Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why did Bush flip-flop about his spying on Americans? Don't want a Dem prez with these powers maybe?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 03:59 PM
Original message
Why did Bush flip-flop about his spying on Americans? Don't want a Dem prez with these powers maybe?
http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/215559,CST-NWS-dom18.article

Bush does about-face, lets court OK domestic spying

January 18, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration changed course and agreed Wednesday to let a secret but independent panel of federal judges oversee the government's controversial domestic spying program.

Officials say the secret court has already approved one request for monitoring.

The shift will likely end a court fight over whether the warrantless surveillance program was legal.

The program, which was secretly authorized by President Bush shortly after Sept. 11, was disclosed a little over a year ago, resulting in widespread criticism from lawmakers and civil libertarians who questioned its legality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. It is not a flip flop. Basically this change gives the spying a free pass
The secret court has already told Bush "go out and spy anytime you wish".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jelly Donating Member (312 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Except we can't confirm that b/c the Secret Order from the Secret Court
is so secret that the public is not even allowed to know whether the FISA order authorizes surveillance against individuals, groups of individuals, or entire "programs."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Yet another phantom
Edited on Fri Jan-19-07 04:25 PM by RufusTFirefly
I think Robbien is right.

Bush's "flip-flop" is a bit like his recent "apology." Both are phantoms that have been relentlessly reported as reality by the MSM. Pay close attention to what Torture Boy told the Senate about it. He described the Administration's proposal to the FISA judge as "creative." What probably happened is that Gonzales and Co. finally succeeded in obtaining a "one-size-fits-all" subpoena that enables them to conduct widespread wiretaps on the basis of a single approval instead of having to return to the FISA Court for each individual case. Note also that the judge is quite willing to release the text of her decision to the public but that Gonzo isn't keen on that. Why not? Perhaps because it would reveal what I (and many others) have just surmised.

UPON EDIT: What Buzz Clik said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Who's betting that most if not all of the docs will be blacked out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. spy vs spy
I thought it was because the Dems now have subpenis power in Congress and they could bring
him down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. The admin wants us to believe this lie along with all their other lies.
But Representative Heather A. Wilson, Republican of New Mexico, who serves on the Intelligence committee, disputed that, and some Congressional aides said staff members were briefed Friday without lawmakers present.

Ms. Wilson, who has scrutinized the program for the last year, said she believed the new approach relied on a blanket, “programmatic” approval of the president’s surveillance program, rather than approval of individual warrants.

Administration officials “have convinced a single judge in a secret session, in a nonadversarial session, to issue a court order to cover the president’s terrorism surveillance program,” Ms. Wilson said in a telephone interview. She said Congress needed to investigate further to determine how the program is run.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/washington/18intel.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin">NY Times


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC