Specter Says Bush May Agree to Surveillance Review

[sabra]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aUS_tQcCQwSM&refer=top_world_news

Specter Says Bush May Agree to Surveillance Review (Update1)

June 25 (Bloomberg) -- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said the Bush administration and Congress may be close to an agreement on submitting a National Security Agency surveillance program to judicial review.

Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who has been critical of the warrantless eavesdropping program instituted after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said White House officials have indicated they may be willing to accept oversight from a special court set up to handle intelligence wiretaps.

``There is an inclination to have it submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court,'' Specter said on the ``Fox News Sunday'' program, ``and that would be a big step forward for protection of constitutional rights and civil liberties.''

...

``The administration has long said that while we don't believe additional legal authority is necessary that we are willing to listen to the ideas of members of Congress on possible legislation,'' White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said today. ``Discussions are ongoing and we will continue to work with Chairman Specter as well as the intelligence committee.''

[onehandle]

1. More fake rationality for the Fall.

Everything Bush (Rove) does for the rest of the year is to save the Fall elections.

President Cheney does Not want to get investigated next year.

[Supersedeas]

22. more backroom deals designed to trivialize/marginalize real discussion

and criticism of the Program

[Rose Siding]

2. They "may be willing to accept oversight"

This is so unbelievably messed up.

[CatholicEdHead]

15. He "may" agree to this and then have a signing statement

saying he will ignore it.

[Solly Mack]

3. White House officials have indicated they may be willing to accept ...

- oversight"

Uh, how big of them.

Just love those checks and balances the unitary executive "may be willing" to accept

Please, Your Highness, Resident Malaprop of the Great Transparency Government, can we offer up a review of your actions? I know it's an imposition on your uniterness but if it's OK with you, we, the Congress, a (lowly and superfluous) branch of the government - though nowhere near as exalted as you, the unitary executive, would be grateful if you would grace us just this once with your magnanimous nature.

[babylonsister]

4. I don't think the wh should have any say in this AT ALL.

:grr:

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Oh, how magnanimous!

Here's a clue, Arlen, you do-nothing rubberstamper. If you have to beg the oversightee for the opportunity to oversee, it ain't fucking oversight, see?

[TheDebbieDee]

6. He MAY agree to it.....My A$$!

Arlen is w's flunky and everybody knows it but him!

[DELUSIONAL]

11. What she said!! That was my exact response to the thread subject line.

[Rex]

7. Ah 'judicial review' --- I smell the money train!

So they will take all future cases to the FISA court (after getting caught by the M$M) maybe. The Executive Branch still believes it has the power to break US laws if it is labeled as fighting the 'war on terror'. Problem in Bozoland, a big one that is unavoidable. I bet Bozo won't figure it out in time... :rofl:

[Joe Bacon]

8. Wake me when Specter decides to be a Senator again...

...he hasn't been one for years!

[pinkpops]

12. Specter to Bush: Let me investigate or I'll shoot this duck

[HuffleClaw]

9. a smokescreen

a SECRET court oversee a SECRET program of domestic surveillance? "a big step forward for protection of constitutional rights and civil liberties." my ass.

[gratuitous]

10. Gee Arlen, and do you believe the Bush administration?

You keep believing them, and they keep coming in your mouth. What's up with that?

[salin]

17. Of course he doesn't. But he is afraid of losing his committe chrmnshp.

So he just believes that they will give him adequate cover with the public so that he appears to be true to his word (in challenging bushco abuse of power and illegal activities) - so that he can then cave in and keep the rwers at bay.

Maybe bush's nic for him is Jellyfish?

[krkaufman]

13. What the hell does Bush's approval have to do with anything?

What a bunch of freakin' lapdogs this Republican Congress is.

[dogday]

14. May Agree?

The whole point is to force the oversight on him whether he agrees or not... I don't trust Spector, he puts on dog and pony shows....

[Amonester]

16. Whatta bunch of corrupt weasels...

Specter Cop: "Huh... s'cuse me Mr. Brutus Criminal, may you please allow me to ask you, Sir, if you would be gentle enough to accept the fact that you should appear before the Judge for a few unsignificant crimes some evidence proves you could be accused of having commited since Jan/2001?"

Let's smoke 'em out (of Congress)...

[ShockediSay]

18. Now they can collect data on political dissidents

and opposition, with warrantless wiretapping, and data gathering they can give to their corporofascist contributors like the insurance companies.

Plus they can block get out the vote drives for the political opposition more easily.

I bet this will chill any legitimate Muslim political organizing, which should make AIPAC happy.

[dicknbush]

19. FUCK YOU SPECTER YOU PIECE OF SHIT....

I don't give this guy any credence for anything he says. He is just one big lie after another and in reality he does nothing and does not keep his word he is a PUSSY! I HATE HIM AND I HOPE WHAT EVER DISEASE HE GETS NEXT FINALLY FINISHES MR "NOT PROVED" OFF. WHAT A PUTRID PIECE OF HUMANITY!

[Vidar]

20. Specter giveth & Specter taketh away. Supersonic Flip-flops.

[zann725]

21. Is that "MAY agree" same as Shrub hundreds of times "agreed" to sign laws

in public, then revoked portions of all of many in private...hours later...invoking "Executive Prigilege."

Of course Shrub is NOT going to allow REAL 'review' of surveillance. As in all else, Shrub has ALWAYS got his way...and shall continue to infinitum"...until he is voted out and/or impeached. And then, maybe not even then...

[coalition_unwilling]

23. Impeachment is necessary but not sufficient. We must have

an international war crimes tribunal set up in the Hague for BFEE and its cronies.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

24. "May"?!!!!! :wtf:

It is appalling that not only can a SINGLE US Senator cut "backroom" deals over a matter as important as this without any open and honest ("transparent") debate or discussion among the public about the merits of this program (and any proposed changes) but also that we now have Congress writing and debating laws to legalize ONGOING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR instead of insisting on holding Bush et. al accountable for BREAKING the current law and demanding that any further such activity be immediately discontinued until or if it becomes legal. if we can't trust Bush with the current law, HOW can we trust him to comply with the "new" law? Whatever the President "agrees" to in public will almost certainly become null and void once his ever popular "signing statements" are quietly released following the passage and "signature" of whatever legislation is finally enacted into law. :banghead: Specter obviously must not realize the gravity of the situation or if he does, he, like McCain, has decided that he has put party loyalty or more specifically, loyalty to Bush, above the needs of American people and the laws that our country were founded on. The Repbulicans are the party of "law and order," indeed. :sarcasm: :wtf: