So, I’ve started reading a new book. It came in the mail from the publisher (I ordered it directly from West Publishing) on Friday and I am slowly sinking my teeth into it.
Emptywheel and I had a brief conversation about whether or not this book would be suitable for Book Salon, and it probably isn’t. You see this book is an over 500 page (maybe 1,000 page if you count the appendices) reference book for lawyers. Not really a general audience kind of book.
So, why am I writing about it anyway? Because this book, called National Security Investigations and Prosecutions, by David Kris and Douglas Wilson appears to be the most up to date, comprehensive treatise on this area of law yet available.
Actually, the title is somewhat misleading, because the book covers much more than simply National Security investigations and Prosecutions. Much, much more. It includes chapters on not only FISA surveillance, but other methods of both electronic and physical surveillance. This is also a superb primer on investigative techniques.
The book lays out the historical context of how these techniques developed, traditional uses and restraints upon them. It talks about how the National Security community was formed and how it developed. This treatise is a history book, it’s a training manual of sophisticated investigative techniques, and it is also a roadmap for the intersection of intelligence investigations and the Constitution. It’s got it all, baby.
The summary of contents is itself educational.
Unfortunately, the book is not available to me in electronic form, so all quotes will be laboriously hand typed by me. I tell you this, so you will not mis-attribute any typos in the quotes to sloppy work by the authors or editors or publishers. It will merely be my usual lousy typing.
As the preface by the Hon. Royce Lamberth, former presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the FISA court) points out
The book offers a special advantage for those who seek to understand, influence, or create national security law and policy: in exchange for an initial investment of careful review, it pays an enduring dividend of informed opinion.
[emphasis mine]
Judge Lamberth went on to describe the book as
….the single best treatment of the topic that I have ever seen. Rich in scholarly analysis, it is also highly practical and impartial. The seamless integration and clear exposition of legal theory, public policy and operational reality is unique to the field, and should serve as a crucial buttress to wise and effective legislation, executive action and judical review.
[again, emphasis mine]
I don’t want to see my Members of Congress ignorantly voting for any more sledge hammer of national security legislation that just atomizes our Constitutionally protected freedoms. The kind of crap legislative products we have seen out Congress since 9-11.
I am sick of bills drafted in ways that overlap and contradict existing law, bills they don’t read or don’t understand the contents of, bills whose actual language does not do what the press release and bill summary claim it does. I want them to craft and vote for surgical and precise legislation that brings the greatest amount of investigative and prosecutorial bang for the buck, while doing the least and only unavoidable violence to the Bill of Rights.
In order for that to happen, EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS needs to educate themselves about this area of law and how it plays out operationally. In order to be minimally qualified to vote upon this kind of legislation, they need to have this book on their shelves. And they need to refer to it often.
By the time I get around to asking the authors to sign it, my copy of this book is going to be so covered in multiple colors of highlighter, tipped with sticky flags and post-its and generally showing all the signs of the Velveteen Rabbit treatment, that the authors might be afraid to touch the, soon to be grimy with use, tome.
This is going to sound funny, but considering that it is a scholarly work, and meant for a narrow field, it is a surprisingly pleasant and accessible read so far. OK, maybe not beach reading (though I may take there this afternoon), but certainly something you don’t necessarily have to be a lawyer to understand.
So, listen up beloved and esteemed members of both Houses, before you try to “fix” all the legislative messes you have made with respect to National Security Law, take a little time to ACTUALLY LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO. It will make things so much easier for you, and so much less frustrating for the rest of us.
[Note to Thompson West publishing: if you don't put an image of the book's cover online, no one can show what the book looks like. This is an important book and deserves intelligent marketing. At the very least, basic information should be available so that somebody can get the word out.]
Related posts:
- FDL Book Salon Discusses “The Test Of Our Times” With Gov. Tom Ridge
- When and To What Degree Was John Ashcroft Read Into the Illegal Surveillance Program?
