Fox’s Wendell Goler: Secret Wiretapping Program Used 18,000-Plus Times
Fox’s Wendell Goler: Secret Wiretapping Program Used 18,000-Plus Times
Yesterday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said President Bush’s warrantless spying activies were part of a “very concentrated, very limited program.”
But during today’s press briefing, Fox News White House correspondent Wendell Goler stated his “understanding” that the program was used “18,000-plus times.” Scott McClellan refused to confirm or deny Goler’s numbers:
GOLER: It’s our understanding this power has been used 18,000-plus times. Are we to presume that there are that many al Qaeda agents in this country?
MR. McCLELLAN: I’m not going to get into talking about more than what we’ve said publicly. That’s getting into more than what we’ve talked about publicly, so I’m not in a position to confirm or deny the numbers that you threw out there.
If Goler is correct, Bush’s program could hardly be described as “very concentrated” or “very limited.”
UPDATE: As commenter jsp points out, Goler may be conflating the number of times Bush’s program was deployed with the number of authorized FISA warrants, which number approximately 19,000.
Transcript continues below:
GOLER: You don’t want to give us an indication of how often this power is used, and you don’t want to give us an indication of the size of the potential threat in this country?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I think, again, the Attorney General and General Hayden talked a little bit about this yesterday, but I talked about the nature of this authorization and the scope of it, and I talked about the safeguards and oversight that are in place. This is very carefully reviewed every 45 days and it –
GOLER: I really don’t need you to go there.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, but this goes to your question. It is limited to people who have — one of the parties to the communication have a clear connection to al Qaeda or terrorist organizations, and one of the parties is operating outside of the United States. I think that’s important for people to know, because there’s been some suggestions that it’s spying inside the U.S. That’s not the case.
GOLER: I’ll stipulate that. But it is limited to that situation, are we to presume, then, that there are in excess of tens of thousands of al Qaeda agents in this country, because it’s been used that many times?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I’m not confirming or denying those numbers. I don’t think anyone has done that publicly, so I’m not going to get into a discussion of that nature.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
93 Responses to “Fox’s Wendell Goler: Secret Wiretapping Program Used 18,000-Plus Times”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
18,000?
On the news this evening they said (based on their answers from the White House) that it could be as high as 1000 times.
So this would be more right?
December 20th, 2005 at 9:38 pmNeed to revise the text to Soon to be former Fox News White House correspondent Wendell Goler...
:-)
December 20th, 2005 at 9:40 pm18,000 times? Sounds like it's time to raise the Conservative Threat Level...
December 20th, 2005 at 9:41 pmHow many times would be "very limited" Nico?
And since when do the propagandists of ThinkDefeat use a Fox News reporter as a definitive source? LOL
December 20th, 2005 at 9:41 pmYea, I imagine they'll frown on that :|
December 20th, 2005 at 9:41 pmNo one said it was definitive wwallace. Stop inventing words for people.
It's news. And every day another little tidbit, lets call em nails, comes out, and seals that lid on the coffin tighter and tighter.
It's like a never ending stream of blunders, bungles, lies, and more lies.
Pardon my language, but right about now, you and the Republicans in power look like a monkey fu#*7@&ng a football. :P
December 20th, 2005 at 9:45 pmIs he perhaps conflating the new, warrantless program with the ongoing FISA taps? EPIC tallies 18,000+ warrants since 1979.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:47 pm"It’s like a never ending stream of blunders, bungles, lies, and more lies."
True, that's a perfect description of the Defeaticrat Party.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:49 pmIf anyone in here doesn't think that Bush and friends used this power as many times as they possibly could, then I have some real nice swamp land for sale.
In Florida. :|
December 20th, 2005 at 9:50 pmTrue, that’s a perfect description of the Defeaticrat Party.
Comment by wwallace — December 20, 2005 @ 9:49 pm
Nice wwallace. Very poignant.
I take it that speak-n-spell is working out well for you?
December 20th, 2005 at 9:52 pmI hope they did use every opportunity to catch Worfeus' al Qaeda allies. It would be irresponsible not to.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:52 pm18,000? That's, like, almost all of us Quakers!
December 20th, 2005 at 9:56 pmFox News conducting REAL journalism?
December 20th, 2005 at 9:58 pmwwallace. you're not even funny anymore. you used to bring POINTS to an argument. now all you do is call names. C'mon, mate. crack open a book. watch something besides Faux news.
