The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation.

The administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly a user's browser history. It does not include, the lawyers hasten to point out, the "content" of e-mail or other Internet communication.

But what officials portray as a technical clarification designed to remedy a legal ambiguity strikes industry lawyers and privacy advocates as an expansion of the power the government wields through so-called national security letters. These missives, which can be issued by an FBI field office on its own authority, require the recipient to provide the requested information and to keep the request secret. They are the mechanism the government would use to obtain the electronic records.

Full story from the Washington Post

There is some criticism afoot of the Clintons, charging that it's hypocritical for them to host a $3 million-$5 million wedding for their daughter in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.  

Funny, I don't see it that way at all.  The money is theirs, and so they are entitled to spend it any way they want, whatever the economic conditions.  And so far as anyone knows, no significant public money is being spent to subsidize the affair (unlike, say, Michelle Obama's high-living trip to Spain).

If there's hypocrisy afoot, it's in the fact that the Clintons can spend money like drunken sailors -- thanks entirely to the money they've earned as a result of their "public service" -- even as they systematically espouse high-tax policies that makes it harder for those in the private sector to achieve the same level of success.

I wonder if Americans will ever get tired of watching the lifestyles of those who have become rich and famous thanks only to having held "public office" -- that is, spending the money regular people supply through what seem like ever-higher taxes.  

Interesting campaign...

The U.S. military has made great headway in Iraq, and we are seeing the country make major strides toward self-sufficiency.

But there's a lot of hard work ahead, and the Obama administration must keep its focus on supporting the fragile government and fighting the Iranian-backed militias who want to spread their Islamist agenda.

As the White House recoils from months of bad news pouring out of Afghanistan, topped by the sacking of Gen. Stanley McChrystal and replacing him with Gen. David Petraus, there is actually good news to report from Iraq.

In a special August report from Bill Roggio, "Iraq's Not Over Yet," readers get the good news from Iraq, the progress our military is making, the way forward and the warning signs we cannot afford to miss.


Here's an excerpt:

The United States’ plan for the transition of security to Iraqi forces and drawdown of American troops in country to 50,000, which was crafted by the Bush administration and continued by the Obama administration, is on track. This will allow the United States to honorably withdraw from Iraq, leaving behind a country that can potentially be an ally in the heart of the Middle East. However, this scenario can occur only if the administration continues to see the plan through.

The situation in Iraq in July 2010 is one that only the most optimistic of Iraq watchers would have predicted in July 2007, at the height of the so-called “surge,” which saw the United States change its strategy in Iraq and pour an additional 30,000 troops into the country to partner with Iraqi forces and take on both the Sunni and Shia insurgencies. The surge, championed and executed by Petraeus, was a bold and risky move, one that many predicted would fail. Petraeus and the American and Iraqi troops have proved them wrong.

Today, Iraqi Security Forces handle the bulk of the fi ghting and policing in country, while U.S. forces, with some minor exceptions, serve in an “advise and assist” role. At the same time, joint U.S. and Iraqi special operations teams are ruthlessly hunting down al Qaeda’s leadership throughout the country. Earlier this year, Iraq held another successful election, and although the formation of a new government has been problematic, there are few signs that a return to the violence of 2005-2006 is anywhere near the horizon. In short, Iraq is moving along the right path and will continue to do so if the United States continues the course. This is somewhat ironic, given that President Obama, while on the campaign trail, dismissed Iraq as a war of choice and one that America needed to extract itself from, while he championed Afghanistan as a war of necessity. Today, the “war of choice” in Iraq is on the path to success, while serious doubts have been raised about the ability to win the “necessary war” in Afghanistan.

Read the whole thing in the August issue of Townhall Magazine.

Sit like a lady...

Those who demand quick U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan need to confront an uncomfortable question: what happens when NATO troops go home?

During the Vietnam conflict, anti-war advocates fatuously claimed that Communists would bring reconciliation, but no one advances such illusions about the Taliban. Their previous years in power demonstrated their bloodthirsty habits and support for terrorism. Moreover, a U.S. defeat in Afghanistan would inspire Islamist radicals everywhere with an appearance of American vulnerability. Even more significantly, abandoning our Afghan allies to the tender mercies of the Taliban would make it impossible to maintain necessary friendships elsewhere in the Muslim world, demonstrating that America can’t be trusted, while you can count on our enemies to exact bloody revenge on pro-American moderates.

These factors demonstrate that rewarding terrorists with a crucial Afghan victory would place every American in heightened danger. 

Luke received the highest of accolades with a response like this.

Truer words have never escaped his mouth.