ThinkProgress: WH Lied About Having Briefed Congress About Domestic Spying

[AtomicKitten]

White House lied about having briefed Congress about domestic spying program -- but it's still illegal

From ThinkProgress
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/18/graham-no-reference/

Former Intel Chairman Graham: White House Made ‘No Reference’ to NSA Program In Briefings

This morning, Condoleezza Rice defended the NSA evesdropping program by arguing that congressional leaders — specifically “leaders of the relevant oversight intelligence committees” — had been briefed on the activities.

RICE: It’s been reviewed not just by the White House counsel but by the lawyers of the Justice Department and by the lawyers of the NSA, the National Security Agency, and by the Inspector General of the National Security Agency, and it has to be reauthorized every 45 days. And the Congress, the congressional leaders, including —

RUSSERT: Those are administration lawyers. Why not go to an objective court?

RICE: — including leaders of the relevant oversight intelligence committees have been briefed on this.

This is apparently not true. At the time the program was initiated, the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee was former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL). On Friday’s “Nightline,” Graham made clear he had never once been briefed by the administration about the program:

There was no reference made to the fact that we were going to…begin unwarranted, illegal — and I think unconstitutional — eavesdropping on American citizens.

Read the full Graham transcript:

ABC: You were Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time the President signed this executive order. Vice President Cheney met with congressional leaders — I’m sure you were among them in 2002, is that correct?

GRAHAM: There was such a meeting. And the issue, then, was whether we could intercept foreign communications when they transited through U.S. communication sites. The assumption was that if we did that, we would do it pursuant to the law, the law that regulates the surveillance of national security issues. And there was no suggestion that we were going to begin eavesdropping on United States citizens without following the full law.

ABC: You’re saying you were not briefed as the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee at the point the President signed this?

GRAHAM: I was briefed. There was no reference made to the fact that we were going to use that as the subterfuge to begin unwarranted, illegal — and I think unconstitutional — eavesdropping on American citizens.

ABC: So if the administration says that you were informed about this action, they would not be telling the truth?

GRAHAM: We were not informed that this would be a pretense for using warrantless searchs to listen in to the private conversations of United States citizens.

ABC: Sounds like you were saying you were lied to.

GRAHAM: I think there has been a selective use of information to build a case that was already determined, rather than using intelligence for its intended purpose, which is to improve the decision-making process on a judgment that has not yet been determined.

[rodeodance]

1. also on War and Peice

which I posted earlier.

http://warandpiece.com /

December 18, 2005

Unprecedented Domestic Surveillance. Barton Gellman and Dafna Linzer:

......A high-ranking intelligence official with firsthand knowledge said in an interview yesterday that Vice President Cheney, then-Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet and Michael V. Hayden, then a lieutenant general and director of the National Security Agency, briefed four key members of Congress about the NSA's new domestic surveillance on Oct. 25, 2001, and Nov. 14, 2001, shortly after Bush signed a highly classified directive that eliminated some restrictions on eavesdropping against U.S. citizens and permanent residents.

In describing the briefings, administration officials made clear that Cheney was announcing a decision, not asking permission from Congress. How much the legislators learned is in dispute.

Former senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who chaired the Senate intelligence committee and is the only participant thus far to describe the meetings extensively and on the record, said in interviews Friday night and yesterday that he remembers "no discussion about expanding to include conversations of U.S. citizens or conversations that originated or ended in the United States" -- and no mention of the president's intent to bypass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. ...

Graham said the latest disclosures suggest that the president decided to go "beyond foreign communications to using this as a pretext for listening to U.S. citizens' communications. There was no discussion of anything like that in the meeting with Cheney.".............

[rodeodance]

2. and the Wash Post article with Bob Graham comments.--not briefed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121701233_pf.html

[tinfoilinfor2005]

8. Graham misremembering?

Yeah, he is talking about the same man that the gop made fun of during the last election year because he has kept a daily diary his entire life and is meticulous about details.

I've met Bob Graham on several occasions, and I have never found him to be a person who "misremembers" details about something this important.

[FreedomAngel82]

15. I keep a journal about stuff

It's just so I can remember everything later on if I need to. And I think it's a great idea. They're just trying to do that to cover their asses.

[AtomicKitten]

5. Hooray - for once - for the MSM

All over this like stink on a monkey. The administration would have us think it's no big "thang."
But it is. Bush broke the law, and is damn proud of it.

