Defiant Bush admits breaking law

[YASNY]

What? Are you saying that your leaders are too damn stupid to topple a corrupt, constitution ignoring president?

[Rex Kickass]

No, YAS.

 

I'm asking you what they should do since you pretend to have all the answers regarding this.

[Balta1701]

What?  Are you saying that your leaders are too damn stupid to topple a corrupt, constitution ignoring president?

Hmph...I always suspected Yas was part of a new version of COINTELPRO...trying to get us to turn into revolutionaries so the FBI can take us into custody...now I have proof.

[YASNY]

YAS,

 

What the hell can they do then? Short of lead a popular uprising and attempting a coup, what on earth do they have the rights to do?

 

Wait. I'm fairly close to drunk and very much in need of sleep. I withdraw the comment above because I can't give it the thought that is required to give a reasonable response.

[Rex Kickass]

Fair enough. Drink one for me!

[YASNY]

No, YAS.

 

I'm asking you what they should do since you pretend to have all the answers regarding this.

 

I wish I would have waited before withdrawing my remarks until I saw this. I don't begin to believe I have the answers to the democrats problems, nor do I want to give them advice. Let them figure it out for themselves. They're the braintrust that advocates your position. Let's see what they can do.

[YASNY]

Hmph...I always suspected Yas was part of a new version of COINTELPRO...trying to get us to turn into revolutionaries so the FBI can take us into custody...now I have proof.

 

That does not warrant a response .. green or not.

[YASNY]

Good day folks. I'm gonna crash.

[Rex Kickass]

They could introduce articles of impeachment. Oh wait, they've tried before and they weren't honored. They could try to hold hearings, but the rules prevent them from being entered into the Congressional record. They could ask the administration to answer questions but they have and the administration has refused. They could demand investigations from the full Congress, but those get rejected too. They could command a secret session of the Senate to get information from the NSA on this program... but that's an extraordinary step taken only when every recourse is taken because it essentially shuts the government down for a day. So short of that, I don't know what they can do.

[kapkomet]

They could introduce articles of impeachment. Oh wait, they've tried before and they weren't honored. They could try to hold hearings, but the rules prevent them from being entered into the Congressional record. They could ask the administration to answer questions but they have and the administration has refused. They could demand investigations from the full Congress, but those get rejected too. They could command a secret session of the Senate to get information from the NSA on this program... but that's an extraordinary step taken only when every recourse is taken because it essentially shuts the government down for a day. So short of that, I don't know what they can do.

Then if they think that the law was broken that bad, they damn well better grow a pair and do it. Otherwise, STFU. And guess what? If the law was broken that bad, and they get that information to bring to be American people, something will get done.

Edited January 26, 2006 by kapkomet

[NorthSideSox72]

Then if they think that the law was broken that bad, they damn well better grow a pair and do it.

 

They won't. They fear losing (as the minority in Congress), and worse, as I said, they fear looking soft on terror. It's a shame for them, because I think it would make them look strong, not weak. But they are not willing to make that leap right now.

[kapkomet]

They won't.  They fear losing (as the minority in Congress), and worse, as I said, they fear looking soft on terror.  It's a shame for them, because I think it would make them look strong, not weak.  But they are not willing to make that leap right now.

Again, if the President committed an 'impeachable offense' the Democrats would garner support from the American people. I really believe that. And they need to stop politicizing it and bring it to the front burner in a way besides a bunch of verbal diarreah, I mean, rhetoric.

[NorthSideSox72]

Again, if the President committed an 'impeachable offense' the Democrats would garner support from the American people.  I really believe that.  And they need to stop politicizing it and bring it to the front burner in a way besides a bunch of verbal diarreah, I mean, rhetoric.

 

Actually, I am not 100% sure that the support would be there. Americans are spooked - partly due to reality, and partly due to the fear tactics the current Presidential administration used during their reelection bid. And there is a chance (and not a small one) that if the Dems tried to make it that big an issue, it would backfire, with them looking like they are giving in to terrorism.

 

Right now, the Dems see themselves getting Congress back (or narrowing the gap quite a bit anyway) in the November elections. Momentum seems in their favor. They have decided to wait this out until then, for two reasons. One, why mess with the current situation, when they are looking likely to gain seats? Two, if they have more seats, this sort of thing will have more traction.

