Senator Reveals Secret Bush Legal Opinions

Intelligence Committee Member Tells Of Administration Memos Used To Justify Warrantless Wiretaps

(CBS)  A member of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Friday President Bush is standing by "feverish legal theories" to justify actions which are unconstitutional.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., made the comments on the Senate floor during debate on an upcoming vote to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (or FISA).

The primary focus of the legislation is to clarify by what means wiretaps can be initiated against Americans and non-Americans. The bill was written in response to reports that the Bush administration has for years engaged in wiretaps of citizens without acquiring warrants, as is required under FISA law and the Fourth Amendment.

The administration has argued that obtaining warrants can hamstring its surveillance of terrorists.

Critics have cited instances where the administration has used warrantless wiretaps to obtain phone conversations, E-mails and other communications.

Whitehouse said that the Bush administration's actions have been "misguided," by usurping the balance of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches in order to exercise unquestioned authority by the office of the president.

Whitehouse said that as a member of the Intelligence Committee, he had examined "highly classified secret legal opinions" issued by the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, which the administration used to get legal support of its surveillance program.

Whitehouse recounted that, "Sitting in that secure room, as a lawyer, as a former U.S. Attorney, legal counsel to Rhode Island’s Governor, and State Attorney General, I was increasingly dismayed and amazed as I read on."

Whitehouse related three OLC legal opinions which he got declassified:

"An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it."

Currently, executive order 12333 limits executive branch surveillance to Americans whom the Attorney General has determined to be agents of a foreign power. But under this legal opinion, Whitehouse says, “an executive order cannot limit a President.”

"So unless Congress acts," Whitehouse said, "Here is what legally prevents this President from wiretapping Americans traveling abroad at will: nothing. Nothing."

"The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President’s authority under Article II."

Despite the 1803 decision Marbury v. Madison, in which Chief Justice John Marshall established that it is “emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is," Whitehouse said the legal opinion declares that it is the President who decides.

"The Department of Justice is bound by the President’s legal determinations."

"Imagine a general counsel to a major U.S. corporation telling his board of directors, 'In this company the counsel’s office is bound by the CEO’s legal determinations,'" Whitehouse said. "The board ought to throw that lawyer out - it’s malpractice, probably even unethical."

"We are a nation of laws, not of men," the senator said. "This nation was founded in rejection of the royalist principles that 'l’etat c’est moi' and 'The King can do no wrong'."

[bareemperor]

Yeah, we all know Bu$h is a crook...
The REAL news today is this:

''State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard, under scrutiny for his brother''s link to the Blackwater security firm, has decided to resign, U.S. officials said on Friday.--

Krongard last month recused himself from Blackwater oversight after saying in a congressional hearing that his brother A.B. ''Buzzy'' Krongard, a former executive director of the CIA, had attended a meeting of Blackwater''s advisory board.

Krongard had begun the hearing by denying the "ugly rumors" that his brother was associated with the company, which is under investigation for a September 16 shooting incident in Baghdad in which 17 Iraqis were killed.''

Tie it together - Blackwater and the greedy ''put options'' of 9/11...

Seems the Krongard family may have known 9/11 was to occur and bet millions that the involved airlines stock would plummet...

insiders/CIA/Halliburton...

[forthepeopl1]

it''s so funny that they think that this all that has been destoyed by the bush adminastration(cheney) everyday they do it. and for our congressman and woman and senators to be suprised that this happen is killing me i cant stop laughing, boy do we have a stupid and so blind goverment

Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, a persistent critic of the Bush administration''s anti-terrorism policies, was to speak on the Senate floor about the destruction of the interrogation tapes, and its not having been revealed for some two years. At least one Republican lawmaker has also expressed dismay over the destruction of the tapes.

The CIA''s destruction of the tapes came in the midst of Congressional and legal scrutiny about its secret detention program, according to current and former government officials.
White House officials declined this morning to comment on the matter.

"This matter must be promptly and fully investigated," said Harman, now head of the Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence and terrorism risk assessment. She noted that in early 2003 she received "a highly classified briefing" on CIA interrogation practices from the agency''s general counsel, and that she had expressed "serious concerns" in a letter to the lawyer afterward.

"I call for my letter of February 2003, which was never responded to and has been in the CIA''s files ever since, to be declassified," the Congresswoman said.

