If that's what you believe then that is fine. Another take might be that he found a piece relevant to what was being discussed. He posted it for those that were interested in discussing it could. It is entirely possible that cowardice or courage didn't enter into it at all. Honestly, I really don't care if you want to keep it up. I was just trying to give you a different prespective as to how it might look to a neutral observer.
actually this is the wrong thread, but on the other thread he just says 'uh look i cant read what tinman said but he saying stuff uhhh i bet its not good stuff uhhh'. that's cowardice.
I won't argue whether it is or isn't. It could be that rightly or wrongly he felt he saw enough of the kinds of posts you had read, and felt he was safe in making those statements. I will stop arguing for what another person is or isn't doing. I am just saying what it looks like from the outside.
It actually is. It was at the time when Steve Francis was here, and I wanted a bit of the old, and a bit of the new in my screen name. In my current parks and rec league basketball team, I chose number one because of Buck Johnson. I liked him a lot. I saw him stuff Michael Jordan back many years ago. I also liked his rarely used tomahawk jam.
Specifically, I don't exactly know but generally people like the president don't testify under oath as a compromise between testifying under oath and not showing up at all. My best guess would be something similar here.
We are going to need a score card to track who is doing and saying what. White House Ordered to Release Spy Papers Feb 17, 4:06 AM (ET) By KATHERINE SHRADER WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge ordered the Bush administration on Thursday to release documents about its warrantless surveillance program or spell out what it is withholding, a setback to efforts to keep the program under wraps. At the same time, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said he had worked out an agreement with the White House to consider legislation and provide more information to Congress on the eavesdropping program. The panel's top Democrat, who has requested a full-scale investigation, immediately objected to what he called an abdication of the committee's responsibilities. U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy ruled that a private group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, will suffer irreparable harm if the documents it has been seeking since December are not processed promptly under the Freedom of Information Act. He gave the Justice Department 20 days to respond to the group's request. "President Bush has invited meaningful debate about the wireless surveillance program," Kennedy said. "That can only occur if DOJ processes its FOIA requests in a timely fashion and releases the information sought." Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said the department has been "extremely forthcoming" with information and "will continue to meet its obligations under FOIA." On Capitol Hill, lawmakers also have been seeking more information about Bush's program that allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop - without court warrants - on Americans whose international calls and e-mails it believed might be linked to al-Qaida. After a two-hour closed-door session, Senate Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said the committee adjourned without voting on whether to open an investigation. Instead, he and the White House confirmed that they had an agreement to give lawmakers more information on the nature of the program. The White House also has committed to make changes to the current law, according to Roberts and White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino. "I believe that such an investigation at this point ... would be detrimental to this highly classified program and efforts to reach some accommodation with the administration," Roberts said. Still, he promised to consider the Democratic request for a vote in a March 7 meeting. Earlier, Bush spokesman Scott McClellan reiterated that Bush does not need Congress' approval to authorize the warrantless eavesdropping and that the president would resist any legislation that might compromise the program. Later Thursday, Bush adviser Karl Rove told at the University of Central Arkansas: "The purpose of the terrorist-surveillance program is to protect lives. The president's actions were legal and fully consistent with the 4th Amendment and the protection of our civil liberties under the constitution." West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the Intelligence Committee's top Democrat, said the White House had applied heavy pressure to Republicans to prevent them from conducting thorough oversight. He complained that Roberts didn't even allow a vote on a proposal for a 13-point investigation that would include the program's origin and operation, technical aspects and questions raised by federal judges. Rockefeller said the Senate cannot consider legislation because lawmakers don't have enough information. "No member of the Senate can cast an informed vote on legislation authorizing or conversely restricting the NSA's warrantless surveillance program, when they fundamentally do not know what they are authorizing or restricting," he said. It remains unclear what changes in law may look like. Roberts indicated it may be possible "to fix" the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to authorize the president's program. Perino said the White House considers suggestions put forward by Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, the starting point, particularly his proposal to create a special subcommittee on Capitol Hill that would regularly review the program. DeWine's proposal would exempt Bush's program from FISA. That law set up a special court to approve warrants for monitoring inside the United States for national security investigations. Yet Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., left the closed hearing saying he has been working on a different legislative change to FISA. "It seems that's a logical place to start, to upgrade FISA given the extraordinary expanse of technology in the 30 years that have lapsed," he said. Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., told a forum at Georgetown University Law School Thursday night, "You cannot have domestic search and seizure without a warrant." He is drafting legislation to require the foreign surveillance court to review Bush's program and determine if it is constitutional. California Rep. Jane Harman, ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told the Georgetown audience the surveillance "can and must comply" with the law requiring warrants from the special court. However, she supported the need to conduct electronic eavesdropping to combat terrorism. Specter's committee will continue to probe the program's legality at a Feb. 28 hearing. The Justice Department strongly discouraged him from calling former Attorney General John Ashcroft and his deputy, James Comey, to testify about the surveillance program. Just as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales could not talk about the administration's internal deliberations when he appeared before the committee earlier this month, neither can Ashcroft nor Comey, Assistant Attorney General William Moschella said in a letter to Specter.
