I won't try to summarize it. Just go read A J's post.

***

More at Stop The ACLU and Captain's Quarters. I like A J's take better. Hope he's right.

***

Read Allahpundit's take here.

***

Patterico comments here.

*** Update and bump. Original timestamp 17:03

Another Bush "Surrender" That Isn't 
Hatched by Dafydd

All the wires and elite media are abuzz with the "news" that the Bush administration "won't reauthorize eavesdropping," and that this "appears to be a concession to its critics."

The media refer to President Bush's announcement that he will not reauthorize the NSA al-Qaeda interecept program... now that the FISA court has finally stepped up and issued orders allowing the very same program to proceed with judicial support, making it virtually impossible for majority Democrats to kill off. Surprise, surprise on the jungle cruise tonight (no surprise to "George Orwell," however), the MSM play this story as if it were a historic victory over Bush.

I have the pleasant task of bursting the latest anti-Bush liberal triumphalism: the media take is complete rot. The only reason they bypassed the FISA court in the first place was that it was too slow... and at last, the court has agreed to reforms, crafted by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, that not only dramatically speed up court review when necessary but also leave in place blanket approval of communications intercepts whenever there is probable cause to believe it's an al-Qaeda or related terrorist communication. Per the New York Times: ...

Read the whole thing. To me it reads like a more detailed case of A J's take.

***

Terrorist Surveillance Program, RIP
John Hinderaker

Attorney General Gonzales announced today, via a letter to Senators Leahy and Specter, that the Terrorist Surveillance Program has been put under the jurisdiction of the FISA court and therefore will not be reauthorized by President Bush. Gonzales says that the administration has not compromised the program's effectiveness:

[O]n January 10, 2007, a Judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court issued orders authorizing the Government to target for collection international communications into or out of the United States where there is probable cause to believe that one of the communicants is a member or agent of al Qaeda or an associated terrorist organization. As a result of these orders, any electronic surveillance that was occurring as part of the Terrorist Surveillance Program will now be conducted subject to the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Gonzales assured the Senators--not that they care, necessarily, but we do--that security will not be compromised because the court authorization "had to ensure that the Intelligence Community would have the speed and agility necessary to protect the Nation from al Qaeda--the very speed and agility that was offered by the Terrorist Surveillance Program." He adds that "These orders are innovative, they are complex, and it took considerable time and work for the Government to develop the approach that was proposed to the Court...." ...

***

The New Wiretapping Program
Posted by Curt 

I'm really not sure what the big deal is about this news that the NSA wiretapping program is not going to be reauthorized by Bush when it expires.  I mean if you read all the reports coming out it appears that the Administration got what it wanted.  The whole reason they set up the program in the first place was because the FISA warrants took too long, but now:

Gonzales said a recent secret-court approval allowed the government to act effectively without the program.

[...]Gonzales said a judge on the secret FISA court recently approved a government proposal allowing it to target communications into and out of the United States when probable cause exists that one person is a member of al Qaeda or an associated terrorist organization.

He reiterated the administration’s position that the surveillance program has been legal, but said the government will now have the ability to act with sufficient “speed and agility.”

So now Bush submitted a plan to FISA where they can still monitor communications into and out of the US when one of the participants is a terrorist, AND do it quickly.  That means no 48 hours to get a approval.

I take this to mean that its a blanket authorization if they have probably cause.  They will more then likely have to prove that PC at a later time but they can now monitor the conversations in real time.

***

Greg Tinti and Sister Toldjah have more

***

Michelle's buying Capt Ed's doom and gloom interpretation (which he's since backed off of a little).

***

Terrorist Surveillance Program; What's Going On? 
John Hinderaker

A knowledgeable reader--a former professional in the area--sent us his thoughts on the likely significance of Attorney General Gonzales' disclosure that the Terrorist Surveillance Program is being moved under the jurisdiction of the FISA court, which we wrote about here. His comments, while necessarily speculative, strike us as highly plausible:

[...]

Here is a possible scenario to explain this new order from the FISC. Previously a lot of collection of wireless communications was undoubtedly done by targeting persons outside the US, and for that no FISC order is needed: such an order is only needed for radio communications sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person who is in the United States, if the contents are acquired by intentionally targeting that United States person. Other collection outside the US undoubtedly just scooped up whatever was available and was then analyzed using sophisticated software to produce leads. But the Gonzales letter refers to "targeting for collection." Obviously, if person #1 in, say, Waziristan is in regular communication with person #2 in Manhattan it would be possible to target person #1 in Waziristan for collection, and end up collecting person #2 in Manhattan, without getting an order. If in the course of that collection it becomes apparent that person #2 in Manhattan is also talking to person #3 in, say, Baluchistan, person #3 could also be targeted, resulting in person #2's communications being collected in that instance as well. All without an order from the FISC, since technically the persons targeted were outside the US.

From published accounts, it appears that the FISC balked at accepting information that was collected in this manner for probable cause purposes when it was submitted by the FBI in FISA applications targeting US persons. It may be that the FISC considered that this type of operation was an end run around them. The deal might then be something like this: the FISC is informed of probable cause against the non-US persons, if those persons are being targeted for collection when they communicate with persons inside the US. That keeps the FISC in the loop and they get to say they're monitoring intel operations for possible abuse: they can say that whatever submissions they receive must be sworn to, and so that means there is accountability. But the order that the FISC has now issued may mean that they will drop objections to accepting NSA information for purposes of probable cause in FISA applications that target US persons, now that a chain of accountability has been established that covers all the information that is submitted to the FISC.

***

James Taranto has thoughts here.

***

The New Wiretapping Program, Update
Posted by Curt 

The Scotus Blog found the question and answer briefing given after the announcement of the new wiretap program.  It's long but this segment sticks out: (h/t Protein Wisdom)

QUESTION: Okay.  Just one clarification here.  Are you doing anything different than you were doing before or did you just work out a way for the FISA court to be involved at every stage and in every case?

SENIOR DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICIAL: I’m not going to discuss precise modifications. Obviously the details of the program were never publicly discussed.  The general contours of the program were, and as the letter from the Attorney General explains, the general contours under these orders allow us to do the same thing and to target the same types of communications.  And critically the determination was made that operating under the orders that we’ve obtained here provides the speed and agility necessary to effectively conduct that surveillance in a way that will protect—there’s no compromise in national security.

I think the President would not have allowed this to go forward if it were determined that it would compromise national security.

QUESTION: So you’re saying you’re not doing anything different, all you’re doing is working out a way for this to be handled in a bureaucratic fashion that does not in any way impinge on what you thought needed to be done? ...

Listen, it's common sense here.  The only way to get a quick wiretap is to have the power of a anticipatory warrant.  As Orin Kerr explains here, this is a warrant in which the wiretap is immediately approved if several triggers occur:

[...]

And guess what?  According to Orin, the Supreme Court, for the first time, has approved anticipatory warrants:

What’s the mystery legal development that helped make this possible? If my guesses are on the right track, it’s probably the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Grubbs, which was handed down on March 21, 2006. The Grubbs case is the first Supreme Court decision approving the use of anticipatory warrants.

Ta Da! ...