[sgtrds]

To Bush and cronies the Constitution and the law are merely minor obstacle''s to be gotten around or just plain ignored. They have zero respect for the rule of law or for what this nation really stands for. Instead they attempt to rule like a monarchy or dictatorship, rather then to lead like real Americans. They are the most un-American regime ever to hold power in US history.

[sgtrds]

"The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President%u2019s authority under Article II."

Which means of course that the president thinks he has whatever powers he says he has. A law unto himself. That''s not a democracy, it''s a dictatorship. George W. Bush believes he is an absolute ruler with absolute powers. A dictator.

[bareemperor]

Just wonder what Bu$h has in mind for 9/I I I

[Razzl]

And of course, all of these legal opinions were improperly classified, so that no due process could ever be exercised against them.

This is just one more example of why the outrageous misconduct of Bush administration officials and underlings needs to be prosecuted in a court of law: the conservatives need to be shown that there will be real consequences for usurping the law, and that it will apply to them. Prosecution now staves off dictatorship later...

[sgtrds]

Under these "legal" opinions there is absolutely nothing that could stop Bush from declaring himself president for life. These opinions say he has just that power and the little bas***** just might try it to.

[ajayvee]

SgtRDS wrote: Under these "legal" opinions there is absolutely nothing that could stop Bush from declaring himself president for life. These opinions say he has just that power and the little bas***** just might try it to. ================

And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do to him. There is not, nor will there ever be, a court of law with jurisdiction. And if he has the brains (which collectively he obviously has) he will declare Martial Law the minute there is the smallest hint of impeachment or criminal investigation. It might also be tempting to declare specific members of Congress "security risks" and treat them as such. AND THERE WILL BE NOTHING ANYONE CAN DO ABOUT IT !!!!

[omded]

TheGateway1,
I construe from your posting that you consider yourself a "conservative", and, in most ways directly opposite of a "liberal". I''ve looked at both "sides" of the political fence, and, the interesting thing is, I can''t find any difference between the two. Both are staunch disbelievers in the idea of giving the people what they want. Both appear to think they know what''s best for the people, and are quite happy to force that "right way" on everyone. Both appear to believe they''re doing everyone a favor by forcing upon them what they "know" is best for them. You even allude to this in your statement about preferring politicians who "do their jobs, without worrying about stupid polls, opinion surveys, etc." I don''t feel comfortable having someone running my life and making my decisions for me. That''s why I used to like the "conservatives" of the 1980''s. They preached a sermon of trusting the people to make their own decisions - in knowing what was best for them. They believed in making government smaller, and less intrusive into the personal lives of its citizens. In my opinion, people like you, and the current administration, are not conservatives at all. They''re as liberal as the most staunch liberals around. When you make desparaging remarks about "liberals", in my eyes, you''re taking a poke at your very self.

[trumpetstuff]

The king is a fink!!

[toolmangler-2009]

Posted by omded at 06:12 PM : Dec 07, 2007


Huh?

[toolmangler-2009]

Posted by omded at 06:12 PM : Dec 07, 2007



wanna say that agin'' an make it simple for us mountain folk, y''all?

[undermyboot]

Glad at least one Senator has the courage to say that the Emperor has no clothes.

[undermyboot]

Bush simply wishes there were none of these "inconvenient" checks against his exercise of arbitrary power. Whether it comes from the Constitutional power of the Congress, or the restrictions imposed by the 218-year old Bill of Rights, this president has made clear what he thinks of our way of life and American Liberty.

"It''''s just a G*dd*mned peace of paper!", GWB to three Republican Senators who questioned whether there were Constitutional limits to his power.

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there''s no question about it." G.W. Bush
Source: Business Week Online, "A Gentleman''s "C" for W," Richard S. Dunham, July 30, 2001

[kesac4650]

Whitehouse is arguing both sides of this issue and blaming half of his nonsense on Bush. The whole infomercial article is nonsense.

[toolmangler-2009]

It was always my feeling that the Presidents job was to find out "What the people want" then ''lead'' them in that direction. Not to ''TELL'' them what they want then force them to go there. I thought only Dictators were suppose to do that. (cudda fooled me)

[idlepugilist]

You have to admit George has made some uniquely liberal interpretations of the Constitution and his duties as President. Signing statements, for one. This speaks volumes about what kind of a man George is. Yes, not wishing to be accountable would be an accurate depiction.

