NationStates Jolt Archive

Throw his ass in prison, I say (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/hayden-broke-law/):
The Bush administration has pulled out all the stops in attempting to defend the NSA’s warrantless domestic spying program. After speeches by President Bush and Attorney General Gonzales, Deputy Director of National Intelligence and former NSA Director General Michael Hayden took another crack at the defense (http://www.dni.gov/release_letter_012306.html) in a speech on Monday. He’s not exactly the ideal choice to restore the administration’s credibility.

As Think Progress documented back in December (http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/19/nsa-director/), Hayden misled Congress. In his 10/17/02 testimony, (http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/hearings/911hearing-trans-oct17.htm) he told a committee investigating the 9/11 attacks that any surveillance of persons in the United States was done consistent with FISA.

At the time of his statements, Hayden was fully aware of the presidential order to conduct warrantless domestic spying issued the previous year. But Hayden didn’t feel as though he needed to share that with Congress. Apparently, Hayden believed that he had been legally authorized to conduct the surveillance, but told Congress that he had no authority to do exactly what he was doing. The Fraud and False Statements statute (18 U.S.C. 1001) (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=18&sec=1001) make Hayden’s misleading statements to Congress illegal.

All this on top of the fact that, as three major papers have now noted, Republican Senator Mike DeWine wanted to revise the FISA statute to lower the burden for getting a warrant to wiretap foreign citizens, and the administration argued against it, saying it would be unconstitutional.

I have no doubt that the Bush apologists on this forum will still claim that the warrantless wiretapping program was somehow legal, probably based on the "Presidential dibbsies" theory of jurisprudence, but there's little doubt, the longer this story goes on, that the Bush administration broke the law.

one bump--that's all, I swear.:D

give it time, the talking points probably haven't been distributed yet

He didn't lie. He 'engaged in disinformation practices'. :)

give it time, the talking points probably haven't been distributed yet
Ah--I'm ahead of the curve again, then? :D

He didn't lie. He 'engaged in disinformation practices'. :)
Accuracy-destruction-program-related-activities?

Ah--I'm ahead of the curve again, then? :D

yeah. perhaps we should save time and come up with some talking points for them?

I haven't been following this.

So, it's basically that they were wiretapping without warrents since '02 and all involved parties knew that it was illegal?

could we have a few more scandals/unethical actions? Please? I don't think we've had enough.

I think I'll write my congressman and ask him to become a bastard. And make it public this time.

Throw his ass in prison, I say (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/hayden-broke-law/):


All this on top of the fact that, as three major papers have now noted, Republican Senator Mike DeWine wanted to revise the FISA statute to lower the burden for getting a warrant to wiretap foreign citizens, and the administration argued against it, saying it would be unconstitutional.

I have no doubt that the Bush apologists on this forum will still claim that the warrantless wiretapping program was somehow legal, probably based on the "Presidential dibbsies" theory of jurisprudence, but there's little doubt, the longer this story goes on, that the Bush administration broke the law.
Maegi brought up something alluding to this on the "Bush Impeachment" thread.
You ROCK. *bows*

one bump--that's all, I swear.:D
I see your *bump* and raise you one *bump*

Wonder what happened to all those people who were swearing up and down that the warrantless wiretapping was legal? Anyone else hear crickets chirping?

Ok, so what you're saying is that since the Director of the NSA lied about whether or not a CLASSIFIED operation was going on, it means that said operation was illegal?

So, it, in no way, has to do with the fact that it was CLASSIFIED information?

Wierd.

By the way, I'm happy to report that as of last week, the FBI has officially started the investigation into who leaked the CLASSIFIED information to the New York Times.

Yeah, you're right. Somebodies going to jail. You just might not have picked the right person. :D

By the way, those aren't crickets. It's the whimpering of someone who's about to be federally indicted for leaking classified information vital to national security. ;)

So we can impeach a guy for having fun with a Jew(no offense intended), but we can't impeach a guy for openly lying.

So we can impeach a guy for having fun with a Jew(no offense intended), but we can't impeach a guy for openly lying.
What the hell are you talking about?

