Ach, ta "lewackie" media

05.03.06, 19:41
spia jak zwykle:

Sen. Frist yesterday wrote a truly amazing letter
frist.senate.gov/_files/030306.pdf
to Reid expressly threatening to radically re-structure the Senate
Intelligence Committee if the Committee votes to hold NSA hearings:

"I am increasingly concerned that the Senate Intelligence Committee is unable
to its critically important oversight and threat assessment responsibilities
due to stifling partisanship that is exhibited by repeated calls by Democrats
on the Committee to conduct politically-motivated investigations. . . .

I would propose that we meet with Senators Roberts and Rockefeller as soon as
possible. The Committee was established and structured to reflect the
Senate’s desire for bipartisanship, and to the maximum extent possible,
nonpartisan oversight of our nation’s intelligence activities. If attempts to
use the committee’s charter for political purposes exist, we may have to
simply acknowledge that nonpartisan oversight, while a worthy aspiration, is
simply not possible. If we are unable to reach agreement, I believe we must
consider other options to improve the Committee’s oversight capabilities, to
include restructuring the Committee so that it is organized and operated like
most Senate Committees."

These are truly desperate and extreme measures to block an investigation of
the President’s conduct. Sen. First is literally threatening the Committee
not to exercise oversight over the President’s warrantless eavesdropping on
Americans.
    • felusiak1 Re: Ach, ta "lewackie" media 05.03.06, 20:58
      The Senate Intelligence Commitee does not have the power to investigate
      presidential conduct.
      It would have to go to a Judiciary Commitee.
      • iamhotep Re: Ach, ta "lewackie" media 05.03.06, 22:19
        felusiak1 napisała:

        > The Senate Intelligence Commitee does not have the power to investigate
        > presidential conduct.
        > It would have to go to a Judiciary Commitee.

        I beg to differ. We are not dealing with "white water" or "wet stains" type of
        conduct. We are dealing with the executive branch ILLEGAL INTELIGENCE GATHERING.

        The Senate Intelligence Committee was created 30 years ago to perform exactly
        this oversight function – to investigate our government's INTELLIGENCE
        activities. Here is how the Committee itself describes its purpose:
        intelligence.senate.gov/juris.htm
        Created pursuant to S.Res. 400, 94th Congress: to oversee and make continuing
        studies of the intelligence activities and programs of the United States
        Government, and to submit to the Senate appropriate proposals for legislation
        and report to the Senate concerning such intelligence activities and programs.
        In carrying out this purpose, the Select Committee on Intelligence shall make
        every effort to assure that the appropriate departments and agencies of the
        United States provide informed and timely intelligence necessary for the
        executive and legislative branches to make sound decisions affecting the
        security and vital interests of the Nation. It is further the purpose of this
        resolution to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence
        activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in
        conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.


        • felusiak1 Re: Ach, ta "lewackie" media 06.03.06, 06:21
          You can beg to differ all day long. Unfortunately for you it does not change the
          rules of Congress. Only the Judiciaty Commitee has the power to investigate
          president's conduct. Period. They can investigate all othe shit.
          How do you know that NSA eavesdropping was illegal? Very intersting point of view.
          I thought you want to investigate to find out wether it was illlegal or not.
          I guess you already know that, so let's skip that and go directly to the drawing
          of the articles of impeachment. Have fun.
          • iamhotep Re: Ach, ta "lewackie" media 06.03.06, 20:19
            Last week, the Senate voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act, and that vote was
            given prominent coverage in both the New York Times and the Washington Post.
            But neither paper saw fit to mention that the Patriot Act and FISA are
            essentially the same thing. The Times even quoted President Bush saying the
            following:


            "The Patriot Act is vital to the war on terrorand defending our citizens
            against a ruthlessenemy," the president said in a statement from India. "This
            bill will allow our law enforcement officials to continue to use thesame tools
            against terrorists that are already used against drug dealers and other
            criminals, while safeguarding the civil liberties of the American people."


            The Post carried part of the same quote and added that "[r]enewing the act,
            Bush and congressional Republicans said, was key to preventing more terror
            attacks in the United States."

            These statements--while unremarkable in a universe where the president isn't
            openly flaunting this very law--are entirely incoherent in the universe we
            actually inhabit, where the president has admitted that his administration is
            currently engaged in the very type of surveillance that FISA explicitly
            criminalizes. After all, if some combination of the AUMF and Article II bestow
            the president with the power to disregard FISA--as the administration and its
            defenders claim--then, by definition, the amendments to FISA contained in the
            Patriot Act are clearly not "vital to the war on terror." Indeed, they're
            entirely superfluous.
            • felusiak1 Coo aid drinker? 06.03.06, 21:14
              FISA and Patriot Act are essentially the same thing? The Patriot Act contains
              amendments to FISA? Only in your distorted mind.
              One has nothing to do with the other.
              Only 10 of your guys voted Ney
              Akaka (D-HI)
              Bingaman (D-NM)
              Byrd (D-WV)
              Feingold (D-WI)
              Harkin (D-IA)
              Jeffords(I-VT)-this one used to be ours (barely) and now he pretends to be on
              his own
              Leahy (D-VT)
              Levin (D-MI)
              Murray (D-WA)
              Wyden (D-OR)
Inne wątki na temat:
Pełna wersja