Defense Lawyers Plan Challenges Over Spy Effort

New York Times ^ | December 28, 2005 | By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

[ThePythonicCow]

---

December 28, 2005

Defense Lawyers Plan Challenges Over Spy Efforts

By ERIC LICHTBLAU
and JAMES RISEN

WASHINGTON, Dec. 27 - Defense lawyers in some of the country's biggest terrorism cases say they plan to bring legal challenges to determine whether the National Security Agency used illegal wiretaps against several dozen Muslim men tied to Al Qaeda.

The lawyers said in interviews that they wanted to learn whether the men were monitored by the agency and, if so, whether the government withheld critical information or misled judges and defense lawyers about how and why the men were singled out.

The expected legal challenges, in cases from Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Virginia, add another dimension to the growing controversy over the agency's domestic surveillance program and could jeopardize some of the Bush administration's most important courtroom victories in terror cases, legal analysts say.

The question of whether the N.S.A. program was used in criminal prosecutions and whether it improperly influenced them raises "fascinating and difficult questions," said Carl W. Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond who has studied terrorism prosecutions.

"It seems to me that it would be relevant to a person's case," Professor Tobias said. "I would expect the government to say that it is highly sensitive material, but we have legal mechanisms to balance the national security needs with the rights of defendants. I think judges are very conscientious about trying to sort out these issues and balance civil liberties and national security."

[saleman]

Oh yea, we really fought over that Meier's nomination didn't we? If that's what you're calling fighting then you just need to give up now.

[MNJohnnie]

I am as American and conservative as they come and care deeply about my country and what the scum on the left are doing to

Sure you do. That is why every single post is a flaming rant at what is supposedly "your side". Actions speak louder then words. Maybe if you spend, say 25% of your time actively ATTACKING Democrats rather then 100% flailing Republicans, people might not suspect you of Trollism.

[Lancey Howard]

Any ideas on how that'll happen?

It's already happening.

When dissecting the importance of all this "domestic spying/civil liberties" stuff, it is important to separate the educated zeal of us political junkies (1%) from the practical simplicity of the rest of the population (99%).

We went nuts over Clinton's corruption and subsequent impeachment while the rest of America merely got a little disgusted by Clinton's behavior and in the end shook their heads and concluded "it's only about sex". The more the GOP turned the thumbscrews, the faster Clinton's numbers went UP. The Republicans were seen as partisan and heavy handed and Clinton became a "victim". (Admittedly, Clinton and his allies at the New York Times and the networks did a good job with the spin.)

Fast forward. What the American public sees today, in all its glorious practical simplicity, is that President George W. Bush sidestepped a bunch of liberal ACLU judges - - the kind of judges who routinely turn confessed murderers loose on the streets because some cop forgot to read his Miranda card to a ten-time loser, don't you know - - in order to eavesdrop on terrorists and their collaborators and protect Americans from another 9/11 attack.

Trust me - - THAT is the way Joe Sixpack sees this whole liberal wetdream of a "scandal". Bush's numbers have gone UP over the past week and they will continue to go UP as long as the New York Times continues its drumbeat of concern for the rights of terrorists. It's a beautiful thing. Of course, it is up to Bush and the GOP to make sure that they continue to pound out their own message every.... single.... day. They must punch HARD, and STAY on the OFFENSIVE every.... single.... day.

The one and only way that Bush could possibly screw up this incredible opportunity is if he goes on the defensive.

Regards,
LH

[kcvl]

I haven't even seen this until now. Maybe others have missed it as well.


http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/investigatetheleaks/

[blogblogginaway]

Thank you so much for the advertisers. I will begin my letter writing in the morning. Meanwhile I have gone to the NYT finance 'message board' on Yahoo http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=l&board=7083216&tid=nyt&sid=7083216&mid=8928 and posted a message listing these links and the reason they should be contacted. Please, everyone needs to get the word out to insist these advertisers immediately cease advertising with the NYT who abets our enemy or a campaign of mammoth proportions will be mounted to boycott their products. When I write my letters tomorrow, I will insist there be a public announcement via a company PR within two weeks that they have chosen not to do business with a company who divulges top secrets to our enemies in a time of war to the detriment of Americans.

[ndt]

"wonder about these challenges. Wouldn't there be legal precedence set by the Aldrich Ames case? In that case Klintoon authorized the break in and placement of bugs without a warrant."

Actually it was physical search without a warrant, the eavesdropping was with a FISA warrant. It's a moot point though, I would think the 4th would equally apply to both.

[American in Israel]

Fine, throw out evidence in a civil court, then kill the terrorists with a military firing squad, along with their lawyers. Treason and Sedition are military charges, not civil ones.

I do not want these pukes living in a padded prison for years on taxes as attempted murderers, I want them in a wooden box six feet under as enemy agents caught in the act.

[devolve]

[PogySailor]

The NYT has become a mouthpiece for the dhimmi movement in the US.

[hispanichoosier]

I thought that the procecutor was representing "the people" not a President?

You're half right. In federal cases, the US Attorneys represent the United States government, not the citizenry per se. They don't represent the chief executive either, though.

In some states--California, for example--prosecutors represent "the people." They title their cases, for example, "People v. Larry Smith." Other states, including Indiana--where I practice law--have prosecutors represent the state, not the people. This is because of the Anglo-American concept that the state is a sovereign entity in and of itself. We title our cases, for instance, "State v. Virginia Smith." Of course, there are the oddballs out there (VA, KY, PA, and MA) who, in a similar vein, will employ, "Commonwealth v. Virginia Smith." ; )

[ConservativeGreek]

You're half right. In federal cases


Thanks........

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

Thanks! We're up to 60 now! I have sent the petition to some prominent conservative bloggers and talk radio hosts and not one has signed or responded. It's sad to think that they just pay lip service to important issues but don't throw in their "status" to help.

[Mo1]

Why do I get the feeling Risen and the New York Times is gloating about this??

Do they really think these links will hurt the Bush Administration???

[McGavin999]

Do they really think these links will hurt the Bush Administration???

Sure they do. Of course, they seem to have missed the point that there is a possibility that one of the people caught was the guy who was going to blow the Brooklyn Bridge. Hmmmm, where is that now? Isn't that in New York? Gee, I wonder how many Americans travel on that bridge each day. Most of them would be New Yorkers, wouldn't you say?