Judge accuses CIA officials of fraud, unseals secret files

[babsbunny]

Judge accuses CIA officials of fraud, unseals secret files

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/72176.html

By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — A federal district judge ruled Monday that the CIA repeatedly misled him in asserting that state secrets were involved in a 15-year-old lawsuit involving allegedly illegal wiretapping.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth also ordered former CIA director George Tenet and five other CIA officials to explain their actions or face potential sanctions.

Lamberth also questioned the credibility of current CIA Director Leon Panetta, saying that Panetta's testimony in the case contained significant discrepancies, and rejected an Obama administration request that the case continue to be kept secret. He released hundreds of previously secret filings.

[Why Syzygy]

1. Gods bless the Judges! whoot! nt

[glitch]

2. Wow. No wonder the bushies wanted to stack the judicial branch so badly.

Looks like they missed one. :applause:

[Why Syzygy]

5. Right.

And this isn't the first judge who has ruled in favor of the LAW lately.
The Judicial is the only branch that still retains a commitment to the Constitutional order of law.
Our only hope at this point.

[chill_wind]

3. How about that!

KnR

[spanone]

4. k&r....

[AntiFascist]

6. K&R n/t

[katandmoon]

7. Dear Judge Lamberth: PLEASE watch your back...(and your front. And your sides.)

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. will Tenet sing?

[boppers]

9. About freaking time.

Looks like the lid is coming off, and it's gonna be surprising to a lot of people the extent of our network, the amount of data we've been tapping, and how long this has been going on.

Jaws will drop.

[autorank]

10. Lamberth is the 800 pound gorilla

Holy Shee Yatt! This is serious. This guy knows just about everything you need to know to blow things
wide open.

I'll bet Panetta was given bogus information and, if he was, he'll go on the rampage, literally.

[boppers]

11. So, basics of the case:

A US employee was overseas, and was being monitored.
Because all non-US-only communications were being monitored.
Since Clinton.

All phone calls, faxes, emails, web pages visited, IM, *any* communications that reached outside of US boundaries.

This is the secret they're trying to protect.

Post to an email list in the UK, with both the source and destination in the US? Monitored.
Get a call from a friend in Mexico? Monitored.
Send an IM to a friend in Canada? Monitored.
Look at a porn site in the UK? Monitored.
Grocery list sent between between a man and a woman in Ireland, passing through US google/yahoo servers? Monitored.

This is the thing most people don't "get". Since every post a person puts on DU (for example) is fair game in another country, as soon as a thread is viewed by somebody in CA, NZ, or AU, it can be monitored.

Without a warrant.

[TorchTheWitch]

13. All non-US communications were being monitored?

I'm not seeing that being the case here. It apprears that Horn accuses Huddle and Brown of illegally eavesdropping on HIS calls because of an issue between Horn and Huddle at the time...

The case was filed by retired Drug Enforcement Administration officer Richard A. Horn in August 1994. Horn accused Huddle, who was then the U.S. charge d'affaires at the U.S. embassy in Rangoon, Burma, and Brown of eavesdropping on his phone conversations while Horn was the DEA's attache in Burma. It was unclear what Brown's position was at the time; he eventually became the head of the CIA's East Asia division.

Horn and Huddle had a strained relationship, as diplomats and DEA drug-fighters pursued different agendas. In one legal filing, Horn claimed he wanted "the truth (concerning) Burma's drug enforcement efforts, which were substantial, be told to the U.S. Congress and the executive branch; whereas the (State Department) and CIA . . . desired to deny Burma any credit for its drug enforcement efforts."

Horn thought that Huddle was trying to force him out of the country. Horn said he found proof of the eavesdropping in a cable Huddle sent to Washington.

Horn doesn't allege any illegal wiretapping against anyone but his own self and that it was done to him because of an issue between he and Huddle.

[TorchTheWitch]

12. So this was under Clinton

Looks like it anyway. The suit was filed in 1994 but I can't really tell from the article who the president was when the event(s) occured that are the reason for the suit. Clinton, Shrub and now Obama have been trying to get rid of this case. Good on the judge not standing for this lying and covering up.