Gonzales Says Congress Authorized Spying (this will surprize many

[rodeodance]

members of Congress (I hope).


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/domestic_spying;_ylt=AuxFWlQmzXHgaD2ZGZMpO5Gs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
Gonzales Says Congress Authorized Spying

By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer 6 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Responding to a congressional uproar, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Monday that Congress had essentially given
President Bush the authority for domestic surveillance after the Sept. 11 attacks.

In a round of television appearances, Gonzales provided a more detailed legal rationale for Bush's decision authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on international phone calls and e-mails of people within the United States without seeking warrants from courts.

Gonzales said he had begun meeting with members of Congress on the Bush administration's view that Congress' authorization of the use of military force after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks was ample authorization for the surveillance.

"Our position is that the authorization to use military force which was passed by the Congress shortly after Sept. 11 constitutes that authority," Gonzales said on CBS' "Early Show."....

[rodeodance]

1. Gonzalas has been all over the tube with this new talking point.

[indepat]

6. Thank God we have an AG who can interpret the law and Constitution

;) Or is it neither the Congress nor President has the power to abolish what parts of the Constitution are not to their particular liking. Perhaps neither realize there is a process to constitutionally amend the Constitution. :grr:

[HereSince1628]

19. There was no time to test it on a focus group, so it's a field trial

If it gets good reviews they let it go as is. If it gets hammered they quickly get talking points they can feed Bush through the earplug.

[Solly Mack]

2. Wow

Just wow

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. Amazing

He actually stated that the authorization for the use of force was also authorization to eavesdrop on American citizens. His secondary authority (alternative argument) was the "inherent power of the presidency."

It is time for Congress to act.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

12. Amazingly feeble. Wow, if this is their justification they are in deep

shit! "Inherent"??!!! Of, course that's really no surprise, because that is the same load of crap he was pushing in the torture arena. Barbara Bush MUST step in and ask W - "Now Georgie, if Alberto and Harriet told you it was ok to jump off of a bridge, would you do it?"

[Evergreen Emerald]

14. Feeble is right

Indeed, I was surprised at how feeble. I expected more from the Attorney General. Perhaps the excuses were feeble because they honestly believe they are above the law and don't have to answer to anyone. Bush was pissed that anyone dare question his authority.

I await the reaction from Congress.

[maddezmom]

4. that BS isn't going to fly

I hope

[HereSince1628]

5. Strange an authorization for military force covers a civilian agency?

The NSA may be the fountainhead that military intelligence networks into, and its headquarters are on a military reservation but I don't believe the NSA is a part of the uniformed service.

[rodeodance]

8. Feingold said it was resolution to go to Afgan and fight terror -not this!

It was the most detailed legal explanation given by an administration officials since the New York Times reported Thursday that since October 2001 Bush had authorized the NSA to conduct the surveillance.

Gonzales said Congress' action after Sept. 11 essentially "does give permission for the president of the United States to engage in this kind of very limited, targeted electronic surveillance against our enemy."

The domestic spying revelations has created an uproar in Congress, with Democrats and Republicans calling for an investigation.

"This is just an outrageous power grab," said Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis. on NBC's "Today" show. "Nobody, nobody thought when we passed a resolution to invade Afghanistan and to fight the war on terror ... that this was an authorization to allow a wiretapping against the law of the United States."......

[rodeodance]

13. 'implied war powers' -or so they think/claim.

[HuffleClaw]

7. too little too late

their excuses are gonna wear thing real fast this time. and you can bet this one is just the start. they'll have a bakers dozen trotted out before christmas eve, all of 'em worthless.

[berner59]

10. wow is right....

If this is all they've got as an excuse - someone in Congress/Senate better start jumping on this...

Makes you wonder what else they did for the sake of "our protection"???

[Jackpine Radical]

28. Feingold just did jump on it with both feet.

[Liberal Veteran]

9. Military force = Spy on Americans?

Fascinating defense.

[leftchick]

11. Well that is a bald faced fucking LIE...

<snip>

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said "Congress was never involved" in Bush's decision.

"I think all you need to know is look at former Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Bob Graham -- he was never informed of domestic eavesdropping," the Nevada Democrat said on "Fox News Sunday." "There should be committees investigating this."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/18/bush.nsa/

There is a poll at this link as well.

[onehandle]

15. Fine. Dump the Republican Congress and Impeach Bush.

Mission Accomplished.

[bullimiami]

16. he also thought that torture was fine.

wrong and wrong.

now if someone has the guts to hold them accountable.

[The White Tree]

17. So now they are the non-sequiter administration

What non-sequiter revelation will they tell us of next?

Congress passed No Child Left Behind so we beleive that gives us the authority to prosecute people who have had abortions.

