WASHINGTON, Feb. 13, 2008
Bush: No More Debate Over Spy Program
President Asks The House To Pass Anti-Terror Eavesdropping Laws
-
President George W. Bush said the Senate bill was passed with wide, bipartisan support, and the House should pass it too - before the current law expires at midnight on Saturday. (AP)
-
Interactive Domestic Surveillance The debate over the Bush administration's controversial wiretapping program.
-
Interactive 110th Congress The balance of power shifts and new leadership takes control as the latest session convenes.
Mr. Bush said he would not agree to giving the House more time to debate a measure the Senate passed Tuesday governing the government's ability to work with telecommunications companies to eavesdrop on phone calls and e-mails between suspected terrorists. The bill gives phone companies retroactive protection from lawsuits filed on the basis of cooperation they gave the government without court permission - something Mr. Bush insisted was included in the bill.
About 40 lawsuits have been filed against telecom companies by people alleging violations of wiretapping and privacy laws. The House did not include the immunity provision in a similar bill it passed last year.
"In order to be able to discover ... the enemy's plans, we need the cooperation of telecommunication companies," Mr. Bush said. "If these companies are subjected to lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars, they won't participate. They won't help us. They won't help protect America."
The 68-29 Senate vote Tuesday to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act belied the nearly two months of stops and starts and bitter political wrangling that preceded it. The two sides had battled to balance civil liberties with the need to conduct surveillance on potential adversaries.
Mr. Bush said the Senate bill was passed with wide, bipartisan support, and the House should pass it too - before the current law expires at midnight on Saturday.
"Congress has had over six months to discuss and deliberate," said Mr. Bush, who stood alongside Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell. "The time for debate is over. I will not accept any temporary extension. They have already been given a two-week extension."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused the president and Senate Republicans of being more interested in politicizing intelligence than resolving the debate. Reid said that the issue would not be before Congress if Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney "in their unyielding efforts to expand presidential powers," had not created a system to conduct wiretapping, including on U.S. citizens, outside the bounds of federal law.
"The president could have taken the simple step of requesting new authority from Congress ... but whether out of convenience, incompetence, or outright disdain for the rule of law, the administration chose to ignore Congress and ignore the Constitution," Reid said.
Reid said if the president chooses to veto a short-term extension, he, not Congress will have to take the blame for any gaps in collecting intelligence of terrorists' communications.
"Due to months of White House foot-dragging, the relevant House committees have only just gotten important documents related to whether the Bush Administration followed the law and the Constitution," he said. "They need some time to review and analyze them. We must not let this critical issue be resolved by White House bullying."
Doubtful they can work out the differences in the bills by the time the law expires, Democrats in the Senate and the House prepared short-term extensions that would keep the law in effect for several more weeks. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky blocked an extension attempt Tuesday. Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said Republicans in the House would fight another extension.
"The one thing we've learned about Congress is they won't act until forced to," White House press secretary Dana Perino told reporters after Mr. Bush's statement. "We're not going to pass extensions into perpetuity."
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said Tuesday he still opposes retroactive immunity.
"There is no basis for the broad telecommunications company amnesty provisions advocated by the administration," Conyers wrote in a letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding asking for documents about the wiretapping program. The documents have been withheld from Congress.
While giving the White House what it wanted on immunity, the Senate also expanded the power of the court to oversee government eavesdropping on Americans. The amendment would give the FISA court the authority to monitor whether the government is complying with procedures designed to protect the privacy of innocent Americans whose telephone or computer communications are captured during surveillance of a foreign target.
The bill would also require FISA court orders to eavesdrop on Americans who are overseas. Under current law, the government can wiretap or search the possessions of anyone outside the United States - even a soldier serving overseas - without court permission if it believes the person may be a foreign agent.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From U.S.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 171 CommentsHow''s the menopause going Mary?
mbcsmith
Sure Mary; and your hero could GWBushit could?? ROFLMFAO!!
The final tally was 68-29, with 3 abstaining.
Crossing over to vote with the Republicans were:
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV),
Max Baucus (D-MT),
Evan Bayh (D-IA),
Tom Carper (D-DE),
Richard Casey (D-PA),
Kent Conrad (D-ND),
Daniel Inouye (D-HI),
Tim Johnson (D-SD),
Herb Kohl (D-WI),
Mary Landrieu (D-LA),
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR),
Claire McCaskill (D-MO),
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD),
Ben Nelson (D-NE),
Bill Nelson (D-FL),
Mark Pryor (D-AR),
Ken Salazar (D-CO),
Jim Webb (D-VA), and
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Also keep in mind that ALL Republicans and one "Independent" (Lieberman!) voted for this trash bill!
