more than a "goddamned piece of paper" that kept him from doing what he wanted. Obama has no such excuse. You would think that an administration lead by a former community organizer and professor of constitutional law would be more sensitive to the rights of the people. That was certainly what I thought we would get.
When I decided to support Obama for 2008, I didn't ask for a pony. I didn't ask to see into his soul. I asked for one simple thing that would mark a dramatic change from the nightmare we were going through.
I realize that for some, the nagging question of whether he is too good to be true or not will always remain. The truth is you can scour Obama's words and actions from here to the end of time and they will never serve as portals to his soul. Fortunately, that is not necessary. We are not seeking to canonize a saint. We are seeking to hire a chief executive we reasonably believe will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Considering the growth of the national security state on his watch, it's clear I expected too much.