Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Official Senate Committee Hearing - Electronic Surveillance - Thread 3

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:08 AM
Original message
Official Senate Committee Hearing - Electronic Surveillance - Thread 3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. can someone please give me a quick run down of what's going on??
I'm cube-bound :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Spector refused to swear in Gonzales. This caused a flap between
Feingold, Leahey and Spector. SPector claimed to have proxies, which he could not produce.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liveoaktx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #7
106. VIDEO on CanOFun
Farcical start to hearings

Would this apply to the general public as well? I don't think I should have to swear in under oath if the AG doesn't have to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Gonazales giving opening statement.Defending Bush's position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. authority to review w/o warrant satisfies requirement of 4th amendment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
27. .
FISA prohibits govt from unwarranted surveilance except by STATUTE

unforeseen challenges

Congress gave authority

FISA safety valve
radically <sic> new reality, Congress did 3 things when it passed
right to conduct surveilance
authorized all necessary & appropriate force

broadly worded authorization

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #8
32. .
Other Presidents have used statutes such as the 4th Resolution

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. streaming at CSPAN.org if you can get away with it
CSPAN1 -- Torture boy is spinning
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Specter refuses to swear in rat bastard Gonzales, Gonzales says
he wouldn't mind being under oath because his answers will be the same. They took a roll call vote on whether he would be sworn in, Specter used repuke proxy votes, Feingold asked for proof of proxy votes, Specter didn't have proof and the hearing proceeded...onto the lies of Gonzales.:( That's it in a nutshell. Oh ya...Leahy gave one hell of a speech on why he SHOULD BE sworn in and that fell on deaf ears, of course,:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
47. For you and the other cubed folks
First came a spat about swearing in the AG. Dems lost. Specter spoke laying out the ground rules. Leahy gave a strong statement, unambiguously accusing the admin of breaking the law. AG speaking now- terra, terra, terra, not domestic spying, terra surveillance. Congress gave bushco authority. terraists seeking to attack us from within. George Washington, Lincoln and Wilson did it too, and did it more broadly. Even if congress didn't mean to give the authority, well tough, they did it. The SC has interpreted the force resolution in Hamdi as giving the pres authority to detain enemy combatents. Constantly use FISA, critics don't understand FISA. Requirements of law can be "cumbersome and burdensome".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #47
56. But most disgusting-Specter did not HAVE the proxies that Feingold
wanted to see. te he. made a fool of himself on national TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. authority provided by both constitution and statute
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 10:10 AM by LiberalAndProud
BULLSHIT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
3. Thanks Viva!
:patriot:

I really am outta here now but will be back!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. Gonzo remember every sentence should begin with protect, include 9/11
and end with Al Qaeda

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. I really dislike this bastard ---- As much as I did Bownie!!!
Do you think there is a common reason here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. much more dangerous than brownie, but he has an "inspiring personal
story," so that makes it all better per repubs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #10
24. Would love - LOVE! to see Alberto Abu Ghraib Gonzales held at
Guatanamo...When these fucks are indicted and convicted of war crimes!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #4
85. with a generous sprinkling of warren terra
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. No Senator asked that it be discontinued? They didn't know you
were doing it, how could they ask you to stop? Christ on a crutch!


I guess now we should just assume that they are breaking all laws and ask them to stop breaking all laws every 45 days?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
41. yes, AG/wh continues with this ruse--and the press lets it fly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
6. Inherent authority.
He's saying FISa can't infringe on the President's constitutional powers.

I think my head is going to explode.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berner59 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
17. Talking history of spying...
Washington...Lincoln...oh please!!!! Can't wait for the questions from Dems!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #17
28. I hope all you al Qaida are listening carefully.
Have you EVER seen anyone lie with such impunity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #6
20. the Constitution is clear
if the president does it, it's legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #20
119. Wow!! So lying about sex was legal after all!!
because 'the president did it'.

'If the president does it, it's legal' ~ my head is spinning. Weren't these the same morons who were screaming that 'no president is above the law?' just a few short years ago?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JudyM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #6
117. I suppose the Bill of Rights can't infringe on *'s authority, either...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
11. I feel a Clinton reference coming up...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. We're up to WWII ... yep, should be soon! n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
12. Talking about all the presidents before FISA law passed ??
It doesn't matter what Woodrow Wilson did...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. you mean Bush can wiretap because
LINCOLN INTERCEPTED TELEGRAPHS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #19
29. Al Qaeda = Goldstein
1984
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. Or Lincoln either. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
14. So, because they claim OTHERS broke the law, they should too?
Is that going to be their defense? We aren't any worse than anyone else has ever been?

