Bush acknowledges allowing eavesdropping

[wondergirl9847]

I shouldn't have called bin Laden last week to discuss our plan to take over the world.

I'd better say goodbye now, Ledgies. They are probably gonna be knockin' on my door, right about......

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Yes he did and you are correct.

I get that just about every administration has done this in some way. But, two wrongs do not make a right and to my knowledge, W signed an official document allowing it as opposed to some branch of some Agency doing it without the knowledge of the Oval Office, which I submit was how it may have happened in the past. This is a huge thing that should horrify every American. W is not King George; he is the President and the law applies to all, even him. As I read it, the law said a warrant was needed and he just ignored that. Whatever respect I may have had for him years ago is now further supplanted with disgust.

Is it an impeachable offense? Under the standard mostly bent to apply to Clinton, yes it is and he who lives by the sword . . . .

So much for restoring dignity to the White House

Exactamundo. Lets use the standard the Republicans applied to Clinton and break out the tar and feathers while we're at it. One wonders what he'll do if left alone...and the prospect is S.C.A.R.Y...............

Jason, I like this: W is not King George. Im gonna hijack it ok? too late!

[dissention]

Joe Biden fully supports what Bush did. This whole thing? Is hysterical.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by dissention

Joe Biden fully supports what Bush did. This whole thing? Is hysterical.

Joe Biden?! That surprises me, but it probably shouldnt. I heard Barbara Boxer today say this IS an impeachable offense. This should be VERY interesting.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Joe Biden?! That surprises me, but it probably shouldnt.

"I'm the guy that drafted the FISA act, twenty five years ago on the judiciary committee--it's a secret court, allowing the President to wiretap anybody, intercept anything for up to 72 hours-----he already has the authority under the FISA court."

He's a buffoon, always has been. He went positively gaga over Shrub's last speech. And Chris Matthews said Bush should be made a part of Mt. Rushmore.

Originally Posted by DavidMn

I heard Barbara Boxer today say this IS an impeachable offense. This should be VERY interesting.

I love her. She's got brass balls.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by dissention

"I'm the guy that drafted the FISA act, twenty five years ago on the judiciary committee--it's a secret court, allowing the President to wiretap anybody, intercept anything for up to 72 hours-----he already has the authority under the FISA court."

He's a buffoon, always has been. He went positively gaga over Shrub's last speech. And Chris Matthews said Bush should be made a part of Mt. Rushmore.



I love her. She's got brass balls.

And the thing I like about her is when she said this today, she wasnt pounding gavels or shouting, but speaking in very calm measured tones. It definitely got my attention.

[irishgrl]

Bush: spying program to continue By Adam Entous


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush said on Monday he broke no laws in authorizing spying on Americans with suspected ties to terrorism and declared he would continue the practice despite concern that it infringes on civil liberties.


Bush, facing a barrage of questions over the program at an end-of-year news conference, said he believed an investigation was under way by the Justice Department into who committed the "shameful act" of revealing the covert program to the press.
He rejected any suggestion he was exercising "unchecked power" when he decided after the September 11 2001 attacks to authorize eavesdropping on international telephone calls by Americans with suspected links to terrorism.

"Do I have the legal authority to do this? And the answer is, absolutely," said Bush, who is struggling with low approval ratings and wide public discontent with the Iraq war.

"I've reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill our American citizens," he said.

Bush also said it was "inexcusable" that a group of U.S. senators were blocking renewal of the Patriot Act, a centerpiece of his war on terrorism which includes provisions critics also say infringe on Americans' individual liberties.

Bush said the eavesdropping program, first disclosed by the New York Times on Friday, had been effective in disrupting terrorist acts, but he gave no details.

Several Republican and Democratic lawmakers back plans by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, to hold a hearing on the issue. Many question whether spying on Americans violates the Constitution.