You're not funny, you're not witty, and people aren't even bothering to dress you down anymore (for that, they'd need a TOPIC, which you never seem to add).
well, at least wwallace makes bush seem intelligent.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:58 pmWhy do the neocons hate us for our freedoms?
December 20th, 2005 at 10:01 pmHey wwallace, since you still choose to talk to me, why not answer my question now? I mean, it's been 3 days.
Come on, GIACOMO did. Why not you?
Here, I'll ask it again.
What would you do, if the EU invaded the US to enact necessary regime change?
Understand they are benevolant, only here to help, and plan on leaving as soon as we elect a new President and Congress, from among the candidates approved by our new EU liberators.
What would you do?
December 20th, 2005 at 10:01 pmEVERYONE JUST IGNORE WWALLACE AND HE WILL GO AWAY.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:01 pmwwallace, I noticed that you never addressed my facts list yesterday about the Bill of Rights. Since you don't have any FACTS, why don't you just leave and let the grown ups talk here.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:02 pmFox News conducting REAL journalism?
Comment by Matt O. — December 20, 2005 @ 9:58 pm
I suppose they'd bound to screw up now and again and actually do some real reporting... probably won't be good for their neilsen ratings though.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:05 pmWORFEUS, we're boycotting wwwallace. Thought you might like to join the campaign against verbal incontinence :)
December 20th, 2005 at 10:07 pmThe whole problem is that based on FISA, Bush could have instantly called for taps and then (within 72 hrs) gone for a court order. (That is, retroactively had the tap approved by the secret court - as was done thousands of times). One wonders, if the reports are true - that the Bush ignored FISA totally, who was he/NSA targeting and why didn't they act as per the FISA requirements? Were they afraid that the targets wouldn't past muster after the fact? I dunno - but it is a curious question which seems that the MSM is glossing over.
I repeat again - for the slow readers here (wwallace, et. al.) - FISA has the provision where a tap could be done immediately (no "court delays, blah blah") - but NSA would be required to ask, within 72 hrs, for the permission for the ALREADY done tap. So, there's not an issue - Bush had had quick access to taps - but, the violation, it appears, is his lack of followup with the "court order" to approve the tap.
And - for any of the "slow readers" - I'm not anti-American, or pro-"terrist" - I just believe that the law should be followed - and if Bush thinks he's above the law in his "war on terror", he's mistaken and should be taken down. It's realy quite simple.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:07 pm#18
I do. When he starts his 3rd grade taunting without a point behind it, I just put up that question.
For some odd reason, he does not want to answer it, and he just scurries away.
Works every time :D
December 20th, 2005 at 10:09 pmMrTimPA: thanks for helping spread the word. It seems too few people get the 72 hour deal, sadly enough.
18,000 times is a lot if it was 18,000 individual persons, not calls. If it was calls then it's back to where it was, but still a crime.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:10 pmWho needs foreign enemies, when republicans act like terrorists to the constitution and american values!
December 20th, 2005 at 10:11 pm1 time 100,000 times or more. Once is enough
December 20th, 2005 at 10:12 pmwwallace demonstrates why republicans founded al queda - they're kindred political movements.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:12 pmAnd you think maybe Kerry & Edwards may have been targets?
December 20th, 2005 at 10:13 pmafter using a transmitter during a debate is anything beneath this people?
Bet 18,0000+ times includes use in the 2004 elections and the UN, I bet, I bet.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:14 pmAnyone ever filed a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act? I'm interested to know if I'm one of the 18,000 and would like some pointers.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:14 pmI saw Gonzalez being interviewed a few days ago (MSNBC) and I believe he said 500 times. This might be worth checking into.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:15 pmI hope they did use every opportunity to catch Worfeus’ al Qaeda allies. It would be irresponsible not to.
Comment by wwallace — December 20, 2005 @ 9:52 pm
Wwallace
December 20th, 2005 at 10:21 pmhave you EVER seen al qaeda?
have you ever seen bushes ranch?
have you ever seen his cattle?
the pig farm?
have you ever been to texas?
or waco?
so you think its oilwells?
cowboys and dust?
or just seing what you think you say or believe?
and if so, can you prove what you say?
have you seen worfeus?
have you seen an allie of worfeus?
have you NSA logs?
Have you only a Yap?
Have you a thought?
