Specter: Bush was not given a 'blank check'

[Nickdfresh]

Specter Remains Doubtful of Spy Program's Legality
He says Bush was not given a 'blank check' when Congress OKd the use of force after 9/11.
By Maura Reynolds
Times Staff Writer

January 16, 2006

WASHINGTON — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) on Sunday reiterated his reservations about President Bush's legal authority to order domestic spying, saying that Congress had not given Bush a "blank check" to order warrantless eavesdropping.

Specter also said that if planned congressional hearings determined that the president broke the law, one possible remedy could be impeachment, though he quickly added that such talk was theoretical — and premature.

"The remedy could be a variety of things," including impeachment or criminal prosecution, "but the principal remedy … under our society is to pay a political price," Specter told ABC's "This Week."

He said he was willing to follow the investigation as far as it needed to go, "but I don't see any talk about impeachment here."

"I don't think anybody doubts that the president is making a good-faith effort, that he sees a real problem as we all do, and he's acting in a way that he feels he must," Specter said.

"But we're not going to give him a blank check, and just because we're of the same party doesn't mean we're not going to look at this very closely."

Specter said that he believed the president had acted with the best intentions but that he did not accept Bush's argument that a congressional resolution that authorized the use of force against the nations, organizations or individuals responsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks also allowed him to circumvent the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

However, Specter said he was prepared to listen to the administration's case during the hearings he intended to convene next month.

"I started off by saying that he didn't have the authority under the resolution authorizing the use of force. The president has to follow the Constitution," Specter said.

"Where you have a law which is constitutional, like [the] Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, there still may be collateral different powers in the president under wartime circumstances. That's a very knotty question that I'm not prepared to answer on a Sunday sound bite….

"I'm prepared to listen, but I'm going to wear my skepticism on my sleeve," he added.

Last month, Bush acknowledged that he had authorized the National Security Agency, which conducts international electronic surveillance, to monitor communications between individuals in the United States and those abroad in suspected terrorism cases.

The foreign surveillance act outlaws such domestic wiretapping unless authorized by a surveillance court, which also has the authority to issue warrants retroactively in case of emergency.

The Bush administration has argued that the surveillance court should be bypassed because it cannot act quickly enough — in part because of the nature of the terrorist threat and in part because of the speed of electronic communications.

Specter said he had yet to be convinced that the foreign surveillance act and the court could not handle the situation or be modified to do so by an act of Congress.

On CBS' "Face the Nation," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), another Judiciary Committee member, noted that under the law, "the attorney general can authorize a tap for 72 hours and then they must take it to the FISA court."

"We want these people wiretapped if they're connected to terror, no question," she said. "Follow the law, and the law enables this to happen."

She said it was her understanding that out of about 20,000 applications to the court, the judges had turned down fewer than a dozen.

"Therefore, there is no evidence that the FISA court can't respond," Feinstein said. "They work 24/7. There are 11 judges…. They believe they can cover this."

[DLR'sCock]

Here it comes.

[Warham]

Impeach the bum!

[Nickdfresh]

Glad to see you agree with other prominent Republicans...

Opposition: Specter says 'impeachment is a remedy'
Combined News Services

ACCRA, Ghana - First lady Laura Bush said Sunday that the U.S. government is right to eavesdrop on Americans with suspected ties to terrorists, but a top Senate Republican joined a chorus of lawmakers who think domestic spying is on shaky legal ground.
''I think the American people expect the United States government and the president to do what they can to make sure there's not an attack by foreign terrorists,'' Bush said just before landing here to begin a four-day stay in West Africa.
President Bush is concerned that media disclosure of the program will cripple work to foil terrorists, she said. ''I think he was worried that it would undermine our efforts by alerting terrorists to what our efforts are,'' Bush said.
Bush's secret order gave the National Security Agency permission to listen in on international phone calls and peek at e-mails between Americans and suspected terrorists.
Administration officials claim a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 - a resolution that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism - gave the president the authority to order the program.
''I thought they were wrong,'' Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said on ABC's ''This Week.''
Specter is one of several Republicans and Democrats who are questioning the administration's authority to engage in domestic spying without court warrants. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has agreed to testify at

hearings next month before the Judiciary Committee, which Specter chairs.
Specter also said that although the question of impeachment had not yet arisen for him, he would pursue it if he believes Bush broke the law.
''Impeachment is a remedy,'' he said. ''After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution, but the principal remedy . . . under our society is to pay a political price.''
Committee members, including GOP Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, have expressed doubt about Bush's legal argument for the program.
''We're not going to give him a blank check, and just because we're of the same party doesn't mean we're not going to look at this very closely,'' Specter said. ''And I moved immediately when the matter was disclosed to say that I would use my authority as chairman of the Judiciary Committee to have hearings, and we're going to pursue it.''

