She is a really wierd person. Here is what SMASH has to say about all this:
We know that Congressional leaders were briefed on this program. Some claim to have expressed concerns about the legality of such unusual measures. How were those concerns addressed? Were changes subsequently made to the program to ensure that the rights of law-abiding citizens were not violated? The Bush Administration claims that these intercepts were made without acquiring warrants because of time concerns. Was any officer of the courts consulted after-the-fact? Was the judicial branch involved at any time, in any way?
In short, what checks and balances were present, if any?
I'm also concerned with the apparent eagerness on the part of some partisan Democrats to declare a "Constitutional Crisis" and start the ball rolling towards their ultimate goal: the impeachment of President Bush. While the possibility that the Executive Branch might be ignoring the Fourth Amendment is indeed disturbing, the proper remedy in this instance would be to obtain a court injunction halting such intercepts, and to disallow any evidence so garnered to be used in a court of law (as is routine when evidence is obtained through illegal searches in criminal cases). Calling for the President's impeachment seems a little extreme.
If President Bush has done anything wrong by ordering these intercepts, he was clearly motivated by his constitutional duty to protect American citizens from foreign threats. There is no evidence whatsoever of any malicious abuse of power in this case; the targets of this program were members of the same organization that gleefully slaughtered almost 3,000 men, women, and children on that horrible Tuesday morning four years ago.
Congress has the power to investigate this program, and is already making preliminary moves to launch such an investigation. In doing so, they should keep two principles in mind:
1. Avoid further damage to our national security, and
2. Consider the Constitution first, and their partisan interests not at all.
I urge them to follow the above advice, but I doubt that they will -- 2006 is an even-numbered year, after all.
As we say in the Navy, "stand by for heavy rolls."
http://www.indepundit.com/archive2/2005/12/domestic_intell.html#
Not to attack her patriotism, but she has no reservation about putting partisan politics over the well being of American citizens. She needs to the bete noir of the house just like Ted Kennedy is in the Senate.
There is no evidence whatsoever of any malicious abuse of power in this case;
Give the MSM a few days to report (create) the abuses.
Interesting take. Particularly in that it recognizes the Fourth Amendment applies specifically to criminal cases -- but has no apparent application to wartime intelligence gathering.
Wouldn't you just love to see the Democrats go to court, seeking an injunction that would make "that mean Mr. Bush stop spying on our friends in al-Qaeda"?
I really don't think "W" has any intention of hauling any of these people to court. Instead, his ambition would appear to be to find them and kill them.
I agree heads will roll.
Congress should stay the heck out of the President's business. We are at war. As for impeachment. Let them try, they will not succeed and they will lose more seats. People don't want political turmoil. They want their politicians to work towards governing. Republicans paid a price for impeaching Clinton, and he was guilty of perjury and was later disbarred. Democrats should think long and hard before impeaching anyone. We have elections and as Americans we live with politicians we don't like until the next election-impeachment should not be an option. Personally, I thought it was a mistake to impeach Clinton.