Reply With QuoteSo what nothing be be dome about this...Rich US politicians dont go to jail.
CRS says white house broke law
latest analysis on the wiretapping scandal.
The Bush administration appears to have violated the National Security Act by limiting its briefings about a warrantless domestic eavesdropping program to congressional leaders, according to a memo from Congress's research arm released yesterday.
The Congressional Research Service opinion said that the amended 1947 law requires President Bush to keep all members of the House and Senate intelligence committees "fully and currently informed" of such intelligence activities as the domestic surveillance effort.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...011802158.htmlCumming's analysis found that both intelligence committees should have been briefed because the program involved intelligence collection activities.
The only exception in the law applies to covert actions, Cumming found, and those programs must be reported to the "Gang of Eight," which includes House and Senate leaders in addition to heads of the intelligence panels. The administration can also withhold some operational details in rare circumstances, but that does not apply to the existence of entire programs, he wrote.
Unless the White House contends the program is a covert action, the memo said, "limiting congressional notification of the NSA program to the Gang of Eight . . . would appear to be inconsistent with the law."
So what nothing be be dome about this...Rich US politicians dont go to jail.
This story makes for great partisan politics but is going to go
nowhere for a number of reasons. The New York Times held the NSA
story for a over a year, the Bush Administration had asked them
to do so. Now if there was a national security crisis in the making,
i.e. violations that infringe on civil liberties, why hold the story?
The fact is that congressional members on the Senate Intelligence
Committee of both political parties was made aware of the program.
It involves Intel on overseas communications with al Qaeda affiliations,
not John Kerry’s future campaign plans. Every fair-minded American
understands the difference, also no controversy over who leeked this
classified program (can you say Valerie Plame) just that “Bush is
breaking the law”. The reasons for the program resonate with the American
people, it involves the security of their families, the main reason the
Democrats lost the presidential race. If you don’t believe that, why
is Hillary Clinton moving to the center politically? i.e. support for
the War in Iraq. She know that to carry the Democratic Party line,
particularly the far-left message will end in a campaign defeat.
Hist2004
CRS = Cyber Research Systems, the company that created Skynet in Terminator 3!!!! omgggg0rzr!!!11oneleven!!
Originally Posted by Impulse_t0
How the hell you got unbanned is beyond me.
Anyway as the article says "would appear to be inconsistent with the law" which tbh leave a lot of room for further process on that issue which in the end could mean the WH yes did break law or used a loop hole or didn't break it at all. the verdic on that is still to come.
There fixed!
I'm with hist2004 on this one
you missed the part of the article where it was noted that the white house was supposed to tell quite a few more people than just four senators sworn to secrecy.The fact is that congressional members on the Senate Intelligence
Committee of both political parties was made aware of the program.
and what makes anyone think this was a national security issue? only bush's word, and that is worth less than a plugged nickel to anybody keeping track of the last five years (including abut 2/3s of the US). they got lazy, there's no good reason forthcoming as to why they couldn't be bothered to follow the law except that they thought they shouldn't have to.
I didn’t miss anything in the article; I was trying to respond to the NSA wiretapping
issue as a political football and a national security issue. Let’s break it down then,
the White House was supposed tell quite a few more people than just four Senators?
I find that interesting…. a SAP (special access program) is supposed to be laid out to
how many then? This isn’t a national security issue? Is Valerie Plame a national
security issue? The major media and the Democratic Party certainly thought so. If
you think collecting Intel through wiretap, eavesdropping, email, fax about a possible
terrorist strike either here or abroad isn’t a national security issue, then I’m
glad your not deciding policy.
Only Bush’s word, then why did he inform the members of the Senate Intelligence
Committee? Nancy Pelosi & Jay Rockefeller certainly knew about the program. The raised
concerns (and rightly so) about how far the program would extend. The “reason” they didn’t
request warrants in some cases is because some Intel is time sensitive; there was also a
concern that warrants in some cases could delay action; we all know how the lawyers held
up President Clinton’s Administration from taking many decisive actions against Bin laden.
By the way, refer to the Presidential election results when discussing majority opinion(about Bush).
The American people understand that this isn’t a case of a political party spying on it’s
opponent as was the case with Richard Nixon. It’s about protecting their families, something
the ACLU misunderstood when a few weeks ago they took out three attack President Bush
ads in The New York Times, full-page ads. Quoting the civil liberties people, "Mr. Bush broke
the law in the NSA phone tap deal and is as bad as Richard Nixon." Try telling that to the
soccer moms.
Hist2004
I don't see it as a scandal at all nor do I suspect it being illegal but, it is clear to me certain groups desire to promote and take advantage of the perception of scandal.
Now if someone used this system to spy internally on citizens for reasons other than the war on terror or to continue this beyond the time the Hill decides the war is over; then we have a proper scandal and a real violation of the law.
Actually, if you look at the way Cheney is reacting I think it was done to make a point. I think Cheney and Bush want to make a point of showing that the President has more powers than what people, and the House and Senate for that matter, believe. I think it is a grab for power.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/po...rtner=homepage
Posting Permissions
