Bush suddenly an interesting character again

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Cite please.

You'll be amazed at how much you believe is bullshit, if you just look for cites. I know I was, when I first tried to confirm what I knew.

Keith Olberman interviewed a former analyst at the National Security Agency, whisleblower Russell Tice.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677#28781200

There are a couple of interviews there. Just click on them. and this has been all over the news. Do you not watch the news?

It wasn't "Bush" using it, it was the NSA. This means a lot of people are involved, and the more people, the more likely information about how it's used or misused is to leak out. In fact the very existence of the program was revealed to the NY Times by such a leaker.

Also, this is a logical riddle meant to win arguments, which is something less than a proof. "We believe the program was widely abused." "How do you know?" "Because Bush was secretive! We didn't hear anything, that means something was going on!" Ehh, I'll need a little more than that, personally.

Bush authorized it though. He is the one who wanted it. he was the one in charge. to claim he didn't know, when he was "the decider," is very naive, I think.

Why do you keep asking me to cite things? Do you think I'm just making stuff up?

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I disagree and it was not what most constitutional scholars stated, it was only those that agree with that notion. Never the less it was a leak for a political agenda. That person should be punished.

No, he should be applauded. Anytime our government is behaving outside of the law, SOMEONE needs to come forward. Otherwise our government turns into a shadow government that can commit all kinds of abuses against the people. That is not the kind of government we are supposed to have. that is what we fight against in other countries.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

One could also suggest that the leak was due to a pissed off employee with perhaps, a political axe to grind. What makes one scenario more believable than the other?
Both are mere speculation.

What about the leaking of Valerie Plame's name? No one was punished for that. Still haven't been. and it can most certainly be argued that is was done for political reasons, and by people very high up the food chain...

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

No, he should be applauded. Anytime our government is behaving outside of the law, SOMEONE needs to come forward. Otherwise our government turns into a shadow government that can commit all kinds of abuses against the people. That is not the kind of government we are supposed to have. that is what we fight against in other countries.

It has been like that long before Bush ever came on the scene. There are many things the masses should never be privy to. But I do agree there should be better oversight by FISA, and other entities.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

What about the leaking of Valerie Plame's name? ~snip~ it can most certainly be argued that is was done for political reasons, and by people very high up the food chain...

That was my point. Now the next question is ...who? Was is someone higher up or just someone who got passed over for a promotion or ..a zillion other scenarios. We just don't know - therefore again we are just speculating.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

What about the leaking of Valerie Plame's name? No one was punished for that. Still haven't been. and it can most certainly be argued that is was done for political reasons, and by people very high up the food chain...

I can't agree more. Someone or a group of people should be behind bars. Purely a political leak. Completely damaging to interests of national security.

[Undertoad]

Keith Olberman interviewed a former analyst at the National Security Agency, whisleblower Russell Tice.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677#28781200

That's close but no cigar, there. Pay careful attention. Tice doesn't really say much, does he? Media was monitored in some sort of "24/7" mode. Well, what does that really mean? Different metadata was collected. You're lead to believe "something's up" -- but in the end, he hasn't alleged anything. That's why the piece is headlined "Did U.S. Spy on Journalists?", not "U.S. Spied on Journalists".

Meanwhile, it would appear that Tice has a bone to pick with his former employer that has nothing to do with FISA.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

No, he should be applauded. Anytime our government is behaving outside of the law, SOMEONE needs to come forward. Otherwise our government turns into a shadow government that can commit all kinds of abuses against the people. That is not the kind of government we are supposed to have. that is what we fight against in other countries.

Exactly why we need better "whistleblower" protection.

I would hope the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act that the Democrats introduced last session, and passed in the House (bipartisan vote, 331-94) but stalled in the Senate, will be reintroduced this year.

Bush had threatened to veto it.

[Undertoad]

Richard Armitage leaked Plame's name. Since no charges were filed despite extensive efforts of the Prosecutor in this case, one might guess that leaking the name was not unlawful.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Richard Armitage leaked Plame's name. Since no charges were filed despite extensive efforts of the Prosecutor in this case, one might guess that leaking the name was not unlawful.

Or one could suggest that Libby took the fall by obstructing justice and lying under oath.

But to me, this issue is irrelevant and has nothing in common with the more important issue of protecting government employees who leak (I would rather not see a leak in the press, but a better internal process to protect such employees) information on potentially illegal activities.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

That's close but no cigar, there. Pay careful attention. Tice doesn't really say much, does he? Media was monitored in some sort of "24/7" mode. Well, what does that really mean? Different metadata was collected. You're lead to believe "something's up" -- but in the end, he hasn't alleged anything. That's why the piece is headlined "Did U.S. Spy on Journalists?", not "U.S. Spied on Journalists".

Meanwhile, it would appear that Tice has a bone to pick with his former employer that has nothing to do with FISA.

