Republican Rift Over Wiretapping Widens

[cal04]

Party at Odds on Surveillance Legislation

Deepening Republican divisions over the future of President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program may jeopardize GOP leaders' hopes of making terrorism surveillance legislation a centerpiece of their final legislative push this month.

House and Senate Republican leaders plan to focus congressional attention almost exclusively on national security, hoping to draw clear distinctions between Republicans and Democrats ahead of the November elections. Topping the to-do list is passing legislation officially sanctioning the National Security Agency's secret wiretapping of suspected terrorist communications. The eavesdropping has been carried out without warrants since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. A federal judge in Detroit recently ruled the program illegal.

Republican leaders have planned to produce legislation by month's end that would give the administration as much latitude as possible to continue the program. But that effort may be splintering. The Senate Judiciary Committee will consider as many as four contradictory bills on the issue tomorrow and could approve all of them. That would leave it to Senate leaders and the White House to sort out how to proceed.

Meanwhile, House Republican leaders and the chairmen of the House Judiciary and intelligence committees are coalescing around surveillance legislation that goes beyond legislation negotiated by Vice President Cheney and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/05/AR2006090501136.html

[jazzjunkysue]

1. Cover Thy Ass: The 11th Commandment

Is there enough tacky wallpaper in the world to cover all these asses?

Ye be going down, ye republicans, and ye will be found guilty.

[Mr_Spock]

2. Interesting situation these ass holes got themselves in

Hopefully they'll come out smelling like crap.

[jaysunb]

3. She ruled it " unconstitutional "

not illegal Mr. Weisman. :evilfrown:

[sutz12]

12. I believe she ruled it both unconstitutional and illegal

It is in comformity neither with the 4th Amendment nor the FISA Law currently in place (that happens to soften the 4th Amendment slightly).

[grytpype]

4. Amazing the MSM is mentioning this.

The usual story is "Democrats in Disarray."

[w4rma]

9. The only reason the M$M is covering it is because,

"House and Senate Republican leaders plan to focus congressional attention almost exclusively on national security, hoping to draw clear distinctions between Republicans and Democrats ahead of the November elections. Topping the to-do list is passing legislation officially sanctioning the National Security Agency's secret wiretapping of suspected terrorist communications."

[leesa]

5. Ooooooh...getting cold feet. They know they can't win this one in court.

[LynnTheDem]

6. Security... bottom line; WHO was in the WH when 911 hit?

PERIOD.

[C_U_L8R]

7. Republicans are wiretapped

illegally... just like everyone else.
there's no reason to assume they are immune
from signature Bush regime blackmail.

[Robbien]

8. GOPers believe the BS they are being fed

that only terrorists and Democrats are being monitored. Also, they are not thinking ahead to a time when the entire US government is not controlled by GOPers. But then it will be too late and this surrender of our rights will still be in existence.

[DallasNE]

10. Foolish To Pass Any Bill This Year

It seems that today sweeping bills are drafted overnight with votes taken roughly 48 hours later. What ever happened to committee hearings with expert witnesses questioned by all members of the appropriate committee. The only thing we can depend on now is that a bad bill will be passed.

Yes, there is such a thing as emergency legislation but how can one claim an emergency now rather than 5 years ago.

If the Democrats can't forestall a very bad bill I would hope that they would sunset it, say after 2 years, requiring a new Congress to write a new bill if one is indeed deemed necessary.

It just galls me how legislation is written today. No deliberation, no expert testimony, no unfriendly witnesses and no cross examination. Just brute force, rubber stamp legislation.
Sick, sick, sick.

[rodeodance]

16. jam it through seem to be the motto.

[Drum]

11. CrrrraaaAAAAaaaackkkk!

Widen, you rift, widen!

