Cheney lying?: We Asked If We Needed Approval For Wiretapping, Congress Told Us ‘Absolutely Not’.

[babylonsister]

So Cheney is lying? Will anyone call him out on it?

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/22/cheney-wiretap-briefings/

Cheney: We Asked If We Needed Approval For Wiretapping, Congress Told Us ‘Absolutely Not’»

In an interview with Fox News’s Chris Wallace yesterday morning, Vice President Cheney defended the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, and claimed that the congressional leaders briefed on the program wholeheartedly approved. In fact, Cheney claimed, when the White House asked if it needed congressional approval for the program, they unanimously agreed it did not:

CHENEY: We briefed them on the program and what we’d achieved and how it worked and asked them should we continue the program. They were unanimous, Republican and Democrat alike. All agreed: Absolutely essential to continue the program. I then said, Do we need to come to the Congress and get additional legislating authorization to continue what we’re doing? They said absolutely not. Don’t do it.

Watch it at link:

Cheney’s startling claims run directly counter to accounts by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). Rather than asking for congressional input, Pelosi and Rockefeller said in 2005 that Cheney simply informed them of what was going on — and ignored their objections:

PELOSI: The Bush Administration considered these briefings to be notification, not a request for approval. As is my practice whenever I am notified about such intelligence activities, I expressed my strong concerns during these briefings.

ROCKEFELLER: The record needs to be set clear that the Administration never afforded members briefed on the program an opportunity to either approve or disapprove the NSA program.

Other congressional members who attended those briefings have said that they were told only the barest outlines of the program. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Jane Harman (D-CA) said that the White House never disclosed that it was skirting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants. Former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) said the same thing:

The assumption was that if we did that, we would do it pursuant to the law, the law that regulates the surveillance of national security issues. And there was no suggestion that we were going to begin eavesdropping on United States citizens without following the full law. … There was no reference made to the fact that we were going to use that as the subterfuge to begin unwarranted, illegal — and I think unconstitutional — eavesdropping on American citizens.

What’s more, Rockefeller, then vice-chairman of the Intelligence Committee, wrote a hand-written letter to Cheney in 2003 to “reiterate {his} concerns” about the wiretapping program. “I feel unable to fully evaluate, much less endorse these activities,” he wrote.

Cheney claims to have suggested seeking congressional approval right away. However, the White House put up a stiff fight just a few years later, when Congress finally sought to impose oversight of the wiretapping program. The Vice President has already presented misleading infomration about the dates and frequency of these supposed briefings; now he appears to be offering misleading description

[MADem]

1. Cheney, lying? Sky, blue? Snow, cold? Bear, shit in woods? NT

[formercia]

28. Bears shit in the middle of the road.

from my humble experience with Maine bears.

They must have learned that from Congress.

[MADem]

31. .............

:rofl:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MiniMe]

34. Pope shit in woods? Bear Catholic?

or something like that

:hide:

[rateyes]

2. Pelosi, the Constitution gives you the right to approve or disapprove

You just didn't bring it to the Congress because you are a damned coward.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. This is time for the shit to fly.

If Pelosi and the others were not complicit in this decision, as Cheney would like us to believe, now is the time for them to come out with claws bared. All this pretense that they are team players and cooperating with the Bush Administration is coming back to bite them in the ass.

What did they expect? They set themselves up.

[Ghost in the Machine]

4. Lying?? No.. he's bragging... n/t

[acmavm]

5. You got that right. They're right up to their armpits in all of this.

[Individualist]

8. ...and we've known this for a long time.

[acmavm]

12. Yeah, we have. So why are all these people making excuses?

The main one being Cheney is lying?

[Individualist]

18. Loyalists

(my party right or wrong) or DLC supporters? We do have quite a few of those, and they're spinning like tops today.

[acmavm]

22. No shitskis...

Like this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4701769&mesg_id=4701859

[11 Bravo]

6. Cheney's lips moving = Cheney lying.

[Gman]

7. Maybe Bush might not pardon all of them

so they're making up cover stories. But this is no different than anything they've ever said about everything from the invasion to wiretaps to torture.

[slipslidingaway]

9. But why not ask the questions....does this comply with FISA???

"...House Intelligence Committee Chairman Jane Harman (D-CA) said that the White House never disclosed that it was skirting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants...


...Former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) said the same thing:

The assumption was that if we did that, we would do it pursuant to the law,..."

[babylonsister]

17. I had to go looking, but I do remember

Harman complaining, over a year ago it turns out.


Republicans pushed 'bogus' terror threat to expand FISA, lawmaker says

Source: Rawstory

Republicans and the Bush administration used a 'bogus' terror threat that raised specific fears of an attack on the Capitol to scare lawmakers into adopting a dramatic temporary expansion of the government's spy powers last month, a former top intelligence committee Democrat said Wednesday.