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes David Cole, Torture Memos: Rationalizing the Unthinkable
- Silvestre Reyes: CIA Lied to Congress
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes William Greider: Secrets of the Temple





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

belabor the zed
dos?
Read firs, then saw a zed opp. Not?
They can read?
not, Gnome…
This is exactly where the online community is most valuable. If people like EW and LHP are digesting this material and can explain it to the rest of us, then certainly aids to congress critters can be part of that educational effort. I don’t expect that any member of congress would have the time or the ability to read a book like this, but she/he has aids who are responsible for gathering data in this arena. After all that is what lobbyists do – fill the aid and then the congressperson with their information.
OldCoastie @ 5
:-(
Online bio for Doug Wilson.
What a treasure. Thank you for finding it, LHP.
Myrtle June @ 4
I was wondering whether we should go for a more modest suggestion, such as “every member of Congress should read a book.” But that’s a little broad. We need to steer them away from pop-up books, sticker books, and anything where you flip the pages quickly to watch a cartoon.
According to the publisher’s website, if those members of Congress order the book now, the shipping is free.
At a bare minimum, members of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees certainly ought to be interested in this.
Gnome de Plume @ 6
The beauty of the format the authors chose : a looseleaf service format” is that each chapter is like it’s own little Congressional Research Service report.
It is literally in a looseleaf binder (so that pages can be replaced and updated as the law chnages), so a Congresscritter could take just the chapter relevant to the matter inder consideration, and read it in an evening.
Please do click through to the chapter summary, you will be more knowledgeable about National Security law in only one day!
Bravo looseheadprop! How would we manage without you. Am tempted to buy a gift copy for Speaker Pelosi – but doubt she’d find time to read it. Sigh.
Am reposting an OT comment that was EPUed last thread.
OT yet important info for the progressive netroots and especially FDL community.
Did you know you can hit the paypal donor link at the top of every post and contribute any amount and designate your contribution to our fearless founder Jane toward her nightmarish medical expenses?
Contribute what you can and as often as you can. I just paypaled a hundred bucks and hope someone might match it by the end of the day. ;~)
LHP
Once again you’ve shared your most valuable insight with the rest of us. While not a lawyer, I’ve always valued the Constitutional
law courses I took in the bad old days (way back in the 60’s) and look forward to this ‘tome’ and hope that I’ll never hear some legislator say, “Of course we don’t read these ‘things,’” as if that were perfectly acceptable. My respect for you increases every day. As I’ve said before, never has it been my privilege to have encountered as many gifted, talented and erudite people as I meet here.
I got EPU’ed so here it is and then I am going out and enjoying the remains of the day.
OT continuing a theme I touched on in the last thread, the people at the NYT are idiots.
Carl Hulse has an article on Lamar ALexander. It begins:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09…..kUYac6eDLA
When Democrats don’t take a stand on an issue they are wishy-washy. When a Republican does the same thing, he’s a consensus builder.
Hulse describes Alexander as seeking a middle path. He supports the Iraq study group report but doesn’t want a timetable. He never says anywhere how this can be accomplished or what the h*ll this really means.
The Iraq Study report was never a practical document. Its recommendations could only be put into effect if you presupposed the recommendations had already been put into effect. It was at best a means to give political cover for a withdrawal. Bush rejected that cover. Now the ISG report is apparently being resurrected by mealy-mouthed politicians of both parties as some kind of a talisman, not to get us out of Iraq but to save their political skins. I wonder how many of them have actually read it.
But what really irks me about this story on Alexander and his “struggle” is that Hulse never mentions that Alexander is up for re-election in 2008. Yeah, I bet that has nothing to do with his position on Iraq, not a thing.
Oh, yes, and if kirk murphy is still around. You can get to my list by clicking on my name and the list is up to 244. I left this also at the end of the last thread.
