[AZConser]

He specifically said he "had a finding," which is executive order speak for a Presidential decree that what they were doing is legal under the existing executive order. The thing is, the White House is required by law to report such findings to the respective Intelligence committees and that's something we can get checked. If he didn't inform the committees he either broke the law or he's lying now. That's why I've sent emails to my congress lady and my two senators asking them to check this specific issue.

This sounds every bit as serious as the GWB Admin conducting their "DOMESTIC Spying" on innocent citizens in order to get political dirt on its opponents!! /sarc

[Phsstpok]

The thing is, Bush did report his executive order and finding to the appropriate committee members as laid out in the relevant oversight laws and committee rules. That's why talk of Bush "breaking the law" is total BS. The congress can pass a law saying that what Bush told them is wrong and therefore he must stop, but until then Bush's interpretation of and executive orders on the law stand.

If Clinton didn't notify the congressional committees then he is guilty of (yet another) crime.

That would also mean that his people (Clarke?) who testified before the relevant committees and didn't inform them of this are guilty of a crime as well.

[AliVeritas]

Which in turn sounds as serious as Eschalon, Carnivore, Clipper Chip and Waco... as well as Atlanta Rules. /s