[idlepugilist]

Reagan did wrong, Clinton did wrong, Bush junior did wrong. Under whose administration have civil rights taken the most abuse and military deaths risen the most? I don''t blame George for wanting to expedite wiretaps, but who is overseeing this list of who should be wiretapped? Military deaths are inevitable in war, but the premise for war was based on lies, and Bush lies to us constantly. Does Bush lead by example? Yes, and everyone is learning to not trust the leader.

[the74blaster]

If a law on the books had been broken, someone would have surely plastered it all over the media, quoting section and title.

Posted by TheGateway1

I will admit that you understand how the political process works. If there was a specific code broken I am sure it would have been covered by the media. However, this does lead to another question. If the Bush administration is in full compliance with the law, then why are they hiding under the cloak of executive privilege and national security?

The problem I have is that everytime this administration tells us something it is always a pipe dream. I mean where are all those Iraqis that were supposed to great us as liberators, where are the WMDs and what happened to the brief postinvasion occupation?

Do you still trust GWB?

[the74blaster]

Care to name at least ONE person of the three that all the articles on the internet are referring to? I can''''t find any. All the articles are exact carbon copies of each other, saying

Posted by TheGateway1

Do you actually beleive that these senators would come forward and confirm this event had taken place? That would be an act of treason to GOP and in effect the end of their political career.

[logicanada]

The emperor has no clothes...
and the little kid that pointed it out in in Gitmo with his whole family being waterboarded on a regular basis.

[undermyboot]

According to multiple sourced accounts, Republican Congressional leaders met with President George W. Bush in the Oval Office Nov. 2005 about renewing the USA "Patriot" Act. These GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

%u201CI don%u2019t give a *******,%u201D Bush retorted. %u201CI%u2019m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.%u201D

%u201CMr. President,%u201D one aide in the meeting said. %u201CThere is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.%u201D

%u201CStop throwing the Constitution in my face,%u201D Bush screamed back. %u201CIt%u2019s just a ******* piece of paper!

[undermyboot]

As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."
-Justice William O. Douglas

We are being told that all will be well if we simply give up our liberty and American Principle piece-by-piece. Today it seems like a little loss of liberty, a little more tolerance of unnecessary government secrecy will never lead to despotism. However, many great Americans understood that this is a path that leads to the end of the American Dream. It is a path that without fail leads to despotism and authoritarian government.

"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." -- Thomas Paine

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -- James Madison

[undermyboot]

"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." -- Thomas Paine

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
- Abraham Lincoln

But the lemmings listen to their neocon masters. They gobble up talking points, and stop thinking for themselves. The enemy becomes the "liberals", the "Soldier haters", or some other made-up straw man, and they stop thinking. It''s easier to turn on government Fox "News" TV and be told that all will be well if they simply give up their liberty piece-by-piece.

[lloydbest1]

One poster asked, perhaps reasonably, where''s the evidence? Name the names of the three "high ranking republicans" who bore witness to Bush''s anti constitutional tirade.

I looked and couldn''t find any names or confirming evidence, either. And guess what, I don''t care!

His Georgeness'' actions (or in some cases lack of) speak a lot louder than his words....
1. His failure to court martial high ranking officers who instigated the Abu Gharib outrage. All that came out of that whole mess was a demotion or two and the prosecution of a few noncoms.
2. Ordering the secret wire tapping of Americans and others with out court order. Even worse, his getting pYssed off and defensive and insisting they continue when found out.
3. Extraordinary renditions and offshore secret prisons where unknown numbers of people, some of whom are Americans, have no legal access or recourse.
4. Coverups of Pat Tillman''s possible murder, Jessica Lynch and Guantanamo activities that may include torture.
I don''t have enough room to go on. My point is even if Bush never said a word about the Constitution and the "..godd@mn piece of paper..." claim is so much hooey, his behavior during his term of office continually shows a pronounced ambivalence if not hostility toward it.

[sgtrds]

And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do to him. There is not, nor will there ever be, a court of law with jurisdiction. And if he has the brains (which collectively he obviously has) he will declare Martial Law the minute there is the smallest hint of impeachment or criminal investigation. It might also be tempting to declare specific members of Congress "security risks" and treat them as such. AND THERE WILL BE NOTHING ANYONE CAN DO ABOUT IT !!!!