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00020
And here''s the link to all your senators, in case you might want to voice your outrage:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
The Guardian UK reported:
Despite a boost from Barack Obama %u2014 but not the absent Hillary Clinton %u2014 Democratic senators today failed to stop the Bush administration from winning legal immunity for telecom companies that helped the government eavesdrop on Americans.
Obama voted with 30 fellow Democrats to allow the telecom companies to face lawsuits, which civil liberties groups consider a crucial chance to unearth information on the administration''s programme of wiretapping without a court warrant.
But the immunity survived, with 18 Democrats crossing over to support George Bush.
WHO WERE THE 18 TRAITORS? (Keep in mind all the GOPers are TRAITORS)
Rockefeller was one.
----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------
Posted by IOWEIGN at 06:43 PM : Feb 12, 2008
And why not, LIB. You think Pelosi is more of a man than Reid.
Posted by mbcsmith at 07:44 PM : Feb 12, 2008
What is classified can be de-classified dipshit - and the immunity is for the telcos not Bush and Co. - It isn''t over yet...
Posted by mbcsmith,
Yeah. Thats very much like the WMDs in Iraq, Mission Accomplished and the Contract With America the GOP promised us.
They lied lied to me and they are going to pay for it in November!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by UnderMyBoot at 08:16 PM : Feb 12, 2008
Typical LIB elitist BS. Yes LIB, be afraid, very afraid.
Scalia Defends Torture: It%u2019s %u2018Absurd%u2019 To Say The Gov%u2019t Can%u2019t %u2018Smack%u2019 A Suspect %u2018In The Face%u2019
Today in an interview with BBC Radio%u2019s Law in Action, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia defended torture, claiming that it is not necessarily barred by the Constitution:
Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited under the Constitution? Because smacking someone in the face would violate the 8th amendment in a prison context. You can%u2019t go around smacking people about.
Is it obvious that what can%u2019t be done for punishment can%u2019t be done to exact information that is crucial to this society? It%u2019s not at all an easy question, to tell you the truth.
(cont)
The BBC interviewer, however, objected to Scalia%u2019s use of the so-called %u201Cticking time bomb%u201D scenario to justify government torture. %u201CIt%u2019s a bizarre scenario,%u201D he said. %u201CBecause the fact is, it%u2019s very unlikely you%u2019re going to have the one person who can give you that information. So if you use that as an excuse to commit torture, perhaps that%u2019s a dangerous thing.%u201D Scalia responded:
Seems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can%u2019t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face. It would be absurd to say that.
As the BBC interviewer pointed out, ticking time bomb scenarios %u2014 where a detainee has knowledge of an imminent attack %u2014 are incredibly rare, despite Scalia%u2019s fascination with them. U.S. Air Force Reserve Colonel Steve Kleinman, a longtime military interrogator, testified to the House in November that torture would be %u201Cunnecessary%u201D even in such scenarios. Furthermore, intelligence experts say that torture is %u201Cineffective%u201D because it %u201Coften produces false information.%u201D
It''s also instructive to compare the postings of people who respond to thoughtful points with name calling. No intelligence. They probably dropped out of High School and have convinced themselves that being an ignorant mad fool is a VIRTUE. These are the schoolyard cowards (were grade school bullies) who today gather in vigilante squads to track down Americans who they don''t like. They are exactly why the 2nd Amendment is important. Because they will run in like hte cowards they are when those they call names fill their azzes with buckshot.
Hey LIB, sorry your proggressive leaders betrayed you. Must really hurt to have been so bald faced LIED to. Bush bitc*slapped Reid across the room on that one.
Posted by cdfoxtrot at 07:08 PM : Feb 12, 2008
More significantly, Congress and the Courts risk becoming irrelevant as the President progressively collects all governmental power. Eventually, the Congress will be dissolved, the Federal Courts will be castrat*d, and the new Monarcy will be declared. We will be allowed to vote for the each King after they have been anointed by the Far Right owners of the Press and the Republican power brokers. The end of America as the Far Right applauds the victory, not caring of the cost.
"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
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 171 Comments