Specter wants Jan. surveillance hearings (Gonzales leadoff witness)

[sabra]

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/politics/13459028.htm

Specter wants Jan. surveillance hearings
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter said Wednesday he remains skeptical about a government surveillance program despite an explanation from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The two met for an hour Sunday to discuss the rationale for the warrantless eavesdropping by the National Security Agency that President Bush approved without obtaining any court orders.

"I would summarize it by saying I have grave doubts about his legal conclusion," Specter, R-Pa., said of a meeting with Gonzales, who was confirmed before Specter's committee early this year. "I'm skeptical, but I'm prepared to listen."

Specter said he expects Gonzales to be the leadoff witness at a hearing on the surveillance, which he said he would like to start next month after confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

[meganmonkey]

1. Is it okay to feel happy about all this?

Part of me is devestated at how horrible it is, but part of me is ELATED!!!

:bounce:

[sabra]

4. I am taking a wait and see approach...

peace. :-)

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. "I'm skeptical, but I'm prepared to listen."

[ShockediSay]

16. BushSpin out of the mouth of Gonzalez?

Torture is not torture.

"All force necessary" is the legal ground for the Bush administration to collect files on Wilson, Plame, and the rest of us who think Bush overreaches.

Talk about the lawyer who gives you a legal opinion based on what you wanna hear!

(Betcha Alito has just as much 'legal integrity.')

[jobycom]

5. I think I am angered that it happened but happy to see it taken seriously

[pokercat999]

10. Except the dems won't have subpoena power so

the whole thing will be a repug whitewash.

[meganmonkey]

13. This is a Republican senator talking here,

I think there may be significant bipartisan support...

[pokercat999]

18. I hope you are correct but I have no faith in the repugs. nt

[BR_Parkway]

2. After confirmation hearings? This is national security, it needs to

come first - Alito isn't the priority here.

Besides, if Shrub got impeached with a nominee in front of the court, wouldn't the nominee automatically be withdrawn? That's like buy one, get one free. Oh wait, I'm thinking Ambrohoff.

[kainah]

14. EXACTLY!!!!!

We need to start raising holy hell with the Dems abt forcing Specter to put these hearings ahead of any confirmation hearings for Alito. If * has thumbed his nose at the law, we need to know it before we consider another of his nominees to the Supreme Court. And, remember, there is no rush on confirming a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor. She has promised to stay until her replacement is confirmed and, at this point, if she leaves the court, there are several significant cases already heard this session that might have to be thrown out.

Spying investigation before Alito hearings.

[Independent_Liberal]

3. Watergate hearings on the way?

That's what it smells like to me.

:)

[webtrainer]

6. anybody think the Atty Gen'l is gonna up and quit?

I do . . .

[Inland]

8. More likely he'll get a medal.

Gonzales was chosen because he papers up what the president wanted to do in the first place.

As long as he does that, he'll be AG.

If he had a problem with "sprinking holy water" over Bush's wants (as howard fineman put it) he would never have stuck around this long.

[BR_Parkway]

17. he's liable to get impeached or indicted himself after admitting that they

thought about getting the law changed, but decided that they couldn't get it to pass.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5661134&mesg_id=5661134

[HereSince1628]

7. Actually beginning with constitutional scholars and experts on laws

concerning surveillance would be better. They could suggest the diacritical issues needing resolution regarding whether or not the president can in anyway presume unspecified yet inherent powers.

It seems that the senators are basically in the dark on the issue. Putting up the Gonzales is only a chance to let the hearing be founded on WH mendacity.

[chelsea0011]

9. Go Arlen! Guy's good for a surprise and there.

[DemonFighterLives]

11. MSnbc showed dubby crowing about this

Then they cut to Gonzales rubber stamping and Chertoff. Those 3 clowns would make a great 3 stooges if everything wasn't so serious.
Who stole my country?
Dubby can cram his patriot act up his phony patriot a*s. I hope they get rid of it since it was pushed through without any debate or oversight.
:argh:

[Straight Shooter]

15. But the Fourth Amendment is quaint. *heavy dose of sarcasm*

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.