-
President 2008 Watch: Senator Dick Durbin Says Feingold Censure Resolution “Cannot Be Ruled Out”
U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis)(C) confers with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)(L) and minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) in Reid’s office on Capitol Hill in Washington March 13, 2006, following Feingold’s effort to censure U.S. President George W. Bush over domestic spying. The White House on Monday dismissed as politically motivated a Democratic senator’s attempt to censure President George W. Bush for ordering domestic eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without a warrant.
ASSociated Press: Sen. Durbin Says Censuring Bush Premature
A top Senate Democrat said Sunday that President Bush should be held responsible if he violated the law in authorizing the domestic spy program. But Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said it is too early to tell if either censure or impeachment of Bush would be appropriate.
“I can’t rule anything out until the investigation is complete. I don’t want to prejudge it,” said Durbin, the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat. “But if this president or any president violates the law, he has to be held accountable.”
Durbin’s colleague, Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., last week introduced censure legislation, saying Bush violated the law in not fully informing Congress or getting approval from a secretive court to conduct the eavesdropping program. A censure resolution, if adopted, would amount to Congress scolding the president.
It sounds to Flap that Senator Durbin desires a full fledged debate on Senator Feingold’s resolution. Senate Majority leader Bill Frist has promised such.
“It’s valuable that Senator Feingold is moving us forward to finally be a catalyst to have the kind of hearings and the kind of deliberations as to what lies behind this warrantless wiretap situation,” said Durbin, calling the overall inquiries so far by the Republican-controlled Senate inadequate.
“We have a responsibility to ask the hard questions, to find out what the nature of the program is and whether the president violated the law,” Durbin said.
But, Senator, if you think the NSA Surveillance program is illegal then why have you NOT filed a lawsuit against the President to stop the program? Or don’t you really know?
Flap looks forward to your support of an up or down vote on Senator Feingold’s censure resolution.
Previous:
Michael Ramirez on Feingold’s Censure Resolution FLAP
President 2008 Watch: Feingold Accuses Democrats of COWERING – “RUN and HIDEâ€in Censure Flap
President 2008 Watch: Senator Bill Frist Dares Democrats Over Feingold Effort to Censure President BushPresident 2008 Watch: Democrats Distance Themselves from Feingold’s Bush Censure FLAP
President 2008 Watch: Senator Russ Feingold Wants President Bush Censured for NSA Surveillance
Technorati Tags: BillFrist, RussFeingold, HarryReid, GeorgeWBush -
NSA Surveillance Watch: Senate Intelligence Committee Decides NOT to Pursue Investigation
The National Security Agency (NSA) logo is shown on a computer screen inside the Threat Operations Center at the NSA in Fort Meade, Maryland, January 25, 2006. U.S. President George W. Bush visited the ultra-secret National Security Agency on Wednesday to underscore the importance of his controversial order authorizing domestic surveillance without warrants.
New York Times: Senate Panel Decides Against Eavesdropping Inquiry, for Now
The Senate Intelligence Committee decided today not to investigate President Bush’s domestic surveillance program, at least for the time being.
“I believe that such an investigation is currently unwarranted and would be detrimental to this highly classified program,” Senator Pat Roberts, Republican of Kansas and chairman of the panel, said this afternoon following a closed session.
While Mr. Roberts’s announcement signaled that the administration’s eavesdropping program would not be subject to Senate scrutiny, at least for the time being, there was no guarantee that the House would not go ahead with an inquiry of its own.
Mr. Roberts said “an agreement in principle” had been reached with the administration whereby lawmakers would be given more information on the surveillance operation run by the National Security Agency.
“The details of this agreement will take some time to work out,” Mr. Roberts said.But the committee’s ranking Democrat, John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, was clearly unhappy after the meeting and said it made no sense to pursue legislation when the full details of the surveillance program were not known. Mr. Roberts said Mr. Rockefeller’s proposal for an investigation would be reconsidered when the committee reconvenes on March 7.
There is NO THERE there.
Tempest in a teapot……..
Now, what about the New York Times, James Risen and the person who “leaked”……how do you spell federal grand jury?
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Watch: Congressional Probe of NSA Surveilance Is in Doubt
NSA Surveillance Watch: Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy ProgramNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Testify
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLEDNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter
-
NSA Surveillance Watch: Congressional Probe of NSA Surveilance Is in Doubt
A worker at the National Security Agency (NSA) sits at her computer terminal in the Threat Operations Center during a visit by U.S. President George W. Bush in Fort Meade, Maryland January 25, 2006. Bush visited the ultra-secret NSA on Wednesday to underscore the importance of his controversial order authorizing domestic surveillance without warrants.
