President Bush holds up a copy of the Quiet Revolution Report, produced by the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, Monday, Feb. 25, 2008, as he addressed the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Bush Lobbies Again for Surveillance Law

BEN FELLER | February 25, 2008 05:46 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

WASHINGTON — President Bush on Monday lobbied again for an intelligence law allowing government eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails, as the tone of the dispute between the White House and Congress over terrorist surveillance grew increasingly sharp.

"To put it bluntly, if the enemy is calling into America, we really need to know what they're saying, and we need to know what they're thinking, and we need to know who they're talking to," Bush said at the start of his annual meeting with the nation's governors at the White House.

"This is a different kind of struggle than we've ever faced before. It's essential that we understand the mentality of these killers," Bush said.

The law in question targets foreign terrorist threats and allows eavesdropping on communications involving people in the U.S., so long as those people are not the intended focus or target of the surveillance. The latest version of the legislation expired on Feb. 16, and the rules reverted to those outlined in the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Bush and Congress are at odds over whether to give legal immunity to companies that in the past helped the government spy on customers without court warrants.

Bush wants the House to act on legislation the Senate has passed. That bill provides retroactive protection for telecommunications companies that wiretapped U.S. phone and computer lines at the government's request after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, without court permission.

The House version does not provide such immunity.

"Our government told them that their participation was necessary," Bush said. "And it was, and it still is, and that what we had asked them to do was legal. And now they're getting sued for billions of dollars. And it's not fair."

The president's pitch was the latest installment in a long and increasingly sharply-worded debate between Bush and congressional Democrats.

Democrats, in an op-ed piece Monday in The Washington Post, accused Bush of resorting to "scare tactics and political games."

"It is clear that he and his Republican allies, desperate to distract attention from the economy and other policy failures, are trying to use this issue to scare the American people into believing that congressional Democrats have left America vulnerable to terrorist attack," said the article.

The piece was signed by Democratic Sens. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee; Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee; Democratic Reps. Silvestre Reyes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee; and John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

White House press secretary Dana Perino responded to their op-ed with her own statement. Perino said that Bush is not using scare tactics, but rather repeating the concerns of the intelligence community about the risks to the nation. "Unless this threat is taken more seriously in Congress, the ability to obtain the intelligence we need will be at risk, and with it our national security," Perino said.

Later, speaking to reporters, Perino said the Democrats' use of the phrase "scare tactics" must "be like one of their favorite words _ it must poll very well, because they use it almost every time. What we have done is state facts."

The Justice Department and Office of National Intelligence said Saturday that telecommunication companies are now complying with existing surveillance warrants. The agencies also said that new surveillance activities under existing warrants will resume "for now," but that the delay "impaired our ability to cover foreign intelligence targets, which resulted in missed intelligence information."

Bush says flatly that telecommunications companies won't help the government if they don't have protection from lawsuits, and that he will not compromise with Democrats on that point.


 
Comments
306
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total)

bush is past impeachment. It is off the table now, because it is an inadequate punishment.
Impeachment is a mild repute, except as it was originally applied in merry old England.
Back when, impeachment ment being called before the lords...facing the corporate accusers, then being beheaded and having your cranium impaled on a post for a lesson.

This kind of impeachment for bush I would support.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 02/26/2008

Bush can't be trusted, he lies and he says he lied ( Rumsfeld) remember but that was a lite lie. He has betrayed our trust since day one. It's been proven that he had already had plans to invade Iraq just needed an excuse and he used 9/11 like Iraq had something to do with that. I want him Impeached before he starts a conflict with Iran, he already says he has the power to do it without consent from Congress. Impeach, Impeach, Impeach to save our country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 AM on 02/26/2008

Dear Bush,

Following are two words that you can eavesdrop on. You can use them in any order.

1. You
2. Fuck

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:47 AM on 02/26/2008

My concern, and many others as well, is that, while Bush says the program only targets suspected terrorists, we have statements from AT&T engineers and others that the program sweeps up ALL communications and emails within the USA, and that it was begun less than 2 months after Bush was sworn in, 6 months before 9/11/01. So, clearly the justifications touted by the administration seem to be unclear or downright lies. It seems that if they are sucessful in getting immunity for the telecoms, we will never find out the truth, and the guilty, including Bush, will never be punished. If these programs began in Feb.'01, as is alleged, and if they sweep up all communications and are not specifically targeted at suspected terrorists, they are clearly illegal. I would bet that Kerry and his campaign were targeted. We know that attorneys for prisoners at Guantanamo had calls tapped in violation of attorney-client privilege. That is disturbing enough but the thought of Bush, Rove & Cheney tapping those they consider enemies, a la Nixon is truly disturbing as that was what the original FISA bill was supposed to stop. We need to know the truth. No immunity for telecoms or Bush.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:35 AM on 02/26/2008

He had his chance to stop a terrorist attack and screwed it up royally like he always does. Because Osama didn't give them a time and a date they ignored the warning. So, now I don't have a gram a sympathy for him. If he wants to listen to me and my sister bashing him regularly I could care less. The biggest thing that bothers me is it's not that difficult to get a warrant. It's done every day of the week. But, he is to f...... egotistical and lazy to do it that way. All he has to do is obey the law and there wouldn't be any problem! I think terrorism is a threat. But, he and his fascist buddies are a far bigger one! American's need to wake up to the enemy that is running this country!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:59 AM on 02/26/2008

Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God.
Benjamin Franklin

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:11 AM on 02/26/2008

Dear Bush,

Your the freaking president moron. The government can't endorse violations of peoples privacy or Torture?! But what our intelligence agencies do behind closed doors... Don't ask, Don't Tell and don't get caught. It's not like you need it to convict people in court, you need it to defend the country, and for that people don't need to know where it comes from.
Ask your dad to clue you in, I am sure he knows all about it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 AM on 02/26/2008

the facists always have reasons for what they do:

10 easy steps:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 AM on 02/26/2008

Bush: "[the phone companies] are getting sued for billions of dollars, and it's not fair."