You’re right, LHP, just going through the table of contents and looking up the terms is something of an education. It’s unfortunate that very few congresspeople or their staffs will become familiar with this area of law. The growing trends of government secrecy and government surveillance don’t portend well for us, I think.
A while back, there was a DC insider “tell-all” book, and right after it came out, Richard Armitage was testifying on Capitol Hill. One of the questioners asked Armitage if he had read the book yet. “Well,” he said sheepishly, “I’ve given it a DC read.” The questioner laughed, and said “you mean you went to the index, to see where your name came up, and the names of your friends?” “Right,” laughed Armitage, as did everyone else in the room.
So . . . like a good firepup, I went to the index here to see what cases and such they cited. Sure enough, there are five different case references to US v Libby.
LHP, have you or Marcy checked them out to see what Kris and Wilson have to say about Reggie, Fitz, and Team Irving’s work?
Time to put in an order to West.
OT: Joy in Met-land. Pedro was effective in his debut. Five innings, three runs (two earned), five hits, four strikeouts. Mets lead Cincinnati, 7-3, top of the seventh. Last time I checked, Atlanta led Philly, 4-1, in the sixth.
Sounds like a total dork-fest.
I want one.
alton @ 8
Thank you alton for the link. WHy didn’t I see that on the Westsite? If you hit ‘refresh” you will see that somebody (who I suspect to be Jane) fixed the links into the post and generally glammed the front page up for me.
Unfortunately, the book is not available to me in electronic form, so all quotes will be laboriously hand typed by me
Any relation to Labor Day?
Peterr @ 17
I don’t think marcy has a copy yet. And I was going to try to read it front to back. Just for the pleasure of it.
Yes, I have become that much of a geek. (There was time, back in HS and College when I could e considered cool. No more.)
I’ve read other stuff Kris has writtenand although you can skip around (and this book seemes to be set up to facilitate that) I found that I got much more out of it when I read read front to back.
burnspbesq @ 18
Anybody kick sand in the umpire’s eyes?
I was going to say, hey, FDL should organize to send copies to their congresspeople. And then I saw it was a $150.00 book. Yeesh. Not a Book Salon book on that criterion alone, methinks.
By this price point I infer they mean it to be bought primarily by law libraries (and perhaps law students). In which case, they probably don’t need to market it in the same ways as they would a mass-market book.
To save a bit of typing, here’s the preliminary or summary memo to this looseleaf tome:
Legal memorandum of David S. Kris, former Deputy Attorney General for national security
More citations appended to this article.
looseheadprop @ 23
Naw. Only Republicans do that.
Heal (with) this book!
As the Congress is so enamoured of prayer breakfasts, can we send a few Fire Dog preachers up to the Hill speaking the gospel of Constitutional salvation?
Rev. Billy for the first ten Amendments?
FDL is becoming it’s own Fahrenheit 451 community.
looseheadprop @ 22
They don’t let you do that in baseball, for some reason.
BTW, you can keep track of all that stuff here:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/scoreboard/20070903.html
It refreshes automatically every minute or so.
kirk murphy @ 27
Would that be you, Rev. Murphy?
Cujo359 @ 29
I’m watching the Mets game on mlb.tv, and switching back and forth between FDL and the MLB scoreboard page on espn.com.
I reallllllly like Thom Brenneman, the Reds announcer. He’s about as good as they come.
More joy: Seattle is KILLING the Yankees.
Scarecrow @ 28
With baseball on plasma screens.
LHP – You vixen. EW told me about this book a week or two back (I think after talking to you) and I got around to ordering it end of last week. Now I am jealous you are actually reading it and I am not. Aaarrrgh. Glad to hear it is worth the price. Extra beauty in that I can write it off as a business expense; heh heh. That ought to drive Bushco crazy…
caia @ 24
I think that Judge Lambeth (in the quote above) described the market for this bok pretty well. Government types INLCUDING MEMBERS OF CONGRESS (hint hint), telcoms and other communications service providers, ACLU, law schools, and firms that represent defendants, or service providers.
