WP: Spying Necessary, Democrats Say (Harman & Daschle)

[sabra]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/12/AR2006021201174.html

Spying Necessary, Democrats Say
But Harman, Daschle Question President's Legal Reach

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 13, 2006; Page A03

Two key Democrats yesterday called the NSA domestic surveillance program necessary for fighting terrorism but questioned whether President Bush had the legal authority to order it done without getting congressional approval.

Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) said Republicans are trying to create a political issue over Democrats' concern on the constitutional questions raised by the spying program.

At the same time, the Republican chairmen of the Senate and House intelligence committees -- Sen. Pat Roberts (Kan.) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (Mich.), who attended secret National Security Agency briefings -- said they supported Bush's right to undertake the program without new congressional authorization. They added that Democrats briefed on the program, who included Harman and Daschle, could have taken steps if they believed the program was illegal. All four appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Roberts said he could not remember Democrats raising questions about the program during briefings that, beginning in 2002, were given to the "Gang of Eight." That group was made up of the House speaker and minority leader, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, and the chairmen and ranking Democrats of the House and Senate intelligence committees.

[acmavm]

1. Another couple of worthless f**ks that call themselves dems. No one

has the right to spy on me. I am an American, I love my country, and I not only have read the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I understand them and their intent. Obviously that's more than anyone can say for these two quisling bastards.

[KittyWampus]

9. worthless fucks? The Mediawhores write a misleading title and you jump

right on it and have the audacity to call Democrats "worthless fucks"?

[IndianaGreen]

12. He only called Daschle and Harman worthless fucks

which they truly are!

Nice try at your strawman though.

[Psephos]

17. That's actually not a strawman

Here's a good site for reference defining "strawman" and other logical fallacies.

http://datanation.com/fallacies/

I agree with you, though, about Daschle; still making up my mind about Harman.

Peace.

[leftchick]

21. Harman is a worthless DLC fuckwit

it is easy to figure that out after listening to her once......

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Jane_Harman_Principles_+_Values.htm

<snip>

Member of Democratic Leadership Council.
Harman is a member of the Democratic Leadership Council:

Mission
The DLC’s mission is to promote public debate within the Democratic Party and the public at large about national and international policy and political issues. Specifically, as the founding organization of the New Democrat movement, the DLC’s goal is to modernize the progressive tradition in American politics for the 21st Century by advancing a set of innovative ideas for governing through a national network of elected officials and community leaders.
Who We Are
The Democratic Leadership Council is an idea center, catalyst, and national voice for a reform movement that is reshaping American politics by moving it beyond the old left-right debate. The DLC seeks to define and galvanize popular support for a new public philosophy built on progressive ideals, mainstream values, and innovative, non bureaucratic, market-based solutions. At its heart are three principles: promoting opportunity for all; demanding responsibility from everyone; and fostering a new sense of community.

[acmavm]

18. You are damn right I do. Any dem who stands up for the policy of

spying on the American people is even less than worthless. What is it about this situation that you are incapable of understanding?

[lumpy]

37. Might be a great idea to take the time

to investigate what those 'worthless f**ks/ quisling bastards" had to say about warrantless spying
before going off half-cocked on some useless tirade.

[jab105]

2. These people are M-O-R-A-N-S (spelled that way on purpose)

Its not about getting congressional approval, its about checks and balances...its about unregulated power...

MORANS!

[Coastie for Truth]

3. Valid point - the old GOP change up.

The Repugs are trying to raise weapons of mass distraction -- "Is spying ever necessary?"

The real question - "Is domesic spying without a court order ever Constitutional?"

Don't let them shift the question.

We put a procedure in place after Watergate - and that's the way it is - my God, they can even get a warrant 72 hours after the fact.

[savemefromdumbya]

4. ..............Dumb and dumber......

oh we forgot to ask if it was legal then duh!

[IndianaGreen]

5. Two weenie Democrats!

They cannot even say that Bush is breaking the law, much less call for Bush's impeachment. This is why Daschle and Harman are traitors, just like the French that collaborated with the German occupation.

Bush became a dictator with the help of weenie Democrats!

[Roland99]

6. Daschle (and Gephardt) proved to be tools during the 2000 election

I'll never forget that ridiculous speakerphone conference with Gore.


ooof.

[papau]

7. NBC's "Meet the Press" just was on for the first time in the East -Weather

coverage knocked it off earlier.

They spoke of updating the law "if needed".

The agreed some spying was needed.

They thought the administration non-use of intel except as a way to sell a decision already made for political reasons was the real problem.

Walter Pincus of WAPO saw a different show than I did, I guess. It was a GOP spin on what they said - but then that is all that Pincus ever delivers.

[LynnTheDem]

8. Sure spying is necessary and fine....just

GET A WARRANT FIRST.

It's that simple.

[rodeodance]

11. and I recall Harman making that very clear.

[salin]

22. That was the gist of the parts I heard

that it should be done according to the law.

Btw the whole strawman about this tipping Al Qeada off irks me (and the repubs went back to that one, iirc) - as if the whole Patriot Act didn't raise the spector that their cell phones might be ... er... insecure.

[rodeodance]

28. unfortunately it is a RW talking point that has legs

[rodeodance]

10. Roberts should take a few of his memory pills!

.......Roberts said he could not remember Democrats raising questions

[rodeodance]

13. I watched the show--I think they did well.

......Daschle said he wants the program to continue but maintained that the warrantless wiretapping of calls that came into the United States or calls made overseas, even those involving suspected terrorist sources, violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

He recalled that after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks Bush asked Congress to revise FISA -- to initiate wiretaps and get warrants after 72 hours -- to make it easier to use against terrorists. Those changes were made. But in the authorization to fight al Qaeda, Bush was denied language that would have covered activities on U.S. soil.

