AGREEMENT!?

[filkertom]

Fuck you, Arlen:

The White House is nearing an agreement with Congress on legislation that would write President Bush's warrantless surveillance program into law, the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman said Sunday.

Bush and senior officials in his administration have said they did not think changes were needed to empower the National Security Agency to eavesdrop — without court approval — on communications between people in the U.S. and overseas when terrorism is suspected.

But Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and other critics contend the program skirted a 1978 law that required the government to get approval from a secretive federal court before Americans could be monitored.

"We're getting close with the discussions with the White House, I think, to having the wiretapping issue submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court," Specter told "Fox New Sunday."

Let's make this reeeeeeal simple, for the simple-minded fools in fuckin' Congress, mm-kay? The Bush Administration broke the law. They admitted it. They did so repeatedly. And when even their own party says, "Y'know, that's kind of against the law," they say, "OOGA BOOGA! WAR ON TERROR!"

When are our spineless "representatives" going to say, Enough is enough? Or will they ever say it?

Comments

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

I imagine they'll wait until he does something serious, like get a blowjob.

[jss]

Respectively: Never and no.

[don-tzu.livejournal.com]

I'll have to go with political convenience for 1000, Alex. Simply put, the Republican majority learned that they could throw out the 'terrorism' or 'support our troops' cards and the voters would just fall in line and do whatever they were told. Hopefully, we have matured enough as a nation to resist that sort of Pavlovian response in the future. I'm not counting on it, but I do hope.

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

"When are our spineless "representatives" going to say, Enough is enough? Or will they ever say it?"

Magic 8 ball says: Never...

seriously. I doubt it, because the Republicans could just say.."well, nuts to you, we're going to do it anyway".. and they have no way of stopping them. Which would blow the lie that they have any kind of power left now.
At present they are more concerned about preserving the apperance of democracy than actually doing anything to restore it. because what you ahve now, isn't one, and hasn't been one for quite sometime.

In effect, you have a rogue government in control, and an oppersition that is more worried about 'The people' figuring that out than anything.

[holzman.livejournal.com]

When are our spineless "representatives" going to say, Enough is enough? Or will they ever say it?

One hopes it will happen very shortly after the Republicans, who understand they are now "Brand W" and will rise or fall with George W. Bush, lose control over the body that can do something about it. This is not spinlessness, this is collusion.

It is worth noting that chaning the law in 2006 will not change the fact that from 2001 to 2005 it was illegal.

[jahura.livejournal.com]

"We're getting close with the discussions with the White House, I think, to having the wiretapping issue submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court," Specter told "Fox New Sunday."

How about we just expose all the hearings since 1978 while we're at it? I for one would like to see how the government stuck its glass to the wall for all this time leading up to this fiasco, and how they intend to justify their actions in general.

[andamaroo.livejournal.com]

I don't believe Congress has the power to over-ride the 4th amendment...

But on the other hand this (http://www.freepressinternational.com/nsa-4th-amendment.html) is the type of person with whom we're dealing. You can't prove anything to them with facts.

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

The little bobbing head dolls says...."No!"
Surprise.
Well, *we* knew when they elected this entire Administration--again--it was gonna get bad. I mean, "spotless red cow", "whoopeee let's make sure the Rapture happens earlier, "nuclear war in the Middle East" bad.
So, I'm kind of happy that hasn't happened yet.
Not so happy to learn Time Magazine's cover story is finally getting on the ball about global warming. Like, hey, why not ten years ago, folks?
I'm just wondering what's going to happen if this Senate honestly can't manage to doctor enough of the electronic voting machines, and bully enough people into staying away from the polls, and write off enough people as felons who aren't, to get themselves reeleacted in the midterms.
That will be interesting.

[nomaddervish.livejournal.com]

"We're getting close with the discussions with the White House, I think, to having the wiretapping issue submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court," Specter told "Fox New Sunday."