YOU talk alot Wwallace.
like walking
you talk
and talk
and yabber
Jabber
complain
inane it is.
Worfeus,
I already answered your question - No, I do not want you to email me photos of yourself in women's underwear. Stop asking. LOL
December 20th, 2005 at 10:22 pmI hope Goler has his resume` up to date -- this is intolerable by Fox honchos. One must toe the party line.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:23 pmWwallace.
the mind of a bear trap
mouthy noisy ungrateful.
everthing gets in
never gets out.
Much like your intelligence Wwallace.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:24 pm24 - James: - you're welcome - I just don't understand why the MSM is ignoring this 72hr provision - it's not like it's a secret! Mara Liasson (NPR) mentioned it on FNS tonite, but it was basically glossed over and I really wanted to break the TV (er, my wall - since I use a projector).
I really don't think Bush has any "wiggle" room - to claim "constitutional" authority is pretty lame and to then say that Congress gave him the "power" in their authorization to use force late in 2001 is also lame. Congress never declared "war" in the traditional sense, which (for 15 days would have given Bush such a power) - this "war on terror" is a BS "boogy man" thing. Do I think that there are people in the world who want to commit acts of terror? No doubt about it - do I feel safer since Bush has pissed off pretty much the rest of the world? No way. Is building bigger walls the answer? Nope. No, it's time that we, as a country, build (or re-build, no thanks to Bush) our relationships to other countries and stop being the bully.
It's sad that the current administration has spent every cent of "political capital" it had and then some - and Bush can smugly do a press conference telling "us" that he has the authority to do what ever the hell he wants - laws be damned.
But, the lapdogs (most of the (R) folks in Congress will kiss his butt, and Dems will tip-toe through the doo-doo, and in the end, not much will happen. *sigh*
December 20th, 2005 at 10:30 pmif i could reach thru these wires Wwallace
December 20th, 2005 at 10:30 pmto grab you up
put you down
twist yer peebrain
round and round
up and down
left is right
down is west
east be past
all you Know
is it just words?
books?
lies?
how do
you know?
can you know?
how long ago?
Damn You
December 20th, 2005 at 10:31 pmWwallace stand up
and give Voice
say what you mean
Mean what YOU say.
once again william wallace's antics derail discussion on this thread. this is a problem which needs to be solved. everyone learn how to not engage the trolls so we can have gainful discussion. please.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:35 pmMrTimPa, no decent patriotic American calls his country a "bully."
December 20th, 2005 at 10:35 pmJohn Ehrlichman is a troll. He adds nothing to this debate.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:37 pmSorry about my last post (36) - It's more of a rant in frustration than anything else. But, while I'm not a legal type, I don't see any "wiggle" room given the FISA provisions for "instant" taps w/72hr court order request. But, the entertaining part of it is the spin that Bush and Cheney and others are putting on it. Of course, that there was a "spike" (upwards) in Bush's poll ratings is yet another example of how dumb some segments of America are.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:38 pmSo, again, has anyone on this board been through a FoIA request and, if so, do you have any pointers?
December 20th, 2005 at 10:41 pm"So, again, has anyone on this board been through a FoIA request and, if so, do you have any pointers?"
Comment by John Ehrlichman
Assuming this isn't a troll - Howard Dean has a web page were you can add your name to a FOIA request. See:
http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/domesticspying/fdqadz
December 20th, 2005 at 10:50 pmno american patriot defends politicians that act like bullies and thwart the constitution - they politicians and their idiot defenders are unamerican 'terrorists' unfit to live in the civilized world (that would be you wwallace and the rest of that barnyard stable in your party).
December 20th, 2005 at 10:57 pmThanks MrTimPA. I don't know what I could have posted to make anyone think I was trolling. I come here to read what you guys have to say and occasionally chime in with my thoughts.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:01 pmGoler apparently doesn't plan to be employed too much longer...
December 20th, 2005 at 11:10 pmJohn E: No problem. I mostly read, but there are times when I feel the need to express myself. I try to do so in a decent manner, not calling anyone names, etc - but folks such as "wwallace" pull out their "talking points" on me.
Can't any of you "trolls" think for yourself? Would it help if I toss you a rare piece of beef? (Ok, I sunk to their level for a brief moment).
