Bush broke the law? Nope don't think so.

Published on December 19, 2005 By drmiler In Politics

Okay before I go off half-assed. Why did the NY Times withold their story for a year because of national security only to release it now. What's the difference between then and now? The story is "still" a risk to national security. Add this to the fact that congress "was told" about what was going on.

After the special program started, Congressional leaders from both political parties were brought to Vice President Dick Cheney's office in the White House. The leaders, who included the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House intelligence committees, learned of the N.S.A. operation from Mr. Cheney, Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, who was then the agency's director and is now a full general and the principal deputy director of national intelligence, and George J. Tenet, then the director of the C.I.A., officials said.

Even the Times article makes the case that GW broke no laws.

Link

Comments (Page 1)

drmiler

on Dec 19, 2005

bump

COL Gene

on Dec 19, 2005

The 1978 Law REQUIRES a WARRENT from the Special Court which Bush ignored. There is also a provision in that law that allows wire taps before they go to court if time is an issue but REQUIRES after the fact approval which Bush also violated.

You and Bush have the same problem-- You do not know what REQUIRE means. We saw that when he failed to take a REQUIRED flight PHYSICAL and attend drills and a training exercise that he was REQUIRED to attend and ignored. It is time for Bush to be held accountable for his actions.

Moderateman

on Dec 19, 2005

I see privateparts gene is still beating the same one note drum. bah!

If Bush broke the law then the rest of congress should be indicted for conspiracy too.

If bush did not take extraordinary precautions to protect us citizens and something else happened the clueless one would be screaming "bush did not protect us"

COL Gene

on Dec 19, 2005

First, only a few members of Congress were informed about the President’s actions.

If any members of Congress committed conspiracy I agree with you.

About 10 minutes ago on MSNBC TV, the author James Bamford said that the 1978 law requiring a warrant from the special court that was established for NSA to wire tap was for the express purpose of preventing the President from doing just what he did by authorizing wire taps without court approval. If that is true, Bush needs to be held accountable for violating the law. That law calls for 5 years in prison for EACH violation. That sounds like a VERY serious potential problem for George.

Dr Guy

on Dec 19, 2005

The story I hear is that one of the writers has a book coming out in a week. Always follow the benjamins. They will lead you to the real story.

terpfan1980

on Dec 19, 2005

Excellent article DrMiler!

drmiler

on Dec 19, 2005

First, only a few members of Congress were informed about the President’s actions.

If any members of Congress committed conspiracy I agree with you.

Hey clueless....maybe you should re-read this.

After the special program started, Congressional leaders from both political parties were brought to Vice President Dick Cheney's office in the White House. The leaders, who included the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House intelligence committees, learned of the N.S.A. operation from Mr. Cheney, Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, who was then the agency's director and is now a full general and the principal deputy director of national intelligence, and George J. Tenet, then the director of the C.I.A., officials said.

And like I told you before....BEFORE you run off at the mouth, GO READ THE PATRIOT ACT! Here let me help. I taken the trouble to highlight some pertinent sections for you.

Sec. 206: Expands the use of "multipoint" or "roving" wiretaps in foreign intelligence investigations.

Sec. 207: Expands the duration of foreign intelligence surveillance of non-U.S. citizens.

Sec. 209: Clarifies that law enforcement only needs a simple search warrant to seize a voice mail message, not a wiretap order. The Justice Department argued for this provision as a way to update earlier law, which demanded a wiretap order before investigators could get access to voice mail messages stored on message services.

drmiler

on Dec 19, 2005

Excellent article DrMiler!

Thanks dude! I appreciate that. This has been bugging me since they ran the story. And to be honest, I was getting tired of everybody who was jumping on the bash Bush bandwagon.

drmiler

on Dec 19, 2005

And like I told you before....BEFORE you run off at the mouth, GO READ THE PATRIOT ACT! Here let me help. I taken the trouble to highlight some pertinent sections for you.

Sec. 206: Expands the use of "multipoint" or "roving" wiretaps in foreign intelligence investigations.

Sec. 207: Expands the duration of foreign intelligence surveillance of non-U.S. citizens.

Sec. 209: Clarifies that law enforcement only needs a simple search warrant to seize a voice mail message, not a wiretap order. The Justice Department argued for this provision as a way to update earlier law, which demanded a wiretap order before investigators could get access to voice mail messages stored on message services.

Do notice I said "some" sections, not "all". One of the closest is section 209. And col....in regards to your reference of the 1978 law? You should "really" try to stay up to date. The patriot act changed the law you are quoting!

COL Gene

on Dec 19, 2005

That is not correct. The Supreme Court in 93 ruled that a warrant is a requirement.

The actions of Bush MUST by reviewed by the Supreme Court and will settle ALL the speculation. If Bush broke the law, he should be REMOVED from office.

Gideon MacLeish

on Dec 19, 2005

I don't know whether he broke the law or not. Because we're talking about international phone communications, I would think it to be a "gray area". The fed can tap your phone to ensure you aren't using those connections for gambling purposes or to make drug deals; in many areas, this is little different.

What disturbs me the most, though, is the "lag time" in this story. IF Bush broke the law, then not only HE, but the senators who knew, AND the reporters who knew should be indicted for conspiracy. If heads are going to roll, they need to roll from other places BESIDES 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

drmiler

on Dec 19, 2005

That is not correct. The Supreme Court in 93 ruled that a warrant is a requirement.

You just don't seem to get it do you? After 9/11 EVERYTHING changed "INCLUDING" your vaunted 93 ruling!

On top of all that Gideon's correct! If you are going to hammer on Bush, then you NEED to hammer on everyone involved. Including the NYT that sat on the story for a year.

What disturbs me the most, though, is the "lag time" in this story. IF Bush broke the law, then not only HE, but the senators who knew, AND the reporters who knew should be indicted for conspiracy. If heads are going to roll, they need to roll from other places BESIDES 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

COL Gene

on Dec 19, 2005

Gideon

Heads may need to roll STARTING at 1600 PA Ave and then on to the State Dept, U S Attorney and the members of Congress that knew about this action. 9/11 did not change the Supreme Court ruling. We need a new ruling from the Supreme Court ASAP.

Gene Nash

on Dec 19, 2005

You just don't seem to get it do you? After 9/11 EVERYTHING changed "INCLUDING" your vaunted 93 ruling!

Terrorist attacks change legal precedents? Really?

I'm sure the terrorists will be delighted to hear that.

COL Gene

on Dec 19, 2005

Let’s see what the Supreme Court has to say about George W. Bush allowing the NSA to wire tap without obtaining the required court order.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!