Last week I linked to a NY Times story which suggested, in part, that the NSA had considered attempting a warrantless wiretap on a sitting member of Congress. Today, the big news is that Jane Harman (D-CA), was wiretapped by the NSA (without a warrant, I infer from the coverage), and that the CIA signed off on referring the case to the FISA court in order to get a warrant for further surveillance, but the investigation was squashed by Gonzales because he (apparently) saw Harman as an ally in the fight to defend warrantless wiretapping.
Here's what has me confused. Are we talking about two separate instances of wiretapping a member of Congress, or are these just different accounts of the same incident? People seem to be talking as if the events are separate, but I'm not so sure on what basis that judgment is being made. Anybody out there understand the craziness?
No comments:
Post a Comment