Comments (43)

modmom wrote on July 30, 2007 10:23 AM:

I sure wish Josh would attempt to get the NYT to clarify their statement that it was VP cheney who sent Gonzo/Card to Ashcroft's bedside. If this staatement is true-why wasn't it headlining news?

Steve5117 wrote on July 30, 2007 10:36 AM:

Gonzo said a couple of time that he was there on "behalf of the President" instead of a yes or no answer to the question af whether the VP sent him.

Slim Pickins wrote on July 30, 2007 10:39 AM:

The response was soooo very rehearsed and scripted, that surely whatever motivation lies behind that rehearsal and necessitated such parsing is worthy of examination.

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 10:42 AM:

According to posts yesterday on another Muck Thread, the big secret is that the data mining was outsourced to private companies, located overseas. So it was a giveaway to bushies, making them the contractors for this "intelligence service." The outsourcing likely began before 9/11, not after.

There's much more to this. Click my name for the Muck Thread. Then read down near the end. A post before midnight last night pretty much lays it out. Then you can go back and look for more posts by an anonymous commenter - along with how to google for information, which backs up everything being written about.

pocket wrote on July 30, 2007 10:42 AM:

That's right Steve5117! He was asked point blank if the VP sent him and he responded to Schumer "Sent on behalf of the President".

That answer doesn't really mean much of anything.

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 10:51 AM:

pocket:

The answer shows bush is not in charge. So it does mean something.

Davis X. Machina wrote on July 30, 2007 10:54 AM:

Gonzo said a couple of time that he was there on "behalf of the President" instead of a yes or no answer to the question af whether the VP sent him.

Welcome to the world of "the sovereign reigns, bit does not rule..."

I see no contradiction in the two halves of this statement. 'On behalf of' is a pretty arm's-length level of agency, and Cheney's already arrogated to himself (this is what all the talk of 'delegation' really means) all sorts of powers of the presidency.

In Britain, it's still the Royal Army, and in one sense, Queen Elizabeth sent the RA into Iraq, but no one thinks for a minute that Blair didn't do it.

pocket wrote on July 30, 2007 11:14 AM:

TheraP

I agree wholeheartedly with you. I never thought that Bush was in-charge. And have come to terms with it years ago. I guess I assumed that most now agree with that assertion. But, yes there are some that still believe Bush is in-charge.

I think of Cheny as the_guy_ in-charge. I also think that he has a duplicate WH staff. And may have duplicate cabinet staff as well, why else would he not disclose info on staffing levels. And it would easily explain his ability to control all of government.

Regarding the data mining. There was a Frontline program recently that delved into the subject 'Spying of the homefront'. I found it very informative on what data the gov was collecting and how they analzyed it. They refered to a period of time in Decemeber 2003. Right before the Comey incident.

The gov was said to be collecting _ALL_ data on everyone in Las Vegas. They emphasized _ALL_ data on everyone in town within those dates (residents and visitors). Data included all finiancial transactions (credit charges), all security camera video survailence (public, casino, taxi cab, etc,...). Looking back, it might have been a pilot project for the Comey reviewed program.

johnnydoughey wrote on July 30, 2007 11:26 AM:

Apparently Gonzales and Bush have been together so long that they actually use exactly the same reasoning. Gonzales, in his testimony, was comparing a crime to perceived knowledge of committing a crime... the same excuse for the Iraqi war.

Gonzales didn't believe (or suggested he didn't believe) the FBI new it was committing a crime, therefore no crime was committed.

Bush did believe (or stated he believe) that there were weapons of mass destruction, therefore no crime was committed.

Crimes apparently have nothing to do with victims, only with the perpetrators. We now are supposed to prove that the criminals were aware the act they committed was criminal. This is the same defense for the insanity plea.

So... now that the administration is using the insanity plea, is it okay to remove them from office?