ANd folks Like me who are just facinated by this stuff.
Oh, I left out a crucial catagory–any reporter who is covering these kinds of stories.
Frnakly, it is a pleasent read so far. A lay person could get a lot out of it.
Mmm. More geeky goodness.
This one sounds like it’s worth reading aloud for the purposes of creating podcasts for too-busy members of Congress…
I’m so glad you’ll keep us in the know, LHP! It’s delightful that you enjoy this material and share.
OT, the Iraqis are cheering the fact that the British skedaddled via Yahoo.
“This is a victory for honest resistance. It is a pleasure (to see the troops go),” said trader Ahmed Ali Omar, 35. “We had long been wishing for the occupier to go so that stability can be restored.”
Army officer Sadoun Hami was even more jubilant.
“We are happy to be rid of the British. They were harrassing us in the streets and raided our houses and arrested our sons. We now want to see them out of greater Basra,” he said.
Rayne @ 34
I think if you want to get Congress interested, you’d better hope the thing has pictures.
Rayne @ 35
Ding!
Cujo359 @ 37
For many of the Republicans, scratch’n’sniff would be an attraction.
alank @ 25
Isn’t that WaPo PDF the Q&A associated with Kris’ s testimony in the Senate? I’m not seeing that in the Table of Contents. Nor do I find it by flipping around the appendices. It is not the forward.
I think you have the SJC stuff, which is very good stuff indeed.
EvilDrPuma @ 39
Perhaps we can pass it to them under a stall divider…
Hugh @ 15
Alexander as consensus seeker? Too bad he hasn’t earned any respect in the Senate.
EvilDrPuma @ 39
Screw them. I’m not worried about them. They obviously can’t govern and are unrepentent, unrecoverable; I’m not throwing pearls after swine.
LHP
Can it be made into a movie?
A musical?
I’m looking over EO 12333 now, which is mentioned by Kris and Wilson. The TOC refers to a section 2.5, but I’m just not seeing one in the text, only paragraphs (a) thru (d). Am I missing something?
This order sets up a National Counterrorism Center, BTW. It’s a necessary step, I think, but given the Bush Administration’s predelictions, it has some rather frightening implications.
Jonathan @ 44
It could be a Looseheadprop Production.
bmaz @ 33
I have been waiting for htis book to come uot for months. It got stalled in the vetiing process at DOJ and I was veryfrustrated.
however, sometimes things happen for a reason.
The timing of it’s release could not be more perfect. Pelosi want Congress to clean up the mess it has made of NSL? Well, this is the PERFECT TIME to create some buzz and get the Congress critters to pay some attention and get themselves educated enough to actually do some fixing.
We have situation where Sen. Rockefellers complains that he does not have enough knowledge to understand what he is being briefed inon.
you have these Congress critters buying the bovine fertilizer thrown at them in briefings that flatly contradicts the plain meaning of what they are asked to vote for.
Thisis a very read-able book. they can educate themselves and not be dependant on their briefers.
it will enable them too ask probing questions and recognize bullshit whrn they see it.
knowledge is power.
Rayne @ 35
You know, there are descrete paragraphs that might work for that
Bob in Hawaii,
If you’re around, I left a response to your comment down stairs.
The overall view of the article isn’t pessimistic in my opinion.
Really, I didn’t mean to bum on your holiday, dude.
Cujo359 @ 37
Since KO doesn’t do author interviews too often. I think I should send a shout out to John Stewart and Stphen Clobert.
I have never seen Doug Wilson speak, but I have seen Kris, and he is pithy and spekas i colorful pros and seems tohave a sense of humor.
BOOK HIM.
EvilDrPuma @ 10
Bet Sen Craig wishes he’d read this one.
