Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush to Ignore Rule on Written Notices of Intelligence Actions
Bloomberg.com ^ | Dec. 28 , 2001 | Heidi Przybyla

Posted on 01/03/2002 9:50:13 AM PST by 74dodgedart

Edited on 07/19/2004 2:09:20 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Crawford, Texas, Dec. 28 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush said he'll use presidential authority to sidestep a rule requiring his administration to provide Congress with written notice of U.S. intelligence activities.

Bush made the announcement in signing the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2002, which includes an amendment stating that reports to Congress should ``always be in written form.''


(Excerpt) Read more at quote.bloomberg.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-185 next last
To: backup
Article I, Section 8 deals with military intelligence. It goves Congress full authority to make whatever policies or laws it deems necessary. Does anyone at FreeRepublic ever read the friggin constitution?

Har. Har. Har. I remember you - yesterday you were saying I needed to go back to school regarding grammatical matters and then promptly made a grammatical error and a misspelling. Now you are telling all us dumb freepers that we don't know the Constitution - yet who does the head of the FBI report to? Not the Secretary of Defense, but the Attorney General. Who does the head of the CIA report to? The head of the NSA? Hint - it ain't the Secretary of Defense. Those agencies are not part of Defense and are therefore not affected by Article I, Section 8 - so I see your understanding of the Constitution is as good as your grammar and spelling.

121 posted on 01/03/2002 1:48:30 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: backup
The executive branch is under no obligation to 'enforce the law.' None.

You should really try following the debate instead of jumping into the middle of things. I was responding to OWK's assertion that the president should enforce the law.

122 posted on 01/03/2002 1:50:00 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: backup
Article I, Section 8 deals with military intelligence.

Above and beyond that, try reading the article:

Crawford, Texas, Dec. 28 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush said he'll use presidential authority to sidestep a rule requiring his administration to provide Congress with written notice of U.S. intelligence activities.

I do not see the qualifier "Military" anywhere here - this pertains to ALL intelligence agencies, not just military intel. So you are not even arguing the right subject here, not that it's a surprise.

123 posted on 01/03/2002 1:51:32 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: backup
Ulitmately, Congress governs EVERYTHING that ANY agency does down to the color of pens they use.

Maybe in your theory, but not in reality. We're more interested in how government actually works, not in your uninformed beliefs.

124 posted on 01/03/2002 1:52:50 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Who does the head of the CIA report to?

To whomever Congress' wants.

Congress could pass a law requiring the head of the CIA to wear a purple suit and give a massage to the Senator of Rhose Island.

What part of "LEGISLATIVE BRANCH" do you not understand?

CONGRESS makes the laws. Not the President.

125 posted on 01/03/2002 1:56:17 PM PST by backup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I do not see the qualifier "Military" anywhere here - this pertains to ALL intelligence agencies, not just military intel. So you are not even arguing the right subject here, not that it's a surprise.

Congress has authority over all agencies and can legislate any laws it desires regarding their organization and government. I dont' care if it has to do with the military or not. (In this case, however, the authority by which Congress created the CIA came from Article I, Section 8. That's why I raised the issue. It doesn't matter, though. Even if the authroity came from elsewhere in Artcle I, the end result would be the same: Congress is in 100% control of the rules under which the agencies operate.)

Every single government agency (except, perhaps, the Post Office) could be abolished by Congress overnight (assuming the President signed the Bill.)

Congress has 100% control over all LEGISLATION and REGULATION of EVERYTHING the US does.

126 posted on 01/03/2002 2:02:09 PM PST by backup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
How about this one - Congress passes a law and a president signs it that is clearly unconstitutional.

Then a case should be brought before the Supreme Court. Our Constitution is well designed to handle such situations. If Bush has a problem with the law, he should refuse to sign the bill, or bring a case before the court.

There is no justification for the President ignoring the law like this, period.

127 posted on 01/03/2002 2:04:32 PM PST by ignatz_q
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: backup
To whomever Congress' wants. Congress could pass a law requiring the head of the CIA to wear a purple suit and give a massage to the Senator of Rhose Island.

No need to waste further time here. Every agency in the federal government reports to the President. EVERY ONE. And that is not because Congress says so, but because the Constitution mandates such. I won't bother with your posts any more, rant away at me all you want.

128 posted on 01/03/2002 2:04:52 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: ignatz_q
There is no justification for the President ignoring the law like this, period.

Funny, OWK ended up agreeing that there could be.

