FISA = Conyers to White House: We Need to Know More about Wiretapping

[L. Coyote]

Things are, perhaps, only just about to get interesting. The Chairman of House Judiciary, the "Impeach Committee" in the House, want to know more about Bush's illegal wiretapping. Need I say more.

Recent events clearing a little table space, Rep. Pelosi? :rofl:

===============
Conyers to White House: We Need to Know More about Wiretapping
By Paul Kiel - February 12, 2008, 3:55PM - http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/conyers_to_white_house_we_need.php


Signaling the fight ahead when lawmakers get together to sort out the differences between the Senate and House surveillance bills, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) wrote White House counsel Fred Fielding today to deliver two messages: 1) from what he's seen of the documents relating to the administration's warrantless wiretapping program, there's no reason to grant the telecoms retroactive immunity (he prefers the term "amnesty"), and 2) Congress needs to know more before it can be expected to consider granting that amnesty.

The administration suddenly gave Conyers, along with a limited number of members of his committee and the full House intelligence committee, access to documents relating to the program late last month. It was obviously part of the administration's drive to secure immunity for the telecoms. But Conyers says that hasn't worked for him:

...review and consideration of the documents and briefings provided so far leads me to conclude that there is no basis for the broad telecommunications company amnesty provisions advocated by the Administration and contained in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) bill being considered today in the Senate, and that these materials raise more questions than they answer on the issue of amnesty for telecommunications providers.

Beyond that, Conyers asks a list of questions

[kirby]

1. White House to Conyers: Fuck You... n/t

[ixion]

2. well, for starters, if freakin' illegal and unconstitutional w/o a warrant

which is really as far as the conversation needs to go.

[L. Coyote]

3. This is like saying, "We need to know more about your impeachable offenses!" LOL

They must be wondering if there are enough Repug lawyers still willing to work for them. :rofl:

[Ghost in the Machine]

4. They just need to know more so they'll have a better detailed list of what

to turn a blind eye to and avoid talking about in the future...

Did you *really* think they want more info for any other reason??

[L. Coyote]

5. Yes. Absolutely. Oversight is what is is called. 50 investigations, 300 hearings ....

... not exactly a blind eye!

[Ghost in the Machine]

6. What has come out of these 50 investigations and 300 hearings?

Has anyone been held accountable for anything? Has anyone gone to jail? Please remind me of any consequences of these investigations and hearings..

Thanks...

[L. Coyote]

7. What are the implications of this request on the FISA Conference Committee?