Hmm. Pop-up versions may catch Sen McConnell (R-Queensland); Sen Graham (R-Tinkerbell’s Castle); Sen. Piddles (R-Changing Station); and Rep. McHenry’s (R-Rough Trade) eyes.*
Of course, to catch Rep. McHenry’s attention one would have to compete with his “Serving the Member” program..and the handsome young adult men it brings to his home for sleepovers.
Sounds like a great audience at a teachable moment – surveillance sees through closet walls.
(* or other mucosal surfaces.)
Jonathan @ 44
For it’s movie prospects, you gotta talk to Jane.
A musical,eh? I can envision a big productionnumber with lots of dancers to the tune of ” there is no united States ‘Department of National Security’.” on page 1-3!
Now I have the giggles.
looseheadprop @ 47
It is going to take a whale of an effort by all of us to get the nitwits to read something like this. I have an analogous set on Interrogation Methods and Techniques. They clearly didn’t read that either….
Hitchens is on Book tv if you want to check it out. He’s pimping his new book, God IS Not Great. He’s got some interesting, often conflicted views – not on religion per se, but on abortion, the Clintons, Bush’s, the Iraq war, Saddam and Mother Theresa.
I’m wondering if Hitchens is simply whoring for dollars. He acknowleges that the conflicted Mother Theresa kept women in poverty via lack of access to birth control, yet he is opposed to abortion except in extreme cases.
Real hard to hear him with the heavy british accent and the trailing off of his sentences as it were.
All in all, I don’t think he’s done liberals many favors with his Iraq war/removal of Saddam at all costs meme or his attacks on the Clintons and the handling of the Shrub with kidd gloves by comparison.
alank @ 25
Thanks, alank for the links. Good stuff.
Worth some discussion perhaps? A good question
might be: What is meant by the term ‘the government’?
looseheadprop @ 34
Did someone say SPOTLIGHT?
With a click of a mouse, you can send this post along with a little note of your own to your favorite reporter, suggesting that maybe THEIR expense account could cover this (or like bmaz, they could write it off as a business expense).
Elliott @ 30
I was thinking real clergy – far be it from be to pretend when we’re blessed with the real deal here at that Lake.
It would be a great activist gig, though….
What a hoot.
Revival meetings for the Church of the Constitution.
“Have you been saaaaaaaaving…the Constitution?
Have You been saaaaaaaaaaaaving…the CONSTITUTION?
Have YOU been saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaving…THE CONSTITUITON?
Sing it to me, people…
Have you been saaaaaaving the Republic?…..”
All done under the protection of religious speech, right outside the Dome of the
Prayer BreakfastGlobal CapitalCongresscritters.Cujo359 @ 45
I’m not ure which 2.5 you are referring to .
2.5 in the book has to do with misusing NSL investigations for politcal purposes (like spying on MLK and Eleanor Roosevelt) and about the Church Commttee report.
Elliott @ 46
Nah, Jane does all the movie producing around here. me, I’m in charge of bad typing.
hackworth @ 54
Yes.
Thanks for another round of simple answers… *g*
looseheadprop @ 56
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. Part II, Sec. 16 of K and W is entitled “Surveillance and Searches Abroad—Section 2.5 of Executive Order 12333″. There is no section 2.5 of that EO in the online version that I can see.
Peterr
Spotlight.
Duh, slaps self on forehead.
Ahmmm…LHP? I was just wondering about something that kicked off because of your posting.
You most effectively make the point that our Congress-critters and their staff, really ought to be a tad bit more knowledgable, and certainly more diligent, when they create these law thingies.
Now since many a law has been crafted in its entirety by folks other than Congress-critters and their staff; you know, folks like friggin’ lobbyists, the idea that someone other than Congress-critters and their staff could do this, brought the following “lightbulb” to my mind:
Why not us?
Seriously, there are plenty of fine legal eagles hangin’ in our blogosphere including yourself, Christy, bmaz, Mary and a host of others.