Maybe I shouldn't give them any ideas?

[HereSince1628]

18. Magic and White House politics are all about the art of misdirection.

Tell a big bold lie that ends up on page 1 above the fold, then back away from it in a way that ends up as one sentence at the end of a column on page 17.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

20. essentially is the word I take away from that drivel

I guess my definition of that word and theirs differ.

who knew?

[Tarc]

21. What congressional act does Gonzales refer to?

The Patriot Act, the Resolution on Iraq, or something else?

[Walt Starr]

22. Trying to ahve their cake and eat it, too

No declaration of war, so no need to trouble with quaint notions like the Geneva Conventions, but an authorization of force grants them more power than FDR had in WWII!

[SillyGoose]

23. Here is the Use of Force authorization & a link to the WPR

Congressional Record: September 14, 2001 (House)
Page H5638


AUTHORIZING USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES AGAINST THOSE RESPONSIBLE
FOR RECENT ATTACKS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES


The text of H.J. Res. 64 is as follows:

H.J. Res. 64

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous
violence were committed against the United States and its
citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate
that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense
and to protect United States citizens both at home and
abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security
and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave
acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and
extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution
to take action to deter and prevent acts of international
terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization
for Use of Military Force".

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--That the President is authorized to use
all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized,
committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or
persons, in order to prevent any further acts of
international terrorism against the United States by such
nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.


http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/useofforce.htm


here is a link to the War Powers Resolution of 1973
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/warpower.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's the big question I have: I want to know why they think a FISA judge would reject a request to conduct surveillance on al-Qaeda terrorists. Rice said on MTP that one must be affiliated with al-Qaeda for this warrant-less spying activity to occur.

"There have to be ties to al-Qaeda for the people who--on whom you're collecting information, and it was the president's belief and I agree that without the ability to know what was going on between people with terrorist links inside the country and people--terrorists outside the country, that we're going to leave the country vulnerable to attack again the way that we were vulnerable to attack on September 11."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10479765/page/3/

[berni_mccoy]

24. Force was AUTHORIZED against TERRORISTS, NOT U.S. Citizens!

WTF?

[AzDar]

25. In a way, it is true, since Bush HAS declared war on America....

[OregonBlue]

26. When is someone going to ask - Which members of Congress?

Who knew? What did they know? Inquiring minds want to know.

[mike_c]

27. this will teach the bastards to give dubya blanket authorization...

...for anything. His bunch of criminals needs to be kept on a very short leash at all times.

[killbotfactory]

29. That's fucking rich

someone, somewhere, please call them on this bullshit... please?

[MissMillie]

30. not specifically enumerated

I'm sorry, but if the Act of Congress that gave * permission to use military force doesn't SPECIFICALLY say that he has the power to wiretap American civilians, then it's not there.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

(not to mention: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.)

[TechBear_Seattle]

31. So this isn't just a gross violation of Constitutional rights....

This is the admission by White House officials that the "war against terror" is really a war against American citizens.

[Az_lefty]

32. Why does the chimp hate our freedom? n/t

:shrug:

[Wordie]

33. Admin neglected to notify Congress that Congress had authorized it!

LOL!

Bad move.

[katty]

34. so, it's one so called 'authorization' fits all?!

[Jim__]

35. Of course

From the news story cited above: "Our position is that the authorization to use military force which was passed by the Congress shortly after Sept. 11 constitutes that authority," said Gonzales. He called the monitoring "probably the most classified program that exists in the United States government."

Why can't people see this? Congress authorized the president to use force. Therefore, he can spy on Americans. What could be clearer?

[stickdog]

36. What? None of you have heard about the "War on US Citizens"?

When Congress declared war on all US citizens, they obviously gave their approval to all sorts of domestic abuses.

[Judi Lynn]

37. They obviously think we're all idiots, and no one can stop them.

They've behaved this way from the very first, even before 9/11. These words, from rodeodance's article sounded so strange on tv tonight:

Gonzales defended Bush's decision not to seek warrants from the secretive Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court, saying that "we don't have the speed and the agility that we need in all circumstances to deal with this new kind of enemy."

Speed? Agility? New kind of enemy?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[hang a left]

38. I need to have some questions answered....

WHO were they spying on? Members of Congress? People "In the Know" with respect to 9-11? Political enemies? Was it really "National Security" related?

I don't mean to negate their illegal acts. But, I for one, would like to have some more information.

[NashVegas]

39. Related NYT Article: Administration Cites War Vote in Spying Case

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/politics/20spy.html

I found this part fascinating:


Officials with knowledge of the program have said the Justice Department did two sets of classified legal reviews of the program and its legal rationale. Mr. Gonzales declined to release those opinions Monday.