long ago the director of national intelligence, Mr. McConnell, had said that it was the new statute that enabled us to aid the Germans in cracking a plot, a
terrorist plot there. And then a few days later said, well, he actually made a mistake. The new statute had nothing to do with this.
So there is no disinclination of this administration to stoop to misrepresentations and omissions to try to heighten the sense of danger to get whatever they wish in the legislative package."
Olbermann jokes "Am I correct here in saying that the real bottom line risk would be the administration can take any plot they hear about, or in the worst scenario any plot they might dream up-they could take plan nine from outer
space, and they terrify the people or the legislative branch into giving them, the administration, any power they can think of? The constitution be damned?"
Fein responds "Yes, I think when we get to the actual negotiations that took place before the enactment of this recent statute in early August, the administration was openly telling members of Congress if they voted against the bill that the administration insisted upon, Americans would die, that there was half or a third of all intelligence would be uncollected. There wasn't any substantiation of that. It was just trust me, we always tell the truth. And the Congress, rather than insisting that they be cleared for access to classified information and making an independent judgment, just collapsed and said, all right, we'll ratify anything you tell us as needed to protect the country.
And it's gone even beyond legislation. The director has also said even to have public discussions, like you and I are having, about electronic surveillance is giving aid and comfort to the enemy and is in a sense unpatriotic, suggesting there's only one branch of government that knows how to govern and protect us.
That's the executive branch and we should all be willing to play vassals to the lord in the White House....
Well, the administration has already gone so far as to say they can commit torture to gather foreign intelligence if the president thinks it's necessary. It's hard to imagine any broader power that can be asserted under the Constitution. It's really up to Congress now and the American people to insist that Congress stand up and display that they're members of the vertebrate, rather than the invertebrate species. Because if they don't
continue, they don't insist on access to the information and making independent judgments, there isn't going to be anyone there who is going to say, well, I'll go ahead and vote in a way that I believe will risk the lives of Americans.
And really the ball lies in the Congress and really it's the Democrat Congress that was voted last November to change course rather than to endorse the status
quo....
Well, there's a very simple power. It's called the power of the purse.
And Congress by simple majority could simply say no moneys of the United States shall be employed to gather foreign intelligence in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It's very simple. Now it is true the president could veto the bill, and you would need a two-thirds override. But at least it would be sending a signal that there is resistance to what the president is
claiming and that, at least with someone else in the White House, there may be a change of course here.
But other than that, the president will have his way if he continues to frighten the Congress and Congress refuses to demand information and facts rather than just rumor."
Just think what Rove and big bro 43 would have concocted if the Democrats cut off funding for their NSA illegal wiretapping of US citizens.
Back in mid August I had "They are spineless." put up at
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_winston__070806_they_are_spineless_.htm
I was outraged that the Democrats let themselves be steam-rolled over again by big bro 43. They were misled-just as they were misled by W's "Ministry of Truth" which cherry-picked intelligence from traitors and liars, both from Iraq--Chalabi's INC, and from the US of A's political elite-veteran prevaricators such as Cheney, Wolfowitz, Feith, Hadley, et al, and the US MSM such as the New York Times' Judith Miller comes to mind, for partisan GOP gain. W wants to be named king W the 1st and having a spiffy eavesdropping tool is needed in his insane quest.
Just think of this as the September 20, 2007 article "McConnell: That's Right, Openness Kills Americans" at
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004249.php
makes clear in "Last month, in an interview with the El Paso Times, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said that openly debating changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- changes requested by none other than McConnell himself -- would mean that "some Americans are going to die." At first it seemed like an unfortunate bit of demagoguery. At a hearing today of the House intelligence committee, though, McConnell again anticipated bodies piling up in the streets as the direct consequence of discussing the McConnell's favored revisions to FISA.
From Reuters: He said debate over the programs was important to ensure authorities had proper tools to fight suspected terrorists, but that the open discussion would also help U.S. enemies.
"What this dialogue and debate has allowed those who wish us harm to do, is to understand significantly more about how we were targeting their communications," McConnell told the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.
Asked if debates had cost U.S lives, he said, "They will."
Or as he also put it: "The intelligence business is conducted in secret. It's conducted in secret for a reason."
Why not just declare the 20 committee members enemy combatants and be done with it?"
The Democrats in Congress were coerced into last summer's FISA capitulation, and the US MSM isn't all over this. Why were they fixated on a stain on a blue dress, but not on our civil rights being dismantled? Why can't the Democrats admit the shameful fact that they believed lies back in 2002 when they authorized W to attempt all processes prior to attacking Iraq-as they were lied to in August about the there being an imminent threat against the Capitol?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