What I’m getting to here is the idea that if we, the people, find that odious FISA Update
Surrender your Bill of Rightsbill so objectionable, then why not craft something ourselves that does the job right?Sounds like more of a Wiki-kind of thing, but why aren’t we breaking this new ground ourselves?
After all, we are bloggers and don’t we rule the universe now?
Awesome book, LHP! One question tho, what’s the FBI Woods Procedures?
hackworth @ 54
What do you expect from an alkie ex-trostskyite? The man uses words well, but there’s nothing there.
Someone pointed me to one of his articles on the Islamification (or something) of England as an example of why we must all be vewy afwaid. The first page was “I recently went back to the neighborhood I grew up in, and it had changed…”.
Yeah, well I went back to the neighborhood I grew up in, and it had changed, too. For one thing, everything was much, much smaller. Jeez…
Church of the Divine Constitution. Parishioners read and study articles instead of verses. Ministers arrange their sermons based on the week’s Constitution bashing.
Tax deductible contributions collected go to education of the Constitutionally challenged among us.
Kirk, you rawk!
Loo Hoo. @ 65
Wholly secular, though…!!!
kirk murphy @ 57
Your tax exempt status wouldn’t last 10 minutes.
demi @ 49
Got it. Thanks!
Bob in HI
OK, LHP:
Here’s a question I posted while working through and as a part of one of my diaries over at TalkLeft* (”Mueller’s Unbarking Dog”); what does the new treatise say about this question (beyond my comment at the end):
So, does CIPA make a criminal FISA violation unprosecutable?
-
* N.B.: I can never get my links to work in the text of these comments here, for whatever reason. All I get is code…. Like this:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/8/17/172915/671Cujo359 @ 59
Oh, cripes, nevermind. That’s an EO that refers to EO12333. This EO doesn’t have a number, at least not on the page I’m looking at, so I just assumed. Here’s a (bad) online version of the real thing:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Key…..1981.order
Mad Dogs @ 62
Precisely – that is, in part, the answer to my question. What, precisely, IS ‘the government’? ‘New ground …’ with profound insight into what we DON’T want. I’m for participatory democracy. Period!
scribe @ 69
Impeachment proceedings would eradicate any and all impediments…!!! ;-)
Cujo359 @ 61
Took a little digging to ind an answer to your question. You are in chapter 16 which has note indicating that the fuller discussion of EO 12333 is in chapter 2.
So I went to chapter 2 whre after some really intersting reading about CIA abuses I found the following footnote:
I hand typed that “link” so I’m not sure if it’s gonna work.
But I think the answer to your question is that when they change the EO, they changed to numbering of the paragraphs.
kirk murphy @ 57
Don’t laugh. One of the most uplifting parts of the whole Watergate fall-out was that Constitutionalism had triumphed over power and greed. I felt positively giddy about how wonderful it was that the American people in general, and Congress in particular, revered the Constitution so much. I long for those days, now.
The Constitution doesn’t seem much revered in the WH now, or in Congress, or even in the public, and that seems to be part of the problem.
But next week is Constitution week. I think we need a revival meeting.
Bob in HI
CTuttle @ 63
The “Woods Procedures” are, in a very rough nutshell, a set of internal protocols for the FBI to have their field agents insure and verify the accuracy of FISA applications.
kirk murphy @ 56
Lordy, I’m thinking you got it!
Yikes! The book is 150 smackaroos.. Do they have the installment plan? *s*
My inner geek is sorely tempted.
Mad Dogs @ 63
Yes– You can use Wikispaces for a project like that. Its what I use for Priming the Pump.
Bob in HI
looseheadprop @ 12
Since the book is in looseleaf format, it can easily scanned and OCR’d, which would largely overcome LHP’s lament:
Mad Dogs @ 63
And we are getting the knack of how to lobby for what we want…..
I’ve certainly heard worse ideas in my time.