Kiss my ass Gonzales!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #14
37. The FISA law was passed in 1978...
Because of the abuse of the Nixon Adminstration. It did not exist when Lincoln was President...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
22. I don't know why I am even wasting my time on this n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. NOTHING will come of it. It really is a sham to appease the anti-spying
crowd. Now they can say, "we held a hearing and found no laws were broken." end of subject. Move on to next scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #30
74. I feel like I am going to be sick, If our liberties start to get eroded, I
don't know what I will do.:cry::cry::cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
23. FISA's safety valve? Heh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. New meaning to the term, "Baffling us with Bull Shit!" n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
25. They consider wiretaping as "force"? WTF? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #25
31. Kennedy's rolling his eyes, can't wait for his Q's.....!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
33. USA's #1 Attorney trying to convince USA it's OK to Break Law
This is certainly a fucked up nation. Instead of WORKING WITH CONGRESS this president has decided he's not even going to trust his own party, who by the way RUNS CONGRESS, and simply DISOBEY THE LAW. Now he has our NUMBER ONE ATTORNEY arguing that it's ok to be illegal, if you're president that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Its like Tony Soprano teaching a class on business ethics...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #33
48. He also has the blessing of the repukes in CONGRESS. Otherwise Specter
would have sworn his ass in. We are so screwed.:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
34. AG is talking of "inhentant' powers--this will be tricky for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #34
39. Would that be spelled out in the IWR ?
Breaking laws to spy on Americans ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #34
40. Specter got caught trying to pull a fast on!--I want to see what the 'lib-
eral press says about that one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
35. Fourth Resolution Against AlQuaida vs. Fourth Amendment ???
Is this really what I'm hearing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #35
44. I believe it is what we are all hearing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
38. At least Democrats
fought hard to get Gonzales sworn in, they were just outnumbered....if you count the Republican votes for Republicans who were not even present! Gawd......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #38
50. yes, but they have to fight public opinion---as WH seems to have
convinced many that snooping is ok. They forget -IS it legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
42. Going off line to
call Specter`s office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeanette in FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Original message
Just got through to his office
It took a while to get through. Told them I was deeply offended that Spector would not put Gonzales under oath and that this just became another Republican Dog and Pony show.

Also Leahy's office and told them I was glad that Leahy insisted that Gonzales be put under oath. I told them that the Dems should walk out and let the Republicans hold their dog and pony show by themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
43. Count "Fourth Resolution." 15? 50? times so far?
The FOURTH RESOLUTION.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #43
49. I'm hearing "FORCE Resolution" but correct me if I'm wrong.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #49
55. I heard "4th Resolution". O'Liely heard "troops".
Mistakes happen.

:blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #55
60. final 3 words - War on Terror
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
45. Has Congress declared war?
War against whom? How long was I out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #45
52. NO. Congress has not declared war. The repukes try to use the IWR
as their declaration of war...WHICH IT IS NOT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kber Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #52
120. Serious question here
Against whom (what country (ies) did the IWR authorize force?

If it was Iraq, how does this justify wiretaping against other non-Iraqui enemies?

If it does (in Bush's mind) authorize force, actions or spying against other enemies, does he even need additional congressional approval for invading, say, Iran or Syria?

Where, legally, does it end?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
46. One Question...Why did you BREAK THE LAW mr. president?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
51. At what point do those 2 gentlemen sitting behind the Torture king
start crying...? ala..Mrs. Alito...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. I'm surprised his wife and kids aren't sitting back there so they
could start crying if anyone was mean to "daddy".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #51
64. PLEASE start a thread about that, really. The only thing missing from this
farce is Mrs. Gonzalez running from the rooom in tears.

And if our elected Dems were smart, they'd say just that on tv.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
53. Trust us. Would we lie ???
Uh.....yeah...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
57. what other kind of intelligence does FISA cover? It's ok for other things
but HOT for Al Queda? WTF is that supposed to mean? Intelligence is intellegence. What else might they be looking for? We know it's not drugs because there haven't been any major drug busts since these bastards took office. This just boggles my mind!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #57
61. Feingold must be on Specters shit list for making a fool of him Nat. TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
58. "Our enemy is listening"
So am I, hermanito, and all I hear is BS.

:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coffeenap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
59. "Our enemy is listening" No, our enemy is TALKING!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #59
65. hey, AG--Americans are listening and we are NOT the enemy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #59
67. Bingo !
You got it ! Much more dangerous than al Qaeda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Surya Gayatri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Original message
Al Queda Terra Al Queda Terra

Why did Judge Robertson resign from the FISA COURT? Gonzo doesn't know. SG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
62. everything he mentioned is covered by FISA. Why the illegal stuff???
doesn't answer that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #62
105. AG sidestepped that question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
63. We can not drop the ball - we need to read that written statement
and parse what is different from what he said and what he wrote!


Note to self ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
66. This is total BS
He's not under oath. He won't talk about anything of substance. Each member only gets only 10 minutes and Gonzo will eat up every minute with BS. This is worthless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #66
76. I find this whole scenario surreal.
Here is the Attorney General of the United States JUSTIFYING ILLEGAL ACTIVITY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Surya Gayatri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #76
94. Truly a scene from Kafka...

I can't believe I'm hearing this! SG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
68. This is a sham!
A mockery of our Constitution and our system of checks and balances. These crooks must be held accountable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
69. Specter: FISA court
reasonable & constitutional.

Gonz: FISA should be commended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
70. AG: "They're working on weekends, they're working at night"
in ans to why not have teams go to fisa court.

A variation of It's Hard Work. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Original message
Says he doesn't know why fisa judge resigned!
Lie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
71. is cspan working ?
getting 'server not found' and 'connection refused when attempting to contact'...messages.

?

dp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #71
79. It's probably overloaded... It happened during the Alito hearings too
you just have to keep trying
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berner59 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #71
82. wow...AG is fumbling....
Can't seem to answer the question...why not bring this to FISA??? They don't want to...hmmm...WHAT ARE HIDING????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
72. FISA court is useless on the WAR ON TERRA !!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
73. Specter is not getting answers. Will this piss him off?
I'd be pissed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Original message
Only if they vote on it :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #73
80. He doesn't want answers. He wants power. He wants to keep
his chairmanship of the Judicial Committee. That's why he always just comes this close to doing the job right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #80
88. Bingo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
75. Glenn Greenwald's live blogging - response on not swearing in Alberto.
"Live blogging the NSA hearings

The logistics of live-blogging from the Committee room were too complicated, so I am live-blogging the hearings off-site. I may be able to do it from the Committee room itself for the afternoon session, but I'd rather have full blogging abilities outside of the room than be in the room.

I understood that Gonzales was going to be sworn in. Apparently, Specter decided that he did not want him to be. I think that's a good debate to begin with -- why are Republicans so eager to avoid putting Gonzales under oath ? He's testifying as a fact witness, and his prior statements at issue -- including his false assuarances to Sen. Feingold at his confirmation hearings -- were under oath, so this testimony should be, too.

* * * * *

Feingold is doing exactly what he should be doing - creating a hostile and confrontational atmosphere, rather than a boringly congenial one where the Democrats meekly accept everything (see the Alito hearings). Feingold has been seriously heroic on several of these issues, and it is excellent to see him continuing that right from the beginning at these hearings.

* * * *

As I said last night, if you have hope for Specter's independence and objectivity, just make it easy on yourself and give up those hopes and accept that he is going to be a shill for the Administration. If you are looking for Republican scrutiny, look to Brownback and, to a lesser extent, to Graham.

* * *

Of course Gonzales begins his Opening Statement by quoting Osama bin Laden and Zawahri. We used to quote Madison, Jefferson and Lincoln to decide what the principles of our Government are going to be. Now we quote Al Qaeda. The Administration wants Al Qaeda and its speeches to dictate the type of Government we have. It is the centerpiece of everything they do and say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
77. Gonzalez is blowing the first question.
This is going to be fun.

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #77
81. He is sputtering nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
78. This is like Nancy's "just say no" program - only they are saying
"Just listen". It's a program not a mandate by the law!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
83. He won't even answer Specter
and he has a little smirk on his face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
displacedtexan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #83
87. I noticed that.
He really wants to laugh at these proceedings, doesn't he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tgnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
84. Specter not letting Gonzo bullshit him. Not exactly grilling him, but
this is nothing like the "aren't you wonderful?" questioning you get during confirmation hearings. Specter actually wants answers to his actual questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #84
89. Asked if they didn't use FISA because they didn't like "plan" !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Surya Gayatri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #84
107. If he's so concerned about answers
why the hell didn't he swear the bastard in? SG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
86. I like the questions Specter is asking.
I want to know if FISA is not issuing warrant.

