iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Presidential Surveillance Program: Spying Went Beyond Warrantless Wiretapping

PAMELA HESS   07/11/09 12:32 AM ET   AP

Bush

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the legal basis for the effort but shielding almost all details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal.

The report, compiled by five inspectors general, refers to "unprecedented collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Just what those activities involved remains classified, but the IGs pointedly say that any continued use of the secret programs must be "carefully monitored."

The report says too few relevant officials knew of the size and depth of the program, let alone signed off on it. They particularly criticize John Yoo, a deputy assistant attorney general who wrote legal memos undergirding the policy. His boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, was not aware until March 2004 of the exact nature of the intelligence operations beyond wiretapping that he had been approving for the previous two and a half years, the report says.

Most of the intelligence leads generated under what was known as the "President's Surveillance Program" did not have any connection to terrorism, the report said. But FBI agents told the authors that the "mere possibility of the leads producing useful information made investigating the leads worthwhile."

The inspectors general interviewed more than 200 people inside and outside the government, but five former Bush administration officials refused to be questioned. They were Ashcroft, Yoo, former CIA Director George Tenet, former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and David Addington, an aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

According to the report, Addington could personally decide who in the administration was "read into" _ allowed access to _ the classified program.

The only piece of the intelligence-gathering operation acknowledged by the Bush White House was the wiretapping-without-warrants effort. The administration admitted in 2005 that it had allowed the National Security Agency to intercept international communications that passed through U.S. cables without seeking court orders.

Although the report documents Bush administration policies, its fallout could be a problem for the Obama administration if it inherited any or all of the still-classified operations.

Bush brought the warrantless wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006, and Congress authorized most of the intercepts in a 2008 electronic surveillance law. The fate of the remaining and still classified aspects of the wider surveillance program is not clear from the report.

The report's revelations came the same day that House Democrats said that CIA Director Leon Panetta had ordered one eight-year-old classified program shut down after learning lawmakers had never been apprised of its existence.

The IG report said that President Bush signed off on both the warrantless wiretapping and other top-secret operations shortly after Sept. 11 in a single presidential authorization. All the programs were periodically reauthorized, but except for the acknowledged wiretapping, they "remain highly classified."

The report says it's unclear how much valuable intelligence the program has yielded.

The report, mandated by Congress last year, was delivered to lawmakers Friday.

Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., told The Associated Press she was shocked to learn of the existence of other classified programs beyond the warrantless wiretapping.

Former Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made a terse reference to other classified programs in an August 2007 letter to Congress. But Harman said that when she had asked Gonzales two years earlier if the government was conducting any other undisclosed intelligence activities, he denied it.

"He looked me in the eye and said 'no,'" she said Friday.

Robert Bork Jr., Gonzales' spokesman, said, "It has clearly been determined that he did not intend to mislead anyone."

In the wake of the new report, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt, renewed his call Friday for a formal nonpartisan inquiry into the government's information-gathering programs.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden _ the primary architect of the program_ told the report's authors that the surveillance was "extremely valuable" in preventing further al-Qaida attacks. Hayden said the operations amounted to an "early warning system" allowing top officials to make critical judgments and carefully allocate national security resources to counter threats.

Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

The report questioned the legal advice used by Bush to set up the program, pinpointing omissions and questionable legal memos written by Yoo, in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. The Justice Department withdrew the memos years ago.

The report says Yoo's analysis approving the program ignored a law designed to restrict the government's authority to conduct electronic surveillance during wartime, and did so without fully notifying Congress. And it said flaws in Yoo's memos later presented "a serious impediment" to recertifying the program.

Yoo insisted that the president's wiretapping program had only to comply with Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure _ but the report said Yoo ignored the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, which had previously overseen federal national security surveillance.

"The notion that basically one person at the Justice Department, John Yoo, and Hayden and the vice president's office were running a program around the laws that Congress passed, including a reinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment, is mind boggling," Harman said.

House Democrats are pressing for legislation that would expand congressional access to secret intelligence briefings, but the White House has threatened to veto it.

(This version CORRECTS that Bush brought wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006 rather than started the program in 2006.)

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of f...
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of f...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,871
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (42 total)
05:16 PM on 07/11/2009
How does Ann Coulter spin this one?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ManwithaParachute
Not Seeking Your Approval
03:25 PM on 07/11/2009
There is an irony of the "Yes, We Can!" movement ending up meaning Yes, we can spy on you, on you, on you....and you...on ALL of you. THANKS GEORGE. Regardless, of constitutionality, this is an approach to governance which is unacceptable to me. NObama's insistence on"looking forward" is not done for the country's sake. It is done to maintain the shroud over the executive branch and it's continued violations of human rights. NObama wants the power. Just like his predecessor. If you pay attention and delve into the details, you will see a man who has lied to us but, more importantly he lies to himself and maintains his reality outside of the sphere we "small people" live. NObama has strengthened the executive branches ability to "disappear" people domestically and abroad. Under the guise of national security the executive branch can prevent any and all inquiry, oversight, and challenge to it's "authority." JUST LIKE IRAN. Hence, OBAMA=BUSH. Ask yourself, why does government need the ability to "preventively detain someone secretly, and indefinitely without oversight or challenge? What interest of this nation requires that activity? What threat does it diminish? The threat of human rights poses to those in charge. The far right opposes Obama because a black man has the power.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:24 PM on 07/11/2009
Big Brother, Big Business documentary explains alot. Although they try to downplay how much the government is involved. They do admit to being contracted by Cheney within weeks of 9-11. They are mostly data mining. Keeping your information forever in some cases.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:55 PM on 07/11/2009
Bush AUTHORIZED this - they even called it the "President's Surveillance Program".