Washington Post: Congressional Probe of NSA Spying Is in Doubt
Congress appeared ready to launch an investigation into the Bush administration’s warrantless domestic surveillance program last week, but an all-out White House lobbying campaign has dramatically slowed the effort and may kill it, key Republican and Democratic sources said yesterday.
The Senate intelligence committee is scheduled to vote tomorrow on a Democratic-sponsored motion to start an inquiry into the recently revealed program in which the National Security Agency eavesdrops on an undisclosed number of phone calls and e-mails involving U.S. residents without obtaining warrants from a secret court. Two committee Democrats said the panel — made up of eight Republicans and seven Democrats — was clearly leaning in favor of the motion last week but now is closely divided and possibly inclined against it.
The Leftie Democrats WIMPED out because they know the NSA Surveillance program is legal and has been effective in protecting America.
Frankly, they do NOT have the votes to raise much of a “stink” here. But, they also know that if they sabotage this progam and the United States is hit again by Al Qaeda that it will be their ASS on the line.
Now, isn’t that what Flap said a few weeks ago?
A video wall display inside the Threat Operations Center of the National Security Agency (NSA) shows recent internet threat activity worldwide during a visit by U.S. President George W. Bush at Fort Meade in Maryland January 25, 2006.
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Watch: Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy ProgramNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Testify
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLEDNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter
-
NSA Surveillance Watch: Two Lawsuits Filed Today to Seek End of President Bush’s NSA Electronic Surveillance Program
Legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights Bill Goodman,left, talks to media on Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 in New York. This morning Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a lawsuit against President George W. Bush, the head of National Security Agency (NSA)and the heads of the other major security agencies, challenging the NSAs surveillance of persons within the U.S. without juridical approval or statutory authorization. An unidentified aide is in the background.
ASSociated Press: Groups Sue to Stop Domestic Spying Program
Two lawsuits were filed Tuesday in federal court that seek to end President Bush’s electronic eavesdropping program, saying it is illegal and exceeds his constitutional powers.
The lawsuits – one filed in New York by the Center for Constitutional Rights and the other in Detroit by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups – say the program bypasses safeguards in a 1978 law requiring court approval of electronic monitoring.
Well, these groups have FINALLY done something besides bellow about President Bush’s NSA terrorist/Al Qaeda Surveillance program . Of course, they will lose at the United States Supreme Court but the attorneys will be very busy billing for the legal challenge which if successful will make America safer for terrorists.
Lawsuit #1:
The Center for Constitutional Rights is suing Bush, the head of the National Security Agency and the heads of the other major security agencies.
The organization, which represents hundreds of men held as enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, must now audit old communications to determine whether “anything was disclosed that might undermine our representation of our clients,” said Bill Goodman, the center’s director.
And Flap could care about terrorist or terrorist sympathizers who have been imprisoned as enemy combatants fighting against the United States? Why not just release them so they can continue their terrorist activities against Americans. The insanity of it ALL.
Lawsuit #2
The Detroit lawsuit, which names the National Security Agency and its director, said the program has impaired plaintiffs’ ability to gather information from sources abroad as they try to locate witnesses, represent clients, do research or engage in advocacy.
It was filed by the ACLU, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Greenpeace and individuals on behalf of journalists, scholars, attorneys and national nonprofit organizations that communicate with people in the Middle East, Asia and elsewhere.
A List of the plaintiffs with links is:
American Civil Liberties Union
American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan
Council on American-Islamic Relations
Rabiah Ahmed
Arsalan T. IftikharNational Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Joshua Dratel (Statement)
Nancy Hollander (Statement)James Bamford, journalist/author (Statement)
Larry Diamond, Hoover Institution, Stanford University (Statement)
Christopher Hitchens, journalist/author (Statement)
Tara McKelvey, journalist/author
Barnett Rubin, New York University Center on International Cooperation
Background of Organizations and People Involved in the Lawsuit >>
The ACLU’s Press release is here: ACLU Sues to Stop Illegal Spying on Americans, Saying President Is Not Above the Law.
Andrew McCarthy at the National Review Online has How to “Connect the Dots†– Well, for one thing, you use surveillance.