So we can impeach a guy for having fun with a Jew(no offense intended), but we can't impeach a guy for openly lying.
how is offence not intended if it is completely irrelevant?

yeah. perhaps we should save time and come up with some talking points for them?

How about the Ronald Reagan defense? "You know I did it, I know that you know I did it, but I also know that you think I might just be dumb enough to have done it and not known it was wrong. So how 'bout we all just forget about this 'cause I'm just so charming and folksy?"

By the way, those aren't crickets.
Yes, well it seems obvious that some pests are louder than others. :rolleyes:

Ok, so what you're saying is that since the Director of the NSA lied about whether or not a CLASSIFIED operation was going on, it means that said operation was illegal?

So, it, in no way, has to do with the fact that it was CLASSIFIED information?

Wierd.

By the way, I'm happy to report that as of last week, the FBI has officially started the investigation into who leaked the CLASSIFIED information to the New York Times.

Yeah, you're right. Somebodies going to jail. You just might not have picked the right person. :D

By the way, those aren't crickets. It's the whimpering of someone who's about to be federally indicted for leaking classified information vital to national security. ;)

You mean Rove or Libby? Libby's already been indicted, but for perjury. Perhaps you have information otherwise?

You mean Rove or Libby? Libby's already been indicted, but for perjury. Perhaps you have information otherwise?
If by "information", you mean "innuendo, slander, third-party deliberate misrepresentation", and "right-wing talking points" ...
then yes, that's what he appears to have just about ALL the time.
*nods*

Ok, so what you're saying is that since the Director of the NSA lied about whether or not a CLASSIFIED operation was going on, it means that said operation was illegal?

So, it, in no way, has to do with the fact that it was CLASSIFIED information?

Wierd.
No no no no no. There where people who gave closed testimony, there was an opportunity, if it was classified, for him to not have to lie to congress. "Classified" is not a magic wand of no accountability. Further, he admits that wire taps are happening, the only difference is that he says that they are going through the FISA courts. The courts that, what, rejected all of 6 warrents, is it? So the only thing classified about it, apparently, is that they are doing it unconstitutionally. This, again, implies that if you call it 'Classified' you can do all kinds of crazy shit without accountability. Not in a representative democracy, no.

By the way, I'm happy to report that as of last week, the FBI has officially started the investigation into who leaked the CLASSIFIED information to the New York Times.

Yeah, you're right. Somebodies going to jail. You just might not have picked the right person. :D

By the way, those aren't crickets. It's the whimpering of someone who's about to be federally indicted for leaking classified information vital to national security. ;)
Considering how these things have been going, I don't know that that person is worrying about anything other than what he's going to title his book.

Now I'm not going to assume anything here. You are upset about all leaks, right? You're also chomping at the bit to find out who leaked Plames name in partisan retaliation, right? Because there was no conceivable public good from knowing about Plame. Otherwise...

Thing is I don't buy this whole, "Oh no-that was classified!!! Now the terrorists know we're listening!!!" So, when the terror alert is adjusted based on 'chatter' or 'intercepted comuniques' or when they comment on a lack of Arabic translators did you think that the terrorists where starring at each other with shrugged shoulders going, "How'd they know? They must have magic powers!" until they hear about the warrant-less tapping where they went, "Ooooh, they tap the phones. If only they had to get an easy to acquire secret warrant 72 hours after the fact. Then we would have been safe."

It's just too hard to swallow.

Throw his ass in prison, I say (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/hayden-broke-law/):


All this on top of the fact that, as three major papers have now noted, Republican Senator Mike DeWine wanted to revise the FISA statute to lower the burden for getting a warrant to wiretap foreign citizens, and the administration argued against it, saying it would be unconstitutional.

I have no doubt that the Bush apologists on this forum will still claim that the warrantless wiretapping program was somehow legal, probably based on the "Presidential dibbsies" theory of jurisprudence, but there's little doubt, the longer this story goes on, that the Bush administration broke the law.

The No Such Agency lied!!! I do not believe it!!!

One more *BUMP* for quick reference. Bush ain't outta this just yet.