West Virginia Democratic Sen. John Rockefeller (news, bio, voting record), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on Monday he had expressed serious concerns about the program after he first learned about it in July 2003. In a hand-written letter to Vice President Dick Cheney, Rockefeller wrote that the activities raised "profound oversight issues."

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and his predecessor, Tom Daschle, said they were briefed by the administration about the program but said key details were omitted.

The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act made it illegal to spy on U.S. citizens in the United States without getting a court order. Bush gave the National Security Agency authority to intercept communications without such approval.

ABOVE THE LAW?

"No administration should believe it is above the law. We need to restore checks and balances in this country," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Bush said he wanted to assure the American people that the program "is a necessary part of my job to protect you, and (that) we're guarding your civil liberties."

"As president of the United States and commander in chief I have the constitutional responsibility and the constitutional authority to protect our country," he said.

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said earlier on Monday the Congress' authorization of military force after September 11 also gave Bush the right to order the eavesdropping.

The New York Times said it had been asked by the White House not to publish an article about the program, arguing it could jeopardize investigations. The newspaper said it delayed publication for a year and omitted some information that officials argued could be useful to terrorists.

Bush defended his Iraq strategy, which is costing $6 billion a month and in which more than 2,100 U.S. troops have died. But he conceded that pre-war intelligence failures made it harder to make the case that countries like Iran pose a threat.

"Where it is going to be most difficult to make the case is in the public arena. People will say, you know, if we're trying to make the case on Iran, you know, 'Well, the intelligence failed in Iraq; therefore, how can we can trust the intelligence in Iran?"' Bush said.

(Additional reporting by Patricia Wilson)

[dissention]

Senator says she's asked for opinions on Bush impeachment
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Senato...ions_1219.html

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has become the first in the Senate to raise consideration of impeachment of President George W. Bush for authorizing spying on Americans without warrants, RAW STORY has learned.

In a release issued this evening, Boxer said she's asked "four presidential scholars" for their opinion on impeachment after former White Housel counsel John Dean -- made famous by his role in revealing the Watergate tapes -- asserted that President Bush had 'admitted' to an 'impeachable offense.'

Boxer isn't the first congressmember today to float the word. Earlier today, Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) said Bush should be impeached if he broke the law in the spying program. The liberal California senator has tangled with Bush before -- earlier this year, she challenged the president's Ohio electoral votes.

BOXER ASKS PRESIDENTIAL SCHOLARS ABOUT FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL’S STATEMENT THAT BUSH ADMITTED TO AN ‘IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE’

Washington, D.C.– U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today asked four presidential scholars for their opinion on former White House Counsel John Dean’s statement that President Bush admitted to an “impeachable offense” when he said he authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge.

Boxer said, “I take very seriously Mr. Dean’s comments, as I view him to be an expert on Presidential abuse of power. I am expecting a full airing of this matter by the Senate in the very near future.”

Boxer’s letter is as follows:

On December 16, along with the rest of America, I learned that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge. President Bush underscored his support for this action in his press conference today.

On Sunday, December 18, former White House Counsel John Dean and I participated in a public discussion that covered many issues, including this surveillance. Mr. Dean, who was President Nixon’s counsel at the time of Watergate, said that President Bush is “the first President to admit to an impeachable offense.” Today, Mr. Dean confirmed his statement.

This startling assertion by Mr. Dean is especially poignant because he experienced first hand the executive abuse of power and a presidential scandal arising from the surveillance of American citizens.

Given your constitutional expertise, particularly in the area of presidential impeachment, I am writing to ask for your comments and thoughts on Mr. Dean’s statement.

Unchecked surveillance of American citizens is troubling to both me and many of my constituents. I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter as soon as possible.

Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

[irishgrl]

OHO! Go Barbara!!!!!

somebody get a dang ROPE!!

ps: Thanks Diss!!

[gldstwmn]

There we go.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

There we go.