Washington’s scandal du jour involves a wartime surveillance program President Bush directed the National Security Agency to carry out after al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001. The idea that there is anything truly scandalous about this program is absurd. But the outcry against it is valuable, highlighting as it does the mistaken assumption that criminal-justice solutions are applicable to national-security challenges.
Read it All
Michelle Malkin: YOU CAN’T “CONNECT THE DOTS…”
More blog reax to the ACLU lawsuit…
AJ Strata
All Things Beautiful
Stop the ACLU
Daily Pundit
Dread Pundit Bluto***
Jeff Goldstein helpfully translates the ACLU’s press release for you. Must-read.Stay tuned as the lawsuits progress through the federal court system and hearings begin in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Flap fears that the President will acquiesce to NSA program modifications before the United States Supreme Court rules on the existing program – thus rendering the lawsuits moot.
Will these modifications lead to a LESS SAFE America?
And who then will take the blame if another terrorist act takes place as a result of the failure to connect the dots……the ACLU, the Congress or President Bush?
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Watch: Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy ProgramNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Testify
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLEDNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter
-
NSA Surveillance Watch: Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy Program
Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter (R-PA) during the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito on Capitol Hill, January 11, 2006.
ASSociated Press: Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy Program
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee expressed skepticism Sunday over President Bush’s domestic eavesdropping program, joining a chorus of Republicans and Democrats who are questioning its legal justification.
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who will hold hearings next month on the decision to allow the National Security Agency program without court approval, said he has told Bush administration officials that he believes they are on shaky legal ground.
Bush has pointed to a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism as allowing him to order the program. The program authorized eavesdropping of international phone calls and e- mails of people deemed a terror risk.
“I thought they were wrong,” Specter said on ABC’s “This Week.” “There still may be different collateral powers under wartime situations. That is a knotty question.”
First, Senator who the FRACK cares what you think. The President has greater responsibilities to protect the United States from Al Qaeda and he has done a good job. Wouldn’t you say that has been the case? Damn, we have to ask the Senate Judiciary Committee to be protected from terrorists?
Second, Senator, if you have a REAL concern file a lawsuit and litigate the issue. Flap doesn’t think you will win – nor do you.
A number of members of Specter’s committee, including GOP Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, have expressed doubt about the administration’s legal basis. The hearings, planned for early February, will feature Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Specter, speaking in general terms, noted that impeachment and criminal prosecution are possibilities in the event a president acted unconstitutionally.
But Specter added: “I don’t see any talk about impeachment here. I don’t think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He’s acting in a way that he feels he must.”
Right, Senator let’s impeach the President.
Let’s do it now…….Good Grief but you are a MORON.
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Testify
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLEDNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter
-
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Testify
U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, speaks with reporters at the Department of Justice, Friday Jan. 13, 2006, in Washington. General Gonzales agreed to testify at a Senate hearing on the NSA domestic spying program.
ASSociated Press: Gonzales to Testify on Domestic Spying
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Friday he will testify publicly at a Senate hearing on the Bush administration’s domestic spying program, in the face of questions from lawmakers and legal analysts about whether it is lawful.
Gonzales said he reached an agreement with Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to answer questions about the legal basis for the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping on telephone conversations between suspected terrorists and people in the United States.
“We believe the legal authorities are there,” Gonzales said at a news conference at the Justice Department. “The president acted consistent with his legal authority in a manner that he thought was necessary and appropriate to protect the country against this new kind of threat.”
The attorney general said he will not discuss operational aspects of the program at the hearing, which is expected to occur next month. Specter said Sunday that he had asked Gonzales to testify publicly.
A meaningless hearing for show purposes…….
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLEDNSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll
-
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop? – RECYCLED
Why is the ASSociated Press and AP reporter KATHERINE SHRADER recycling and republishing this story from January 7th – 4 days ago: Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop
The story was WRONG then and CONTINUES TO BE MISLEADING……
From Powerline and the ABC News there is a NEWER POLL:
6. What do you think is more important right now – (for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on personal privacy); or (for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats)?
Investigate threats: 65%
Respect privacy: 32%
No opinion: 3%7. In investigating terrorism, do you think federal agencies are or are not intruding on some Americans’ privacy rights?
Are: 64%
Are not: 32%
No opinion: 4%8. (IF FEDERAL AGENCIES ARE INTRUDING, Q7) Do you think those intrusions are justified or not justified?