I sincerely hope that actually happens, and very soon. Until it does, we don't really know for a fact that the Bush administration broke the law with this program. I believe that they probably did break the law and I agree with you that it damn well should be illegal if it isn't, but, until a court rules on it, we don't actually know that a crime has been committed.

Once a court has ruled the program illegal (I like to hope the FISC would be clear-headed enough to do so), then that sets the stage for forcing them to shut the program down and prosecute those who were involved even though they should have known better.

(If Bush has come out and said "we broke the law", feel free to correct me. To the best of my knowledge, he has admitted to doing things which we believe should be illegal and/or probably are illegal, but he has also maintained that, under his and Gonzales's interpretation of the law, he believes them to have been legal acts.)

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

No, he hasn't said he "broke the law". He and Gonzales have said the law doesn't apply to him. Thing is, it specifically applies precisely to this sort of thing. Look here (http://www.afsc.org/pwork/0512/051232.htm) and here (http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/12/purposely-misquoting-fisa-to-defend.html) for more info.

[andamaroo.livejournal.com]

The NSA is a broadly defined federal agency setup without regard to the constitution or the legal amendment process. It's not legally entitled to do anything.

But then neither is anything else that happens in the federal government. God I miss the constitution.

[dragonscholar.livejournal.com]

They don't care. I really think they don't.

They've got their own system, own little world, we're not in it so we don't matter. We're shit. We do the work, pay the taxes, die in the wars, and they don't give a damn. More tax breaks for their donors, more tax money to Haliburton, and try and scare Joe Sixpack with the fags every two years.

It's a bunch of "cool kids" who made it big, a bunch of prom-queens, having their bitchfights - with no care for the rest of the world, the real world, or us peons in it.

I'm a bit bitter today.

[smallship1.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

[nomaddervish.livejournal.com]

Yep, that's basically what I understood the situation to be, which is why I think it's so important for the courts to look into the program and make an official decision that the law does apply to him and that the program is a violation of the law.

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

Seems to me a certain other president tried to claim that when the President does it, it's not illegal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Quotations).

Didn't play very well at the time, from what I recall...

AGREEMENT!?

[bschilli.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I don't think that our "representatives" are going to say anything as long as their "constituents" continue to vote like they're told. Nothing else seems to matter (he says from the "safety" of Madison Wisconsin). I guess we're back to "bread and circuses".

Ben

Re: AGREEMENT!?

[nimitzbrood.livejournal.com]

Do you truly think that voting (http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/) matters (http://blackboxvoting.org) as much as it used to?

I'm of the opinion that unless that gets cleaned up first the only way to change this country would be open revolution unfortunately.

*sigh* New Zealand is starting to look mighty good lately...

Love livin' in a blue state

[umbran.livejournal.com]

You know, I'm darned lucky. As far as I can tell, my Representative has been saying such stuff for a long time. Sure, nobody listens, so he's none too effective. And on occasion his initiatives are not as well-considered as they ought to be. But where other politicians seem to have removed their hearts and hade them encased in lucite for the mantlepiece, mine seems to at least keep his within the bounds of his ribcage.

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

I am not thrilled with FISA, but we have to remember that some of this stuff dates back to the Jimmy Carter era, so we can't get too partisan about it.

The scary but noteworthy thing here is that Senator Specter is a moderate in this area. Note how he is listed as a "critic". He sounds like a Democrat much of the time on issues of privacy and domestic security, but he's stuck being a Republican. He seems to take the position that getting the administration to agree with laws that favor the administration is better than having the administration ignore the law altogether, because written laws can be interpreted and enforced in courts that have more practical authority than Congress does.

I think Specter is positioning himself as a moderate to have an effective voice after the Democrats take control of the Senate. He really acts like someone who has written off his side's chances this year. He knows the President is wrong, he just can't say so too bluntly. It's interesting to watch.

Re: AGREEMENT!?

[bschilli.livejournal.com]

I know, if voting could change things, it would be illegal.

Ben