Aldrich Ames spy case is not an example of illegal wiretaps or searches.

(Note: This article is to head of the latest RW talking point that the Aldrich Ames spy case is an example of President Clinton using illegal wireless wiretaps in the name of national security.)

Aldrich Ames spy case is not an example of illegal warrantless wiretaps or searches by the Clinton Administration.

Ever since it was revealed that President Bush authorized warrantless wiretaps of Americans, Republican strategists have been scrambling to find precedents for his illegal activities in earlier administrations, or case law that would legitimize extra-legal surveillance at the behest of the chief executive.

They haven't been able to find any, but the attempt is rather fun to watch.

While it is true that there is some legal framework for warrantless searches, it's warrantless wiretaps that are at issue here. Republicans are attempting to blur the line between the two in a vain attempt to muddy the debate.

My favorite example for the justification of President Bush's behavior was written by Charles Hunt, commentator for the Washington Times:



This quote, when taken in context with the rest of Hunt's article, implies that President Bill Clinton ignored the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in order to deal with a national security threat.

In reality, the Ames case is a textbook example of how the FBI was able to uncover a deadly foreign agent without the use of extra-legal authority from the President.

The FBI followed proper protocol for searches of Ames's home and office through the Attorney Generals (AG) office. Also, as required by FISA, all electronic surveillance of Ames was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. According to Aldrich Ames's Criminal Complaint form:



<...snip...>

Ames betrayed his country to an enemy that had more weaponry at its disposal than a terrorist's wildest dreams. And yet, the US government was able to bring him to justice without breaking the letter or spirit of the law.

To claim that the President needs extra-legal authority to bring criminals and security threats under control is to ignore historical evidence to the contrary.

###

I didn't want to overwhelm with info, so I just clipped the highlights for this post. The entire article, which has far more detail, is here: www.brainshrub.com/aldrich-ames-case

I hope you found the above information useful in debunking the spin, feel free to pass it along. I even made two graphics for the talking-points:



What do you think?

where Aldrich Ames lived. He lived in about the 2700 block of North Quincy Street in Arlington VA, about a block north of Nellie Custis Drive. His trash was picked up on a Tuesday night, same as mine. What the FBI did was to institute something called a "trash cover." Late Tuesday night or early Wednesday morning, after Ames had put his big green Arlington County supercan out, the FBI would drive by his house and quickly swap a can that looked just like his for the can he had put out. They would take it back to their office and go through the trash.

Every dumpster diver and trash picker is well aware of California v. Greenwood (1988) {86-684}. Even if you are not familiar with the case, you may be familiar with it by way of the movie The Star Chamber. California v. Greenwood says that you have no expectation of privacy regarding your trash. If you put out something by the curb, it is officially regarded as abandoned property, and anybody who wants it is free to take it.

http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/64/

http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/64/print



If Aldrich Ames was throwing evidence of his criminal activity in the trash (and he was), then anyone, including the FBI, was free to take it.

Shred everything.