Nelly Bly wrote on July 30, 2007 11:38 AM:

Pocket,

Thanks for the info on the Frontline program. If the government was indeed collecting comprehensive data about all of the residents and visitors in Las Vegas during a certain time period, that certainly would explain why Comey et al thought the program was illegal.

If the Las Vegas project was real, the mind boggles at the level of cooperation that must have been proffered by businesses there. Video surveillance from casinos, taxis, airports, local government all went to an I-Spy federal project.

I can't imagine why Las Vegas businesses would participate in that sort of espionage. If word gets around, it wouldn't be good for the tourist business.

Now I am wondering if the Las Vegas project was tried out in other cities. NYC comes to mind.

pocket wrote on July 30, 2007 11:55 AM:

The Frontline program showed the Clark(?) County sherrif and some ex-FBI types all but admitting that the program and the level of data collection.

I suspect that the NSL's (and perhaps some arm twisting) were employed to collect the data.

But most of the data resides with the large corporations. Banks, airlines, credit card companies (visa, mastercard), casinos, phone, internet, hospitals, insurance companies (medical, personal lines), SS #'s.

The Frontline program also goes into some detail as to how the suspected software finds the needle out of the haystack of data.

I was thinking that the Comey project was Nation wide rollout-not city specific.

KYJurisDoctor wrote on July 30, 2007 11:57 AM:

The longer the AG tries to endure, the longer the damage done to justice will take to repair!

http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org

lysias wrote on July 30, 2007 11:58 AM:

Outsourced to private companies located overseas? Where else but in Israel are there private companies with that sort of expertise?

lysias wrote on July 30, 2007 11:58 AM:

Outsourced to private companies located overseas? Where else but in Israel are there private companies with that sort of expertise?

Roberta wrote on July 30, 2007 11:58 AM:

TheraP,

I've been cogitating on the anonymous posts from Friday's article for which you provided a link. Some of it doesn't follow logically, but most of it does. Insider info? Possible. Where should I post or send my analysis when I'm done?

One thing--the writer has had a non-American education, judging by the language use. British, Canadian?

drational wrote on July 30, 2007 12:04 PM:

Look at Gonzales 2/6/06 testimony where TSP is narrowed down and described as a program "the president" approved.

This opens the door to the nature of programs that the Vice Presdient approved.
Click link for article about this issue.

drational wrote on July 30, 2007 12:08 PM:

Sorry I said "article" in post above, but it is my blog at DKos. pure speculation, but I think accurate...

Roberta wrote on July 30, 2007 12:14 PM:

Gonzo said a couple of time that he was there on "behalf of the President" instead of a yes or no answer to the question of whether the VP sent him.
Posted by: Steve5117
Date: July 30, 2007 10:36 AM

Remember Whitehouse's questioning, when he revealed the asterisks in documents that gave the VP (among many others) access to DoJ info that had never been open to that office before. If it happened in one department, it's probably happened in others.

I have a feeling that this is one of the keys to the WH kingdom: Was doing this even constitutional, since as defined, the VP's duties and powers don't "allow" for this.

And note Josh's post in which he points out the assumption made in a NYT editorial that it WAS the VP who sent Gonzales to Ashcroft's hospital room.

Who sent him there was the one question Gonzales outright refused to answer.

Where's a constitutional scholar when we need one?

Steve5117 wrote on July 30, 2007 12:16 PM:

Roberta

Post the results at the TPMCafe in a readers blog:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog

Then report that you've made a post here.

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 12:20 PM:

Roberta:

Good to hear from you!

Thanks for reading all that. I am honestly now convinced. And the reason is Mrs P - who is a former auditor! I think our mystery poster is the person Mrs P advised would be filling in for her, likely another auditor or fraud investigator.

Do you have a Cafe blog? Because that is one place to post your ideas. If you need a place to post, I can assist. Or I could post something and you can put more on there. Honestly I think it might be wise to quote a lot and place links. But I'm not sure how to do all that. Clearly the anonymous person is expecting us to figure out how to spread the word. If someone wants to do a kos diary that would be another idea.

