Just remember as you watch the hearings that Congress is a player in this too. They want the power.
Comparing Nixon surveilling anti-war protesters with Bush surveilling Islamic terrorists is ridiculous.
Besides, Hillary will do what she wants anyway...all those FBI files were illegal too.
Corruption is bound to happen in any administration at various levels. What we do is find it and prosecute it. We can't prosecute corruption if we're dead. And if we're dead, corruption doesn't matter anyway.
I heard Gergen the other day just SURE, absolutely POSITIVE, that domestic spying will commence on political opponents and be used for smears. How unserious is that? He's continuing the overreaction Congress delivered in the '70's (an overreaction that needs a course correction right about now).
There's all kinds of domestic spying done by political operatives. They don't need the NSA to do it. The internet, financial institutions, legal papers, and a good PI are all that are necessary.
I started watching the hearings today, then got so angry I looked for something else. '24' was on. Perfect.
22 comments:
Heard Gergen say that, too. Jeez--what a great vote of confidence in the Gov't, huh?
Well, I can't watch the hearings because the sight of 'Scot's verdict' Specter running things puts my TV in peril.
The question (as Syl noted in her first sentence) is how hard the legislature is going to clutch their oversight perogatives in war time. The courts will put the question aside until it reaches a certain "maturity" (such as when no action they take could possibly be held against them) but the legislature generally doesn't have the sense to do so.
Reporting on these hearings is going to be slightly "colored" by POV so I think I'll wait for transcripts to become available. Aside from watching for quotes from Slow Joe and Leakey.
"Rule or Ruin!" is supposed to be a pejorative, isn't it?
Actually, if we, the American people, have any sense, we will NOT demand that FISA be re-written.
We will simply accept that the Executive has the power to do this under the Constitution and in conjunction with the Resolution to use Force.
If FISA is rewritten, then it will be legal for time immemorial.
But, worse, it will do as FISA was originally meant to do, hamper the executive in carrying out his obligation to protect the American people. There will be barrier after barrier and more i's to dot and t's to cross than are necessary.
FISA was written in the spirit of discouraging its use. Those who say FISA is a rubber stamp have only got it half right.
FISA is a rubber stamp only for those cases so damned serious that the JD is willing to write 75 pages of required material in order to get a damned warrant.
And I didn't know that tons of written stuff and approval needs to be obtained even before an emergency wiretap can commence! Now what was that about 72 hours again? It's a lie.
FISA was always meant as a deterrant. It's there just in case maybe someday some surveillance might be absolutely positively for sure necessary.
As I've said several times, the overreaction in the '70's and the hamstringing laws that resulted are a danger to the republic.
Let the Big Course Correction Begin!!
Let the Big Course Correction Begin!!
or at least continue with the renewal of the Patriot Act.
I wouldn't make this legal under FISA but I would lessen ALL the restrictions somewhat.
I think I'll start a new political platform called the anti-Privacy party!
Privacy demanded in the bedroom, refrigerator, medicine cabinet, and under the sink ;)
Other than that, my life is an open book. Read me!
Syl:
Plenty of folks will join.
I missed Gergen and will do my best to continue to do so. I have to admit that I don't watch this kind of thing much anymore...a little bit of CSpan goes a long way.
As to whether or not the government will end up spying...that is silly. If they want to they will whether or not FISA passes a law. What difference will make some paperwork make to people who have no respect for the law? And if they do indeed have respect for the law and are doing what they say they are doing, then what are these chicken littles carrying on about?
This suveillance is limited and if that is not good enough for these paranoid nutters, I don't know what to tell them to make them feel any better.
"I don't know what to tell them to make them feel any better"
"Good morning, President Gore" ?
flenser:
I read that and thought statement by Leahy and thought "this has to be a mistake. No one would say that."
Honest to God, these guys do not need hearings, the more we see them....the less we like them...the less we want them...as time goes by.
that should read, the statement by Leahy. Oh well Preview is for obsessive compulsives.
knucklehead:
Most people I know expect the government to do this and would be upset if they were not.
I remember after 9/11 when it came to light that the hijackers had lived here and taken flying lessons in the US and even gone to the government for financial assistance.
The reaction was "Why wasn't anyone paying attention to these people?" They were not happy with the fact that the privacy or civil liberties of Atta were more important than the safety of the American people.
Besides the Democrats forget that it was a long time ago when people asked what Nixon knew and when he knew it. I think we baby boomers are wearing out our welcome with these constant references to bygone Republican scandals. It strikes a lot of Americans today as tiresome.
knucklehead:
I read that Leahy said that. I can not remember where I read it now. It might have been polipundit. It does sound bizarre does it not?
Gee, Leahy should have added 'puppies' to his list. He's slipping.
Sen. Leahy is despicable, he'll say anything, he cares not a fig for facts.
Knuck,
Do you mean:
"The Bush Administration knew the names of the hijackers before 9/11."
That's true for a couple of the hijackers if we are to believe the Able Danger story. It would be more correct to say "Both the Clinton and Bush administrations" and it would be even more correct to say "but could do absolutely nothing about it because of the Gorelick wall and FISA."
Specter, Leahey and Rockefeller are doing the administration a great service. No one in their right minds could watch those guys and consider entrusting anything to do with security to them.
The "World's Greatest Deliberative Body" with Bozo as ringmaster is simply not reassuring.
The more history about the Senate that one reads, the more one becomes convinced of the existence of a providencial hand.
I saw that quote flenser is talking about. It was Leahy babbling about nuns and babies and Quakers. I can't find it now. It is one of those things that is so absurd you almost wonder if it is a hoax or something.
But hey, the guy has been a Senator for years and years so who knows what he might say?
This situation is being used to further pander and provoke fear and loathing among the far left wing of the party. I've come to the conclusion that the whole exercise is for the benefit of Demo fund raising. Unfortunately I have no excuse/motive for some of the Republicans who are leading the committee. Tough reelection battles coming up I suppose.
One other thing that gets my goat, every story written re this matter, via my local fishwrap, usually under an AP lead, begins with the first words of the sentence being "Bush's domestic spying program." They are no longer bothering to mention the OBL or GWOT aspect.
I am convinced that the AP is a seditious organization that wishes to see the downfall of this country. Sorry for the rant.
Head on nail, Peter.
They've been as exposed as they're ever gonna be exposed--all the agenda media has--and yet on they carry, on and on and on. Like punching the Pillsbury Doughboy.
Leahy's hysterical blather is reported here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_go_co/eavesdropping_congress_12;_ylt=AolmiZisltmvt8T_2gl8vl7B4FkB;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
Link to loony Leahy
Peter, congrats on the London hate-speech verdict!
Post a Comment