Hey Bush, you dumbfuck, they can read the 4th Amendment as easily as me and you. Qwest said "No, not without a warrant." So should the rest of them. If they are "being sued for billions of dollars", it's because they violated the Constitution, just like you.

There is a rope waiting for you Mr. Bush. But even for you, it will only come after a fair trial. Luckily for you, I won't be one of your 12 "peers".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:48 AM on 02/26/2008

You are so right, Qwest said no and got punished for it; now it is time to punish those who would break the law just because the President who wants to be King said it was OK for them to do it, they have and had a fleet of lawyers that could of told them that it was illegal and I'm pretty sure they did tell them what they were getting into if it ever got out and I'm pretty sure that this President told them not to worry he had their backs, that he could by fear make everyone understand that we need to lose our constitutional right to be safe. I've think this has happen before in history and it doesn't get better when we cowl in fear and give in to those who break our laws.
Investigate
trial
Impeach

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 AM on 02/26/2008

Hey Bush, let's see some of YOUR emails, before we let you rummage through that of law-abiding American citizens.
This atrocity of a President has ten million missing emails that are linked to a criminal investigation- and he wants carte blanche to circumvent the Fourth Amendment to look at all of yours?
No doubt, he wants immunity for the telecoms because the telecoms' lawyers informed him that his warrantless probes are unjustifiable under American law, no matter how loosely construed, and there is always the chance that Congress or the next (Dem) President might have an interest in following the law.
We can only hope....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 AM on 02/26/2008
- jubo I'm a Fan of jubo permalink
photo

Again, 'A people willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither'. Ben Franklin.

But this is about neither. Think this will interest some business 'people'?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 AM on 02/26/2008

I agree. We should be able to tap and listen in on anybody. I'd like to start by listening in on Bushes calls. It could be a matter of national security! Then let's listen in on Cheney - he might be a terrorist. Then Mukasey - let's protect the constitution - he might be a danger to this country, since he thinks it is ok to torture folks. If we hear anything we don't like, let's waterboard them. I'll make the popcorn.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:23 AM on 02/26/2008

Well, nothing like a bit of humor aka lies when such a serious idea is discussed. However, I must remind everyone that Mr. Bush is just in another blabbing mode. There is no suspension of listening that is necessary, The old, old FISA act from years ago authorizes the spooks to listen in to conversations from terrorist suspects overseas. THEY JUST NEED TO GET A WARRANT. Of course, obedience of the law has NEVER been a strong suit of GW, ya know.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 AM on 02/26/2008

I have no problem with wire tapping as long as there is a court order so there is a paper trail to insure the right people are being tapped.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:22 AM on 02/26/2008

It is the responsibility of the Administration and the Congress to protect the American people. If the Administration believes, and demonstrates to the Congress and the rest of us Americans, that it is necessary to "eavesdrop" on, or otherwise monitor, certain communications of Americans to keep us reasonably safe from genuine threats from genuine terrorists, then it must be able to do so.

Having said that, it is extremely important to establish, conclusively, that any Administration (and, especially, this Administration) must be limited to accessing only those categories of communications where they have demonstrated, to Congress, the existence of that legitimate national security need.

Further, and just as important, the Administration should ALWAYS have to justify, under the law, a legitimate need for such access IN EACH CASE, either before that access or within a reasonable period of time thereafter. That justification must ALWAYS have to be accomplished through the judicial system, as established by Congress, and there must always be serious criminal penalty for the government's failure to comply with lawful requirements.

Where the Administration is deceiving the American people and, in the process, shredding the Constitution, is its shameful and illegal disregard of already establshed law allowing the monitoring of such communications and, further, by telling the American people that they can't do the job without being left alone, to act as they choose, without that court supervision. To suggest that they cannot get the job done under existing or easily modified law is, quite simply, a lie.

To simply give the government - ANY government, but especially THIS one - free rein (or reign) in such matters, without constant oversight by the courts is, my fellow Americans, a recipe for disaster, as any informed citizen should easily appreciate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 AM on 02/26/2008



What a show... nineteen fanatics, worked by a brain trust of ten, maybe twenty well-funded extremists at MOST, and this brain-dead basket case has turned them into a global jihad in just a few years.

There were ALWAYS people in this world who didn't like us (some, for good reason). There always WILL be. That's why they invented screens... to keep out the flies.

Border security? Nada.

Port security? Nyet.

Not your run-of-the-mill asshole, this war criminal. No, THIS one's special.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 AM on 02/26/2008

Bush and those with him HAVE to eavesdrop in order to find out WHO is saying WHAT about Bush and his cronies. That's what this is about. Don't let's kid ourselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 AM on 02/26/2008

The article could have mentioned that Bush can wiretap anyone right now by simply getting a warrant - a minimal requirement to protect Americans' rights. If Ben Feller had an independently thinking brain cell left, he'd see this as a noteworthy piece of context. But he's too busy jotting down every word coming from Bush & Perino. Just another White House stenographer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 02/26/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect