Advertisement

Archive for Friday, January 27, 2006

Roberts criticizes Democrats over surveillance issue

January 27, 2006

Advertisement

Fresh off Monday's appearance with President Bush to defend the warrantless wiretapping program, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts is battling Democrats over the issue.

Roberts, R-Kan., said this week that his Senate Intelligence Committee would discuss the program, but he accused Democrats of playing politics with the issue.

"I think we can all agree that intelligence issues, especially in the middle of a war, should not be used as fodder for political advantage," he said in a letter Wednesday to Democrats who had called for aggressive investigation of the program.

But Democratic members of the committee complained that Roberts had done little to satisfy their concerns.

"To date, our committee has not announced its intention to thoroughly investigate the program," they said in a Tuesday letter signed by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and the six other Democrats on the committee.

The New York Times in December disclosed that the National Security Agency, under the authorization of President Bush, had been eavesdropping on communications between U.S. citizens and people outside the country - while bypassing a secret federal court set up in 1978 to monitor and approve federal wiretaps.

Critics say Bush broke the law with the program. But the president defended the program Monday during his appearance at Kansas State University - with Roberts onstage with him - and again Thursday during a news conference at the White House.

"The program's legal, it's designed to protect civil liberties and it's necessary," Bush said Thursday.

While Roberts has expressed support for the president's position, fellow Kansas Republican Sen. Sam Brownback has expressed skepticism. Brownback serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will begin hearings on the matter Feb. 6.

And Democrats remain critical.

"We believe : the significance of this intelligence collection program and the controversy it has engendered requires our committee to take action," committee Democrats said in Tuesday's letter.

Roberts, in his letter, said the committee would be briefed on the issue Feb. 16 by the Department of Justice.

He warned Democrats not to politicize the issue.

"Doing so," he wrote, "is unnecessary, unwise and potentially dangerous."

Comments

wendt 8 years, 2 months ago

Jamesaust:

Unfortunately, I think you're right.

I sincerely thought the Valerie Plame scandal would be the push over the edge of the cliff. I thought both sides of the aisle would see the utility in punishing treason. Now it's out of the news cycle and a non-issue.

Right now, we are trading hostages for hostages to get Jill Carroll back. Like arms for hostages in the Reagan administration, it's a bad move, especially when it appeared that her abduction was one of the few events with a united call for release from both Western and Islamic parties.

0

Jamesaust 8 years, 2 months ago

"What do you think the response will be when the US Iraq War death toll exceeds that of 9/11?"

I don't believe that it will be much at all.

Wake up? I suppose that depends on what (supposedly) they are being waken up to.

0

wendt 8 years, 2 months ago

Jamesaust:

What do you think the response will be when the US Iraq War death toll exceeds that of 9/11???

Will it be a wake up call??

What constitutes a wake up call for this American population?

===

Off to work. Back later.

0

Jamesaust 8 years, 2 months ago

"I think we can all agree that intelligence issues, especially in the middle of a war, should not be used as fodder for political advantage."

Of course, this war is infinite in length and will soon pass World War II in longevity. (A recent poll found the majority of Americans agreeing that Bin Laden was more likely to die of kidney failure than from an American's bullet.)

And, of course, no one - Republican or Democrat - has used the issue for political advantage up to this point (as long as you don't equate getting elected to "political advantage.")

0

Ragingbear 8 years, 2 months ago

What I loved yesterday was the question about Bush's pictures with Abramahoff. Or however you spell it. He said "Those pictures are not pertinent to the investigation."

That is not for him to decide. That is for the ethics review committee to decide, which is open for public viewing. Get rid of the corruption, or we are going to see America fall.

0

wendt 8 years, 2 months ago

Roberts knows that there are oversights set up to monitor warrant-deficient "secret" wiretaps and Roberts is also well aware that the Bush Administration is blowing that oversight off.

That makes his comment that protest over the illegal wiretaps as "just politics" both disingenuous and anti-American.

Yes, I said "Anti-American". Flag waving bald Republicans can do things that contradict the Constitution and the Laws of this Country.

===

BTW, Nixon was gone by this point, after doing similar illegalities, of his administration.

And he was the Captain of his Ship.

===

Ve vill march on a road of bones.........

0

even_money 8 years, 2 months ago

"...Roberts has expressed support for the president's position..."

As Yago the parrot exclaimed in Aladdin, "Why am I not surprised?!"

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.