Justified: 49%
Not justified: 46%
No opinion: 5%Unfortunately, we have no definition of what constitutes “intruding on some Americans’ privacy rights.” But, using whatever definition respondents assume, two-thirds of Americans believe that no “unjustified” intrusions are taking place.
These questions and answers strike me as more meaningful than the one that specifically addresses the current NSA “spying” controversy, where the numbers basically follow a partisan breakdown: 51% consider “this wiretapping of telephone calls and e-mails without court approval” acceptable, while 47% call it unacceptable.
A more meaningful poll and certainly a better analysis. Now, back to the inanity of the ASSociated Press poll…….
Flap: NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop?
The ASSociated Press: Poll: Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop
A majority of Americans want the Bush administration to get court approval before eavesdropping on people inside the United States, even if those calls might involve suspected terrorists, an AP-Ipsos poll shows.
Over the past three weeks, President Bush and top aides have defended the electronic monitoring program they secretly launched shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, as a vital tool to protect the nation from al-Qaida and its affiliates.
Yet 56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism.
Flap reads the poll differently than KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer.
Look at the poll graphic above.
Does the poll NOT ask the question:
Should the Bush Administration be required to get a warrant before monitoring communications between Americans in the United States and suspected terrorists?
Look at the Rasmussen Poll taken December 26-27 and whose question more accurately reflects the NSA Surveillance progam.
The Rasmussen question:Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
The RESULTS of the Rasmussen Poll:
Survey of 1,000 Adults
December 26-27, 2005
Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 64%
No 23%Is President Bush the first President to authorize a program for intercepting telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 26%
No 48%Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 23% disagree.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans say they are following the NSA story somewhat or very closely.
Just 26% believe President Bush is the first to authorize a program like the one currently in the news. Forty-eight percent (48%) say he is not while 26% are not sure.
Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans believe the NSA should be allowed to listen in on conversations between terror suspects and people living in the United States. That view is shared by 51% of Democrats and 57% of those not affiliated with either major political party.
Survey of 1,000 Adults
December 26-27, 2005
Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 64% No 23%
Is President Bush the first President to authorize a program for intercepting telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 26% No 48%
Did the ASSociated Press come/jump to the wrong conclusion or was the AP conclusion simply validated by a faulty or poorly worded poll question.
Or was this simply MSM BIAS?
The NSA Surveillance program whose details of which remain classified involved the intercepts between suspected foreign terrorists outside the United States to people within the United States.
This was NOT merely a DOMESTIC or within the United States warrantless surveillance program. But, a limited program for communications originating outside the United States.
President Bush: “The NSA program is one that listens to a few numbers called from the outside of the United States of known al-Qaida or affiliated people.â€
The ASSociated Press does NOT make this distinction or publish the facts.
Media Bias?
You betcha……..
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll
-
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Russell Tice – New York Times Source
ABC News: NSA Whistleblower Alleges Illegal Spying
Former Employee Admits to Being a New York Times Source
Read the entire sad commentary about a pyschologically challenged former NSA “black world” insider who will likely be prosecuted for “leaking”classified NSA material.
Tice is NOT a “Whisteblower” but a TRAITOR.
Prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.
Read an unclassified letter from the NSA to Russell Tice regarding his non-disclosure agreement and discussion of sensitive classifed materials
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop?
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter, SamBrownback, RussellTice
-
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Arlen Specter Asks Attorney General Gonzales to Testify Regarding Legality
Chairman of the US Senate Judiciary Committee Senator Arlen Specter, R-PA, is seen inside the court room where Saddam Hussein is being tried at the Central Criminal Court in Baghdad, Iraq, Tuesday Dec. 27, 2005. Specter met with the chief judge overseeing the Saddam Hussein trial, saying he’s ‘disappointed’ the court has allowed the former leader ‘to dominate’ the trial.
ASSociated Press: Specter Seeks Gonzales Testimony on Spying
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Sunday he has asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to testify during open hearings on the legality of the Bush administration’s domestic spying program.
Why?
First, this is NOT Domestic Spying.
Second, Attorney General Gonzales was NOT the Attorney General when President Bush first authorized the NSA program after 9/11. John Ashcroft was.
Third, Attorney General Gonzales is formerly President Bush’s White House Counsel and any conversations are attorney-client privileged communication and Gonzales will decline to answer.