Posted by ajayvee at 06:04 PM : Dec 07, 2007

If he does then there will be blood in the streets and lots of it. I will be more then proud to be one of the first to fight for my country, but the truth is it''ll be up to the military to decide if they''re going to continue to obey him. Personally I don''t think they will and that the revolution would start at the Pentagon.

[gkc99]

""I%u2019ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution %u201Ca ********* piece of paper.%u201D"
How about a name. "--Posted by TheGateway1


How about a name of the legal giants who proclaim that the Tiny Texass Tyrant is not bound by the Constitution?

They should be disbarred.

Is John Yoo in there? Does UC Berkeley still employ this clown. F8ck Yoo!

[walt1944-2009]

It is the wisdom of the evil, cowardly, spineless Democrats in Congress that impeachment of anyone is "off the table". The only Congressman I know of with guts enough to put impeachment of VP Darth Vader Cheney, and ultimately the Great Emperor Bush II himself, is Dennis Kucinich, a man that no one will listen to on Capital Hill and the press (like CBS News) tends to ignore!

It has been proved time and again that the Great Emperor Bush II and his court have committed impeachable offenses bordering on treason against the Constitution, that "********* piece of paper" they all swore to PROTECT! No one, though, has the real courage to bring them all to some kind of justice because, so the theory goes, it would tear the country apart and distract Congress from doing its job!!!

So does that mean Congress doesn''t have to protect the Constitution and its all left up to the White House???

GOD HELP US ALL!!!

SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!

[knyghtwolf]

So I am wondering IF Impeachment proceedings now would be a waste of time & taxpayers money? Is there no legal recourses available to just jerk him and his staff out of office? Anyone have any ideas or knowledge of this?

Impeach Bush.

[stevex47]

Again, the mess we are in is in large part because of the judicial branch caving to the executive branch of our government.

Ya, we should be peeved at Congress. We should be infuriated with the Courts.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by knyghtwolf

No, it wouldn''t be a waste. Neither would trial for treason, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.

Whatever the cost, the precedent must be established that a president must be held personally accountable for crimes committed while in office, that result in the deaths and destruction of innocents, of violarions of the laws of the US.

If not, your ethnic or religious or economic group may be the next victims of this, or the next mad person who achieves the office

[jetranger7]

Well you''ve got some Complete Morons on here, that think the Sun rises and sets in BUSHS AZZ, it all they''ve got to cling too, is that *** lying Corrupt SOB, whos in contempt of his Executive branch of powers to begin with, they think that just so neat, till one day they wake up and find storm troopers at their door, wanting to search their house and take their guns, and the banks who backed the little weasel decide to take everybodys houses including the republican dipsticks, who really think their doing a great thing supporting this Neo-Con disaster !!! just a matter of time, for them then it won''t be so funny !! listen to them cry then about how they were betrayed by their own !!!!!

[logicanada]

ain''t taken.... re funny how neocons...
I agree.
Have a look at you tube, Greg Palast: Heir to Bolivar.
Very interesting commentary

[gracchus1]

knyghtwolf,

brianbwb has your solution. Try Bush and Cheney for treason and put them where they belong: in prison. We are way beyond impeachment.

[libsluvsuvs]

you guys can whine you guys can proclaim you guys can pretty much say anything you want..NOT UNLESS YOU HAVE SUBSTANCE TO YOUR ALLEGATIONS..THERE WOULD BE NO IMPRISONMENT THERE WOULD BE NO IMPEACHMENTS..the DNC and the part of liberal Hollywood KNOWS THAT..that is why that are not harping the "impeachment" chant anymore..

only few selected hard core ''in dire need of attention'' are still trying to stoke the idoicy amongst the looney left winged nuts..

[harp1963]

Why don''t we use this technology against Bush and Cheney. Wiretap them. They are the ones who have led us into the current mess this country is in. These two and their cronies are a bigger threat to America than Iran will ever think about being.

[undermyboot]

If he does then there will be blood in the streets and lots of it. I will be more then proud to be one of the first to fight for my country, but the truth is it''''ll be up to the military to decide if they''''re going to continue to obey him. Personally I don''''t think they will and that the revolution would start at the Pentagon.