 

You see, they are dumb... but they are not so dumb.

[kapkomet]

Actually, I am not 100% sure that the support would be there.  Americans are spooked - partly due to reality, and partly due to the fear tactics the current Presidential administration used during their reelection bid.  And there is a chance (and not a small one) that if the Dems tried to make it that big an issue, it would backfire, with them looking like they are giving in to terrorism.

 

Right now, the Dems see themselves getting Congress back (or narrowing the gap quite a bit anyway) in the November elections.  Momentum seems in their favor.  They have decided to wait this out until then, for two reasons.  One, why mess with the current situation, when they are looking likely to gain seats?  Two, if they have more seats, this sort of thing will have more traction.

 

You see, they are dumb... but they are not so dumb.

Running around accusing the president of "breaking the law" and then not doing anything about it, terror or not, will make them LOSE in the long run.

 

They're fooling themselves if they think they can "win back" votes by being blowhards. It's not worked for 12 years.

[Balta1701]

They're fooling themselves if they think they can "win back" votes by being blowhards.  It's not worked for 12 years.

So you're saying it worked in '94?

[kapkomet]

So you're saying it worked in '94?

Yikes. Make it 14.

[Rex Kickass]

Umm, you were right the first time .

[Rex Kickass]

Real interesting read on this topic.

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2134845/nav/tap1/

[samclemens]

They could introduce articles of impeachment. Oh wait, they've tried before and they weren't honored. They could try to hold hearings, but the rules prevent them from being entered into the Congressional record. They could ask the administration to answer questions but they have and the administration has refused. They could demand investigations from the full Congress, but those get rejected too. They could command a secret session of the Senate to get information from the NSA on this program... but that's an extraordinary step taken only when every recourse is taken because it essentially shuts the government down for a day. So short of that, I don't know what they can do.

 

you seem to do a ton of complaining without making a single suggestion on how to remedy any of these situations. if you think a democrat or republican administration hasnt been doing this basically since the presidency has existed, the only person you are fooling is yourself.

 

just try to have some kind of constructive advice, something! c'mon!

[Balta1701]

WaPo.

 

Intelligence officers who eavesdropped on thousands of Americans in overseas calls under authority from President Bush have dismissed nearly all of them as potential suspects after hearing nothing pertinent to a terrorist threat, according to accounts from current and former government officials and private-sector sources with knowledge of the technologies in use.

 

Bush has recently described the warrantless operation as "terrorist surveillance" and summed it up by declaring that "if you're talking to a member of al Qaeda, we want to know why." But officials conversant with the program said a far more common question for eavesdroppers is whether, not why, a terrorist plotter is on either end of the call. The answer, they said, is usually no.

 

Fewer than 10 U.S. citizens or residents a year, according to an authoritative account, have aroused enough suspicion during warrantless eavesdropping to justify interception of their domestic calls, as well. That step still requires a warrant from a federal judge, for which the government must supply evidence of probable cause.

So in other words...the President is lying when he says the program is only used against people speaking with Al Qaeda. It actually is data mining of a huge number of overseas calls.

[NorthSideSox72]

WaPo.

 

So in other words...the President is lying when he says the program is only used against people speaking with Al Qaeda.  It actually is data mining of a huge number of overseas calls.

 

Note also the acknowledegement of some domestic calls being monitored as well. A small number, but still, a number.

[Balta1701]

So...tomorrow the Senate's hearings on this illegal program will start. One decent place for coverage would be Glenn Greenwald's spot, as he'll be live-blogging the hearings and also appearing on C-Span.

 

Arlen Specter, who will be running the hearings, took a swipe or two at the program today on "Meet the Press", and went at Gonzalez by name.

 

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ explanations so far for the Bush administration’s failure to obtain warrants for its domestic surveillance program are “strained” and “unrealistic,” the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman said Sunday.

 

Sen. Arlen Specter, whose committee has scheduled hearings Monday on the National Security Agency program, said he believes the administration violated a 1978 law specifically calling for a secretive court to consider and approve such monitoring.

 

Specter, R-Pa., said he might consider subpoenas for administration documents that would detail its legal justification for the program.

