NationStates Jolt Archive

AHHH The republicans were just pissed a democrat got head and they didn't... Come on guys, admit it....

You put me in mind of Robin Williams in Good Morning, Vietnam" talking to the station supervisor....

Yes, information was lost, get off your ass and pay attention to the media, as misleading as it can be (except for Fox News). Bush is a great president because he stands for moral standpoints to bring ethics back into this country, for example:

Defends the Marriage Act (ie. Gay [faggot] marriages should be outlawed and nonexistent]
Expanding Child Tax Credit
He nominates Judicial Conservatives of which don't legislate from the f**king bench, but actually interpret the law
Banning Tax Payer funded abortions.


Is that enough reasons, or do you still need more?


1. Who asked this guy for "reasons" without defining the word for him?

OR

2. Okay, which of you comedians is pretending to be an ultra-right parrot just to flame-bait?

More CURRENT info regarding one of the main issues on this thread ...

*ahem*

Judges Just Briefed on Surveillance Plans

By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
Monday, January 9, 2006; 9:25 PM

WASHINGTON -- The federal judges who were bypassed when the Bush administration ordered warrantless wiretaps in the United States received a secret briefing Monday on details of the surveillance. Separately, a former FBI director and other lawyers questioned whether the surveillance is legal.

The classified briefing at the Justice Department had been requested by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, presiding judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court. Established by Congress in the late 1970s, the court oversees the government's handling of espionage and terrorism investigations.
U.S. District Judge James Robertson last month resigned from the FISA court and other judges voiced concerns about the National Security Agency's electronic surveillance program, which President Bush authorized after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

Gen. Michael Hayden, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, was among administration officials who attended the briefing. Hayden served as NSA director when the electronic surveillance program was launched and has since become the government's No. 2 intelligence official.

Details of the program remain highly classified.

Justice Department and NSA spokesmen refused to confirm that a meeting took place. A spokesman for Kollar-Kotelly likewise declined comment and the nine other FISA court judges did not return telephone calls Monday.

But two government officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, confirmed the briefing and Hayden's presence.

According to an account in the Washington Post, U.S. District Judge Dee Benson of Utah, a member of the special panel, has asked why the special court was not used in conducting the surveillance.

"If you've got us here, why didn't you go through us? They've said it's faster (to bypass FISA), but they have emergency authority under FISA, so I don't know," Benson was quoted by the newspaper as saying.

The existence of the program was first reported last month by the New York Times. Bush later acknowledged he approved the warrantless surveillance and, along with senior lieutenants, has stoutly defended it.

In a letter Monday to congressional leaders, 13 legal scholars said the Justice Department's written justification for the NSA monitoring program "fails to offer a plausible legal defense."

In a five-page letter to House and Senate intelligence committee leaders, Assistant Attorney General William E. Moschella on Dec. 22 outlined a detailed defense for the warrantless surveillance.

He argued that Bush under a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack, had the authority to order such electronic surveillance as part of his responsibility as commander-in-chief to protect the nation.

But the former government officials and constitutional law experts said Congress did not authorize domestic spying as part of the 2001 resolution. Lawmakers, they wrote, also "indisputably" have the authority to regulate electronic surveillance inside the United States.

The 13 experts said it is "beyond dispute that, in (our) democracy, the president cannot simply violate criminal laws behind closed doors because he deems them obsolete or impracticable."

Legal analysts at the Congressional Research Service last week raised similar questions, and lawmakers have called for hearings on the NSA program.

The group included former federal judge William S. Sessions, who served as FBI director from 1987 to 1993 under President Reagan and President George H.W Bush.


Well, let the character assassination continue unabated!
Oh sh*t, i didn't get this from CNN!!! Woe is me! :rolleyes:

OOH! Yummy! A fact-meal! Thanks, Straughn!

Too bad the inevitable dessert is always BS pudding...

Oh well, you tried.

I haven't been able to catch up on every post of this thread (I had to stop at page 14), so I am sorry if I end up repeating anything that has been said before.

While I hope very strongly that Bush has used the very best of intentions in all that he has done and chosen (even if they have proven to be unwise) nevertheless, I would like to offer some thoughts.

1) Someone said earlier that if you have nothing to hide then there should be no fear of it being known. If this is the case, then why was the administration afraid of letting FISA perform their oversight duties? It is a secret court so national security would not be threatened using it. Also, the 72 or 75 hour grace period provided by it allows for the immediate emergency spying that one may feel necessary before they report it. The reporting is to be there to prove that all was done for the right reasons.

2) The importance of oversight to me is so that people cannot accuse you dishonesty. I like to use the metaphor of a bank teller. A bank teller is hired for their honesty yet no single bank teller is allowed in the vault without another present. That way, if something did happen, each bank teller can witness for each other that neither is responsible for whatever happened.

3) If a precendent is set or accepted that a president secretly spy without any oversight to verify the proper use of the spying, then how would the more conversative citizens of this nation feel if an extreme socialist was someday elected (people have been known to cover up their true characters for elections) and then spying was secretly used to undermine the democracy and capitalist society that America has created for itself? Imagine all the fighting during the Cold War being for nothing?

4) We must all remember that we are human and falliable and therefore laws are necessary to create boundaries of behavior to minimize our falliablities so that they do not impinge on others or worse hurt others. Leaders, as the ultimate role models of society, must behave to an even higher standard. That is why I was personally unhappy that Clinton was able to get off so scot free from lying under oath (even though the whole situation itself was ridiculous to me). As a result, if a leader goes out of his or her way to bypass, ignore, or deliberately break a law, then society's whole fabric of law is threatened.

5) I just want to say, as an independent, that I am tired of all the lemming talk. Too many Conservatives on the news shows say things like, "Clinton did it, Reagan did it", or any some such. Or with the lobbying, "well the Democrats do it too." Morals and honor have always been very important to me, and no one else's wrong should ever justify another's.

Either way, despite that Bush has admitted to his actions, everyone is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty. The law is very important to me if you hadn't figured that out already.

Thank you very much for letting me add my two cents in to the matter. :)

Wow! First a fact meal, now a good-sense dessert. This is better than Thanksgiving dinner! Thanks.