December 20th, 2005 at 11:13 pmunbelieable and Gregor, I have some Q &a for you in this topic:
December 20th, 2005 at 11:31 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/a-federal-judge-ruled-tuesday/
#30
Howard Dean will file a FOIA request on Thursday with the Justice Department. He is soliciting signatures as co-requestors.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:47 pm#30
#51 links to
December 20th, 2005 at 11:49 pm#30
I hope this works http://www.democrats.org/
December 20th, 2005 at 11:50 pmOk, this is really off topic, but it's about O'Reilly. I wrote this last night after watching his show. (I know, busted, yes I watch the O'Reilly Factor, sometimes),
I think most people will agree that Bill O’Reilly is a strong spokesperson for the Christian Right. At least he preaches regularly from his show.
Tonight, he provided us this little tidbit of wisdom, showing us just how educated in the Bible, and the things he preaches, he really is.
He said to his guest, Barbara Walters, that “In ALL Judeo-Christian philosophy, not the religion, the philosophy, there is a common belief in a heaven and a hell, and of free will and that you are free to choose for yourselfâ€
Well this sounds good, but in fact is just another example of how the so called Christian Right like O’Reilly assert facts that they really know nothing about.
Barbara Walters tried to counter that by saying not all Christian religions believe this. He of course countered saying not the religion (there is a religion called Judeo-Christian? That’s an O’Reilly original :\),but the philosophy, whatever that means, and asserted she was wrong and this was fact.
Well Mr. O’Reilly, perhaps you should open that Bible you claim to know, and read about a little Judeo group called the Sadducee’s, who unfortunately do not meet your supposed facts.
The Sadducee’s were a strong order because of collaboration with Rome, and prospered from around 200 BC until right after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
The Sadducee’s were a Judeo sect that did not believe in Heaven, and they did not believe in Hell.
So once more O’Reilly shows us just how much he really knows about nothing.
But he did end the show with one little gem of wisdom.
He said "who know's, maybe I'm the dummy"
Amen Mr. O'Reilly, amen.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:56 pmI noticed the 72 hour provision of FISA, and I noticed it when it was brought up at Bush's press conference. I noticed that Bush brushed it aside too. The 72 hour retroactive provision of FISA makes these warrantless wiretaps completely inexcusable.
Why did Bush do it? This story, which I ironically found through Drudge, gives a good indication. Look at the third and fourth paragraphs, up from the bottom of the story. It sometimes took them days to weeks to decide if a particular tap was going to produce any actionable intel. This raises several questions. If they had "days or weeks" to decide whether or not the tp was going to produce any actionable intel, how come they didn't have time to get a FISA warrant? Second, if they were listening in for days or weeks, and still didn't get enough to even think about getting a FISA warrant, that's a blatantly un-constitutional fishing expedition! Third, why would they even be listening in on people they weren't even sure might produce actionable intel? Thats a ridiculous waste of intel resources, on top of being blatantly illegal!
As usual, Team Bush makes up the rules as they go along, and don't even have semi-defensible reasons for doing so. And I thought his handling of the economy and budget were criminal, if he doesn't go down for this we all need to start watching our backs.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:56 pmBTW Anyone who wants to email that to O'Reilly is welcome to it. Hell sign your name to it if you want.
I would have done it but I'm not giving him my contact information, LOL.
He's a meanee.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:00 amHello all.
Got everything all back up and running after my move.
I have been gone for a while now and I come back to find wwallace is still just as fvcking stupid as ever. You know getting away for a couple of days, really cleared the old head.
I come back here and read lots intelligent posts sprinkled with complete and utter bullsh!t from that a$$hole wwallace.
Guys really, there is absolutely no reason to acknowledge his existence. Don't believe me. Don't do any posting on any political sites for a few days. Don't do anything but maybe read a little news.
I have kept up on current events and converted a real life "republican" to democrat.
Then come back here and read wwallace, I-RIGHT-I, Lyle, ALexxa, etc. etc. comments and you will be embarassed that you did.
I swear, their comments read like something out of a fourth grade Judy Blume book.
Really, try it.
P.S. Bush is still a d!ck.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:00 amHi Spudge,
Sorry I wandered guys. Just thought it was funny that's all.
That damn O'leilly, mutter mutter mutter...
December 21st, 2005 at 12:03 amKudo's to ABC's NIGHTLINE!
They actually presented the facts!
Every Legal Scholar agrees that Bushie committed a Federal Felony that is punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
They all agree that this crime was also a Constitutional crime and is an impeachable offense.
