Dec 23 2005
Leakers Robertson and Rockefeller
We were one of the first to see that the resignation of Judge Robertson from FISA was more likely the act of someone under investigation for leaking and damaging the NSA surveillance of Al Qaeda communications with people in the US. For a protest resignation, both Robertson and the Bush administration were way too quiet. For an investigation of leaking classified material, the behavior was all too recognizable as Robertson lawyers up and the Feds go silent with their investigation.
We will know for sure if Robertson starts missing days on the bench on the DC circuit court – a position he has not resigned yet. But one he cannot retain while under investigation.
Mac Ranger believes this fits his scenario where an all of sudden very quiet Senator Rockefeller is also under investigation for leaking the NSA program. The NY Times story that leaked and damaged the surveillance program mentioned the good Senator by name. Guess he forgot to go on background.
Now Rush Limbaugh has joined the dance in looking at Judge Robertson as a possible modern day Benedict Arnold.
Here’s the dirty little secret: Rockefeller may in fact be the leaker to the New York Times, and you know what else is now being speculated?
…
“According to those officials and others, reservations have been expressed by Senator Rockefeller and a judge presiding over a secret court that overseas intelligence matters.” Now, we overlooked that last Friday.But now that Judge Robertson has in a puff of conscience resigned from the FISA court, there is speculation out there that Robertson and Rockefeller are leakers and Robertson resigned because he was going to be forced out as having leaked and instead he forces himself out.
Mac Ranger is correct in wondering about the timing of all this with the Alito nomination and breaking news Alito supported more agile wiretapping.
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito defended the right of government officials to order domestic wiretaps for national security when he worked at the Reagan Justice Department, an echo of President Bush’s rationale for spying on U.S. residents in the war on terror.
This looks like a huge plus for Alito in my book. Anyone screaming it is wrong to monitor who known terrorists overseas contact here in the US is simply sitting on the wrong side of this debate. 80% of the people are for catching the terrorists by these kinds of means if necessary. Only the 20% of liberal mad with Bush Derangement Syndrome are backing the terrorists’ right to communicate, coordinate and execute their plans without bothersome wiretaps.
Well Roberston is still on the US District Court it appears:
Federal Judge Calls Gitmo Detentions “Unlawful”
This news on Guantanamo Bay: the Washington Post is reporting a federal judge has ruled the detention of two ethnic Uighurs at the U.S. prison is “unlawful”, but says he does not have the authority to release them. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge James Robertson said the government has taken too long to release Abu Bakker Qassim and Adel Abdu Hakim — who have been jailed for four years. The two have been cleared for release, but not returned to China where they would likely face torture or execution.
I found confirmation of this in the Washington Post, but it is not the administration’s fault. Seems no country wants to touch these ‘innocent’ people.
U.S. District Judge James Robertson criticized the government’s detention of Abu Bakker Qassim and Adel Abdu Hakim, who have been jailed at Guantanamo for four years; they have been cleared for release because the government has determined they are not enemy combatants and are not a threat to the United States. But Robertson said his court has “no relief to offer” because the government has not found a country to accept the men and because he does not have authority to let them enter the United States.
The judge seems to be frustrated with the reality and is calling it a crime these people can find no one who will take them in
“The detention of these petitioners has by now become indefinite,” Robertson wrote in a 12-page opinion. “This indefinite imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay is unlawful.”
Judge, they are not imprisoned if they simple have no place to go. Even he backed away from taking responsibility for these poor ‘innocent’ victims:
In a hearing last week, Robertson called the cases of the Uighurs (pronounced wee-gurs) a “classic dilemma” and proposed allowing them restricted asylum in the United States. He rejected that concept yesterday, deciding that the executive branch has control over immigration and that such a move “would have national security and diplomatic implications beyond the competence or the authority of this Court.”