Bush needs to be PROSECUTED.

If Obama feels the need to intervene, let him pardon or commute Bush's sentence - and then suffer the political consequences!
.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:28 PM on 07/11/2009
"The notion that basically one person at the Justice Department, John Yoo, and Hayden and the vice president's office were running a program around the laws that Congress passed, including a reinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment, is mind boggling,"

NOT mind boggling to those of us who can recognize a traitorous snake when we see one.
.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
roncraw
02:28 PM on 07/11/2009
Has anyone heard Fox News even report about this?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Heavy
02:56 PM on 07/11/2009
Why would they. Murdoch has his own program in the UK
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:25 PM on 07/11/2009
"But Harman said that when she had asked Gonzales two years earlier [in 2005] if the government was conducting any other undisclosed intelligence activities, he denied it.

"He looked me in the eye and said 'no,'" she said Friday.

Robert Bork Jr., Gonzales' spokesman, said, "It has clearly been determined that he did not intend to mislead anyone." "

HorseChips! I say PROSECUTE! Lying to congress is a felony!
.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:23 PM on 07/11/2009
"The report says it's unclear how much valuable intelligence the program has yielded."

I'm sure it generated HUGE MOUNTAINS of highly valuable POLITICAL intelligence, perfect for the purpose of blackmailing people.
.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnHKennedy
02:07 PM on 07/11/2009
WE'RE GETTING MADDER ALL THE TIME!!!

The Next Two Elections Will BE Interesting for Obama and Congressional Democrats
IF THEY DON'T DO SOME SERIOUS INVESTIGATING
And PROSECUTING.

Enough violations of our Federal Laws and our Constitution
for a blind man to see.

Keep the pressure on the Democrats to investigate and Prosecute.

SIGN THE PETITION
calling for a special prosecutor at ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

Over 250,000 have signed
Join them and call yourself a Patrio
02:00 PM on 07/11/2009
Why isn't the entire Bush Crime Family in jail by now?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:54 PM on 07/11/2009
Russell Tice revealed this in May of 2007. This should be a surprise to no one, including Keith Olberman who appeared surprised on his show last night. Keith has interviewed Tice more than once.

If you google tice wiretapping there are over 34,000 hits.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Birdman
02:05 PM on 07/11/2009
Ummm you should read a bit more, this goes WAY beyond wire tapping what exactly, they are not saying. The wiretapping everyine knows about at least in the sense that Bush CLAIMS it was only calls to foreign countries. Some have stated though that key politicians were also wire tapped. I guess Bush felt they were terrorists too. In any case this program is more than wiretaps what exactly was done who knows, nor will we likely know, there are still too many protecting the Bush adminsration under the guise of national security. Which I for one am not buying, it is too convinient to claim national security as an excuse to violate the constitution. Also to argue that anything is acceptable to protect us is silly, becasue like anyone, or anything, rules are put in place to prevent abuse. Obviously who Bush spyed on, how, and why will be something we all might know in 30+ years.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:14 PM on 07/11/2009
I believe Tice spoke of data mining also.
01:08 PM on 07/11/2009
Did I mention that President Obama supported former President Bush's wiretapping program?

"I think right now, the Bush people are bringing out their mission-accomplished sign, because they've not only gotten Obama to protect Bush and Cheney and others from any criminal investigation on torture, but he's now gone even further than they did in the protection of unlawful surveillance. This is the ultimate victory for the Bush officials. They have Barack Obama adopting the same extremist arguments, and in fact exceeding the extremist arguments made by President Bush...You cannot any longer suggest that President Obama is advancing the civil liberties and the privacy interests that he promised to advance. This is a terrible roll-back. It's a terrible decision."

http://www.examiner.com/x-7517-Seattle-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m4d14-Obama-supports-Bushs-wiretapping-program
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brandnewstuff
12:46 PM on 07/11/2009
A dallas based telecom INC and a 32 year old white male--of course Panetta would be foolish to hide this-- as emails of the data mining that explioted american citzens and lied to congress- pushing back at texas white men
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
lazercat2008
12:26 PM on 07/11/2009
Wireless wiretapping fees 5 billion, dedicated government employees 7 billion, full time surveillence and oversight, 1 billion, warm and fuzzy feeling, priceless.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
12:21 PM on 07/11/2009
[
House Democrats are pressing for legislation that would expand congressional access to secret intelligence briefings, but the White House has threatened to veto it.
]

I want to know more about this. Existing law already requires CIA to keep Congress informed better than it did in the Bush administration, but no report that I've seen offers the rationale, only the statement that "the White House has threatened to veto it."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Birdman
02:12 PM on 07/11/2009
It is not apparent what the bill entails or why Obama would veto it, but you are quite correct that the CIA has to inform congress on its operations. The only problem is none of this is being done by the CIA, point of fact the article states that the CIA was unaware of the extent of the program and under utilized the information that was available. The whitehouse and the NSA are the ones behind this program, course that still does not mean that at least the intelligence committee doesn't have to sign off on it.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:42 PM on 07/11/2009
You're conflating the CIA and FBI. Take a re-read...
.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:47 PM on 07/11/2009
I tend to agree with President Obama on this one. Giving 40 members of Congress acces to top secret intelligence is to risky. Maybe it should be expanded to more than the Gang of 8, but 40 is to many. Some of them would use it against the party in power. They all tend to have diaherra of the mouth.