As you may know, Bob in HI set up this wonderful wiki thing for doing draft Article of Impeachment. I have underutilized it b/c I am not familiar enough withthe format. Hell, half the time I can’t even get into the damn thing.
SO, bob sent me an email the other day where in he ffered to be like a wiki crutc. His idea being that I send him stuff in an email and he would intgrate it into the wiki for me.
maybe we need something like that to make it easy for folks.
I while back, a working group of lawyers drafted new implimentaion rules for NYS new voting systems. We had audit rules and verification procedures. It was much more comprehensive than any one person could have done on there own.While the bulk of the writing was done in several marathon session in a participant’s conference room, the tweeaking and finshingf work eas done by round robbib emails.
it was very effective. you wiki idea couls work something like that, but you need a ramrod to keep people on shcedule and to set deadlines and tasks.
Or the thing will tend to languish
bmaz @ 76
Thanx, Bmaz, my paralegal training wasn’t that extensive…!!! *g*
By the way, Peterr has a new thread up!!!
wigwam @ 80
You can scan and OCD for personal use, but do be careful about copyright infringement if you go beyond that. We are talking about a book written by lawyers, after all.
scribe @ 70
Congress needs to revisit CIPA. The WH is hiding behind it in a way that amounts to obstruction of justice.
Bob in HI
“Bush is also angry with Craig, a conservative who joined with Democrats in a filibuster to defeat permanent renewal of the Patriot Act. As a meeting recently, Bush referred to Craig as “a goddamned traitor” and told the National Republican Senatorial Committee to start recruiting someone to run against the Idaho Senator in 2008.”
http://www.opednews.com/articl…..nment_.htm
looseheadprop @ 72
Here’s 2.5 from the old version of EO 12333:
Even then, it looks to a non-lawyer like the Attorney General had broad discretionary powers.
I don’t see anything like that in the previous link I cited, so I’m pretty sure it’s a different EO. Sad that they can’t put the number on the page somewhere.
I get a “page not found” error from that NYT link. Have you tried it recently?
CTuttle @ 64
That refers to a “secret” memo written by Michael Woods in the FBI Genral Counsel’s Office in April 2001. Pre-9/11.
It was de-classifed in June 2002. The version in the appendix to the book is neat because it has all the hand written cross outs of the word “secret” and handwritten changes to reflect it’s declassification.
It gives you that being inside the agency kind of feel. A cute touch.
Anyway, the memo
scribe @ 70
You know, that is a good question and too deep for comment off the top of my head. But it may be fodder for post later in the week.
Of course, intrinsic to that answer woudl be whether or not other parts of the admin were part of the cover up.
nonetheless, PatFitz was able to get all kind sof stuff declassified for the Libby trial (which I realize was NOT aout a a fisa violation)
But with FISA, you have an actual court with real judges you can go to, to get things declassified in a way that you cannot with regular grey mail….
I’ve gotta give that a lot more thought. Or hope that an author shows up on one of these threads and bails me out.
Maybe we should get together for a “funds drive” so we can buy at least 49 copies of this book for our Democratic Senators. Holy Joe aint one of us anymore, and its so tough figuring out lately where his head starts and King George’s butt ends!
CTuttle @ 73
Whoohah!
CTuttle take the sword and cleaves the GordianKnot in two.
looseheadprop @ 88
These are the same submissions that were excoriated by the IG of DoJ for numerous violations, I assume…!!! Shoddy paperwork, inappropriate NSL usage, etc… Hmmm…
Mad Dogs @ 63
MadDogs, great idea.
This is exactly what industry does – drafts legislation for obedient Congresscritters to sign.
That’s how industry has made non-violent protests illegal acts of terrorism – by defining speech and other nion-violent acts as criminal behaviors via State/Federal law.
