http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/07/AR2008040702364_pf.html

FBI Data Transfers Via Telecoms Questioned

By Ellen Nakashima

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, April 8, 2008; A03

When FBI investigators probing New York prostitution rings, Boston organized crime or potential terrorist plots anywhere want access to a suspect's telephone contacts, technicians at a telecommunications carrier served with a government order can, with the click of a mouse, instantly transfer key data along a computer circuit to an FBI technology office in Quantico.

The circuits -- little-known electronic connections between telecom firms and FBI monitoring personnel around the country -- are used to tell the government who is calling whom, along with the time and duration of a conversation and even the locations of those involved.

Recently, three Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, including Chairman John D. Dingell (Mich.), sent a letter to colleagues citing privacy concerns over one of the Quantico circuits and demanding more information about it. Anxieties about whether such electronic links are too intrusive form a backdrop to the continuing congressional debate over modifications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which governs federal surveillance.

There's more - click sig for linky.

Do tell the dates/searches/results YOU got. You just flat-out called Glenn a liar.

I'm really interested...

I'm personally completely unfamiliar w/ NEXIS, so I won't even hypothesize as to why your results differed. We'll see, I hope.

You and 'lette know much more about this topic than I, so I'm not inclined to differ. I thought the article lent additional support to the general pattern of abuse unfolding.

In this case, the word was "necessarily".

To whit - that I am capable of having a reasonably intelligent discussion about ANY of the technical specifics of [fill in the blanks w.r.t. eavesdropping]. FISA (the law itself), telecom protocols (the "engineering" aspects), distinctions to be drawn between "data-mining" and legitimate requests relevant to an "official" probe, virtually any of it. But I am appalled by the NARUS thing, especially in conjunction w/ the proliferation of NSL's.

Wiretaps to obtain the content of a phone call or an e-mail must be authorized by a court upon a showing of probable cause. But "transactional data" about a communication -- from whom, to whom, how long it lasted -- can be obtained by simply showing that it is relevant to an official probe, including through an administrative subpoena known as a national security letter (NSL). According to the Justice Department's inspector general, the number of NSLs issued by the FBI soared from 8,500 in 2000 to 47,000 in 2005.

I'd whole-heartedly agree w/ the bulk of your post, but I really wonder WHY there seems to be such a huge appetite for right-wing media. Why the disconnect between the public's (via polling) ostensible positions on virtually any topic, and the consumption of so much in the way of contrary media positions. Why isn't "liberal" media more heartily consumed? I watch Democracy NOW!, but I literallly do not know anyone else who does...

I'm baffled, as is usually the case.

Now, bring on the TRUTH COMMISSION!

http://balkin.blogspot.com/

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/LawPolitics/story?id=4583256&page=1

Sources: Top Bush Advisors Approved 'Enhanced Interrogation'

Detailed Discussions Were Held About Techniques to Use on al Qaeda Suspects

http://tinyurl.com/3jtruk

or linky @ sig

Amid economic woes, House GOP to pivot from FISA, earmarks to taxes

By Jackie Kucinich

Posted: 04/09/08 07:09 PM [ET]

House Republicans are poised to shift their focus from national security to the economy, hoping to rally opposition to what they claim are Democratic plans to raise taxes amid the economic downturn.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) is expected to announce Thursday that the House GOP floor emphasis will transition away from passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and earmark reform to “stop the tax hike.”

Proximate Wanker RETURNS!

Or was it some other nitwit who was banned recently?

Regardless, the headline applies.

No exuberance here - just passing on an interesting tidbit.

Agree w/ you about Pelosi.

The operative term being "if". "If" it is true (I have no idea), I find it annoying.

(The one that estimated some 600,000 dead Iraqi civilians), I wrote a Letter to the Editor which, much to my surprise, thay published. I referred to the study, and said that GWB, along w/ all those who cheered him on, had far more blood on their hands than did the terrorists. Some of my neighbors haven't spoken to me since.

N/T

I just watched the vid.

As you are aware, your transcript is, in all relevant aspects, accurate.

Mukasey HIMSELF states it's NOT in the 9/11 Report.

Maybe you ought to read somebody's prior posts before you tee off on the wrong person.

Not only have you determined the precise call to which Mukasey is so cryptically referring, you've done a fair bit of cipherin' yerself, to the extent that you can point out the precise places within the 9/11 Commission Report that prove Mukasey doesn't know what he's talking about! Wow.

I sure hope you work for one of our intelligence agencies.

I've got to go w/ Selise's original transcription

We (or maybe, you) sholdn't need it.

Listen to Mukasey's inflection. It's declarative.

And sorry, but I'm not convinced Mr. Fenton's nailed down the precise call.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/LawPolitics/story?id=4635175&page=1

President Bush says he knew his top national security advisors discussed and approved specific details about how high-value al Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the Central Intelligence Agency, according to an exclusive interview with ABC News Friday.

"Well, we started to connect the dots, in order to protect the American people." Bush told ABC News White House correspondent Martha Raddatz. "And, yes, I'm aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved."

Click sig for linky.