I wouldn't normally tweet out an amicus brief to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, but given the faux "controversy" over the FISC's request that @DavidKris write this brief, a few words about it seem appropriate.
lawfareblog.com/david-kris-sub…
lawfareblog.com/david-kris-sub…
First, anyone who actually reads this brief will realize immediately why the FISC asked David to write it. It is exactly the sort of dense, serious-minded, independent, and non-political analysis that David does.
It is also, within the confines of the FISC's request to David—which asked him to analyze the FBI's proposals to improve accuracy in FISA applications—hard-hitting. While David treats the bureau's proposed remedies thoughtfully, he concludes they don't go far enough.
And he proposes some imaginative additional steps that you have to be very deep in the FISA weeds to have perceived.
Put simply, I don't think there's anyone else who could have written a brief this sober, serious, and constructive—certainly not in a few days ...
Put simply, I don't think there's anyone else who could have written a brief this sober, serious, and constructive—certainly not in a few days ...
...while being attacked by the President of the United States, memebers of Congress, and the entire Fox News information ecoystem.
Second, those who were expecting David to produce some "deep state" or swampy political defense of the bureau are going to be a bit perplexed by this document. No, it doesn't call for the abolition of the FISC or any nonsense like that. But it is in no sense a defense.
And it is in no sense political.
So why then has David been branded "highly controversial" by the president? Why has he been treated like some kind of partisan warrior? The goalposts have moved. If you're not prepared to be even-handed between Trumpist nonsense and the truth...
you are said to be part a partisan of the left.
So read the brief. This is who David is.
So read the brief. This is who David is.
