RUSH: Colon in Normal, Illinois. Glad you called, sir. Welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: That would be
CALLER: No problem. I’d like to take exception to a comment you made earlier considering —
RUSH: It depends. The problem with warrants is the speed with which you need to issue them.
CALLER: Yes, but —
RUSH: But you see the problem with your argument on warrants is that oftentimes we don’t know
CALLER: Well, considering the speed, I believe you’re legally allowed to tap the phone without a warrant and seek the warrant later. Is that not true?
RUSH: Not if you guys get your way. That’s the whole point.
CALLER: Who is “us” guys?
RUSH: You guys on the left.
CALLER: I’m not on the left. I’m not on the right. I’m just… You know… I’m just here.
RUSH: Oh, you’re not, you’re not a liberal? It says you’re a liberal. Did you tell the call screener you’re a liberal or not?
CALLER: I did not.
RUSH: You did not tell the call screener you’re a liberal?
CALLER: I simply stated —
RUSH: The call screener inferred it. I apologize, sir. We don’t like labels on this program. Labels get in the way of our common humanity, don’t you know.
CALLER: My point being — my point being I feel as a rule you try to present sort of a half-truth and leave out certain bits of information such as there are apparatus in place to monitor calls within the United States, and —
RUSH: Right. Have you heard of the case of Zacarias Moussaoui?
CALLER: I have.
RUSH: Well, that’s a case where we didn’t get to find out what was on his computer, and we found out he was the 20th hijacker.
CALLER: (silence) And…?
RUSH: And? We missed finding out what was going on beforehand! The FBI wanted to know what was on his computer, and couldn’t get a warrant to do it from the FISA Court. They didn’t like the way the procedures had been followed, bammo! 9/11 happened.
CALLER: They could have done it without the warrant, could they not have? I believe that’s the law, and then you can seek the warrant afterwards. Why didn’t we follow that, that procedure?
RUSH: Because there was a wall at the time this happened. This is 1999. This is during the Clinton administration. There’s a wall that you couldn’t share information. One intelligence agency couldn’t share it with another. So it wouldn’t have done any good.
CALLER: Well, very well. I just wanted to issue my feelings, and I’m sure I’m not going to convince anybody, especially
RUSH: You know the thing that I’m talking about here? You want to start talking procedure here, and I’m talking philosophy. We’ve got a big argument going in the country right now, Colin, about the “culture of corruption” in the Republican Party, the Abramoff scandal and the Democrats have been in the last six months or so trying to make hay out of this culture of corruption, and I think that there is an even larger culture of corruption that we need to explore and that’s the culture of an ideology. I think liberalism is
The fact is that you have, nevertheless by the position you’ve taken, you have supported a position that makes it more difficult for us to gather intelligence on known enemies in this country. That is corruption of what you believe, whether you’re a liberal or not. As Mark Stein wrote about this, and this was yesterday in the Chicago Sun-Times. This is a quote: “It’s very hard to fight a terrorist war without intelligence. By definition, you can only win battles against terrorists preemptively. That’s to say, you find out what they’re planning to do next Thursday and you stop it cold on Wednesday. Capturing them on Friday while you’re still pulling your dead from the rubble is poor consolation. If the Democrats have their way, all terrorist cells in Europe or Pakistan would have to do to put themselves beyond the reach of US intelligence is get a New Jersey-based associate to place a bulk order for Verizon cell phones,” and then use them, because the way we’re going about it, we’re not going to be allowed — if the Democrats have their way in their effort here to get Bush. In their effort to impeach him, we’re not going to be able to do any spying on anybody in this country, include the enemy where they are currently operating, we fear.
RUSH: Now, our last caller, Colin, wanted to make the point that, “Look, go ahead and spy, and then get the warrants after the fact. What’s wrong with doing that?” Well, I looked some things up here. First of all, you need probable cause for a warrant, and what’s the point of a warrant issued by a judge
But to get an after-the-fact warrant, “A: Submission by federal officer approval of attorney general content. Each application for an order approving electronic surveillance under this subchapter shall be made by a federal officer in writing upon oath or affirmation to a judge having jurisdiction under Section 1803 of this title. Each application shall require the approval of the attorney general based upon his finding that it satisfies the criteria and requirements of such application as set forth in his subchapter. It shall include, 1: The identity of the federal officer making the application. 2: The authority conferred on the attorney general by the president and the approval of the attorney general to make the application. 3: The identity if known or subscription of the target of the surveillance. 4: A statement of the facts and circumstances relied upon by the applicant to justice the fact that…”
It goes on. Let me hold this up. You can’t see it, too much light. It would take 72 hours to go through all of the requirements here just to apply for the warrant. It’s absurd. What are we supposed to do here, have scores of lawyers ready to undertake these ridiculous tasks to make sure terrorists and their friends in the US around denied rights they don’t have under the Constitution in the first place? We’re talking about enemy combatants on the ground in this country who you want to confer constitutional rights. That’s why it is being said by some that all the terrorists are going to have to do if the Democrats get their way is to come into this country, go into New Jersey or New York somewhere, get a bunch of Verizon cell phones and go to town. It is clear that the people on the other side of this don’t support capturing these, and we don’t know that for sure but what we do know is they want to penalize George W. Bush for what he’s been doing even though it’s been done by previous presidents.