Is he clearing his docket of cases so he can go on a hiatus? We will know soon enough. Judge Roberts is due to be assigned emergency cases at the US District Court January 1-2, 20o6. We shall see if that status remains for the time being. Robertson is also assigned Motions Court for February.
If Robertson is under investigation, it should be ‘leaked’ fairly quickly.
This whole thing was a big PR stunt. He had already made the same ruling back on August 19, 2005. It wouldn’t be too hard to conduct another one for a status report since no one will actually be in court. This was done to change some wording in the ruling by adding phrases against the Bush administration. I will post the both rulings shortly, but here is the Order from August 19, 2005.
Petitioners have asked for a “hearing on the conditions
of interim relief.” Giving it that label would [**10] suggest
a ruling on the question of whether the Court has the
power to grant “relief” to these petitioners. Nevertheless,
as it appears that both sides seek a just and honorable
solution to the practical problem before us, a hearing will
be set for the purpose of considering and perhaps reaching
agreement on the conditions in which the petitioners
are live, and the privileges they will have, pending their
relocation to another country.
It is accordingly:
ORDERED that a hearing is set for August 25, 2005,
at 2:00 p.m. And it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the government be prepared
at the time of that hearing to make appropriate disclosures to the Court in camera augmenting the declaration of Pierre–Richard Prosper concerning the process and status of efforts to relocate the petitioners.
JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge
December 22, 2005 Order
In Rasul v. Bush, the Supreme Court confirmed the jurisdiction of the federal courts “to determine the legality of the Executive’s potentially indefinite detention of individuals who claim to be wholly innocent of wrongdoing.” 542 U.S. at 485. It did not decide what relief might be available [*16] to Guantanamo detainees by way of
habeas corpus, nor, obviously, did it decide what relief might be available to detainees who have been declared “no longer enemy combatants.” Now facing that question, I find that a federal court has no relief to offer. An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum.
JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge
ORDER
For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum,
Petitioners’ motion to vacate the stay order [24] is granted in part and denied in part, and petitioners’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus [1] is denied. This is a final, appealable order.
JAMES ROBERTSON United States District Judge
The part about the ruling from the Supreme Court has nothing to do with any of this. It’s just an attempt to throw the President into the mix. He even says so after quoting it
“It did not decide what relief might be available [*16] to Guantanamo detainees by way of habeas corpus, nor, obviously, did it decide what relief might be available to detainees who have been declared “no longer enemy combatants.”
Then why did you just quote, you moron?
The kicker is the last part that says
“This is a final, appealable order.”
He didn’t order anything except a Bush bashing session and nothing changed from his previous ruling that said he does not have the authority to grant relief. What are they going to appeal when he again said he can not grant relief??
SBD
Okay,
Here is the link to the Memorandums
August 18, 2005
December 22, 2005
Here is a comparison of the two documents. In addition, I have yet to find any record between these two dates regarding this case.
Compare
Summary
2472 word(s) added
1274 word(s) deleted
681 word(s) matched
SBD
[…] AJ Strata […]
Robertson and Rockefeller leaked Top Secret NSA Program?
AJ Strata over at The Strata-Sphere blog, is all over this story with a theory that sounds pretty likely to me. Judge Robertson (the FISA judge who supposedly resigned in protest) actually was either forced to resign to chose to do so before being for…
Are James Robertson And Jay Rockefeller The Leakers?
The simmering anger over the treasonous leaking of the details of a NSA surveillance program targeting terrorists has had the heat turned up today to a full boil. Many people (myself included) have been asking just who these Media Magpies might be, and…
[…] AJ Strata is thinking about those leakees […]
[…] AJ Strata over at The Strata-Sphere blog, is all over this story with a theory that sounds pretty likely to me. Judge Robertson (the FISA judge who supposedly resigned in protest) actually was either forced to resign to chose to do so before being forced while under investigation for leaking this story in the first place. We will know for sure if Robertson starts missing days on the bench on the DC circuit court – a position he has not resigned yet. But one he cannot retain while under investigation. […]