I am unsure where W is getting the authority to do these taps, et al. The law guiding this procedure is very clear that the warrant from the secret court must first be obtained. Also, if memory serves me correctly, that secret court has denied like 20 out of 14,000 requests over the last few years - so little evidence apparently is required. So, it makes no sense that W and, more importantly, Rove would not have put the ones at issue in front of that court and then sign an Executive Order allowing the taps to take place. This just makes no sense, but it clearly was illegal - at least according to anything I have read and though I have not read it all.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I am unsure where W is getting the authority to do these taps, et al. The law guiding this procedure is very clear that the warrant from the secret court must first be obtained. Also, if memory serves me correctly, that secret court has denied like 20 out of 14,000 requests over the last few years - so little evidence apparently is required. So, it makes no sense that W and, more importantly, Rove would not have put the ones at issue in front of that court and then sign an Executive Order allowing the taps to take place. This just makes no sense, but it clearly was illegal - at least according to anything I have read and though I have not read it all.

I can't see how anyone would think it's not blatantly illegal. I'm most curious to know who he was actually wiretapping.
I sat there and watched Jeffrey Toobin on CNN yesterday dance around the subject and never really answer Paula Zahn's question of whether it was illegal or not. Maybe he's afraid of being wiretapped.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I can't see how anyone would think it's not blatantly illegal. I'm most curious to know who he was actually wiretapping.
I sat there and watched Jeffrey Toobin on CNN yesterday dance around the subject and never really answer Paula Zahn's question of whether it was illegal or not. Maybe he's afraid of being wiretapped.

I also am unsure of how anyone would ever sue to stop it. Certainly, the terrorists they are watching will not - though that would be an interesting case because the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine dictates that any evidence obtained in an illegal search cannot be admissable at trial. Also, you would have to know you are being tapped and I am unsure how you would go about doing that. Other than the person being tapped, who would have the required standing as an injured party to stop the tapping. I guess the DOJ or Congress could do some broad legal action to stop it though - but those are both controlled by W

Finally, they could have apparently just gone to the secret court afterward and obtained a warrant in hindsight. Why did they not just do that.

The whole thing is strange.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I also am unsure of how anyone would ever sue to stop it. Certainly, the terrorists they are watching will not - though that would be an interesting case because the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine dictates that any evidence obtained in an illegal search cannot be admissable at trial. Also, you would have to know you are being tapped and I am unsure how you would go about doing that. Other than the person being tapped, who would have the required standing as an injured party to stop the tapping. I guess the DOJ or Congress could do some broad legal action to stop it though - but those are both controlled by W

Finally, they could have apparently just gone to the secret court afterward and obtained a warrant in hindsight. Why did they not just do that.

The whole thing is strange.

I agree. I'm sure they didn't secretly wiretap people just for the hell of it. Like I said, it would be most telling to see who was tapped. Ashcroft's true reasons for resignation are becoming clearer to me by the day. Even for him, this kind of stuff must have been beyond the pale.

[gldstwmn]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...122000685.html

A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John D. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation.

Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterday that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.

Robertson, who was appointed to the federal bench in Washington by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and was later selected by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to serve on the FISA court, declined to comment when reached at his office late yesterday.

Word of Robertson's resignation came as two Senate Republicans yesterday joined the call for congressional investigations into the National Security Agency's warrantless interception of telephone calls and e-mails to overseas locations by U.S. citizens suspected of links to terrorist groups. They questioned the legality of the operation and the extent to which the White House kept Congress informed.

Sens. Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) echoed concerns raised by Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has promised hearings in the new year.

"There's going to be a great national debate on this subject," Specter told reporters yesterday, while emphasizing concerns over the White House's legal arguments in support of the program.

The hearings, possibly in several committees, would take place at the beginning of a midterm election year during which the prosecution of the Iraq war is also likely to figure prominently in key House and Senate races.

Hagel and Snowe joined three Democratic colleagues -- Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Carl M. Levin (Mich.) and Ron Wyden (Ore.) -- in calling for a joint investigation by the Senate's Judiciary and Intelligence panels into the classified program.


Click the link for the full article.