Posted on 12/22/2005 9:49:50 PM PST by RWR8189
In the face of mounting questions about news stories saying that President Bush approved a program to wiretap American citizens without getting warrants, the White House argues that Congress granted it authority for such surveillance in the 2001 legislation authorizing the use of force against al Qaeda. On Tuesday, Vice President Cheney said the president "was granted authority by the Congress to use all means necessary to take on the terrorists, and that's what we've done."
As Senate majority leader at the time, I helped negotiate that law with the White House counsel's office over two harried days. I can state categorically that the subject of warrantless wiretaps of American citizens never came up. I did not and never would have supported giving authority to the president for such wiretaps. I am also confident that the 98 senators who voted in favor of authorization of force against al Qaeda did not believe that they were also voting for warrantless domestic surveillance.
On the evening of Sept. 12, 2001, the White House proposed that Congress authorize the use of military force to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States." Believing the scope of this language was too broad and ill defined, Congress chose instead, on Sept. 14, to authorize "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided" the attacks of Sept. 11. With this language, Congress denied the president the more expansive authority he sought and insisted that his authority be used specifically against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Just before the Senate acted on this compromise resolution, the White House sought one last change. Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
FDR started doing this very action at a time when it was illegal to wiretap any phone, even of a known criminal. It was continued and used by Clinton and Carter. Case closed...
What a complete and utter LOSER!! I could, even not being a lawyer, conceive the words put in the legislation to assume it meant the President could do "anything" he deemed necessary to fight terrorism. This is why legislation should never be hastily entered into, and the language of law should be solid and not ambiguous.
Tom, shut the hell up and go back under your rock.
Actually that's not the case. Carter and Clinton did it illegally, but no one moaned about it. President Bush did it with legislative consent, and now everyone is up in arms. Liberals should just keep their heads in the sand and their mouths shut.
Tommie,Tommie,Tommie--so many lies, so,little time.
You're still not re-elected.
Tom who?
Not only do we obstruct domestic policies, we obstruct efforts in the War on Terror. --- Vote Democrat!
Hey, Tom!
KONA
Does Tom D still have his radio program? LOL.
FDR did much worse.
In 1940 he had a State Dept employee at the London embassy arrested and kept 'detained' until 1946.
The guys 'crime' was that he worked in the Embassy Code Room and was going to go to the Republicans in Congress with documents (uncoded messages) proving FDR's ongoing conspiracy with Churchill to get the USA into WWII. Someone at the embassy found out, blew the whistle on him and the FBI 'disappeared him'.
This is all per that FDR documentary that ran on the History Channel a few months ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.