Posted on 01/23/2006 8:06:42 PM PST by RWR8189
The Bush administration is bracing for impeachment hearings in Congress.
"A coalition in Congress is being formed to support impeachment," an administration source said.
Sources said a prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February. They said the hearings would focus on the secret electronic surveillance program and whether Mr. Bush violated the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Administration sources said the charges are expected to include false reports to Congress as well as Mr. Bush's authorization of the National Security Agency to engage in electronic surveillance inside the United States without a court warrant. This included the monitoring of overseas telephone calls and e-mail traffic to and from people living in the United States without requisite permission from a secret court.
Sources said the probe to determine whether the president violated the law will include Republicans, but that they may not be aware they could be helping to lay the groundwork for a Democratic impeachment campaign against Mr. Bush.
"Our arithmetic shows that a majority of the committee could vote against the president," the source said. "If we work hard, there could be a tie."
The law limits the government surveillance to no more than 72 hours without a court warrant. The president, citing his constitutional war powers, has pledged to continue wiretaps without a warrant.
The hearings would be accompanied by several lawsuits against the administration connected to the surveillance program. At the same time, the Electronic Privacy Information Center has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that demands information about the NSA spying.
Sen. Arlen Specter, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman and Pennsylvania Republican, has acknowledged that the hearings could conclude with a vote of whether Mr. Bush violated the law. Mr. Specter, a critic of the administration’s surveillance program, stressed that, although he would not seek it, impeachment is a possible outcome.
"Impeachment is a remedy," Mr. Specter said on Jan. 15. "After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution. But the principal remedy under our society is to pay a political price."
Mr. Specter and other senior members of the committee have been told by legal constitutional experts that Mr. Bush did not have the authority to authorize unlimited secret electronic surveillance. Another leading Republican who has rejected the administration's argument is Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas.
On Jan. 16, former Vice President Al Gore set the tone for impeachment hearings against Mr. Bush by accusing the president of lying to the American people. Mr. Gore, who lost the 2000 election to Mr. Bush, accused the president of "indifference" to the Constitution and urged a serious congressional investigation. He said the administration decided to break the law after Congress refused to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government," Mr. Gore said.
"I call upon members of Congress in both parties to uphold your oath of office and defend the Constitution,” he said. “Stop going along to get along. Start acting like the independent and co-equal branch of American government that you are supposed to be under the constitution of our country."
Impeachment proponents in Congress have been bolstered by a memorandum by the Congressional Research Service on Jan. 6. CRS, which is the research arm of Congress, asserted in a report by national security specialist Alfred Cumming that the amended 1947 law requires the president to keep all members of the House and Senate intelligence committees "fully and currently informed" of a domestic surveillance effort. It was the second CRS report in less than a month that questioned the administration's domestic surveillance program.
The latest CRS report said Mr. Bush should have briefed the intelligence committees in the House and Senate. The report said covert programs must be reported to House and Senate leaders as well as the chairs of the intelligence panels, termed the "Gang of Eight."
Administration sources said Mr. Bush would wage a vigorous defense of electronic surveillance and other controversial measures enacted after 9/11. They said the president would begin with pressure on Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Mr. Bush would then point to security measures taken by the former administration of President Bill Clinton.
"The argument is that the American people will never forgive any public official who knowingly hurts national security," an administration source said. "We will tell the American people that while we have done everything we can to protect them, our policies are being endangered by a hypocritical Congress."
This is just getting stupid.
Brownback is against the administration on this too?
yea right, bring it on.
How 'bout if the minority party in Congress is automatically allowed to impeach every sitting President from the majority party ... Yeah, that's the ticket to good Governmental health!
This is insane.
Specter and Brownback are not part of the minority party.
Which act violates the Executive's Constitutionally unlimited power to wage war.
Congress cannot by Act amend the Constitution to curb the explicit powers of the Executive.
Great, the first president to try to be impeached for not breaking the law.
Insight apparently has no insight.
It's going beyond getting stupid.
this is getting ridiculous
for some reason, I suspect the administration would love to have this "domestic spying" nonsense get blown up into impeachment hearings by the Donks - just in time to sell 'em enough rope to hang themselves for the '06 elections.
"This is just getting stupid."
The word that leaps to my mind is "perfidious."
One writer called it, "impeachment envy." They think they can improve their political position if they offset the impeachment of the vile rapist with an impeachment, however groundless, of a Republican president.
And it bothers them not at all to damage the United States of America, so long as the interests of the Democrat Party are advanced.
I thought that the House started impeachment hearings, then took the findings to the Senate.
I just hope the White HOuse has all of its ducks in a row.
For what it is worth, I was that administration source.... I think. (I told someone something about something to somebody).
and TIRESOME!
whatever happened to the immunity the President is supposed to have in acting out his official duties in good faith? I havent dealt w/ this area of the law so I'd like to hear some ideas on this defense. This makes me furious....if there had been another attack they'd be screaming that the WH didnt do enough....just like Hitlery is doing about Iran. I wish she would ride her broom somewhere else....
Won't get out of committee. We are at war.
Let the Libs impeach. Here's what that implies:
Dear Editor
Suppose Osama Bin Laden called an Al Qaeda member in Pakistan and said “GO!” Then the Al Qaeda member immediately called Mohammed Johnson in Washington, D.C. and told him to “Blow up the Capitol now!” Would you want the U.S. Government to be listening in and stop Mohammed?
If you would allow Al Qaeda to blow up the Capitol killing thousands, you agree with most Liberal Democrats. They think it is wrong to quickly tap the phone lines when a terrorist’s call comes into this country.
If you want the government to prevent terrorist murderers who make calls like this, you agree with most other Americans. Most folks agree that in a time of war it is right to tap the phone lines of terrorists’ contacts in the U.S. In addition, the Justice Departments of the Bush ( R), Clinton( D), Bush ( R), Reagan ( R) and Carter ( D) Administrations have all agreed it is legal.
Please remember whose side you are on the next time a Liberal Democrat complains we’re violating the constitutional rights of terrorists.
Brad Cloven
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.