The WH is saying to Congress "going make some laws" but don't seriously expect us to obey them. Is Roberts the WH tool or what? He blocked any meaningful investigation into GWB manipulation of intell prior to invading Iraq and now this. Spying Inquiry Blocked by GOP # The Senate intelligence chair buys time, saying the White House is open to legislation on Bush's surveillance program. Many are doubtful. By Greg Miller and Maura Reynolds, Times Staff Writers WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a proposed investigation of President Bush's domestic spying operation Thursday as the chairman of the Intelligence Committee said he had reached an agreement with the White House to pursue legislation establishing clearer rules for the controversial program. But Senate aides described the discussions with the White House as very preliminary. And angry Democrats expressed skepticism over the negotiations, with some describing them as a ploy to protect the Bush administration and the highly classified surveillance operation from congressional scrutiny. The political maneuvering underscored the stakes surrounding a secret intelligence-gathering program that the White House describes as crucial to preventing future terrorist attacks in the United States, but which critics see as unconstitutional and an abuse of executive power. The tactics by Republicans on the Intelligence Committee leave the surveillance operations in place while giving the White House time to influence the debate on Capitol Hill. Separately, the House Intelligence Committee is considering its own inquiry. Among members of the panel raising questions about the program is Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.). Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), after a closed-door meeting with Senate committee members, said the panel had decided to adjourn without considering a Democratic proposal to begin an investigation of the program, which is run by the National Security Agency, an intelligence agency that operates eavesdropping posts around the globe. Roberts, the panel chairman, said the vote was put off because the White House had "committed to legislation and has agreed to brief more Intelligence Committee members on the nature of the surveillance program." White House officials confirmed a new willingness to consider legislative fixes, after weeks of insisting that no congressional action was necessary. "We maintain that the president does not need additional congressional authority," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. But she said the administration was now willing to discuss a GOP proposal that contained "some good legislative concepts that would not undermine the president's ability to protect Americans." Perino was referring to a proposal by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) that would specifically authorize the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on international calls involving U.S. residents and suspected terrorists overseas without first obtaining a court warrant. The White House has said Bush has the authority to approve such operations to protect the nation. But critics say the program violates a 1978 statute — the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA — that outlawed domestic eavesdropping without approval from a special intelligence court. The administration's new willingness to consider legislation appeared to be enough to appease several Republican lawmakers who had expressed misgivings about the domestic intelligence collection and were in a position to cast deciding votes on whether to launch a Senate inquiry. A senior Republican aide said that before the meeting, Sens. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) told Roberts that they were prepared to vote for an investigation if the committee did not agree to work toward legislation. The "agreement in principle" to discuss the DeWine proposal was enough to persuade the senators to postpone the vote on an inquiry. But the issue was far from resolved. "This is just a starting point," the aide said. Snowe indicated Thursday that the White House had bought a limited amount of time. In a statement, she called for "congressional and judicial review over a program that currently has none," and said the administration had until March 7 — when a follow-up Intelligence Committee meeting is scheduled — to "demonstrate its commitment to avoiding a constitutional deadlock." The spying program was authorized by Bush in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. Before the operation was exposed late last year, it had been one of the most closely guarded secrets in the intelligence community, with the administration providing briefings to only a handful of senior lawmakers. Senate Democrats denounced Republicans for delaying the vote on an investigation. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said the party-line vote to adjourn the meeting before taking up the proposal was "another stalling tactic." "Today, the Senate Intelligence Committee once again abdicated its responsibility to oversee the intelligence activities of the United States," Rockefeller said. Roberts defended the decision to block the vote, saying he believed an investigation would hurt an intelligence operation that he described as "vital for the protection of the American people." He offered few specifics about his discussions with the White House on possible legislation. Roberts' spokeswoman, Sarah Ross Little, described those talks as in their early stages. "There's nothing specific," Little said. "The White House has agreed and committed to work with Congress on an expanded role in oversight and some sort of legislative solution. But there is nothing particular or specific beyond that." Other Republican aides said no legislative language had been shared with the White House. But White House and congressional officials said the discussions were focusing on DeWine's proposal, which also would create a new subcommittee on the Senate Intelligence Committee solely to monitor the National Security Agency program. Critics have called the DeWine approach inadequate. "To simply exclude communications from the coverage of FISA and allow secret wiretapping without a warrant … would be a clear violation of the 4th Amendment," Kate Martin, director of national security studies at George Washington University, said in an e-mail message. Meanwhile on Thursday, the Justice Department was ordered by a federal judge to respond within 20 days to requests by a civil liberties group for documents about the National Security Agency program. The Electronic Privacy Information Center had sued the department under the Freedom of Information Act seeking the release of the documents. In a setback for Bush, U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy ordered the department to finish processing the group's requests and produce or identify all records within 20 days. A Justice Department spokesman said the agency was reviewing the ruling.