Finally, mainstream media is reporting the truth.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:10 ameRlichman
http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/04_1.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/2001foiapost3.htm
Jest fer starterz
December 21st, 2005 at 12:14 amthe herdz
Don't forget to send Postage Paid envelopes back to companies that consistantly barrage you with their junk mail.
Write messages such as Impeach Bush and Cheney on the return slips.
Great way to get your message across.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:15 amBush didn't commit the felony once. He did it thirty times by his own admission. Do the math.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:16 amhttp://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foi-upd.htm
of courz da herdz iz two stupid two reed
December 21st, 2005 at 12:17 amHi Spudge, Merry Fitzmas!
You know how the bad news (for Bubble boy) always comes out on Fridays? Wouldn't it be great if Rove is indicted THIS Friday?
What a Merry Fitzmas it will be.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:17 amnext edumakated dipstix..
December 21st, 2005 at 12:18 amHi WORFEUS!
Susan,
I have been doing this for years. I think it was George Carlin that came up with that a long time ago.
I need to add that. Funny.
Include this:
December 21st, 2005 at 12:20 am#Bush didn’t commit the felony once. He did it thirty times by his own admission. Do the math.
Comment by purvis ames — December 21, 2005 @ 12:16 am
Aka; Verbular mental master-baiter
December 21st, 2005 at 12:20 am#45 Tim, thanks for the Dean link. I signed and fowarded to everyone in my address book.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:22 amHey Susan!
Isn't it funny how the right wingers are trying to cover for this blatant ilegal act ordered by Bush himself. Then the dumbass comes out and acknoledges that he did it. I bet his handlers flip at the minute in time.
Don't let them foget the good times:
December 21st, 2005 at 12:24 amI just love these.
Our ilustrious leader:
December 21st, 2005 at 12:25 amI bet his handlers flip at the minute in time.
Spudge, I've been wondering when the Rove/Cheney mafia will make the decision that Bubble boy is a liability and give him the kiss of death.
If you haven't written or called your Senators and Reps, here's a link that makes it easy.
We are demanding impeachment hearings.
http://www.millionphonemarch.com/impeach.htm
December 21st, 2005 at 12:29 amSusan,
Thanks for the link, but I write more than just my Senators and Reps. I write everybody. But, you probably figured that. :)
December 21st, 2005 at 12:57 amShare the link if you can Spudgeboy. The flood of mail and phone calls seems to having an impact. For once I think that Congress knows we are fed up and are not going to take it anymore.
December 21st, 2005 at 1:03 amSusan,
"I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"
December 21st, 2005 at 1:05 amDid the Republican News Network (or better known as Fox News) stand up to the White House? Oh that is a big no-no to Dear Leader, but I think this Fo News reporter better go work for CNN because his ass is grass. Sorry, talking about Dear Leader will not cut it here at Fo News. Sorry Wendell, you had a good run on with that idiot Shepard Smith (oh tell Bill O'Reilly he can kiss my Latino ass).
peace.
December 21st, 2005 at 1:24 amPresident George W. Bush incriminated himself, by admitting he authorized wiretaps on American citizens without court orders. It is the "smoking gun" for his impeachment!
VP Dick Cheney also put his foot in his mouth, yesterday, by saying the wiretaps are protecting America > lol
December 21st, 2005 at 2:13 amWow, what a day!
December 21st, 2005 at 3:41 amI kind of like the wwallace protest poetry though...
MrTimPa, no decent patriotic American calls his country a “bully.â€
Comment by wwallace
He does if he believes his country to be bullying the rest of the world. Such is his right, and his duty. True patriotism is getting involved in the fight for TRUTH, DECENCY, and THE AMERICAN WAY, even if that includes defying a false and incompetent leader.
December 21st, 2005 at 7:46 amHey!! Doesn't he know that He's Fox "News" Employee?!?!?
Shocking!
So, What other Crimes will GW Cop to?? He apparently feels he's above the law and has no problem admiting to an Impeachable offense...
December 21st, 2005 at 8:02 am[Comment deleted by admin]
December 21st, 2005 at 8:59 amThe Sadducee’s were a Judeo sect that did not believe in Heaven, and they did not believe in Hell.
So once more O’Reilly shows us just how much he really knows about nothing.
But he did end the show with one little gem of wisdom.