Posted by SgtRDS at 09:11 PM : Dec 07, 2007
--------
I agree. Coming from a proud military family I know the reverence these Americans hold for the Constitution and the preservation of our liberty. It would be a sad day that we have to look to the military to protect us against a wannabe dictator like Bush, but I have no doubt the vast majority would protect the Constitution and refuse to follow unlawful and un-Constitutional orders.

[watcher269-2009]

Everyone is pointing the finger at Bush for this mess.

Bush can''t tell time without someones help - this is all Cheney''s doing.

Cheney is the person responsible for circumventing the Constitution not Bush.

Hang Cheney for Treason - 2009 - that should be the New Democratic Slogan!

HANG CHENEY FOR TREASON - 2009!!

[skyk-2009]

Everyone is pointing the finger at Bush for this mess.

Bush can''''t tell time without someones help - this is all Cheney''''s doing.

Cheney is the person responsible for circumventing the Constitution not Bush.

Hang Cheney for Treason - 2009 - that should be the New Democratic Slogan!

HANG CHENEY FOR TREASON - 2009!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by watcher269 at 04:40 AM : Dec 08, 2007
+ report abuse

Yes but even someone who can''t tell time KNOWS when they are doing wrong. Bush may NOT be the guiding hand here but he is the front man and by law is just as guilty.

[skyk-2009]

only few selected hard core ''''in dire need of attention'''' are still trying to stoke the idoicy amongst the looney left winged nuts..


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by libsluvsuvs at 02:37 AM : Dec 08, 2007
+ report abuse


LOL You don''t get out of your room much do you??? LOL

[magoo2u1]

A literal interpretation of the law would be right wing , not left. Lefties would would argue against the constitution. Bush is operating outside the law. Very liberal.

[morganborgan]

Do you little libs ever look at yourselves in the mirror? What you see there must be so disappointing. Look at the things you write. Its'' Bush and Cheney. They did it. What did they do? Everything. Anything. Whatever you''ve got, they did it. You little pukes are soooooooo worried about those little angels that eat better than you do at Guantanamo. "They deserve a trial". "What about their rights"? These guys would cut off your mothers'' head right in front of you and then brutally rape and kill your 10 year old daughter before ending up their day by disemboweling you and any other family members that might be there. On that matter we hear nothing from you. On how to defeat this barbaric enemy we get ZERO from you. I promise you, when next they come, they''ll be coming for you. You in your big cities. You in your liberal Utopias. And when they do, what will you do? Oh, I know. "Bush and Cheney did it".

[oleander8]

Well...he is the "Decider".

[gkc99]

"Do you little libs ever look at yourselves in the mirror? "--Posted by morganborgan


Do you neoconscum? When you do, no image is reflected, right? Because you''re the evil undead, trying to steal our precious freedom from us in the name of fear. It''s you vermin who have made our beloved Red White and Blue into a worldwide symbol of torture! We''re not going to let you do it, scumbag!

[jowand]

The Divine Right of Kings was the prevailing Christian Principle of government in 1776. The notion so clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence, that the right to govern comes from the governed, was a decidedly unChristian Principle.

Regards,
Posted by Nancy_Naive at 06:41 AM : Dec 08, 2007

Your version of history is really twisted, stupid, political, Stalinist and immaginary; O'' great and powerfull twisted one.

[watcher269-2009]

What happened to the Oath - ''To Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States''? This Man has Pisssed on the Constitution since he got in office!

Bush/Cheney have defecated on the Constitution of the United States and all those that defend these individuals are just as guilty.

[skyk-2009]

Your version of history is really twisted, stupid, political, Stalinist and immaginary; O'''' great and powerfull twisted one.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by jowand at 09:43 AM : Dec 08, 2007
+ report abuse

How so?? I''ve studied History for 35 years...taught it for well over 25 and my friend she is so very right it''s not funny! The King felt his right to rule was ordained from the all mighty. The very Radical Liberals that made up our founding fathers felt that the right to govern could ONLY be obtained from those who were governed. This fact was so strong that Conservatives lined up to get into Canada and away from these EVIL people driven by the devil... THAT is just FACT and is well documented.

[ddaymichael]

I suppose at his trial for treason, Bush''s defence will be, "I vas only obaying ORDERS!" (Cheney''s orders)

Hang `em both.

[gunnertwo1]

I believe Nancy_Naive has it right.