Wasn't there a "thing" about Clinton not being above the law?

[davekriss]

13. Hey!

"Wasn't there a "thing" about Clinton not being above the law?"

That was so last century. Dontcha' know, 9-11 changed everything!





:sarcasm:

[rodeodance]

3. we need to listen to Bob Graham.--not Lindsey.

[rodeodance]

4. nominated.

[seafan]

16. Truer words never spoken. n/t

[JerseygirlCT]

6. I just have to ask one question

and maybe I'm naive.

WHY doesn't anyone seem to want to come right out and say "yes" when asked if the WH lied about something?

There's always this sort of semantics dance going on -- ways to say "yes, they lied to me" without actually speaking the words.

Why the heck not just say it?

[AtomicKitten]

7. because Dems have no spine

Levin on Meet the Press slithered under the questioning. Christ, for all the fake outrage the Republicans muster, this is SOMETHING and the Dems are pussyfooting around it.

This is IMPEACHABLE.

WHY WON'T THE DEMS GO FOR THE JUGULAR!!!!!!!!!!

[JerseygirlCT]

9. Frustrating, isn't it?

Don't you think we'd also have more "believability" with the general public if we just plain old said what we mean?

I know it's stupid to go off half-cocked, throwing accusations around and name-calling.

But there's got to be something besides that -- rather than, as you say, pussyfooting.

What's wrong with a plain, old "they lied" -- followed perhaps by a sorrowful exclamation about how terrible it truly is when leaders do that?

[AtomicKitten]

10. I think Dems are afraid of the "war"

But this all goes back to the big fat lies told to start the illegal, immoral war, the abuse of power, the CIA outing, the forged documents.

The Dems need a leader. Sometime to blow it ALL out of the water. Not systematically, not innuendos, not take a wait and see attitude.

The Republicans have never been more vulnerable. Now we just need to find someone with the balls to call bullshit on it all!

[grasswire]

11. there is a reason

Because then the story headlines change from "Bush spies on Americans" to "Senator calls Bush liar." And that means politics becomes the story. The opposition has a chance to rough up the critic.

[TankLV]

19. I constantly wonder the same thing. It always infuriates me.

You know the REPUKES never have such hesitation with their BASELESS charges!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

20. I thought the exact same thing upon reading that article

Why won't he just say "They're lying"?

Do they have something on him? There were some weird things involving him and 9/11, IIRC...

[FreedomAngel82]

12. When have these people never lied??

[sellitman]

14. Just say: WE WERE FUCKING LIED TO!!!!!

How hard is that Sen. Bob Graham ?


:argh: :grr: :banghead: :rant:

[ktlyon]

17. This is interesting, he thinks he is Saddam

remember when Saddam was captured and he was told he would be put on trial for violating the law and Saddam said "I am the law" or something like that.

[AtomicKitten]

18. just like the Bug Man

Saying he's the federal government.
These people are drunk with power.
Like Condyloma Rice lying about torture and rendition.
Lying right to our faces,
with no accountability.

[MellowOne]

21. We are continually being lied to

Why is this man still in office? Do you think a Democrat president would still be there, no way!

[rateyes]

22. So, the administration unilaterally took away all of our

civil rights against illegal searches and seizures...They lied to us about it...and our response is going to be to yawn and let it happen. Shame on all of us if we don't demand impeachment...this is a high crime, no doubt.

They lied. Surprise, surprise!

[TheGunslinger]

23. Sen. Reid: "I was briefed on wiretaps once, three years after it began"

Democratic Senate leader: I was briefed on wiretaps once, three years after it began
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democratic_Senate_leader_I_was_briefed_1219.html

Statement from Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) issued to RAW STORY.
#

“I personally received a single very short briefing on this program earlier this year prior to its public disclosure. That briefing occurred more than three years after the President said this program began.

“The Administration briefers did not seek my advice or consent about the program, and based on what I have heard publicly since, key details about the program apparently were not provided to me.

“Under current Administration briefing guidelines, members of Congress are informed after decisions are made, have virtually no ability to either approve or reject a program, and are prohibited from discussing these types of programs with nearly all of their fellow members and all of their staff.

“We need to investigate this program and the President’s legal authority to carry it out. We also need to review this flawed congressional consultation system. I will be asking the President to cooperate in both reviews.”

More of the Propagandist's lies exposed.

[benny05]

24. Levin said he had not been briefed either

:argh: