Wiretap applications and orders are granted under seal. They are applied for by prosecutors after authorization is obtained from a specifically designated offical in the Attorney General's office in DC. The orders authorizing interceptions will allow the FBI or other investigative agency as the case may be to install the devices surreptitiously and monitor the intercepted conversations. An initial order is valid for 30 days and then extension orders can be applied for and granted. Progress reports are required periodically, so the Judge can determine if the goals of the interception (as set forth in the application for the bug) are being met.

Since the application and order are under seal, the FBI may be taking the position that it can't disclose anything about them until a court unseals the documents. If the Justice Department believes doing so would jeopardize a continuing investigation or put people at risk, it may decline to ask the Judge to unseal them now.

Here is what the feds have to show a Judge to get a warrant (paraphrased from the statute):

a) there is probable cause for belief that an individual is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a particular offense for which wiretapping or bugging is allowed;

(b) there is probable cause for belief that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through such interception;

© normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous;

(d) except as provided in another section of the wiretapping statute, there is probable cause for belief that the facilities from which, or the place where, the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted are being used, or are about to be used, in connection with the commission of such offense, or are leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by such person.

You can access the federal wiretapping statute (called "Title III") here.

It sounds like the Mayor is saying that the Justice Department, for political reasons, applied for and obtained a lawful electronic surveillance order on specious grounds. That's a serious charge.

We can't recall anyone in recent years accusing the feds of installing a bug or wiretap without a court order. So, the questions are: What is the Mayor, or others who use his office, suspected of doing? Is the suspicion supported by credible allegations amounting to probable cause of the commision of a crime for which bugging or wiretapping is authorized? Did the feds really need to bug the mayor's office to obtain evidence of the alleged crime --would less intrusive means likely have sufficed (like flipping people to get the information they wanted)? Did they exhaust all reasonably available alternatives before applying for the bugging order?

We don't think there will be any quick, definitive answers here. If the feds got what they wanted before the bug was exposed, there may be a quick indictment of whoever it is they think committed a crime. If not, we think they will try to keep the details secret as long as they can.

By the way, if there's a lawful bugging order (referred to as an order authorizing the interception of oral communications), we think it's likely that wiretap (phone) orders were obtained as well.

We're basing our speculation that there was a lawfully obtained order on the news article linked above and our experience defending against federal wiretaps-our opinion may change as more info becomes available, so stay tuned.