He said “who know’s, maybe I’m the dummyâ€
Amen Mr. O’Reilly, amen.
Let me take the opportunity to agree with Worfeus (since they seem to come so infrequently) ... The Sadducees (some claim that John the Baptizer was a member of this group) did not believe in a duality of the afterlife.
That comment begs the question though ... are there any Saudducees left? If not, then perhaps O'Reilly was speaking about current Judeo/Christian thought.
Did you also notice a retraction on last nights show (during the discussuion of the school in Plano, Texas)? O'Reilly said, "I was wrong" about the school asking the kids not to wear red and green (the school only said that decorations had to be white ... not student clothing). It was kinda a half-a*#ed retraction ... but a retraction none the less.
December 21st, 2005 at 9:08 amonce again william wallace’s antics derail discussion on this thread. this is a problem which needs to be solved. everyone learn how to not engage the trolls so we can have gainful discussion. please.
Comment by John Ehrlichman — December 20, 2005 @ 10:35 pm
John,
KillCon and I started boycotting wwwingnut wallace yesterday.
We're trying to spread the word to ignore him.
Not all trolls, because we know the importance of debating them, but wallace is just spewing nonsense that clogs the posts because he is looking for attention by any means necessary.
December 21st, 2005 at 9:11 amKudo’s to ABC’s NIGHTLINE!
They actually presented the facts!
Every Legal Scholar agrees that Bushie committed a Federal Felony that is punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
They all agree that this crime was also a Constitutional crime and is an impeachable offense.
Finally, mainstream media is reporting the truth.
Comment by Susan — December 21, 2005 @ 12:10 am
Wow! Its seems just like Christmas!! Oh wait, it really is... Still great news, thanks for sharing it!
December 21st, 2005 at 9:15 amI noticed the 72 hour provision of FISA, and I noticed it when it was brought up at Bush’s press conference. I noticed that Bush brushed it aside too. The 72 hour retroactive provision of FISA makes these warrantless wiretaps completely inexcusable.
I think the issue here, while not stated, can be fairly deduced. Quite simply, the burden of proof needed to get a warrant may not be present on the individual(s) they want to monitor. In that case, they couldn't get a warrant. This is on one part very troubling (for if there's not enough evidence, should they be listening) and on another part somewhat evident (suspected terrorist(s) are not qualified by some "threashold" of evidence, but, rather, a series of troubling acts). I can see both points in this debate right now. I don't want willy nilly wire taps, but neither do I wish to hamstring the NSA (the formation of which was developed out of the Army's monitoring program) ...
Someone on Fox (I know that for some of you that disqualifies this comment, but TP posted a Fox reporters comments so I will as well) ... I believe it was a Constitutional attorney from Georgetowne siad that the President is not so much limited by the Constitution as he is by politics. He states that it is common for ALL Presidents to use a wide interpretation of the powers given to them by the Constitution ... where those powers "upper most" end is mostly where political restraints (and citizen sentiment) say they end.
Another thing that seems to be coming up often is a discussion of admissable evidence and criminal law. This is not the basis upon which the White House is authorizing surveillance ... the basis is upon "war" powers implicit in the Constitution (on another thread I quoted the three instances that the White House is claiming allows this ... if people want to read it, I'll re-post it here). Again, in time of war the President has inherent powers to allow surveillance ... we will see how this plays out. If it comes out that Bush used these powers for political gain, I think the uproar will gain momentum ... if not, I don't believe it will.
December 21st, 2005 at 9:19 amGeorge Bush deserves a fair trial.
and yes, America does act like a bully sometimes.
December 21st, 2005 at 10:36 amRestore America's credibility by putting Bushco on trial at the Hague, and if convicted by a jury (composed of 12 top judges randomly chosen from 12 different countries) then administering punishment against Bushco in accordance with the decision.
December 21st, 2005 at 11:33 amIf gonzales and the adminsitration say it is in the 500 range and that it was only people with terrorist conections we must assume that it is in the thousands and includes poltical enemies. With this adminsitration I no longer trust anything and have to believe the worst, and that reality is going to be far worse than what they present.
December 21st, 2005 at 12:13 pmThe one piece of the picture is constantly being left out - the role of Condolezza Rice as Security Advisor. She must have participated in the decision to go ahead with this.