And anyone reading this, do your part! If you choose.

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 12:26 PM:

drational:

Would you consider doing a kos diary on the info I just discussed with Roberta? It's very complicated and actually posts related to it are done anonymously going back several days - even before Friday - on different threads. Perhaps you saw them.

Click my name for the link to the tpm thread. Read carefully. Google stuff if you want. Whatever you need to convince yourself. If you'd like to help here.

I think the poster did this anonymously so we can simply lift stuff, follow the trail of clues, and spread the word.

And the word is "fear."

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 12:32 PM:

Steve5117:

I think we can do a number of cafe blogs on this. Keep it alive. Link from one to the next. Post links here also.

As our "mystery poster" suggests, people are having trouble taking the larger picture. Getting bogged down in minutia. Maybe the bad guys are even trying to facilitate that - to keep people bogged down with pursuing little pieces of information, instead of going after the unified theory.

What say you?

Steve5117 wrote on July 30, 2007 12:43 PM:

I agree that posting at the Cafe is a good place to start. Again, let me remind you of the Muck Resources and Hot Topics links on each TPMmuckraker page, on the right, just below the masthead.

Perhaps the fruits of this endeavor will end up there.

Try an initial post outlining the project.

Kathleen wrote on July 30, 2007 1:34 PM:

Subpoena Philbin and Addington! Philbin objected to the scope of the wiretaping program, Addington got rid of him. Call them in

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 1:51 PM:

Cafe Blog Post: "The better to eat you, my dear" (click on my name)

Roberta, use that or start your own blog post.

We have a lot of work to do to synthesize the information. But I think it's essential that it be collected together. Possibly there is further information at Mrs. P's blog.

We need all the help we can get to get this out! And then further help to get this mess straightened out.

Kathleen wrote on July 30, 2007 1:55 PM:

Amcocs, Comverse Infosy...Israeli based communication systems. Check out the You Tube four part piece by Fox News Reporter Carl Cameron on "alleged" Israeli spying

drational wrote on July 30, 2007 3:03 PM:

TheraP said:
"Would you consider doing a kos diary on the info I just discussed with Roberta? It's very complicated and actually posts related to it are done anonymously going back several days - even before Friday - on different threads. Perhaps you saw them."

TheraP,
I tried to follow the logic in the anon posts, but often got stuck owing to the complexity and technicality.
It needs synthesis, segregation.

I ran a big volunteer group of kossacks to analyze the DOJ docs, but it was labor intensive for me, as I was the only person doing analysis and assigning projects (One tech guy was running the web aspect).
I can probably access my contacts, but the truth is that to effectively manage a large-scale research project, you need small packets of research that are not too analysis-heavy.

As I look at the project at present, there are too many angles and too much technicality for me to manage.

I too, get the feeling that there is some hard truth and personal knowledge in the posts, but at the same time I also get a flavor of paranoia. When the docs and info are coming from the HJC and the overall story and goal was clear, it was pretty easy to motivate people to help. I think this project is risky, but perhaps has significant reward, but need up front work before recruiting helpers.

I will help, but I'd like to see a clearer picture and definitive target goals emerge. I am occupied with real work and presenting a workshop at ykos friday, but will follow.
please email me at drational at yahoo.com or at google.com to discuss further.

Tom Betz wrote on July 30, 2007 3:52 PM:

Gonzales sidelined? How about Gonzales gone, and somebody like John Yoo taking his place?

The Senate is inviting such an outcome, by taking the August recess. Gonzales could resign during the recess, and Bush could appoint a toady replacement as evil as John Yoo to be his 171st recess appointment, and the Senate couldn't say boo about it.

We need to contact our Senators and call for them to keep the Senate in session for the month of August, to prevent such a nightmare from becoming our reality.

Click on my name for a more thorough discussion of the matter.

DiFi Fan wrote on July 30, 2007 4:02 PM:

What's going on in TPM today? There hasn't been a new post since 10:30 this morning.

