released, on a Friday night....silence from the Media

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/d...ortPSP.pdf

Andy McCarthy, prosecutor of the blind sheik and author of "Willful Blindness" summarizes it here:

Quote:Had [President Bush's Warrantless Surveillance Program" been in place before the [9/11] attacks, hijackers Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi almost certainly would have been identified and located." [Andy McCarthy]

Another Friday night, another dump by the Obama administration of a report underscoring the vital importance of President Bush's post-9/11 national security tactics.

The above quote about Midhar and Hazmi and is from Gen. Michael Hayden, the former CIA director who was director of the NSA when that agency ran Bush's "Terrorist Surveillance Program." It is a bombshell mentioned in passing on page 31 of the 38-page report filed by five executive branch inspectors general (from DOJ, DOD, CIA, NSA, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence) pursuant to Congress's 2008 overhaul of FISA (the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act).

I'll have more to say about the report this week, but it also contains some other interesting facts that the folks who drop these reports late on summer Fridays would rather you didn't linger over. For example:

* Alberto Gonzales did not attempt to mislead Congress in 2007 when he testified that the controversy that erupted at the Justice Department in 2004 was not over what was popularly known as the "terrorist surveillance program" (i.e., the NSA's warrantless surveillance program to intercept suspected terrorist communications that crossed U.S. borders — the effort the Left smeared as "domestic spying"). In fact, as Gonzales told the Senate judiciary Committee, the controversy was about other intelligence activities.

* When congressional Democrats rolled their eyes, suggested that Gonzales was lying, and groused that a special prosecutor should be appointed, they well knew he wasn't lying — but they also knew he couldn't discuss the intellligence activities at the center of the controversy because those activities were (and remain) highly classified. That is, they knowingly badgered the Attorney General of the United States at a hearing in a calculated effort to make him look dishonest and to intimate something they knew to be untrue: namely, that the dispute at DOJ arose because senior officials believed warrantless surveillance was illegal.

* Before Gonzales and President Bush's then chief-of-staff, Andy Card, went to see Attorney General Ashcroft in the hospital (where he was being treated for pancreatitis), President Bush directed his administration to meet with top congressional Democrats and Republicans (Senate leaders Frist and Daschle, Speaker Hastert and House minority leader Pelosi, Roberts and Rockefeller from Senate Intel, and Goss and Harman from House Intel) to alert them that Ashcroft's deputy, Jim Comey, had refused to sign off on intelligence activities that Ashcroft had previously approved. Advised of the problem, the Gang of Eight did not agree to a quick legislative fix but, according to Gonzales's contemporaneous notes, agreed that the intelligence activities should continue. (Three years later, after Gonzales's testimony, Pelosi, Rockefeller and Daschle claimed that they hadn't agreed.)

* Only after this meeting with the bipartisan congressional leaders, and with the prior 45-day authorization for all the program's activities about to expire, did Gonzales and Card go to the hospital to visit the ailing Ashcroft — at the direction of President Bush.

* Between the time the time the collection intelligence activities that came to be known as the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" was first authorized after the 9/11 attacks until the warrantless surveillance aspect of the program was exposed by the New York Times in December 2005, the Bush administration briefed the bipartisan leadership of the congressional intelligence committees 17 times about the activities involved in the program.

In sum, congressional Democrats knew about the program and knew that the dissent of the Justice Department's senior leadership in 2004 was not about warrantless surveillance. They knew that if they postured that the dissent was about warrantless surveillance, Gonzales — not an adept communicator — would not be able to rebut them in a public hearing because the details of the dispute were classified. Congressional Democrats also knew that President Bush agreed to make changes in the program in March 2004 to assuage DOJ's concerns, and they knew that the program activities continued thereafter for a year-and-a-half (i.e., until the Times blew part of the program) without incident and with bipartisan congressional leadership continuing to be briefed.

The politicizing of the nation's security that went on here was shameful.

been saying that Bold part for years now...


oh yeah, Nancy Pelosi is a Liar

This is where I jump in and say "have I mentioned lately Pelosi is a LIAR?"

Quote:The politicizing of the nation's security that went on here was shameful.

It's worse than shameful, it's criminal and, in some cases, is borderline treason.

