[ken5050]

AG Gonzales will be the ONLY witness today, that is after all 18 senators get their 15 minutes or more of opening statements. The Dem senators have been criticized long and hard by their rapid base for their weaks efforts questioning Alito, so I expect very confronational efforts today.

Play very close attention to the opening comments by Rockefeller. Friday night, on the radio, Jed Babbin publicly said that Rockefeller IS the source of the leaks...BTW..Babbin will be hosting Hugh Hewitt's show today..worth listening.

[TomGuy]

G: Some of the aspects must remain classified...

[Huge sighs from the libDems. Wanna bet they try to get him to reveal some of these during questioning???]

[Howlin]

LIVE THREAD right here!

[MEG33]

My daughter has this on and I left the room..I cannot bear to listen to their posturing..Thank you for the thread.

[TomGuy]

Lindsay Graham was a-rockin' an' a-whistlin'

[ohioWfan]

For those of us who don't have enough time to watch, but want very much to know what's going on these live threads are a blessing!

THANKS!

[TomGuy]

Why would G have any objection to Ashcroft coming before the committee????

That question from Specter doesn't even make sense, since the Committee can subpoena whomever they want.

[TomGuy]

Leahy WANTS to be combative.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

And now a word from our REAL Sponsors of Free Speech

The Men and Women who serve,
and have served, our country
are the ones who make sure that
the Politicans and Judges are free to do their job.

We would not have a US Supreme Court
without the protection of the Military.

Politicans and Judges are safe
because of the Military who protect them.

TEST : Call your Senator or Congressman's office
AFTER 5 PM, or on the weekend.
IF you speak to an actual person, ask who's in charge today?

Now look up the phone number
of your local military base.
Call that number 24/7
and ask the live voice you get
to speak with the person in charge.

Send a Thank You while you enjoy your Freedom also.


You will stay right where you are on the thread.
Please take a moment and Thank a Service Man or Woman.
Just Click on the graphic to send an e-mail.

[Christian4Bush]

..Babbin will be hosting Hugh Hewitt's show today..worth listening.

Babbin is also filling in for Laura Ingraham, at least for today. She is in Iraq. I don't know if he mentioned anything about Leakyfeller in the second hour.

[tellw]

WHY WE WIRETAP!

/A>

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Has Specter made any idiotic statements yet?

[Liberty Valance]

bump - wurkin and lurkin

[mykpfsu]

Someone please inform feinstein that the U.S constitution IS LAW!!!

[excludethis]

Foremost among the objectives committed to that trust by the Constitution is the security of the Nation. As Hamilton explained in arguing for the Constitution's adoption, because "the circumstances which may affect the public safety are [not] reducible within certain determinate limits, . . . it must be admitted, as a necessary consequence that there can be no limitation of that authority which is to provide for the defense and protection of the community in any matter essential to its efficiency." Id.

Nor is the authority to protect national security limited to actions necessary for "victories in the field." Application of Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1, 12 (1946). The authority over national security "carries with it the inherent power to guard against the immediate renewal of the conflict." Id.

Congress may not unilaterally restrain executive officials in the performance of their duties. In INS v. Chadha (1983), the Supreme Court struck down a law which authorized either House of Congress to veto an executive decision made by the Attorney General.

The Supreme Court has emphasized that we should not construe legislative prerogatives to prevent the executive branch "from accomplishing its constitutionally assigned functions." Nixon v. Administrator of General Servs., 433 U.S. 425, 443 (1977).


As Justice Joseph Story said long ago, "[i]t may be fit and proper for the government, in the exercise of the high discretion confided to the executive, for great public purposes, to act on a sudden emergency, or to prevent an irreparable mischief, by summary measures, which are not found in the text of the laws." The Apollon, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 362, 366-67 (1824). The Constitution entrusts the "power [to] the executive branch of the government to preserve order and insure the public safety in times of emergency, when other branches of the government are unable to function, or their functioning would itself threaten the public safety." Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. 304, 335 (1946) (Stone, C.J., concurring).