RUSH: We got a call earlier. I think the caller’s name was Colin, and where was he from? Where was he calling from? Yeah. Colin from Normal, Illinois. You know, forgive me for not being up to speed on this, but his talking point seemed to be — I’ve been researching this here during the top-of-the-hour news break. He denied being a liberal, and that’s fine, but his talking point is one of the
So what I’m going to do — I found it at PowerLine, the PowerLineblog. So I’m going to post the relevant parts of the statute at my website. I just sent it up to the webmaster, Koko, and I’ll put it up there at RushLimbaugh.com so you can see what would be necessary to legally get a warrant after you have detected via electronic surveillance information that you want to act on, because that’s their argument: “Well, there’s nothing says you can’t get a warrant. You’ve got 72 hours after the fact.” You take a look at those requirements and you tell me if 72 hours is enough time. It’s absolutely absurd. But more importantly than that, folks, the president doesn’t need a judge on a secret court authorizing him to do what the Constitution already authorizes him to do — not
He’s the commander-in-chief. He is authorized to defend and protect the country, and he doesn’t need some judge, particularly a bunch of judges who may now be leaking like sieves anyway to the media about what’s going on in their court. He doesn’t need a judge on a secret court authorizing him to do what the Constitution authorizes him to do. The court is usurping
RUSH: I wanted to expand on this whole thing of ideological corruption that I mentioned talking to Colin from Normal, Illinois. I’m not sure if I were a Democrat I would want Teddy Kennedy out there talking about ethics and morality. Ted Kennedy was on ABC yesterday, kept referring to the GOP’s “culture of corruption,” and like James Taranto of OpinionJournal.com says. He’s got the best retort. Any time Kennedy stands up and starts talking about corruption. He says, “Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.” It’s just classic. I just love it. “Mary Jo Kopechne, unavailable for comment.” So they send Teddy Kennedy out. He’s going to write a children’s book, and this is hayseed time. It’s tough to keep up with these people. But as I said, they can talk about a culture of corruption in the Republican Party, culture of corruption anywhere. I’ll tell you what’s corrupted and that’s their ideology. Liberalism
This whole NSA business is part of an ongoing campaign with these leaks to the New York Times, and from the judges and who knows who’s doing the leaking but we’re going to find out now. I tell you it’s members of Congress. We’re going to find this out. They’re doing everything we can to sabotage our effort to conduct war
RUSH: Dan in Orlando, Florida. Welcome to the program, sir. It’s great to have you with us on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hi. Good afternoon, Rush. Former federal agent with extensive experience working cases under FISA, and it was back during the middle 1980s when the stuff wasn’t on the front page, very, very frustrating work — and a lot of the public just doesn’t have a tenth of the understanding of what’s involved.
RUSH: Okay, let me ask you a question right there. Because, if you’ve been listening, as you probably heard, the latest line from the left is, “Hey, if electronic surveillance uncovers something, fine. Go ahead and act on it then just drop over to FISA. You’ve got 72 hours to get a warrant and everything is legal. Is it that easy?”
CALLER: Well, Rush, it’s not that easy. There’s two separate divisions. One being working a case on the criminal side; another working a case on the FISA side, and the two could never meet. In other words, anything I was working on, I could never go down to an assistant United States attorney to brief them on the case and try to get a search warrant or an arrest warrant or any kind of wiretap or anything else. They weren’t even authorized to hear my case. They didn’t have the security clearances involved. Everything that I worked had to be under FISA. When a case would be opened it was opened under a preliminary investigation and I could do basic things such as running a license plate number, for example, off a car, things of that nature. Once I found out certain amount of information, I had to convince, back at headquarters, a supervisor to allow me to proceed to a full investigation. During that full investigation, I would have to develop enough facts and information
RUSH: Right, and by the time you add electronic surveillance into this, when you don’t even know who your subject is.
CALLER: Well, Rush, let me tell you something. Every FISA case that I worked — and I worked 30, maybe 35 in my tenure — none of them had a FISA application go out of the Department of Justice to even be presented to the FISA Court. The woman that was there was always fearful of something being turned back or turned away from the FISA Court. So every little thing was nitpicked and so forth. Now, maybe that was good. Another thing is, if I had a case that developed that involved a US person — and we had a definition of that. A US person is not just a naturalized citizen or a born citizen of the US. If somebody had a green card, they were considered a US person. Well, we saw where a lot of these guys —
RUSH: (Laughing.) Gosh.
CALLER: That was the first thing they tried to do was get a green card, and then they became a US person, you were not going to get anything approved. Don’t even ask for it. Don’t even apply.
RUSH: You know, this is surprising, I’m sure, to a lot of people, because most people think federal agents are jackbooted thugs. They do whatever they want. There’s nobody’s gonna rein you guys in or stop you, that you have free rein to just go entrap anybody any time you want to, and I think that’s one of the reasons here that we’re having such trouble getting people to understand this is the misinterpretation, or misunderstanding, of just what kind of power federal agents have. Anyway, Dan, that’s illuminating. I’m stunned. Actually, I’m not. I’m not. I’m glad you called to actually substantiate all this that we’ve confirmed ourselves.