Slim Pickins wrote on July 30, 2007 4:17 PM:

I like to think they are busy digging up something BIG.

modmom wrote on July 30, 2007 4:18 PM:

Pocket, Here is a link to the Frontline Spying on the Homefront episode you mentioned regarding Las Vegas:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/view/

I plan to watch tonight-thanks.

regular lurker wrote on July 30, 2007 4:55 PM:

Maybe this was discussed...if so, my apologies.

I thought AT&T participated in the NSA program -- phone records, wire tapping, etc -- according to a whistleblower (google shows it was a Mark Klein?). Wired magazine followed the story.

Wouldn't it be possible to swim up the chain of command via AT&T? Who from NSA placed/signed off on the order with AT&T and other vendors? Who gave that NSA person directions? etc. There's a paper trail in there some where. Someone made drawings, someone designed the program and hardware, someone bought components, someone did the installation, someone signed the check, etc...

modmom wrote on July 30, 2007 5:23 PM:

Some info provided by AT&T Whistleblower Mark Klein:

According to Klein, this room contained (among other things) a Narus STA 6400 traffic analyzer into which all of AT&T's Internet and phone traffic was routed; Klein himself helped wire the splitter box that made this possible. In addition to AT&T's own traffic, Klein alleges that the company also routed its peering links into the splitter, meaning that any traffic that passed through AT&T's own network could be scanned. Futhermore, San Francisco wasn't the only place such secret rooms were built; Klein claims that AT&T offices in Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego also have them.

So what exactly is a Narus STA 6400? It's hard to get precise details for obvious reasons, but Narus does describe the system in general terms. Others have done a bit more digging and claim that the system can analyze more than 10 billion bits of data per second, and point out that the company sells its systems to governments worldwide. Saudi Telecom and Telecom Egypt both use Narus equipment to monitor and apparently block VoIP traffic in their countries, for instance, and they they recently inked a similar deal with Shanghai Telecom.

Given the massive scale of the spy operation in the US (and this is only one company; it's not yet clear if the NSA has partnered with other telecom firms), it's growing increasingly difficult to believe that this is truly "targeted surveillance." The equipment used and the vast scale of the information being monitored both suggest that the NSA is sifting through massive amounts of user data and phone calls. Much of the information that passes through their spy system must therefore be domestic rather than international in nature. It is possible that phone calls, for instance, that begin and end in the US are simply passed through the system without being scanned, but if so, this must certainly tempt the NSA, which has only to tweak their settings to see all that new data. What is actually being monitored is still unclear, but it looks as though this trial could bring much of it to light.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060412-6585.html

If they outsourced the datamining to a foreign company (to do their dirtywork), wouldn't it make sense to utilize equipment that can communicate with each other? The above points to Saudi Telecom, Telecom Eqypt and Shanghai Telecom.

regular lurker wrote on July 30, 2007 6:26 PM:

Seems like an added step to outsource to a foreign company when many US companies already have off shore foreign subsidiaries.

TheraP wrote on July 30, 2007 6:32 PM:

As I understand it, modmom, the private companies are owned by bush cronies - but the work is done overseas. How nice....

You can read the anonymous posts for yourself in the thread with link below - or see an initial synthesis of info by clicking on my name - at cafe blog we've started to make sense of those meandering posts.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003805.php

If you care to assist, we'd love your help!

liz wrote on July 30, 2007 7:18 PM:

I just have a thought, and maybe not very well thought out, but I'll just put it out there. I've read, over on NextHurrah, about the connection w/ the Cunningham case and some fake business that was set up (I can't remember the name), it got $ for furniture in the VP office or something like that. Do you think maybe Lam getting fired, and the Cunningham connection have anything to do w/ the outsourcing of data collection? And did the telecom companies have anything to do with this? Surely there's somebody who had to approve a contract that knows something about this.

