I dunno. The realm of "entirely possible" is pretty wide. The FISA program is supposed to be secret so they're not supposed to talk about it. Also, this most recent news may change things, but up until now the heat and focus has been on the NSA, FBI and DOJ, not the judges, so the judges have no incentive to speak up publicly and attract the attention. The judges may have privately had some harsh comments towards NSA and FBI investigators and DOJ prosecutors, but at this juncture there's no way to know that.
Plus, there is virtually no oversight of the FISA Court, and it's as one-sided as it can get (the absence of anyone but the judge and the government present at the hearings), and these judges work intimately with these federal agencies, and as of the case with local and state judges, often view prosecutors more as colleagues than advocates.
These judges are all District Court judges appointed for 7 year terms to the FISA Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. As the NYT noted in 2013, the FISA Court has become effectively a parallel Supreme Court, because the judges' decisions have no oversight and therefore cannot be overruled.
It also lends itself to a situation where these judges believe their poopy doesn't stink. In 2013 (that's when the phone records collection poopy hit the Eric Snowden fan), back when Democrats were rightly skeptical of government secrecy and surveillance, Democrat Ron Wyden was probably the most vocal critic, accusing the FISA Court of group polarization, or groupthink. Not because of the natural tendency of those with such power to abuse it, but because of political considerations. He felt that because all of these judges were appointed by the Chief Justice, a Republican, that the court was stacked with like-minded individuals. He was right to be skeptical, but for thy wrong reasons. Since 2013, four of the five judges appointed have been judges appointed by Bill Clinton. So the only groupthink that's going on is, "How dare you question my decisions! My poopy doesn't stink!"
So I really don't look for many FISA judges to go public saying things like, "I was duped! I got played, because I didn't do my job as a skeptical judge to ensure the constitutional rights of American citizens."
One of the more interesting things about this story is, and it's a bombshell of a story that should make every American crap their pants, according to the MSM this is either a story that doesn't exist, it is a figment of the imagination of a wimgnut, or it is simply not newsworthy. It is a story that writes itself in the form of federal court filings, yet not a word from the cracker jack journalists of The Press.
Plus, there is virtually no oversight of the FISA Court, and it's as one-sided as it can get (the absence of anyone but the judge and the government present at the hearings), and these judges work intimately with these federal agencies, and as of the case with local and state judges, often view prosecutors more as colleagues than advocates.
These judges are all District Court judges appointed for 7 year terms to the FISA Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. As the NYT noted in 2013, the FISA Court has become effectively a parallel Supreme Court, because the judges' decisions have no oversight and therefore cannot be overruled.
It also lends itself to a situation where these judges believe their poopy doesn't stink. In 2013 (that's when the phone records collection poopy hit the Eric Snowden fan), back when Democrats were rightly skeptical of government secrecy and surveillance, Democrat Ron Wyden was probably the most vocal critic, accusing the FISA Court of group polarization, or groupthink. Not because of the natural tendency of those with such power to abuse it, but because of political considerations. He felt that because all of these judges were appointed by the Chief Justice, a Republican, that the court was stacked with like-minded individuals. He was right to be skeptical, but for thy wrong reasons. Since 2013, four of the five judges appointed have been judges appointed by Bill Clinton. So the only groupthink that's going on is, "How dare you question my decisions! My poopy doesn't stink!"
So I really don't look for many FISA judges to go public saying things like, "I was duped! I got played, because I didn't do my job as a skeptical judge to ensure the constitutional rights of American citizens."
One of the more interesting things about this story is, and it's a bombshell of a story that should make every American crap their pants, according to the MSM this is either a story that doesn't exist, it is a figment of the imagination of a wimgnut, or it is simply not newsworthy. It is a story that writes itself in the form of federal court filings, yet not a word from the cracker jack journalists of The Press.
