LIVE THREAD: SJC hearing on the NSA surveilance program - C-span 1; 9:30 am EST

[Mo1]

all of it. Ickes?? Podesta? Maggie Williams? Soros?? Someone's definitely directing the drip drip drip.

IMO .. The Clinton Goons ...

And add in Rahm Emanuel also

[daybreakcoming]

there are rumours that he is being blackmailed........

Hi - Got a link for any of those rumors?

[Cboldt]

What did you think of Specter's assertion that they expect Bush to wage a war without being able to do surveillance without a group of judges giving them permission???
Isn't that what he was saying?

I didn't take his objection to be as you rephrased it. I took his objection as the President "stretching" the AUMF beyond Congressional intent, when that stretching is used to justify surveillance with a domestic component.

At the same time, Specter seems just fine with "inherent authority," where any given (domestic/terrorist) surveillance would be measured in court by the test of "reasonableness" as articulated in the 4th amendment.

I'll have to read the transcript to see if he is adamant about requiring court order for surveillance in the first place. I think he's not adamant that way.

[Txsleuth]

I think the "ROLE" that we the people have in this war....is reelecting BUSH to run it with the military....

NOT let Congress run it....like they did the Vietnam war.

[Mo1]

http://exposetheleft.com/2006/02/06/attackonrepublicans/

Schuster Turns Republican Attack Segment Into An Attack on Republicans (VIDEO)

[Peach]

This is a detailed report about the argument between Specter and Reid today in Senate asbestos hearings.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1573068/posts

[samantha]

Great posts. let everyone know what a disgusting double standard worm Chuckie is.

[McGavin999]

you can bet we'll be circumspect about granting him any authority."

Congress doesn't "grant" the president authority, the Constitution does. Congress doesn't have the power to change anything in the Constitution.

[MEG33]

They are "protecting our Constitutional rights" so I fully expect all those who feel this way will give at least a "sense of the Senate and vote against this surveillance/s/

For most it is merely a great way to undermine the President, for some a sense that the Senate rules the President, some few are sincere.

[Pirate21]

Isn't it interesting that these leftists don't worry about the lot of data that can be found out about them in open source material...

You're going to love this --- during the proceedings today, Biden called data mining "unscrupulous". Maybe he is a little worried.

[oneofmany]

Watching the callers on C-span after hearing. Seems the DUmmies have a good strategy; call in on the Republican line and blast Bush.

[STARWISE]

Yup .. that would be right up his swarthy sleeve.

[Txsleuth]

Okay...I have to admit that I was listening to Specter while playing with Chase...

BUT, I really got the impression that he seemed SHOCKED that this kind of surveillance was being used under the AUMF...I didn't catch whether he was referring to "domestic" use.

Please let me know what you find in the transcript...I think these guys like to talk "lawyerese" so that they will impress us...and I think they get too cute...like Graham does.

[Pirate21]

At how many RPMs? :-)

;)  (LOL!)

[samantha]

The original incident was in 2003, and a lot of the lawsuits against the city are still in ligitation. Several people involved were sent to jail,fired,disgraced, but Iris Weinshall got no punishment whatsoever. It certainly pays to be a slimey Politician's wife especially if you are over your head and incompetent in your Job.

[Cboldt]

I think that people with common sense would assume that this kind of surveillance would be part of ANY WAR PLAN.

I agree in that no terrorist worth his salt would assume communication channels are not monitored.

But I disagree in that unilaterally undertaken electronic surveillance of US Citizens has, for the past 39 years (since Katz), resulted in evidence that was inadmissible in Court.

So, if this is part of a WAR PLAN, will the troops come in and take down the terrorists on the domestic end of these calls? Will the perps be incarcerated in military brigs? Will habeas corpus be suspended, to facilitate military trials?

Any clear take on the issue of NSA surveaillance must think through the use of the infomation, as well as what limits and what oversight will be applied - all of that is infinitely variable, and needs to be adjusted to suit changing circumstances.

[oldbrowser]

Well, the Bush Presidency has seen the deadliest attack on the U.S. in history, the worst hurricane in U.S. history, and now what looks like will develop into a full-fledged Constitutional Crisis, courtesy Arlen Specter and the New York Times.

That is fine. The greater the man, the greater the problems they are willing to tackle. Americans like a president that is willing to take on a challenge.

[Cboldt]

I think the "ROLE" that we the people have in this war....is reelecting BUSH to run it with the military....
NOT let Congress run it....like they did the Vietnam war.

Ok. "Run it with the military."

[Cboldt]

Congress doesn't "grant" the president authority, the Constitution does. Congress doesn't have the power to change anything in the Constitution.

You haven't followed my argument. I was critical of Gonzales and the Presidnet for giving the AUMF (which I think you will agree, was a grant from Congress) as the justification for the domestic/terrorist surveillance.

And you are right, Congress doesn't have the power to change the Constitution, and the President doesn't have the power to declare war.

[daybreakcoming]

A war cannot be run by a Committee, and quite clearly especially not one like this one.

AMEN to that. I think enough Americans (even the lefties) have been on committees and would agree. We would see exactly what we have seen today until they all had to have a koran on their podiums.