Link

[Nickdfresh]

No comments on this? We're now openly using the "I" word over perceived law-breaking...


Great Scott! Shades of...

[knuckleboner]

i'm not a constitutional scholar. but the spying is a really gray area.

the constitution says you can't do certain things (like unreasonable search and seizure.) it doesn't say what the penalty for breaking those are.

generally, courts have said that the penalty is that any evidence gained from an illegal search is excluded from your trial.

fair enough. but what if the government has no intention of trying you? what's your recourse?



nonetheless, i think you're much more likely to see this authority shot down in court, rather than an impeachment trial. it is not uncommon for government officials to wrongly interpret the scope of their authority. court cases will then determine if they were right or not. but impeachment would have to mean that: 1) the powers were improper AND 2) the people knowingly abused them.


with all the loopholes and interpretations of the law, i think you might could get 1). but you'll have a tough time proving 2).

[Hardrock69]

Dupe thread. Somebody close this.


http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showt...threadid=31630

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Dupe thread. Somebody close this.


http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showt...threadid=31630

Actually, it's not. Sen. Arlen Spector (R. PA) and some guy on the internet are a whole different ballgame...

[FORD]

I'll allow it.

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Actually, it's not. Sen. Arlen Spector (R. PA) and some guy on the internet are a whole different ballgame...

Actually it is.

Read & weep:

posted: 01-15-2006 at 11:37 AM
Profile Pm Email Search Buddy IP

Specter says no 'blank check' for Bush on spying

Sun Jan 15, 1:22 PM ET



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee promised a thorough investigation on Sunday into
President George W. Bush's secret domestic eavesdropping program and said there would be no blank check for Bush.


Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), a Republican from Pennsylvania, said Bush in theory could face impeachment charges if found to have violated the law by authorizing the program, but he did not endorse that approach and had heard no serious talk of it.

News of the covert domestic spying program last month sparked an outcry by both Democrats and some members of Bush's Republican party. Many lawmakers and rights groups questioned whether it violates the U.S. Constitution.

The judiciary committee has scheduled hearings on the issue and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said he will testify on the administration's legal justification. The operation includes eavesdropping on U.S. phone calls and reading e-mails. The hearings are expected next month.

"We're going to explore it in depth," Specter said on ABC television's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos."

"I don't see any talk about impeachment here," Specter said. "I don't think anybody doubts that the president is making a good faith effort, that he sees a real problem as we all do, and he's acting in a way that he feels he must."

Still, the senator insisted, "we're not going to give him a blank check, and just because we're of the same party doesn't mean we're not going to look at this very closely."

POST SEPT. 11

The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act makes it illegal to spy on U.S. citizens in the United States without the approval of a special, secret court. Bush secretly gave the National Security Agency authority to intercept communications without such approval.

Bush and senior officials have contended that the eavesdropping on Americans suspected of links to terrorism is legal and necessary to help defend the country after September 11.

Gonzales has said the authorization of military force by the U.S. Congress after the September 11 attacks also gave the president the right to conduct the domestic surveillance.

Specter reiterated his view that the vote did not allow domestic spying, although he said presidential war powers under the U.S. Constitution might supersede the law.

Asked if he might be willing to amend the law to accommodate the spying program, Specter did not rule it out. "I'm prepared to listen, but I'd be very dubious," he said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) of California, a Democrat on the committee, said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that the president's exercise of power must be examined.

She said she does not believe Bush's constitutional powers "allow him to simply avoid the law when he can do it (authorize domestic spying) by following the law."

Bush only acknowledged the program after it was reported by The New York Times, and called its disclosure to the newspaper "a shameful act." The Justice Department has announced an investigation into who disclosed the NSA operation.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060115...avesdropping_dc

[Post #4]

[Hardrock69]

[Warham]

Who cares what Specter says. He can't even decide whether he's a Democrat or Republican.

[Hardrock69]

Who cares what Warham says? He can't even decide if he is a Republican or a Republican....