Alexander sidestepped the question, saying the Department of Justice
was responsible for outlining the legal authorities under which the
agency could request such data. He pledged, though, that he would make
an effort to provide that explanation to the committee.
"I will work hard to do that, and if I can't do that, I will come back to you and tell you why," he said.
If he
Had a brain in his head, and/or
Actually intended to answer,
he'd have had the information ready. And, especially after the "We saved New York with this!" claim fell apart, saying the call-tracking program had helped prevent “dozens” of terrorist attacks ain't gonna cut it unless you can show the data. Which, for some reason, I doubt they can.
And while they're at it, they can explain this:
That’s right, the government’s sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.
Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.
Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.
And just because
2 comments:
Um, let's see, he's the same guy that said that the contractors need more oversight (possibly true) but apparently doesn't think that he and his ilk do, much less being required to comply with the provisions of the Constitution.
"Since October 2011 Mosques have been off limits to FBI agents."
I can't imagine this regard being given to the German American Bund in 1942.
Hence a caller to a radio show Monday said that the way to ensure the government stops listening to your phone calls is to say "It's al Bush's fault", "The Tea Party is Racist", but the real nuclear option is to say the word "Allah". They'll hang up right away and put you on the Government Do Not Call list pronto.
Post a Comment