 

“The president could’ve taken this there and lay it on the line,” Specter said, citing the special court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

 

“That court has an outstanding record of not leaking. They would be pre-eminently well-qualified to evaluate this program and say it’s OK or not OK,” Specter told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Edited February 6, 2006 by Balta1701

[Balta1701]

Newsweek's running a version on this story I've brought up...can the President order a killing on U.S. soil?

 

Feb. 13, 2006 issue...In the latest twist in the debate over presidential powers, a Justice Department official suggested that in certain circumstances, the president might have the power to order the killing of terrorist suspects inside the United States. Steven Bradbury, acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel, went to a closed-door Senate intelligence committee meeting last week to defend President George W. Bush's surveillance program. During the briefing, said administration and Capitol Hill officials (who declined to be identified because the session was private), California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Bradbury questions about the extent of presidential powers to fight Al Qaeda; could Bush, for instance, order the killing of a Qaeda suspect known to be on U.S. soil? Bradbury replied that he believed Bush could indeed do this, at least in certain circumstances...

[yakyusox]

I think it is sad when, in America, people are struggling to get by. They go from job to job hardly able to save much. People in America don't have insurance unless they work for a pretty big company (usually) but the norm has become outsourcing and getting part-time people to work full time hours on part time wages and benefits. Meanwhile, the people in Washington and all the major companies are giving their business to even bigger companies and this is all money that will never find it's way back to the people. Bush has started this s*** and even has the machismo to say, "Hell yeah, I did it and would do it again." He is the weakest link. All of this chaos started from the war on terror. We lost 400 BILLION dollars and almost 3000 lives and for what...? So Halliburton could misplace money in Iraq? So we could get first dibs on oil? So the politicians could invest in this war and make out like porn stars? The politicans have learned how to cover their tracks since Watergate. They are covering their tracks but this nation is going to suffer for it. And don't think because you don't see it on the news it's not there. Living in Japan I get to see not only CNN but also BBC and Japan news channels, Al Jazeera, among others and America is shameful. I love America but I can't fathom what it has become. America has become a nation of pimps and whores running the country. Us generation Xers will have no insurance for our family, no pension (but we get a 401k which will be ours to manage if we enjoyed managing stocks, but many people don't follow the stock market. These dicks who thought of the idea of a 401k can't see that WE don't like f***ing with our money, unlike them who f*** with money for a living) and no social security. I've already resigned myself to the fact I'm gonna be working and I'll drop dead at my desk. You can say what you want about Clinton but theybalanced the budget under his watch and Clinton was a lover, not a war-monger. We would have gone to war with or without the terrorist attacks. That I can promise you.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I think it is sad when, in America, people are struggling to get by. They go from job to job hardly able to save much. People in America don't have insurance unless they work for a pretty big company (usually) but the norm has become outsourcing and getting part-time people to work full time hours on part time wages and benefits. Meanwhile, the people in Washington and all the major companies are giving their business to even bigger companies and this is all money that will never find it's way back to the people. Bush has started this s*** and even has the machismo to say, "Hell yeah, I did it and would do it again." He is the weakest link. All of this chaos started from the war on terror. We lost 400 BILLION dollars and almost 3000 lives and for what...? So Halliburton could misplace money in Iraq? So we could get first dibs on oil? So the politicians could invest in this war and make out like porn stars? The politicans have learned how to cover their tracks since Watergate. They are covering their tracks but this nation is going to suffer for it. And don't think because you don't see it on the news it's not there. Living in Japan I get to see not only CNN but also BBC and Japan news channels, Al Jazeera, among others and America is shameful. I love America but I can't fathom what it has become.  America has become a nation of pimps and whores running the country. Us generation Xers will have no insurance for our family, no pension (but we get a 401k which will be ours to manage if we enjoyed managing stocks, but many people don't follow the stock market. These dicks who thought of the idea of a 401k can't see that WE don't like f***ing with our money, unlike them who f*** with money for a living) and no social security. I've already resigned myself to the fact I'm gonna be working and I'll drop dead at my desk. You can say what you want about Clinton but theybalanced the budget under his watch and Clinton was a lover, not a war-monger. We would have gone to war with or without the terrorist attacks. That I can promise you.

 

Poor misguided soul.

 

 

:rolly