If the President is confronted with an unforeseen attack on the territory and people of the United States, or other immediate, dangerous threat to American interests and security, the courts have affirmed that it is his constitutional responsibility to respond to that threat with whatever means are necessary, including the use of military force abroad. See, e.g., Prize Cases, 67 U.S. at 635 ("If a war be made by invasion of a foreign nation, the President is not only authorized but bound to resist force by force . . . without waiting for any special legislative authority."); Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. at 336 (Stone, C.J., concurring) ("Executive has broad discretion in determining when the public emergency is such as to give rise to the necessity" for emergency measures); United States v. Smith, 27 F. Cas. 1192, 1230 (C.C.D.N.Y. 1806) (No. 16,342) (Paterson, Circuit Justice) (regardless of statutory authorization, it is "the duty . . . of the executive magistrate . . . to repel an invading foe") (12); Mitchell v. Laird, 488 F.2d 611, 613 (D.C. Cir. 1973) ("there are some types of war which without Congressional approval, the President may begin to wage: for example, he may respond immediately without such approval to a belligerent attack") (13); see also Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19, 27 (D.C. Cir.) (Silberman, J. concurring) ("[T]he President has independent authority to repel aggressive acts by third parties even without specific statutory authorization."), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 815 (2000);id. at 40 (Tatel, J., concurring) ("[T]he President, as Commander in Chief, possesses emergency authority to use military force to defend the nation from attack without obtaining prior congressional approval."); Story, supra note 9, § 1485 ("[t]he command and application of the public force . . . to maintain peace, and to resist foreign invasion" are executive powers).

Conducting foreign affairs and protecting the national security are, as the Supreme Court has observed, "'central' Presidential domains." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 812 n.19 (1982). The President's constitutional primacy flows from both his unique position in the constitutional structure, and from the specific grants of authority in Article II that make the President both the Chief Executive of the Nation and the Commander in Chief. See Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731, 749-50 (1982). Due to the President's constitutionally superior position, the Supreme Court has consistently "recognized 'the generally accepted view that foreign policy [is] the province and responsibility of the Executive.'" Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 529 (1988) (quoting Haig v. Agee, 453 U.S. at 293-94).

"The Founders in their wisdom made [the President] not only the Commander-in-Chief but also the guiding organ in the conduct of our foreign affairs," possessing "vast powers in relation to the outside world." Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U.S. 160, 173 (1948). This foreign affairs power is exclusive: it is "the very delicate, plenary and exclusive power of the President as sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations - a power which does not require as a basis for its exercise an act of Congress." United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304, 320 (1936).

As future Chief Justice John Marshall famously declared a few years later, "The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations. . . . The [executive] department . . . is entrusted with the whole foreign intercourse of the nation . . . ." 10 Annals of Cong. 613-14 (1800). Given the agreement of Jefferson, Hamilton, and Marshall, it has not been difficult for the executive branch consistently to assert the President's plenary authority in foreign affairs ever since.

[BunnySlippers]

The broadtape is now reporting that Iranian protestors are trying to fire bomb the Danish embassy.

[Graymatter]

Why do they keep asking him whether he minds bringing other AGs before the committee? What's the point of that?

[ianschwartz]

If there is anything worth getting on video, please ping me!

[Pirate21]

Time to have Curt Weldon give an earful to Biden. Biden just called data mining "unscrupulous"!

[Jim Noble]

The more hearings there are on this, the better.

Hold them in every red state with a RAT senator up for reelection in November, and when people get sick of them, hold more.

In fact, in August, start impeachment hearings, and get every RAT up for reelection on national TV.

[Cboldt]

Transcript Links

Part 1
Part 2 Starts 3:48 pm, at Kohl
Part 3 Starts at 7:26 pm, at Durbin

Those are not the complete hearings, and omit at least Specter's closing exchange with Attorney General Gonzales.