Most recent example is AETA “Animal Enterprise Anti-Terrorist Act”
Industry’s anti-Constitution shock troops in ALEC do the dirty work:
Oh – the provisions in AETA?
they criminalize just about all forms of public protest:
CTuttle @ 92
Percentage wise, there were not that many violations. And most of them came from field ofices that don’t use FISA that often. the biger problem was that Main FBI (in DC) didn’t have a tracking or oversight system to help these less experienced offices or to catch when they were doing it wrong. The NY field office had less than 1% applications/NSL letter with problems and those were mostly paperwork issues not substantive issue. NY file doffice howefver ahd it’s own inventory and tracking system,, which is why is had os few mistakes.
looseheadprop @ 12
I used to make this kind of looseleaf book for Thomson. This is the first time I have ever heard the word “beauty” applied to the format. ;)
Garrett @ 95
Hope it made you happy!
This format does lend itself to excerpting
Garrett >
It is a very functional & useful design for any material that changes regularly (think of the paper saved !).
Pilots subscribe to services (Jeppesen is the most well known) that provide update information for Instrument Flight Rule information like airports, approaches, nav aids etc in this format.
Design for use = beautiful
“Now is the time when we’ve got to steer by the stars and not by the lights of every passing ship.” – Omar Bradley
Hillary is a lawyer. I would think she’d glom on to this. But, that’s where I make my inevitable mistake about politicos. I think.
Coming in late here but I see two very powerful ideas unleashed in this thread (beyond the idea of all Congress folk/Congressional aides reading this book of course).
1) Podcast (MP3 file) of different sections of the material made available for those long aircraft rides over oceans and across country made by said Congress individuals. “Put it on your iPod” etc.
2) Bloggers writing legislation and passing it around (members of the public would LOVE this I think & probably would want to join in).
“If you don’t behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you behave.” – Bishop Fulton John Sheen
bmaz @ 41
Members of Congress can read? Sheesh! Ya coulda fooled me on that one!
Peterr @ 84
I was thinking in terms of eas of quoting, i.e., saving keystrokes.
Explain please:
OCR=
OCD=
?
looseheadprop @ 102
Optical character recognition.
You scan in a piece of printed text, run the software, and it converts it into a document for a word processor. (Depending on the software and the quality of the scan, you may or may not have to do a lot of proofreading to catch errors.)
Optical character recognition- my scanner had a program bundled with it- scan page or part of page of text, send it to program. text goes to word document. Hugely useful for teaching I’ve found. A lawyer friend intro-d me to it. She scanned a bunch of typical contracts to use bits and pieces for boilerplate.
aren’t there copyright issues with that?
Though in this case, it’s for the purpose of promoiting the origanial work, so that’s would fall under the fair use doctrine.
looseheadprop @ 106
Most serious office copying machines are actually a scanner plus printer with a small computer in between. Most of them can be hooked to a network and used independently as scanners, printers, and/or copiers.
Standalone autofeed duplex (two-sided) scanners run from $500 on up, depending on speed, reliability (e.g., double-feed detection), capacities etc. Fujitsu and Kodak seem to be the most respected brands. (scantastik.com has a good website for comparisons.)
I’m told that a lot of law offices scan everything in sight so that they can electronically search through documents. (I first heard of this being done by the Simpson defense team.)
looseheadprop @ 105
LHP- I only use it for scanning portions of text- mostly figure legends- from a textbook that the students are already required to buy for the course. I use parts for PowerPoints, and these are available only to class members. I assume this is “fair use”.
LHP, why don’t you get the IRISPen EXECUTIVE hand-held scan-to-text device? It’d quicken up the input. Check it out on MacMall.
Sounds like an interesting primer.
Since FDL is activist…could you put contact Harry Reid and contact Nancy Pelost on your website? I’m challenged to say the least so go to whitenoiseinsanity and with 2 clicks email Nancy. …which I just did with” Nixon was impeached for 17 illegal wiretaps. You say impeachment is off the table.Bush has wire tapped America. I’m so proud of the first woman speaker.”