the Justice Department has not produced any compelling evidence that the USA PATRIOT Act has been essential in preventing al Qaeda-style terrorist plots.

the Justice Department has been quite frank in its use and desire to use the USA PATRIOT Act in non-terrorism contexts.

the FBI used the USA PATRIOT Act when it executed a covert search of Mayfield's home.

I have become skeptical on all of these fronts.

Senator Craig's SAFE Act would restore the ascertainment requirement.

We ought to be fighting terrorism ferociously without gutting civil liberties.

I want to know more about this.

Well, again, what is hard for us to address here is that we're to some extent doing oversight in the dark.

I'm concerned that a lot of these recipients aren't given notice of their right to challenge search orders.

But what is the standard of proof, then?

I'm not aware of abuses.

With all due respect, Mr. Director, as I've said, you've worked very well with me. This is not what we've done over the years.

I think that's a pretty sweeping comment that there really isn't any standard of proof, that there isn't any, to your terminology, no particular standard of proof.

Is it fair to say then, Director, that this staged development of information, as you describe it, is in fact the new standard of proof for issuing a FISA warrant and a National Security Letter?

What I am interested in knowing is, what is necessary at this point, Director Mueller, to initiate an investigation within the FBI?

Why not require a judge to approve these National Security Letters?

I hope that Thursday's session can be done in public.

My concern is, and I'll wrap up with this Mr. Chairman, that the pre-9/11 set of walls has been replaced with a new set of walls preventing information sharing.