There's plenty of room for right good thinking people over on our Constitutional side of the discussion. Enlightened Republicans who want to serve their constituents The American People (again, at last!) should draw near and join in the overthrowing of these awful eavesdropping loopholes. And, of course, the overthrow of the assholes who've given birth to those policies. Enlightened GOP, c'mon over...shed the burden that the Bush White House has forced you to shoulder...stop being zealots and come over to the light.

Or, go back to your pre-election debate on horse-slaughtering. We'll know quickly enough which tack you've chosen.

:shrug:

[RangerSmith]

13. It's really hard to tell

how much of this is election posturing.

Either way, it works best for anybody on the ballot who doesn't have an (R) beside their name.

[NoodleyAppendage]

14. At what point do we catch a photo of Cheney shitting on the Constitution?

I can just visualize (however horrible it might be) Cheney squatting over the glassed-in case at the National Archives. I so hate that man and will rejoice upon hearing that his long-dead, black heart has finally given out.

J

[unschooler]

15. Aw, heck. Everybody knows it doesn't matter what Congress does.

The Chimperor has the "inherent authority" to do whatever he pleases, doesn't he?

[rodeodance]

17. look. even Healther Wilson seems to be getting into the checks and balan

ces.




......"You need checks and balances in place to make sure future administrations or even civil servants don't get out of line," said Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.), sponsor of the main House surveillance bill. Unlike Specter's bill, she added, "my bill was not authorized by the White House."

At issue is the balance between congressional oversight and executive- branch latitude. In July, Specter announced what he called "a major breakthrough" when he presented legislation backed by the White House that would allow the administration to submit the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program to a secret intelligence court for review of its legality. Under the bill, the secret court that now administers surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would be permitted to review the legality of the program as a whole and not individual wiretaps, which could continue without warrants.

Republican leaders rallied around the deal, apparently believing they could portray Democratic opposition as evidence that their opponents are soft on terrorism. But since then, some Republicans have moved to toughen the terms of the agreement.

Sens. Mike DeWine (Ohio), Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) sponsored a competing bill that would require a court-issued warrant for wiretapping beyond 45 days, unless the attorney general certifies to Congress in writing and under oath that such a warrant could not be obtained but that the surveillance is necessary for national security. With DeWine and Graham on the Judiciary Committee, the legislation is likely to be approved tomorrow, committee staff members and Senate leadership aides said yesterday......

[rodeodance]

18. But here is the bottom line (in the last paragraph) folks:

......The American Civil Liberties Union and top Democrats have said Wilson's and Specter's bills would gut judicial review of executive surveillance, creating so many loopholes that court warrants would become optional.

[brg5001]

19. They'll all fall in line with the Rove-choreographed presentation

Exactly, rodeodance. All of the objections from "responsible" Repubicans, whether to warrantless eavesdropping, military tribunals, or other fascist-inspired misbehavior, will all evaporate once Chucklenuts comes up behind them to give them all nice back rubs. These bastards don't know how to stand up the war machine. If they did, they'd change parties, filibuster the money, or resign in protest.

[redqueen]

20. Time for a flurry of LTTE's, then, I think. n/t

[brg5001]

21. Love the signature, redqueen

"People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution; they don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible." Jamie Raskin

But you know, if even if they did swear to "uphold" the Bible, which Bible would it be? And which interpretation? As an ex-Christian and an ex-conservative, it's clear that the entire inscrutable mass of theological concepts known as "The Bible" is just a paint-by-number kit for whichever Big Daddy happens to be running whatever church. Somehow, the only thing that unites the mythological mayhem known as "Christianity" is whatever cultural enemy is currently fashionable, with the only unpardonable sin being -- DISSENT! How convenient for the patriarchal puppeteers and their corporate sponsors! Humility, tolerance, kindness, self-examination -- it all goes right out the window as soon as one starts asking serious questions about doctrine, about politics, and about issues of control and freedom.

[redqueen]

22. Thanks, and excellent observations!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

Whoops... didn't check your join date, was going by your post count... either way, nice to see you. :)