- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
This is what I suspect has happened:
Since the NSA started monitoring domestic email and phone calls of 'terrorists', they quite likely also have been monitoring domestic email and phone calls of politicians and reporters.
Imagine if, just before a vote on a bill important to the administration, 'anonymous' emails arrive in the in-boxes of the opposition party, as well as in those of reporters covering the story.
Imagine that these contain things like lists of porn sites visited by said representative, or embarrassing snippets from past email correspondence to non-spousal girlfriends, boyfriends, etc.
Or imagine that they contain audio clips of embarrassing phone calls. Or digital photographs of embarrassing encounters.
Given the NSA's prodigious talents, there would not even be a return address on these messages. The source of the message would be perfectly clear.
Tin foil hat paranoia? Perhaps. Possible? Certainly, given this administration's 'win at all costs' approach.
To me, this is the only explanation as to why the media and the Democrats have rolled over and played dead so many times.
Why would you fold a winning hand, unless the other guy is pointing a gun at you under the table?
In any case, without external review of who and what are being watched, it is technically possible. This is why the FISA court oversight was so important.
There was no reason not to mandate review of NSA monitoring after the fact. The administration has no logical reason to resist this - it would slow down nothing, yet protect us from abuse.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely...
