According to a book on Hillary Clinton, she personally reviewed transcripts of cell-phone conversations illegally tapped by members of her husband's first presidential campaign in 1992. The Hill notes that the calls took place between members of opposition campaigns, and would have been as illegal then as they are now. It places Hillary in the position of demanding limitations on surveillance of terrorists while having pursued wiretaps on political opponents:
In their book about Clinton’s rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth, who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote: “Hillary’s defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.
“The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill,” Gerth and Van Natta wrote in reference to Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton. “Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions.” ...
Gerth told The Hill that he learned of the incident in 2006 when he interviewed a former campaign aide present at the tape playing. He has not revealed the aide’s identity. Clinton’s campaign has not disputed any facts reported in the final version of his book, which became public this spring, he said.
“It hasn’t been challenged,” said Gerth. “There hasn’t been one fact in the book that’s been challenged.”
The episode gets reported in Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton, which originally came out last June. It hasn't sold very well to this point, but that may soon change. The Hill listed its Amazon rank as 43,016 in its report this morning, but it has already risen to 1,599 since then.
The Hill extensively quotes Hillary on how government should have tight limitations on communications surveillance. In July, she addressed the American Constitution Society, and told them -- rightly -- that "when it comes to a regular program of searching for information that touches the privacy of ordinary Americans, those programs need to be monitored and reviewed as set out by Congress in cooperation with the judiciary." She then voted against the FISA bill in August that allowed for warrantless surveillance on limited communications in the US.
Interestingly, her chief strategist also has a history of communications intercepts. Mark Penn got served with a lawsuit from a former vice-president of his firm, claiming that Penn illegally tapped into his e-mails. Mitchell Markel accused Penn of intercepting messages sent from his Blackberry, and Penn had to settle the case in July.
Nor is this the only such incident for the Democrats. Jim McDermott (D-WA) got hold of a cell-phone conversation between Newt Gingrich and John Boehner in 1996 and published its contents as a political attack on the Speaker. McDermott eventually lost the lawsuit at the Supreme Court, as it reaffirmed the illegality of intercepting cell-phone conversations first established in the mid-1980s.
So Hillary doesn't want the NSA to intercept communications in defense of the nation, but had no problem with using such intercepts to get her husband elected President? Think that will play well in a general election?