The LA Times is reporting that despite an enormous expansion in surveillance of Americans, there has been no increase in terror prosecutions.

Kevin Drum has a useful pictorial perspective:

He also has a perspective that is even more alarming:

If anything, the real situation is almost certainly even worse than this: ‘Warrants’ understates the vast increase in surveillance, which also includes things like national security letters and the warrantless programs run by the NSA, while ‘prosecutions’ overstates the number of genuine terrorists who have been taken to court. It would be nice if Congress actually took a serious look at this.

Needless to say, I’m not sanguine about the likelihood of a Congressional investigation, but I do have a theory as to why you would have an explosion in surveillance without any increase in anti-terror actions: surveillance of political enemies.

By expanding surveillance to unprecedented levels, it allows a few dozens of actions to be taken against political opponents. For people who are actually conducting the surveillance, typically non-poltical civil service appointees, it would be easy to miss the political surveillance among the hundreds discreet actions, but someone *cough* Karl Rove *cough* would have the clearance to get the data that they wanted.