Posted on 01/25/2006 11:38:04 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Sen. Clinton Blasts Bush on Eavesdropping
By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer 7 minutes ago
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday called President Bush's explanations for eavesdropping on domestic telephone calls "strange" and "far-fetched," launching a blistering attack on the White House ahead of the president's State of the Union address.
"Obviously, I support tracking down terrorists. I think that's our obligation. But I think it can be done in a lawful way," the New York Democrat said.
Clinton, a potential 2008 presidential candidate, told reporters she did not yet know whether the administration's warrantless eavesdropping broke any laws. But the senator said she did not buy the White House's main justifications for the tactic.
"Their argument that it's rooted in the authority to go after al-Qaida is far-fetched," she said in an apparent reference to a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. The Bush administration has argued that resolution gave the president authority to order such electronic surveillance as part of efforts to protect the nation from terrorists.
"Their argument that it's rooted in the Constitution inherently is kind of strange because we have FISA and FISA operated very effectively and it wasn't that hard to get their permission," she said. The super-secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court was established by Congress to approve eavesdropping warrants, even retroactively, but Bush has argued that the process often takes too long.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Hillary want the wall back so we can get blown up again. Her team - the terrorists - are losing ground.
Good take on the DNC money. The question is what role did BC play in either Algore's or Kerry's defeat. We often focus on the Clintons without remembering that other players have a say, too, and that the Clintons don't always win.
I'm willing to bet good money that she was forced to say that...
Notification of Congressional leaders According to the Washington Post, four members of Congress were briefed on the surveillance, though more than four have stated that they were briefed. The Post interviewed former Democratic Senator Bob Graham, who stated that he "[had] no discussion about expanding [NSA eavesdropping] to include conversations of U.S. citizens or conversations that originated or ended in the United States... I came out of the room with the full sense that we were dealing with a change in technology but not policy." The Post further reported "he believed eavesdropping would continue to be limited to 'calls that initiated outside the United States, had a destination outside the United States but that transferred through a U.S.-based communications system.'" [32] California Democrat Nancy Pelosi also admitted to being briefed about the warrantless surveillance. Pelosi has stated that: "I was advised of President Bush's decision to provide authority to the National Security Agency to conduct unspecified activities shortly after he made it and have been provided with updates on several occasions. The Bush Administration considered these briefings to be notification, not a request for approval. As is my practice whenever I am notified about such intelligence activities, I expressed my strong concerns during these briefings." [33] A letter that Pelosi wrote in October 2001 when she was Ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, was declassified at her request in January 2006, along with the response from Lieutenant General Michael Hayden, then the NSA Director (Pelosi release). The letter expressed concerns about "whether, and to what extent, the National Security Agency has received specific presidential authorization for the operations you are conducting." Hayden responded that he used authorities "to adjust NSAs collection and reporting." Judith A. Emmel, a spokeswoman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said, "He had authority under E.O. 12333 that had been given to him, and he briefed Congress on what he did under those authorities." [34] Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, ranking member of the Intelligence also stated that he was briefed, and that he wrote to Vice President Dick Cheney expressing concern about the surveillance. The information he received was so confidential that Rockefeller actually handwrote a note to Cheney rather than have a staffer type one out. However, Republican Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the Intelligence Committee chairman, disputed this, saying that he did not recall Rockefeller expressing concerns during briefings, and also disputed whether he was effectively gagged from telling other senators about the surveillance. Roberts stated that "a United States Senator has significant tools with which to wield power and influence over the executive branch. Feigning helplessness is not one of those tools." [35] Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), though expressing reservations based on media reports about whether the program might have exceeded her briefing and whether more members of Congress should be briefed, stated: "As the Ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to US national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities." On January 4, 2006, Harman wrote to the President that "In my view, failure to provide briefings to the full congressional intelligence committees is a continuing violation of the National Security Act." (Washington Post) Notification of Congress is not directly relevant to the legality of the wiretaps, but is important politically and for separation of powers. Suzanne Spaulding, who worked with the House and Senate Intelligence Committees as general counsel argues that the method of congressional notification Bush used "eliminates the possibility of any careful oversight" because only 8 legislators were notified, and it would have been illegal for them to discuss what they were told, even to other legislators or to their staff in order to determine the program's legality.[36]
What?
"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday called President Bush's explanations for eavesdropping on domestic telephone calls "strange" and "far-fetched," launching a blistering attack on the White House ahead of the president's State of the Union address."
I spose it isn't strange that Hillary used the IRS to go after conservatives and Christian activists. She should be in a federal penitentiary, but Republicans in DC have no guts.
I guess if anybody knows about ""strange and far-fetched, and blistering" it's Hillary Clinton.
If she thinks President George Bush, is acting the "king" then for certain she is acting the fool.
I cannot believe that this whole "eavesdropping" thing is still alive, and I guess I have to credit Karl Rove. The more the scumbags moan and wail about "eavesdropping", the more the average American realizes that George Bush wants to protect them from terrorists while the Democrats are more interested in protecting the terrorists' "rights".
God bless Karl Rove. How did he ever pull this one off? (Of course, I also wonder how he figured out that the rats would be so utterly and collectively stupid that they would not only take the cheese, but run with it. And run and run and run. . . . )
I can't help but smile from ear to ear!
Thanks for the ping!
Yes Ma'am!
That's not true.
You can't lose what you never had.....and their isn't a Liberal on this planet with a mind.
redrock
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.