How Bush killed the Wiretap Probe -------------- White House Working to Avoid Wiretap Probe But Some Republicans Say Bush Must Be More Open About Eavesdropping Program By Charles Babington Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, February 20, 2006; A08 At two key moments in recent days, White House officials contacted congressional leaders just ahead of intelligence committee meetings that could have stirred demands for a deeper review of the administration's warrantless-surveillance program, according to House and Senate sources. In both cases, the administration was spared the outcome it most feared, and it won praise in some circles for showing more openness to congressional oversight. But the actions have angered some lawmakers who think the administration's purported concessions mean little. Some Republicans said that the White House came closer to suffering a big setback than is widely known, and that President Bush must be more forthcoming about the eavesdropping program to retain Congress's good will. The first White House scramble came on Feb. 8, before the House intelligence committee began a closed briefing on the program, which Bush began in late 2001 but which was disclosed only recently. The program allows the National Security Agency to monitor communications involving a person in the United States and one outside, provided one is a possible terrorism suspect. The administration says the program is exempt from the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which provides for domestic surveillance warrants. Many lawmakers and legal scholars disagree. The House hearing came a day after a prominent Republican member called for an inquiry into the wiretapping program, and two days after Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales had angered some senators by defending it without providing details. On Feb. 8, House members were grumbling that the administration apparently planned to have Gonzales, joined by former NSA director Michael V. Hayden, provide the same limited briefing to the House intelligence committee. But the White House unexpectedly announced that Gonzales and Hayden would give the 21-member committee more insight into the program's "procedural aspects." The briefing placated many members. When committee leaders later said the panel will look further into the program, they made clear it will be a controlled process rather than the freewheeling investigation some Democrats want. The second White House flurry occurred last Thursday, as the Senate intelligence committee readied for a showdown over a motion by top Democrat John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.) to start a broad inquiry into the surveillance program. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. -- who had visited the Capitol two days earlier with Vice President Cheney to lobby Republicans on the program -- spoke by phone with Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine), according to Senate sources briefed on the call. Snowe earlier had expressed concerns about the program's legality and civil liberties safeguards, but Card was adamant about restricting congressional oversight and control, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing office policies. Snowe seemed taken aback by Card's intransigence, and the call amounted to "a net step backward" for the White House, said a source outside Snowe's office. Snowe contacted fellow committee Republican Chuck Hagel (Neb.), who also had voiced concerns about the program. They arranged a three-way phone conversation with Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.). Until then, Roberts apparently thought he had the votes to defeat Rockefeller's motion in the committee, which Republicans control nine to seven, the sources said. But Snowe and Hagel told the chairman that if he called up the motion, they would support it, assuring its passage, the sources said. When the closed meeting began, Roberts averted a vote on Rockefeller's motion by arranging for a party-line vote to adjourn until March 7. The move infuriated Rockefeller, who told reporters, "The White House has applied heavy pressure in recent weeks to prevent the committee from doing its job." Hagel and Snowe declined interview requests after the meeting, but sources close to them say they bridle at suggestions that they buckled under administration heat. The White House must engage "in good-faith negotiations" with Congress, Snowe said in a statement. Roberts, reacting to Hagel and Snowe's actions, told the New York Times on Friday that he now supports bringing the NSA program under FISA's jurisdiction in some manner, a stand that could put him at odds with the administration. The White House has praised a plan by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) to draft legislation that would exempt the NSA program from FISA, while providing for congressional oversight. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said that Bush "is open to ideas from Congress regarding legislation, and we've committed to working with Congress on a bill." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/19/AR2006021901031_pf.html
GOP Lawmakers Work to Limit Probe of Domestic Spying Program Washington - Republicans in Congress are trying to limit the scope of any investigation into how President Bush's secret domestic-surveillance program has operated. Some key lawmakers are also working to legalize such spying on U.S. citizens in the future, perhaps with some judicial restrictions. The dual-track effort is designed to protect the Bush administration from an all-out congressional inquiry into the secret program, while rejecting Bush's argument that he already has full legal authority to order such surveillance. The Senate Intelligence Committee is scheduled to vote Tuesday on a Democratic plan to conduct a broad investigation into the program. Committee chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., is trying to win support for a more limited inquiry. Roberts refused to say Monday whether he had the votes to forestall the Democratic demand for an investigation. Democrats need only one Republican to side with them to order such a probe. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030706A.shtml
The Senate Intelligence Committee is scheduled to vote Tuesday on a Democratic plan to conduct a broad investigation into the program. Committee chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., is trying to win support for a more limited inquiry. Roberts refused to say Monday whether he had the votes to forestall the Democratic demand for an investigation. Democrats need only one Republican to side with them to order such a probe. I hope one Republican Senator on that panel has the guts to vote for an investigation and put an end to the cover-up the White House is attempting. This trampling of our Constitution cries out for a complete investigation. The American people deserve to know why this was kept from them, and why the President thought it was so vital to national security that he was willing to lie to conceal it. Keep D&D Civil.
SOAB!!!! When are true republicans going to stop covering for this administration? Nothing, NOTHING will ever happen to hold this administration accountable of ANYTHING until the democrats can get a majority! Senate panel rejects bid for NSA inquiry http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060308/pl_nm/security_eavesdropping_dc
I'm disappointed, but not surprised. Yet another issue to use against the worst administration in my memory. Payback starts this Fall. Keep D&D Civil.
