Posted by D. Cupples | Since 2005, Verizon repeatedly handed customer records to federal authorities without a warrant -- apparently, not just terrorist-related records. From today's WaPo via Memeorandum:
"Verizon also disclosed that the FBI, using administrative subpoenas, sought information identifying not just a person making a call, but all the people that customer called, as well as the people those people called....
"The disclosures, in a letter from Verizon to three Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee investigating the carriers' participation in government surveillance programs, demonstrated the willingness of telecom companies to comply with government requests for data, even, at times, without traditional legal supporting documents." (See Verizon's letter.)
Here's one dot to connect: an audit revealed in June that the FBI repeatedly violated its own rules when gathering data on Americans' phone calls, emails and financial transactions.
Another dot: new evidence suggests the Bush Administration sought wiretapping help from one company before September 11th, 2001 -- though, officials claimed that domestic-spying grew out of the 9/11 attacks. There's yet another dot:...
Citing a January 2006 press release, Salon points out that President Bush said this about warrantless-wiretapping:
"This is a limited program designed to prevent attacks on the United States of America. And I repeat, limited. And it's limited to calls from outside the United States to calls within the United States. . . . [involving] numbers of known al-Qaida members or affiliates."
If that were the case, why did Administration officials ever seek records of Sally's calls to her friends and family members, followed by records of their calls to all their friends and families?
These dots matter now, as Congress debates whether to give legal immunity from privacy lawsuits to telecom companies that had (perhaps illegally) helped with the Administration's warrantless wiretapping (BN-Politics-3). President Bush began pushing for this immunity two months ago. (MSNBC)
Keep context in mind: the Bush Administration is far more fond of claiming executive privilege than openly disclosing facts to the public. At least one good thing has come out of privacy lawsuits: evidence of what telecoms and the Bush Administration have been up to.
If Congress gives blanket immunity to telecoms, how will we taxpayers find out how our money is really being spent?
Comments