Gonzo is not very convincing, is he?

Specter: I ask you to reconsider your answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #86
93. "Gonzales Answers Tough Questions on Spying"--yahoo story


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eavesdropping_congress&printer=1;_ylt=ArZAqpuMklN2mwzE3RH9rx2MwfIE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Gonzales Answers Tough Questions on Spying

By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee expressed skepticism Monday about the legality of President Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program and suggested it be reviewed by a special federal court.

Federal law "has a forceful and blanket prohibition against any electronic surveillance without a court order," said Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., as he opened a hearing on National Security Agency eavesdropping within the United States.

While the president claims he has the authority to order such surveillance to protect Americans from terrorist attacks, Specter said, "I am skeptical of that interpretation."

Monday's hearing into the NSA program got off to a rocky start when Democrats protested that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should be given a sworn oath before testifying.
......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #93
99. Wow. Yahoo is prescient.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #93
109. Gonzalez Doesn't Answer Tough Questions on Spying
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM by HootieMcBoob
That should be the headline
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #86
95. Scripted or at least, agreed upon.
Specter is full of it and he will not allow this hearing to serve its purpose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #95
104. If he is honestly being tough, why no swearing-in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #104
113. As the Stomach Turns.
This is a farce.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
90. why don't we know the names of these affiliated organizations?
Why is that so broad too? Just how many affiliates do they have? And, where did they file these papers to state their affiliation so we know that they are, in fact, affiliated?

They are playing 6 degrees of Al Queda here folks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tgnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
91. Specter: how can you assure us that you are ONLY listening to Al Qaeda?
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 10:30 AM by tgnyc
Gonzo: We're sure. Trust us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qanda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
92. If there are Al Qaeda members or agents of Al Qaeda in America
Why haven't they been arrested?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #92
97. from yahoo story above: "My concern is for peaceful Quakers . (Leahy)


Gonzales, who was not sworn in, told the committee he would voluntarily take the oath if the committee so desired. Either way, "my answers would be the same whether I was under oath or not," he said.

Specter raised the possibility that a special court set up by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act might have to review the wiretapping policy.

Leahy, meanwhile, said that while al-Qaida terrorists should be monitored, Bush chose to illegally wiretap Americans' conversations without safeguards to protect civil liberties.

"My concern is for peaceful Quakers who are being spied upon, and other law-abiding Americans and babies and nuns who are placed on terrorist watch lists," Leahy said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #92
102. Translation - Gonzales Speak
"Narrowly Tailored Program" ---> Only those folks who THREATEN the Neo-Con Executive Branch in any, way shape or form. Hummmm?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
96. It seems apparent to me that Gonzo has no viable legal argument
NONE. Clearly.

He is squirming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tgnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #96
103. When a Republican can't dodge a Specter line of questioning, he
clearly has nothing going for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
98. Thread 4 is up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeanette in FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
100. I've got an advance copy of Hatch's questions to Gonzales
1. That is a beautiful tie, can you please tell the committee where you purchased it?

2. Can you please tell us how wonderful it is to work daily with President Bush?

3. I love your accent. Can you just speak some bullshit to me any bullshit will do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasLady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #100
112. LMAO!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #100
118. Hilarious! Thanks for that! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
101. Ask Comey to come in and testify, then we might get some REAL answers! nt
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 10:31 AM by Sydnie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
108. Why does Ashcroft get to "consider" if he will testify?
Subpeona the jerk. Anyone who knows anything at all should be in front of this committee giving answers to the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #108
114. Because he hasn't been subpoened by the committee.
Specter is opposed to using subpoenas because of the obvious negative implications of that. Specters game is to look like he is conducting an oversight investigation, not have an actual investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #114
116. Ah, there it is...The NSA has OTHER authority.
Wanna bet, the Administration was into this under a differently named program
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
110. I've had enough, shutting this whitewash off (EOM)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
111. WTF Ashcroft has the ability to refuse to appear. Terror Czar has no
Objection (after pressed) on Ashcroft appearing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
speedoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #111
115. Leahy's gloves are off!
He just swept aside all the bullshit. Demanding answers on the timeline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC