Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

In the first Senate hearing on the controversial programme, which was set up secretly in 2002 and revealed publicly in December, Alberto Gonzales, the attorney-general, will say that the press accounts "are in almost every case, in one way or another, misinformed, confused or wrong," according to Time magazine, which has obtained documents outlining the planned testimony.

"Contrary to the speculation reflected in some media reporting, the terrorist surveillance programme is not a dragnet that sucks in all conversation and uses computer searches to pick out calls of interest," Mr Gonzales will say in response to questions raised by Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate judiciary committee. "No communications are intercepted unless first it is determined that one end of the call is outside of the country, and professional intelligence experts have probable cause [that is, 'reasonable grounds to believe'] that a part to the communication is a member or agent of al-Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist organisation."

Of course, we know that this is not true, as the Washington Post reported today:

Intelligence officers who eavesdropped on thousands of Americans in overseas calls under authority from President Bush have dismissed nearly all of them as potential suspects after hearing nothing pertinent to a terrorist threat, according to accounts from current and former government officials and private-sector sources with knowledge of the technologies in use.

The highlights of the Washington Post's story:

1.  The NSA's computers sifts through hundreds of thousands of faxes, email messages, and phone calls;

2.  Of those, thousands of communications are selected for review by NSA analysts;

3.  Of those, only a handful, perhaps a dozen or so, have warranted sufficient attention that follow-up surveillance was ordered (through the FISA court).

Gonzalez, however, will admit NONE of this, and, because the Administration refuses to turn over the most basic information about this program on the grounds that it is classified, the Senate will have little to question him with other than the Washington Post article, which is easy for a Bush apparatchik to dismiss as a product of the irresponsible liberal media.

Which is why that it is IMPERATIVE that the Senate aggressively call witnesses with first hand knowledge of the program who will actually insist on telling the truth, rather than just repeating administration talking points.  Without these witnesses, we simply will not be in a position to fully learn about and understand the program.  Here are some initial suggestions for witnesses:

1.  Former head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal counsel -- Jack Goldsmith.  He raised serious legal questions about the NSA's wiretapping program, which led to the program's temporary suspension in 2004.

2.  Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey.  He backed up Goldsmith's work, and refused to reauthorize the wiretapping program while Ashcroft was hospitalized.

3.  NSA whistleblower Russel Tice.  Tice was one of James Risen's primary sources for the NYT's original wiretapping story, and appears to know the ins and outs of the program and how it worked in practice.  He had serious concerns about the program's legality and its potential to invade the privacy of ordinary Americans.

These individuals constitute the bare minimum of witnesses who should be called to the hearing.  While much of their testimony will have to take place in closed session, their conclusions about the program's legality and the extent to which it invades American's privacy can be made public.  If  Senator Specter truly believes (as he said) that the NSA program "is in flat violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act," then it is incumbent on him to make the case to the public that this is an illegal program that must be stopped.  Calling witnesses who can testify to the program's illegality is, of course, a necessary predicate to making this showing.

If you live in Pennsylvania, you can contact Specter with your views on this subject here.