December 21st, 2005 at 3:46 pmGiacomo, I was watching c-span today and one Michael Woods, an attorney and former head of the FBI National Security Law Unit (1999 - 2002) was the guest. The moderator asked "How does this work? How do these 11 judges meet and what are there responsibilities?", Woods replied: "The Foreign Intelligence Survelliance Court is a court that is, it's like a part-time court, and these are all regular US federal District judges, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints judges to this Foreign Intelligence Survelance Court on a rotating basis. They serve for 7 year terms and they sit, one at a time, to evaluate requests from the government to conduct survelliance for national security purposes. So this is the court that when people speak of the FISA process, this is the court that actually sees applications from the FBI, or the NSA, and determines whether or not the legal standard has been met to authorize survelliance."
The moderator then displayed a chart indicating that in the most recent figures from the year 2004, the FISA Court had 1,758 applications submitted. 1,754 were approved. 3 of those applications were withdrawn. Apparently 1 was rejected.
Mr. Woods agreed. "Yes. Yes, the numbers for the FISA Court always look this way. There have been many years in which the Court has not rejected or modified any applications. AND ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT IS THAT THE LAW THAT CREATES THE COURT ACTUALLY REQUIRES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO CERTIFY THAT THE LEGAL STANDARD HAS ALREADY BEEN MET. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, IN ORDER TO GET IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE, YOU ALREADY HAVE TO CROSS THE HIGH LEGAL THRESHOLD, THE SAME LEGAL THRESHOLD THE JUDGE IS GOING TO APPLY. AND SO IT IS VERY UNCOMMON FOR A MATTER TO REACH THE COURT THAT HAS NOT ALREADY RECEIVED A GREAT DEAL OF SCRUTINY AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT." (caps are mine)
The question for me remains, why would you not go and get a FISA judge to approve the application? Either you were deliberatly thowing down the guantlet regarding Executive Power "erosion" or, you knew you could never convince the AG & others in the loop at the Justice Dept that your intended targets rise to the level of terrorist and are not in any way political. It's very scary and very disappointing, and the Administrations explanations thus far are not cutting it for me.
December 21st, 2005 at 8:07 pmI am so happy Big Brother is watching me and keeping me safe from terror. I love Big Brother. 18,000 just isn't enough. I think they should be given unlimited powers so they can keep me safe from all the evil around me. I am going to install homeland security surveillance cameras in every part of my house and am going to go get verichipped so they can make sure I am safe and so they can stop Osama if he tries to break into my house and chop my head off.
Winston Smith
December 22nd, 2005 at 3:44 amOceania
too damn bad bush wasnt busted getting one of those highcrime bj's instead of simply abrogating our constitution in every way imaginable..maybe then we could get enough moral outrage going to run his azz off..
December 22nd, 2005 at 9:02 amAre my calculations wrong or suspicions misplaced?
December 24th, 2005 at 3:52 pmDidn't Bush claim that he reapplied to snoop at least 30 times, and that each application was for 45 days?
Doesn't that add up to the original plus 30 re-ups totaling about 46.5 months?
I'm wondering why he chose not to be specific as to how many times he sought and was granted approval? I suspect it wouldn't take much to prove he started the spying even before 9-11 occurred. Any FOIA on the specific number of reauthorizations granted Bush?
Just curious.
Regards,,,John
( john_rice@neitherparty.org )
Restore America’s credibility by putting Bushco on trial at the Hague, and if convicted by a jury (composed of 12 top judges randomly chosen from 12 different countries) then administering punishment against Bushco in accordance with the decision.
Comment by big dave from queens
I've got a better idea cocksuker, let's put you on trial in Texas. If you pass you get to go to prison without being raped by a Longhorn. How's that sound?
December 25th, 2005 at 9:54 pmWhat we have here is a reporter creating news. Picture a reporter at a press conference stating I have information that the wiretaps were 100 million...is that true. Whether its 1 or 100 million the person giving the conference is not going to confirm any number or get into anything. So naturally the 100 million number gets traction among those that dislike the program...never mind that it was created by the reporter in the first place.
Interesting.
January 29th, 2006 at 5:43 pmI dared to write about the US Govt's betrayal of its South Capitol Mall proposal, and got ambushed by 20+ black-cloathed police ...
wwwfsbushs.blogspot.com
wwwfreespeechbeneathUSHS.blogspot.com
wwwsouthcapitolstreet.blogspot.com
November 17th, 2006 at 11:54 pm