I may be completely wrong. But, I agree that something is up. For all of the upper level administrators of the DOJ and FBI to be willing to resign, this had to be bigger than just "data mining".

liz wrote on July 30, 2007 7:18 PM:

I just have a thought, and maybe not very well thought out, but I'll just put it out there. I've read, over on NextHurrah, about the connection w/ the Cunningham case and some fake business that was set up (I can't remember the name), it got $ for furniture in the VP office or something like that. Do you think maybe Lam getting fired, and the Cunningham connection have anything to do w/ the outsourcing of data collection? And did the telecom companies have anything to do with this? Surely there's somebody who had to approve a contract that knows something about this.

I may be completely wrong. But, I agree that something is up. For all of the upper level administrators of the DOJ and FBI to be willing to resign, this had to be bigger than just "data mining".

Steve5117 wrote on July 30, 2007 7:45 PM:

Liz remember the republicans wanted to downsize government and one way to do that was to outsource some functions. This created the opportunity for faithful republicans to receive contracts to do those jobs, abetted by earmarked funds for many dubious things.

With no oversight of themselves, the republican congress was too busy enriching themselves to see the other changes taking place in the executive branch. The DoJ, in particular, was being reshaped to support the party objectives at at cost to our freedoms.

ryan wrote on July 30, 2007 7:49 PM:

there's some new muck in the world of alaska politics. In the last few hours the FBI and IRS have begun searching the Girdwood home of Sen. Ted Stevens. You can read about it and the backstory at the Anchorage Daily News website www.adn.com

liz wrote on July 30, 2007 7:52 PM:

I just have to say that this completely terrifies me. My family thinks I am just a big conspirapy theory dork (I read a lot of blogs), but I know someone is finally going to connect all the dots and this is going to be big and ugly.

Anonymous wrote on July 30, 2007 10:53 PM:

Rather than Leahy threatening Gonzalez with "we want clarificatin, or else", just cut the budget.

If Gonzalez wants the money, he should cooperate with Congress and provide the information.

Make it clear to Gonzlaez: the budget cuts in DoJ rest on fhte AG's back: the longer Leahy gets no cooperation, the more DoJ loses money: That means DoJ contractors, and the RNC lobbyists who are feeding off the DOJ Contracting gravy train.

"How's that DoJ S/W upgrade going, [name of under performing contractor deleted ]? Not good? We'll you aren't peforming. The program in canclled. Got a problem with that? Whine to Gonzlaez. That doesn't mean the G. Bush kind of "wine" if you know what I mean."

sc= "linen", as in "Time to change your diapers, Gonzalez -- Vitters wants a chance."

Anonymous wrote on July 30, 2007 10:56 PM:

"someone is finally going to connect all the dots"

Posted by: liz
Date: July 30, 2007 7:52 PM

Heard of the Verizon e-mails?

Anonymous wrote on July 30, 2007 11:03 PM:

WARNING: The following is a [/snark] response intended for comic relief. If you do not want to attempt to smile, skip over this. You might be upset after reading this. This may make you very angry. Avoid reading this. Very dangerous.

- - - - -

"For all of the upper level administrators of the DOJ and FBI to be willing to resign, this had to be bigger than just "data mining"."

Posted by: liz
Date: July 30, 2007 7:18 PM

What if the NSA contractors involved were

A. GoP lobbyists

B. rewarded for doing illegal things with nice Iraq recontruction contracts?

C. Given inside information on bogus contracts awarded to GOP front companies: The firms had insired shares of these front companies used to channel DoD contact money directly into the GOP cmapaig

What if the US Attys were getting wind of what was going on, and Lam was targeted for firing becuase whe was aware the GOP was using these DoD front companies for money laundering. . .

What if the data mining was not related to national security, but a commercial enterrise to milke the American public of other money through [God forbid ] direct marketing using [OMG] the post office.

"bigger than data mining" for sure: Making the post office employees lift heavy junk mail, simply because the NSA found a way to leverage e-mail subject lines into targeted junk mail. Oh, the infamy!

"Would you like a six pack with that smoldering Constitution, Mr. Mayor?"