Harman noted that the House and Senate intelligence committees were briefed last week on domestic wiretapping. "We're only 36 members total that we're talking about, and those members should decide whether this program fits within the law, and if it does, which I think it does, we should all declare victory. If it does not, then we should be changing the law or changing the program."

The three current intelligence committee members talked about the article in Foreign Affairs by Paul R. Pillar, the former senior CIA intelligence analyst on Iraq. He criticized the Bush administration for "cherry-picking" intelligence to justify a decision it had already reached to go to war, while ignoring assessments that problems would emerge after Saddam Hussein was removed.......

[MrSlayer]

14. Spying is fine, just do it legally.

When you do it illegally chances are you are spying on people you shouldn't be.

[NVMojo]

15. Daschle just better give up his freaking presidential wet dream

[meow2u3]

16. As long as we can spy on neocons

:evilgrin:

but they had better keep their prying eyes out of the business of Democrats!

[rman]

19. The issue is not spying per se but WARRANTLESS spying

Why don't these Dems mention that?

[mike_c]

31. the issue IS spying-- focus on the lack of warrants is a smoke screen...

Without court approval, domestic spying is as much an invasion of constitutionally guaranteed privacy as a police squad breaking down your door "to have a look around" your house. Even the toady FISA court-- and make no mistake, they're tools-- would not have issued the blanket warrants that the Bush administration would have needed, and besides, the administration didn't want any paper trail outside the White House and the NSA anyway. Focusing on the question of warrants gives the impression that the spying was OK, and that the issue is merely procedural. Technically, an oversight, sort of. No big deal, really. In fact, the spying was a deliberate violation of consitutional protections. THAT is the issue.

[rman]

34. "constitutional protections" have everything to do with court orders

The constitution does not protect from spying/intrusion *with* a court order.

The spying is a violation of constitutional protections exactly because of lack of court orders.

Domestic spying without a warrant is a violation of the law, which is much more then a "technicality".

To get them for spying regardless of any warrants, you'd first have to change the constitution as to give protection from spying with a court order, then retroactively apply that change in the constitution to the * gang. Good luck with that.

[JCMach1]

20. Horrible spin by these guys... the issue is THE PRESIDENT BROKE THE LAW

that's the bottom line...

[Disturbed]

23. The Dems couldn't bring themselves to say...

that the FISA Law was violated and that Shrub should be Impeached for that and many other crimes. It's anyone's guess why they could not do so.

The two Rethugs were full of shit.

[mmonk]

24. Harman was on TV last week and said she didn't see

anything wrong with warrantless spying in that it just wasn't approved by congress. I consider her a bush republican. There are several bush republicans in the party.

[leesa]

25. More foolish Democrats.

[Solly Mack]

26. Can I spy on Congress then? And the Whitehouse? and the SCOTUS?

Cause well, I'm positive I'd find some criminal activity taking place.

[Ezlivin]

32. No shit

If all we did was exactly what they did, we'd all be in Gitmo.

[Javaman]

27. the two leaders of the Jellyfish brigade (no backbone) n/t

[Hosnon]

29. It is WITHOUT A DOUBT necessary...just please freakin' get a warrant. nt

[mike_c]

33. what necessity...?

I think any logic supporting it is very dubious indeed. To begin with, the threat of terrorism is utterly exaggerated to justify an American security state. The "war on terror" that this was a part of is a scam, plain and simple, so there is no logical reason to conduct domestic spying programs except that, well, secret police just DO that sort of thing-- it comes naturally to them. The WOT is a smoke screen to divert people's attention from the reasons underlying anger against America. Finally, even if there WAS a terrorist threat that genuinely warranted domestic spying, constitutional protections should not be so easily given up to obtain a little corporeal protection: "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." --Ben Franklin. Way too many Americans are willing to give up their liberty way too cheaply.

[Hosnon]

38. I look at the situation very narrowly. If the government has reason

to believe that person X is communicating with known/suspected terrorists, I do not think it harms any notion of liberty in this country to go to a judge and get a warrant to tap the communications. That happens all the time in this country everyday.

No new constitutional protection would be given up. Wiretapping with a warrant has been legal since a wiretap was ruled to be considered a "search" under the IVth.

And the concept behind Franklin's quote is valid but we must remember that under social contract theory, the theory the Constitution is based upon, every individual must give up liberty as part of society's contract. In my opinion, a search that requires a warrant is not a relinquishment of essential liberty.

[wordpix]

30. I saw this MTP interview: the title of article is misleading. Daschle &

Harman both made point after point about not being fully informed; Harman said the "Gang of 8" was sworn to secrecy and couldn't ask questions of intelligence experts or anyone familiar with FISA law and court.

Russert was good, for once, pressing the points: "Why not go to Congress and ask for changes in the law if they were needed?" and "Why did the president go around the law?"

They did quite well against the Repugs on the show who whitewashed the illegal * program.

[bain_sidhe]

35. Let me get this straight...

Bush breaks the law and it's the DEMOCRATS' fault for not stopping him????

At the briefings, Roberts said, "Those that did the briefing would say, 'Do you have questions? Do you have concerns?' " Hoekstra said if Democrats thought Bush was violating the law, "it was their responsibility to use every tool possible to get the president to stop it."

[lumpy]

36. Might be a good idea to go to :

http://www.canofun.com/blog/default.asp

Find out what the two Dems had to say before drawing the wrong conclusions.