Was this not the interview where he talked about NSA officials listening in on personal calls from military personel to their spouses? Whoever talked about it said they would actually tell other agents so they could listen in as well, if it was juicy. hmmmm, I wonder which program I heard that on... I thought it was that one.

So many people have come out against Bush and his administration and their policies, from the very beginning when he was first elected, and people on the right always say they had an axe to grind. Well they couldn't all just be disgruntled employees. The fact that there have been so many speaks volumes, to me anyway.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Redux

Or one could suggest that Libby took the fall by obstructing justice and lying under oath.

But to me, this issue is irrelevant and has nothing in common with the more important issue of protecting government employees who leak (I would rather not see a leak in the press, but a better internal process to protect such employees) information on potentially illegal activities.

I think whistleblowers need better protection as well, in government and in corporate America, but I also think it's pretty horrifying that someone could leak an active undercover intelligence agent's name to the press and not be prosecuted. That is a serious national security leak. And bush was supposed to be all about national security. The truth is, bush was about what was convenient for bush. Now he's trying to claim executive priviledge for people who worked for him in perpetuity (I'm talking about Karl Rove). The man really does think he is above the law. I want to see him knocked down off that pedestal.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

I think whistleblowers need better protection as well, in government and in corporate America, but I also think it's pretty horrifying that someone could leak an active undercover intelligence agent's name to the press and not be prosecuted. That is a serious national security leak. And bush was supposed to be all about national security. The truth is, bush was about what was convenient for bush. Now he's trying to claim executive priviledge for people who worked for him in perpetuity (I'm talking about Karl Rove). The man really does think he is above the law. I want to see him knocked down off that pedestal.

I agree that someone higher than Libby (Cheney?) should be held accountable..but its not gonna happen and at this point, I would prefer to look ahead.

BTW, Undertoad...if Tice, in his recent interviews, had provided any detail beyond just the general outline of what he observed in the way of potentially illegal spying on citizens by the NSA with an authorization from Bush, he would likely have been subject to arrest under the Official Secrets Act.

What I would like to see is an independent commission like the one proposed last month by the Democratic chair of the House Judiciary Committee.

To establish a national commission on presidential war powers and civil liberties

There is established the National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ‘Commission’) to investigate the broad range of policies of the Administration of President George W. Bush that were undertaken under claims of unreviewable war powers, including detention by the United States Armed Forces and the intelligence community, the use by the United States Armed Forces or the intelligence community of enhanced interrogation techniques or interrogation techniques not authorized by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, ‘ghosting’ or other policies intended to conceal the fact that an individual has been captured or detained, extraordinary rendition, domestic warrantless electronic surveillance, and other policies that the Commission may determine to be relevant to its investigation (hereinafter in this Act referred to as ‘the activities’).

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-104

Not for punitive purposes against Bush administration officials, but rather to ensure that questionable abuses of power that occurred over the last eight years are not enabled through dubious legal justifications for Obama or any future president. Bush would be required to waive executive immunity for anyone other than himself (which is probably unconstitutional under most circumstances anyway) and I would even give sweeping immunity to lower level persons who might have been engaged in those questionable practices to get at the truth.

Something along the lines of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

[Undertoad]

BTW, Undertoad...if Tice, in his recent interviews, had provided any detail beyond just the general outline of what he observed in the way of potentially illegal spying on citizens by the NSA with an authorization from Bush, he would likely have been subject to arrest under the Official Secrets Act.

He can say "I have additional, utterly convincing details which I can't reveal under the law. My hope is that a Special Prosecutor is appointed to whom I can safely give this information."

But he doesn't. He just puts his poorly-explained evidence of *something* suspicious and lets it hang there, so people will take it as confirmed that domestic spying happened.

And if it were me, and I had actual, damning evidence of illegal operations, I would accept being arrested for revealing it. How about you?

Originally Posted by Undertoad

He can say "I have additional, utterly convincing details which I can't reveal under the law. My hope is that a Special Prosecutor is appointed to whom I can safely give this information."

But he doesn't. He just puts his poorly-explained evidence of *something* suspicious and lets it hang there, so people will take it as confirmed that domestic spying happened.

And if it were me, and I had actual, damning evidence of illegal operations, I would accept being arrested for revealing it. How about you?

I agree that the manner in which Tice revealed what he (allegedly) knew and saw raises doubt and doesnt necessarily reflect well on him.

I dont know that I am that noble as to potentially risk 5-10 years in jail for crimes against the "people" committed by higher ups. I would like to think so.

I do believe that it is essential that the fact surrounding the Bush administration actions and their unilateral interpretation of presidential "war powers" (particularly when Congress had not declared a "state of war") be brought to light.

Which is why I believe that these many Bush memorandum be made public and part of an investigation such as that proposed in the Commission described above.

Not for the purpose of putting Bush officials on trial, but for putting further safeguards in place to restore the executive/legislative checks and balances and prevent such actions by any future president.