Congress agreed to give President Bush and the nation's intelligence agencies extra authority to spy on Americans just hours before lawmakers left for a month-long recess in August. In the legislative session's final week, news emerged of an impending plot by foreign terrorists to attack the US Capitol, and Republicans pointed to the reports as justification to expand the administration's powers.

"That specific intelligence claim, it turned out, was bogus; the intelligence agencies knew that," Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) said at a forum on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act organized by the Center for American Progress in Washington. However, lawmakers did not learn of the claim's unreliability until "the day" they approved the FISA expansion, she said.

Harman was among Congress's "Gang of Eight" in 2002 when she served as ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. The gang was briefed in 2002 on President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program initiated after 9/11 before the New York Times revealed its existence in December 2005. The group comprises the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees plus each party's leader in both parties.

more...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2997754

[slipslidingaway]

24. But that was in 2007, I'm talking about the earlier briefings and

what was referenced in the OP.

Many times when my children say "they did not tell me"... my reply is "Did you ask?"

And the same for ASSume.

When you look at the statements such as "the White House never disclosed that it was skirting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act..."

or

"The assumption was that if we did that, we would do it pursuant to the law,..."

you have to wonder about the people who are supposed to be a check on the executive branch IMO.

We already know that they knew more about the torture program as well and did not speak up.

[lurky]

10. Sadly, I think Cheney is more believable on this.

It's painful to say it. But the opposition of the Dem leadership to this kind of clear violation of our rights has always been tepid and ineffectual. It seems more like lip service designed to shut up their constituents than anything else. The fact that Pelosi, Reid, and Harman (and Obama, for that matter) all supported that horrible Telco Immunity bill in July gives the lie to any claim they make about opposing this policy.

[gratuitous]

11. Actually, it's up to the Judicial branch to rule on legalities

But anyone who thinks that Congress had access to the same information that the administration had is either foolish or deluded. You can bet a dollar to a hole in a donut that Congress saw only what the administration showed them, and that was very carefully culled so that Congress would give the administration the answers they wanted.

But you can bet that for all of Cheney's braggadoccio, nobody in Congress will call him on it. And he knows it. Motherfuckers all. Everyone who signed off on this because they were duped or wanted to believe and doesn't come forward earns a special circle of Hell from me. Bad enough to be swindled; even worse is to stand by silently while the swindler crows about how he fucked us all over.

[mmonk]

13. Semantics on both sides.

If there was widespread disapproval, there would have been concrete steps to stop it and not attacking the critics of the program in public such as Harmon did. Also, a letter of concern to Cheney and only to Cheney was more of a CYA move should it later come up. Otherwise, those concerns would have been made public and debated on the floor. You can debate legalities without violating methods. Also, immunity would not be granted as a stand alone item and votes to continue would not have been voted in the affirmative.

[VP505]

14. So who is lying,

Cheney or the congressional leaders briefed on the program? I suspect that it might be a case of both lying to cover all their asses. What makes me think that, is how quickly and easily congressional leaders folded and worked hard to pass immunizing the Telecoms.

[spanone]

15. cheney has big enough balls to lie straight-faced and if no one calls him on it, shame on them

they are as guilty as the rat-bastard himself

[OwnedByFerrets]

16. I dont think he has ever lied. Not answered, yes.....but you have

to worry about consequences to feel the need to lie. He has no fear of jail time or prosecution. He knows too damn much. He knows where the skeletons are buried.

[mmonk]

21. Iraq and WMD's was explicit lying. Especially given the intelligence manipulation.

Nearly all of them lie, really.

[OwnedByFerrets]

27. Did HE ever explicity say they did? I cant remember.

I thought it was others. I could be wrong.

The main point of what I was trying to imply, however, was that he doesnt worry about prosecution.

[mmonk]

29. I'm one of those that have DVD's full of their lies as well

a drawer file. There was also the "threat of mass death", being able to lauch an attack on us in 45 minites, training al Queda terrorists, mushroom clouds, planes and gliders to deliver biological agents to our cities (even though Iraq had no air force, navy, or missile capacity to do so), etc., etc. It's both funny and sad to watch these DVD's.

[gkhouston]

19. Senator Leahy, I believe that was your cue. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. The "duh, we didn't know" defense again?

Were their lips taped shut? They couldn't ask obvious questions?

"We assumed.." Just like the "good Germans" assumed.

At best, it illustrates incompetence. At worst, collaboration.

[slipslidingaway]

25. My thoughts as well n/t

[ThomWV]

23. And we culd have Impeached them both anytime we wanted after 2006. What happened?

[Independent_Liberal]

26. We can still do it after they're out of office.

It's never too late for impeachment.

[ThomWV]

30. Once the Pardons are given what do I care about Impeachment?

[Independent_Liberal]

32. Pardons don't apply in cases of impeachment.

It's also an impeachable offense to pardon people involved in a crime you authorized. Whether you favor it or not, there's those who are still going to keep fighting for it long after the regime is gone if necessary.

[MiniMe]

33. He is trying to rewrite history. It's hard work.