Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy Program

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee expressed skepticism Sunday over  President Bush's domestic eavesdropping program, joining a chorus of Republicans and Democrats who are questioning its legal justification.

Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., who will hold hearings next month on the decision to allow the National Security Agency program without court approval, said he has told Bush administration officials that he believes they are on shaky legal ground.

Bush has pointed to a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism as allowing him to order the program. The program authorized eavesdropping of international phone calls and e-mails of people deemed a terror risk.

"I thought they were wrong," Specter said on ABC's "This Week." "There still may be different collateral powers under wartime situations. That is a knotty question."

A number of members of Specter's committee, including GOP Sen. Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) of Kansas, have expressed doubt about the administration's legal basis. The hearings, planned for early February, will feature Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Specter, speaking in general terms, noted that impeachment and criminal prosecution are possibilities in the event a president acted unconstitutionally.

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

When Republicans start using the "I" word, Shrub better stand up and take notice!

Yahoo! News with information from this morning's This Week with George Stephanopolus
Just to show you how biased the MSM is against going into the Impeachment mode, Specter also said that, impeachment or not, "the president will have to pay a serious price" for his activities.  Short of impeachment, I don't know what that could be.  Additionally, whatever price is exacted, Cheney has to pay an equal part of the bill.

Amazing, however, that Yahoo/AP failed to mention the additional- and ascerbically critical- Specter comments.  My guess?  It's payback time: Bush tried to have Frist remove Specter as Judiciary Committee Chair last year.  Specter has been supportivly unsupportive of Frist since, and now he can crucify Shrub if he wants to- and I think he wants to.  He is aware of the Senate's equality in the checks and balance of our government, and he understands that usurpation by the executive is not acceptable.  "Even though we're from the same party," he said, "I don't think this president can support the legal basis for his actions." 

  Sunday, January 15, 2006
Specter and the "I" word

Specter and the "I" word

It looks like Arlen has joined the ranks of some Americans when he said today on This Week:
George: You know if the President did break the law or circumvent the law, what's the remedy?

Specter: Well, the remedy could be a variety of things. A president - and I'm not suggesting remotely that there's any basis, but you’re asking, really, theory, what's the remedy? Impeachment is a remedy. After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution, but the principal remedy, George, under our society is to pay a political price.

(Video links on the blogpage)

Think Progress:  "The non-partisan Congressional Research Service concluded "that the administration’s justification for the warrantless eavesdropping authorized by President Bush conflicts with existing law and hinges on weak legal arguments."

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

I heard him say that. He's dreaming if he really believes no one doubts the President was making a good faith effort. I'm a doubter and I'm one of many. It's not so much what he did as how he did it. He doesn't think he has to answer to anyone. He is above the law. He can do anything he wants, anytime he wants, anyhow he wants. That's a dangerous presidence.

Recognize this: China is now in the hands of the major corporations; they are a fascist nation now.  Fascism is more efficient than democracy because it doesn't have to anwser to any power other than itself.  The only way Grover Norquist and the other K Street fascists running our government feel we can compete with China is if our government doesn't have to answer to anyone but itself.

Catch the latest news in the auto industry? Once the Chinese get their cars to meet our safety and emissions standards, they will be selling them here in the US for ~$10k. Dealerships will be severely limited to one per geographic selling area. Watch people kill themselves to A: get a cheap car and B: get the dealerships C: put the final nail in the US auto industry.