Help me understand this spying issue better.......

I posted some "smackdown" to use against rightwingers on it here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5673078&mesg_id=5673078

I thought I had read all the relevant information, and am just waiting for the media to crank up and vindicate Clinton and Carter and reinforce the point that Bushs spying is nothing like that.

Now I've been reading about Aldrich Ames. What's the deal with that case? Have the repukes mannaged to squirm out of something again by finding a single transgression from the past that they can claim sets the precedent for what Bush did?

If you don't know about this Aldrich Ames guy, he was a CIA agent giving secrets to the Russians and is now serving a life sentence. Apparently the FBI bugged and serveiled him back in the early 90's without a warrent.

Anyone know where this is going??????

Thx.

Carter and Clinton both were within the law, and even Echelon was in compliance with FISA. There have been FISA warrants issued after the fact, however, and perhaps this is what the right may be yowling about.

They haven't managed to squirm out of anything. FISA has been a rubber stamp for any warrant against any powerless person in the US. Trust me, they got warrants to eavesdrop on the Quakers and the Raging Grannies. What makes this different is that they didn't TRY to get warrants, and that makes us all believe they weren't spying on us nobodies, they were spying on the powerful and famous, people they considered enemies or potential enemies politically.

And this is why your friend is in Bogusland. Aldrich Ames was an appropriate target and warrants were obtained in his case (warrantless searches being inadmissible in court back in those days). This is an administration fishing expedition, and the faster your friend figures this out, the safer we'll all be.

On Edit: This is just another attempt by howler monkeys on the right to make people believe that two wrongs make a right. Yelling "He did it too, Ma!" didn't work when they were five, so one wonders why they think it'll work now.

I'm looking for evidence that the FISA court granted a warrant for the heretofore warrant-less invasion of property and planting evesdropping devices, wire tapping etc. I'm of the impression that the case never went to JURY trial, because FISA was not used..

any source showing evidence of FISA presented in the prosecution of Aimes?

it'

<http://mediamatters.org/items/200512220011>

Sometimes I feel like mediamatters is too partisan to be useful against rightwingers, but they certainly lay out a lot of good facts so maybe I shouldn't slag them too much!

there seems to be a bit of hair splitting, doesn't bring clarity for me...

maybe i'm just being dense, or I'm just trying to rush through a great deal of extremely dense material with a plethora of source links, which require much more time than i have to sift through and sort it out for myself.

that's kind of the problem for a little people.. this is not to slam media matters because even though they're obviously partisan, they do important work.

.....The Aldrich Ames case involved physical searches, not electronic surveillance. Ames was also an agent of the American government, not an ordinary citizen. An arrest warrant was issued and I believe I read where the AG acted according to certifications in place at the time.

As we now know, he was a traitor, and there was substantial evidence to that fact before the searches took place.

the Ames case involved the FBI not the NSA. That is a HUGE difference. Also, there was one subject in that case. In the NSA case of today the issue is blanket surviellance of many, many people. There are HUGE differences in these cases.