Fourth, if Specter or any of the other Senators have a problem with the NSA program file a lawsuit in federal court asking to enjoin the President and see how far you get………
Let’s face it – Senator Arlen Specter should NEVER have been chosen as Senate Judiciary Committe Chairman. He is simply not up to the task. But, then look who allowed him to accede to the chairmanship – Senator Bill Frist.
But GOP Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas said, “There was no discussion in anything that I was around that gave the president a broad surveillance authority with that resolution.”
And this guy from Kansas thinks he will be President? Grandstanding Midwestern McCain.
Brownback, on ABC’s “This Week,” said the Senate Intelligence Committee also will hold hearings — closed to the public — on the NSA program.
“I think this is something that bears looking into and us to be able to establish a policy within constitutional frameworks of what a president can or cannot do,” said Brownback, considered a presidential hopeful for 2008.
He said he was “troubled by what the basis for the grounds that the administration says that they did these on, the legal basis, and I think we need to look at that far more broadly and understand it a great deal.”
Flap doubts any Senators on the Intelligence Committee are going to prescribe what the President does – nor should they.
It is called separation of powers.
And Brownback thinks he will get out of Kansas – Doubtful.
And Schumer – well……….
Academics and others will be asked to appear, part of a list of witnesses “who think the president was right and people who think the president was wrong,” Specter said.
Look at the Rasmussen Poll, Specter.
Why are you wasting taxpayer money to have a useless and meaningless hearing?
File the lawsuit – come on Flap DARES YOU!
Previous:NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop?
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll, ArlenSpecter, SamBrownback
-
NSA Surveillance Watch: AP Poll- Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop?
The ASSociated Press: Poll: Most Say U.S. Needs Warrant to Snoop
A majority of Americans want the Bush administration to get court approval before eavesdropping on people inside the United States, even if those calls might involve suspected terrorists, an AP-Ipsos poll shows.
Over the past three weeks, President Bush and top aides have defended the electronic monitoring program they secretly launched shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, as a vital tool to protect the nation from al-Qaida and its affiliates.
Yet 56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism.
Flap reads the poll differently than KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer.
Look at the poll graphic above.
Does the poll NOT ask the question:
Should the Bush Administration be required to get a warrant before monitoring communications between Americans in the United States and suspected terrorists?
Look at the Rasmussen Poll taken December 26-27 and whose question more accurately reflects the NSA Surveillance progam.
The Rasmussen question:Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
The RESULTS of the Rasmussen Poll:
Survey of 1,000 Adults
December 26-27, 2005
Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 64%
No 23%Is President Bush the first President to authorize a program for intercepting telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 26%
No 48%Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 23% disagree.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans say they are following the NSA story somewhat or very closely.
Just 26% believe President Bush is the first to authorize a program like the one currently in the news. Forty-eight percent (48%) say he is not while 26% are not sure.
Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans believe the NSA should be allowed to listen in on conversations between terror suspects and people living in the United States. That view is shared by 51% of Democrats and 57% of those not affiliated with either major political party.
Survey of 1,000 Adults
December 26-27, 2005
Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 64% No 23%
Is President Bush the first President to authorize a program for intercepting telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?
Yes 26% No 48%
Did the ASSociated Press come/jump to the wrong conclusion or was the AP conclusion simply validated by a faulty or poorly worded poll question.
Or was this simply MSM BIAS?
The NSA Surveillance program whose details of which remain classified involved the intercepts between suspected foreign terrorists outside the United States to people within the United States.
This was NOT merely a DOMESTIC or within the United States warrantless surveillance program. But, a limited program for communications originating outside the United States.
President Bush: “The NSA program is one that listens to a few numbers called from the outside of the United States of known al-Qaida or affiliated people.â€
The ASSociated Press does NOT make this distinction or publish the facts.
Media Bias?
You betcha……..
Previous:
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: Vice President Cheney Strongly Defends Eavesdropping Operation
Cox & Forkum: One Man’s Whistleblower
Global War on Terror Watch: Why the NSA Monitors Communications of Al-Qaida
NSA Surveillance Leak Case Watch: President Bush Defends NSA SurveillanceNSA Leak Case Watch: New York Times’ Reporter James Risen
NSA Leak Case Watch: Justice Deptartment Probing Domestic Spying LeakNSA Surveillance Watch: President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps
NSA Surveillance Watch: Calls for Congressional Hearings
Technorati Tags: NationalSecurityAgency, NSA, AssociatedPress, NSASurveillance, NSALeakCase, NewYorkTimes, RasmussenPoll