# FBI raids home of former DoJ lawyer suspected of leaking surveillance program **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 6, 2007, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627 "2007-08-06T14:49:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/1 "2007-08-06T14:49:49Z")
Under a [classified search warrant,](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20121795/site/newsweek/) they seized Thomas Tamm’s desktop computer, two of his children’s laptops and a cache of personal files. > [@](#): > > A veteran federal prosecutor who left DOJ last year, Tamm worked at OIPR during a critical period in 2004 when senior Justice officials first strongly objected to the surveillance program. Those protests led to a crisis that March when, according to recent Senate testimony, then A.G. John Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller and others threatened to resign, prompting Bush to scale the program back. Tamm, said one of the legal sources, had shared concerns about he program’s legality, but it was unclear whether he actively participated in the internal DOJ protest. 😕 Why, at a juncture when the Admin should be trying to look as nonthreatening as possible WRT this whole business, are they bothering with this? Even if Tamm was the leaker, he’s no longer working at DoJ and no longer a secrecy risk. Why rake up the coals? Why remind the public that there **were** internal protests over the program? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/2 "2007-08-06T15:26:10Z")
Well, to discourage people from doing similar things in the future, for one. The administration probably thinks the public is more on its side when it comes to the warrantless wiretapping issue, so I don’t think they mind so much that it’s in the news. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/3 "2007-08-06T17:15:02Z")
What **John Mace** said. Also, there’s the fact that most people don’t know anything about the wiretapping case to begin with, let alone this little side story. And even if they did, what of it? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/4 "2007-08-06T21:33:06Z")
[Dept. of Justice must investigate Rep. John Boehner for possibly leaking classified info.](http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/29882) > [@](#): > > Today, CREW filed a complaint with the Department of Justice asking that the Counterespionage Section of the National Security Division initiate an investigation into whether House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH) violated the law by leaking classified information. Our complaint can be found here. > > In a July 31, 2007 interview with Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto, Rep. Boehner disclosed an aspect of a Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court’s decision regarding warrantless wiretapping Does anyone think Justice will jump onto _this_ leak? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/5 "2007-08-06T21:39:20Z")
Of course not. Justice Department officials serve at the pleasure of the President, and it is the President’s pleasure that political allies be protected and enemies be persecuted. Next silly question? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fbi-raids-home-of-former-doj-lawyer-suspected-of-leaking-surveillance-program/414627/6 "2007-08-06T22:14:48Z")
This is the difficult part about dealing with classified matters: anything involving the secrecy of eavesdropping methods is very highly classified and there is a whole special section of law related to protection of communications intelligence (18 USC 641), much in the way there is a special section of law relating to disclosure of the identities of CIA operatives. Disclosure of this kind of information is absolutely, unquestionably, without a doubt a violation of that law. However, in the absence of any specific information about what effects the disclosure of the program may have had on tracking down real terrorists, I certainly see that the public has an compelling interest in knowing this kind of information. It is very hard to see how the disclosure of the controversy about the legality of the program hasn’t greatly served the public interest. So we have someone who allegedly broke the law, but the country is probably much better off, in balance, for knowing that the President may have seriously abused his power. Where does it leave us? Most journalists have the conviction to go to jail to protect their sources. Maybe civil servants ought to share the same devotion to their cause: if you’re willing to break the law, even if it is for the perceived benefit of the country, maybe you shouldn’t pretend that you didn’t do something illegal, and accept the punishment. Of course, I have no idea if this guy was the leaker; I’m just stating a general principle.