Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Old Obama Vs. New Obama on Warrantless Wiretapping

Posted by John Nichols, TheNation.com at 8:45 AM on June 18, 2009.


In a letter to president Obama, Sen. Russ Feingold issues a stern warning about his dangerously shifting positions on wiretapping.
nsa

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

When Barack Obama was running for the United States Senate in 2004, he said that he saw U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, as his legislative role model.

Obama told me five years ago that he wanted to emulate Feingold as a defender of civil liberties and the Constitution, especially when it came to matters of protecting the right to privacy that was so under assault during the Bush-Cheney interregnum.

After his election as the junior senator from Illinois, Obama did work with Feingold on a number of issues and joined the Wisconsin progressive in boldly and unequivocally asserting that the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program was "illegal".

But now, Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, has asserted in a speech, and restated in a response to a reporter's question, that Bush-Cheney warrantless wiretapping program "wasn't illegal."

Feingold wants to know which side the president is on; that of Senator Obama, who said warrantless wiretapping was "illegal" or that of the Obama administration intelligence director who says it "wasn't illegal."

Here's Feingold's latest letter to the president:

Dear Mr. President,

I am writing to reiterate my request for you to formally and promptly renounce the assertions of executive authority made by the Bush Administration with regard to warrantless wiretapping. As a United States Senator, you stated clearly and correctly that the warrantless wiretapping program was illegal. Your Attorney General expressed the same view, both as a private citizen and at his confirmation hearing.

It is my hope that you will formally confirm this position as president, which is why I sent you a letter on April 29, 2009, urging your administration to withdraw the unclassified and highly flawed January 19, 2006, Department of Justice Legal Authorities Supporting the Activities of the National Security Agency Described by the President ("NSA Legal Authorities White Paper"), as well as to withdraw and declassify any other memoranda providing legal justifications for the program. Particularly in light of two recent events, I am concerned that failure to take these steps may be construed by those who work for you as an indication that these justifications were and remain valid.

On June 8, Director of National Intelligence Blair asserted in a speech and in response to a question from a reporter that the warrantless wiretapping program "wasn't illegal." His office subsequently clarified that he did not intend to make a legal judgment and that he had meant to convey only that the program was authorized by the president and the Department of Justice. Nonetheless, Director Blair's remarks – which directly contravene your earlier position, as well as the position of Attorney General Holder – risk conveying to the Intelligence Community, whose job it is to explore legally available surveillance options, that not complying with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act may be such an option. Moreover, his "clarification" highlights the need to formally renounce the legal justification that the "White Paper" provides.

In addition, I asked your nominee to be General Counsel for the Director of National Intelligence, whether, based on the "White Paper" and other public sources, he believed that the warrantless wiretapping program was legal. His written response to my question, which was presumably vetted by your administration, indicated that, because the program was classified, he could not offer an opinion. Should he be confirmed, this position, too, risks conveying to the Intelligence Community that there may be classified justifications for not complying with FISA. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee who has seen all of the legal justifications, classified and unclassified, that were offered in defense of the warrantless wiretapping program, I strongly disagree with this implication.

As president, you have spoken clearly on the importance of the rule of law and have taken action in a number of areas, such as torture, that have reassured the American people and provided much-needed clarity to the Intelligence Community and the rest of the executive branch. For these reasons, I strongly urge you to formally renounce the legal arguments behind the previous administration's warrantless wiretapping and to demonstrate again your clear commitment to the rule of law in this area.
Thank you for considering my views on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Russell D. Feingold
UNITED STATES SENATOR

President Obama needs to pause and consider the message from the man he once hailed as a role model.

The Barack Obama of 2004 was right -- about Feingold and civil liberties.

The Barack Obama of 2009 needs to get back in touch with his better angels.

Digg!

Tagged as: barack obama, fisa, russ feingold, warrantless wiretapping

John Nichols writes about politics for The Nation magazine as its Washington correspondent.


Senate Votes to Move Forward on Health-Care Bill: McCain Accuses Reid of Criminal Scheme
In debate leading to vote, McCain compared Reid to Madoff, Hatch invoked socialism, and Lincoln promised trouble ahead
Post by Adele Stan. November 21, 2009.
ACORN: Another Super Villain with Super Powers
For the trembling patriots of the right.
Post by Steve M.. November 21, 2009.
Tiny Michigan Town Tells Liz Cheney to Take her Fearmongering Elsewhere
Someplace where they're all wusses.
Post by BarbinMD. November 21, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Criminals
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jun 18, 2009 8:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama says that warrantless wiretapping is "legal" because if it weren't legal, Obama himself would get impeached (or worse) for continuing Bush's Big Brother crimes against Americans.

(Keep this in mind when you realize that Obama could pick several more Supreme Court judges.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Feingold needs to get a clue about O-blah-blah
Posted by: DCostello2 on Jun 18, 2009 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama voted in FAVOR of the new FISA and for giving immunity to the telecoms when he was a Senator. Did Feingold call him on it then??? Why bother now? This 'new' Obama is the REAL Obama. Read his book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why bother now? Posted by: Sister_Lauren
What is he waiting for?
Posted by: Mrs. Jefferson on Jun 18, 2009 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a member of Congress who swore an oath of office to defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic, he needs to start impeachment hearings against Obama. This is a Constitutional crisis carried on as in the Bush administration. We can't go on like this another year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama lacks a moral center and that worries me a great deal
Posted by: Paul_C on Jun 18, 2009 7:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He bends this way and that as the wind blows, so his enemies have learned to simply take a hard line on everything and he will fall in line. Did you think that was a coincidence?

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The government will justify wiretapping as long as we maintain the lies of 911
Posted by: pfgetty on Jun 19, 2009 5:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the war on terror, wiretapping seems to be a necessity. That is how it is presented to us.
All they have to do is bring up the horrors of 911, and most Americans will then feel that, well, I guess it is just a compromise........what else can we do?
And they have a point. If attacks like 911 could be prevented from happening, and if they really are a threat, then maybe we should not complain so much about wiretapping.

But all of this is nonsense because 911 was NOT a terrorist attack. It was planned, executed, and covered up by our own government officials. We know this. It is proven.

And so wiretapping has no place in America. It is not justified. It is wrong, and unConstitutional. And the war on terror is a fraud.

The only problem with this answer to wiretapping is that the truth of 911 is censored in the news, and that includes Alternet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Their all a bunch of criminals.
Posted by: ronniejw on Jun 19, 2009 7:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George Bush, Barack Obama: once your seen one politician you’ve seen them all, their all a bunch of criminals. The US government is a Fascist government. It’s time for a real change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it still going on?
Posted by: greg451 on Jul 10, 2009 8:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does anyone know if this warrantless wiretapping/collecting still going on? Aren't they supposed to be going to the FISA court now before investigating anyone? Are they still collecting/sorting everything domestically or just outside the country?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]