129 posted on 01/03/2002 2:06:11 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Here's the law modified:
"Sec. 413a. - Reporting of intelligence activities other than covert actions
To the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources and methods or other exceptionally sensitive matters, the Director of Central Intelligence and the heads of all departments, agencies, and other entities of the United States Government involved in intelligence activities shall -
(1) keep the intelligence committees fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities, other than a covert action (as defined in section 413b(e) of this title), which are the responsibility of, are engaged in by, or are carried out for or on behalf of, any department, agency, or entity of the United States Government, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity and any significant intelligence failure; and
(2) furnish the intelligence committees any information or material concerning intelligence activities, other than covert actions, which is within their custody or control, and which is requested by either of the intelligence committees in order to carry out its authorized responsibilities "

This section is only about "other than covert" activities!

I think the reporter has left out something important, so he/she can enhance the conflict.

130 posted on 01/03/2002 2:10:34 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
No need to waste further time here. Every agency in the federal government reports to the President. EVERY ONE.

I guess you think the CEO of IBM is actually the one in charge, as opposed to the Board of Directors...

Whatever.

I tell you what... I'll just throw out the 25 or so volumes of the United State Code that set forth -- in great detail -- the manner in whcih our federal agencies (from the FAA to the CIA to OSHA) are to be run, how much the members are to be paid, to whom they are to report (directly to Congress in many cases), etc., etc.

What a dolt.

131 posted on 01/03/2002 2:14:17 PM PST by backup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: OWK
Listen, can you help me out here?

In that constitution of ours, you know, the one that names the president commander in chief of the armed forces, where does it grant Congress the right to demand information about military intelligence operations?

132 posted on 01/03/2002 2:18:34 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: borntodiefree
If we're not a nation of laws, then we have no nation, and the president is just a feel good dictator.

Which is why it's good to bookmark "The coming American dictatorship" and read it once a month.

133 posted on 01/03/2002 2:42:19 PM PST by CubicleGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Once again- 'thanks Sandy!'
Sheesh, you seem to be doing all the work around here. :-)

I'm still confused though, since "Sec. 413a. - Reporting of intelligence activities other than covert actions " is ONLY about "other than covert actions".

If it was about covert actions, I'd understand the dispute.
The only "other than covert" actions I can think of would be diplomatic actions that have never been open to the Congress since day one of the Republic.

134 posted on 01/03/2002 2:45:52 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Congress controls the purse strings. That's really the bottom line. They (presumedly representing we the people) have a right to know where the money is going before just handing it over willy-nilly. And they (again, we the people) have the right to know what was done with previous appropriations before continuing to hand out more.
135 posted on 01/03/2002 2:52:59 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
I'm not sure I understand it either.

Notice it says, "keep the intelligence committees fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities, other than a covert action (as defined in section 413b(e) of this title)."

...Which leads us to Section 413b(e), which says:

(e) "Covert action" defined

As used in this subchapter, the term "covert action" means an activity or activities of the United States Government to influence political, economic, or military conditions abroad, where it is intended that the role of the United States Government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly, but does not include -

(1) activities the primary purpose of which is to acquire intelligence, traditional counterintelligence activities, traditional activities to improve or maintain the operational security of United States Government programs, or administrative activities;

(2) traditional diplomatic or military activities or routine support to such activities;

(3) traditional law enforcement activities conducted by United States Government law enforcement agencies or routine support to such activities; or

(4) activities to provide routine support to the overt activities (other than activities described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3)) of other United States Government agencies abroad.

Apparently, there's a whole lot more to intelligence activities than covert actions, such as the activities listed in 1-4 above, for example.
136 posted on 01/03/2002 3:11:53 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: 74dodgedart
Given that a full 54 members of Congress are members of the Communist Party I think this is a good move. I sure wouldn't trust Gore with that kind of power though.
137 posted on 01/03/2002 3:14:22 PM PST by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
..."Not really. IMO much of the so-called oversight exercised by Congress over the executive branch is unconstituional - the Constitution is clear that the president is in charge of operating the government, not Congress"....

'Cuse me for coming in here, but the Congress was given certain powers. Under Article 1, Section 8, which enumerates the powers of Congress....and it includes war and defense...the final clause, #18, says, "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any other department or officer thereof".

138 posted on 01/03/2002 3:21:05 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
On your #100 post, Under the OLD and NEW law, it reflects Section 413 of Title 50, Chapter 15....and yet St. George's letter refers to Section 305 and Section 502. Any ideas.....??

Is anyone else having problems....this is slow and sluggish, took forever to get to post against this post #....never could get to #100!

139 posted on 01/03/2002 3:59:17 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
..."I don't see the words intelligence agency in there. Aside from that, the point is, Congress can set up agencies, but it is up to the Executive Branch to run them. But we've already progressed well beyond that point in the debate - it really comes down to the nature of the change in the law being spun as something else by the media."...

Read further.....Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18.

140 posted on 01/03/2002 4:02:34 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-185 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson