A lot of talk today about House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi’s October 11, 2001 letter to NSA chief Gen. Michael Hayden over NSA surveillance of suspected terrorists. The New York Times reports that after September 11, the NSA expanded its surveillance activities on its own, which Hayden revealed to Pelosi and other lawmakers in an October 1, 2001 briefing. Pelosi then wrote a letter to Hayden listing some concerns — the issue at the time seemed not to be warrantless surveillance but Pelosi’s preference for a pre-Patriot Act wall system in which an intelligence agency would not be allowed to tell law enforcement when it discovered potentially valuable information about possible terrorist activity. Pelosi’s greatest concern, however, was this: That Hayden was acting without having received specific presidential authorization. Later, of course, Hayden received very specific presidential authorization, in the form of an executive order, and some Democrats want to impeach the president for it. Here is the text of Pelosi’s letter to Hayden, with redactions for classified information:

During your appearance before the committee on October 1, you indicated that you had been operating since the September 11 attacks with an expansive view of your authorities with respect to the conduct of electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and related statutes, orders, regulations, and guidelines. You seemed to be inviting expressions of concern from us, if there were any, and, after the briefing was over and I had a chance to reflect on what you said, I instructed staff to get more information on this matter for me. For several reasons, including what I consider to be an overly broad interpretation of President Bush’s directive of October 5 on sharing with Congress “classified or sensitive law enforcement information” it has not been possible to get answers to my questions.
Without those answers, the concerns I have about what you said on the 1st can not be resolved, and I wanted to bring them to your attention directly. You indicated that you were treating as a matter of first impression, [redacted ] being of foreign intelligence interest. As a result, you were forwarding the intercepts, and any information [redacted ] without first receiving a request for that identifying information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Although I may be persuaded by the strength of your analysis [redacted ] I believe you have a much more difficult case to make [redacted ] Therefore, I am concerned whether, and to what extent, the National Security Agency has received specific presidential authorization for the operations you are conducting. Until I understand better the legal analysis regarding the sufficiency of the authority which underlies your decision on the appropriate way to proceed on this matter, I will continue to be concerned.