Yeah, I agree guy's. Bush lying about going to Aschcroft in the hospital. Cheney directing Hayden to keep things away from the gang of 8. Inserting your own things in a NIE. Then citing that as a reason to expand servaliance powers. I hope we get to the bottom of all of this politicizing of our nation's security. It looks like Holder will start an investigation soon. I know you guys want to get to the bottom of it to.

Looks like the drinking is affecting you reading abilities again.

(07-11-2009 08:13 PM)Paul M Wrote:  This is where I jump in and say "have I mentioned lately Pelosi is a LIAR?"

THis is where I jump in and say "have I mentioned that the Republican party is getting really desperate to save Bush's legacy(not to mention the entire party)".

(07-12-2009 12:56 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-11-2009 08:13 PM)Paul M Wrote:  This is where I jump in and say "have I mentioned lately Pelosi is a LIAR?"

THis is where I jump in and say "have I mentioned that the Republican party is getting really desperate to save Bush's legacy(not to mention the entire party)".

The Republicans could give Two Sh'ts about a Bush Legacy, they just need to win some Mid-Terms and STOP this Madness that is going on by this Fruitcake and his More Fruity Minion Congress.

This has to be stopped or we are done so cooked, that we simply disappear in a puff of smoke.

The "Tax & Spend" Stupidity and Foolishness MUST BE STOPPED and that is what the Conservatives are wanting to do ... not save some Ex-POTUS's Legacy.

.

Yes, the silence from the MSM has been deafening.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/...=hpmostpop

Quote:The report concluded the program was built on a "factually flawed" legal analysis inappropriately provided by a single Justice Department official, John Yoo, in 2001. Yoo did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment, and he was not interviewed for the report.

A 2004 review by the Justice Department triggered a dramatic confrontation in 2004 between White House and Justice officials who concluded the program would not pass legal muster. Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, who took part in that face-off, told investigators that the program's original authorization "involved ignoring an act of Congress, and doing so without full congressional notification."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31852177/ns/politics/

Quote:Many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap in intelligence. Others, including FBI, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center analysts, said intelligence gathered by traditional means was often more specific and timely, according to the report.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8052894

Quote:Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

What sweet vindication for Bush.

(07-12-2009 11:24 AM)jh Wrote:  Yes, the silence from the MSM has been deafening.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/...=hpmostpop

Quote:The report concluded the program was built on a "factually flawed" legal analysis inappropriately provided by a single Justice Department official, John Yoo, in 2001. Yoo did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment, and he was not interviewed for the report.

A 2004 review by the Justice Department triggered a dramatic confrontation in 2004 between White House and Justice officials who concluded the program would not pass legal muster. Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, who took part in that face-off, told investigators that the program's original authorization "involved ignoring an act of Congress, and doing so without full congressional notification."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31852177/ns/politics/

Quote:Many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap in intelligence. Others, including FBI, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center analysts, said intelligence gathered by traditional means was often more specific and timely, according to the report.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8052894

Quote:Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

What sweet vindication for Bush.

What does defending the man and his team on "Legal Issues" have to do with his Legacy ????

I am sick of POTUS's Legacies, they were NOT "HIRED" to build Legacies, they were "HIRED" to Uphold the Constitution of United States and Abide by the Oath they Took.

People can't Eat, Medicate, Pay Necessary Bills with POTUS Legacies.

If the man is going to have to Make a Day for His Trial, then why would you not think his Supporters would NOT be out front defending him ????

Lib's Defend every Fart Obama makes, so "Touché".

.

(07-12-2009 11:51 AM)Tripster Wrote:  

(07-12-2009 11:24 AM)jh Wrote:  Yes, the silence from the MSM has been deafening.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/...=hpmostpop

Quote:The report concluded the program was built on a "factually flawed" legal analysis inappropriately provided by a single Justice Department official, John Yoo, in 2001. Yoo did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment, and he was not interviewed for the report.

A 2004 review by the Justice Department triggered a dramatic confrontation in 2004 between White House and Justice officials who concluded the program would not pass legal muster. Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, who took part in that face-off, told investigators that the program's original authorization "involved ignoring an act of Congress, and doing so without full congressional notification."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31852177/ns/politics/

Quote:Many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap in intelligence. Others, including FBI, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center analysts, said intelligence gathered by traditional means was often more specific and timely, according to the report.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8052894

Quote:Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

What sweet vindication for Bush.

What does defending the man and his team on "Legal Issues" have to do with his Legacy ????

I am sick of POTUS's Legacies, they were NOT "HIRED" to build Legacies, they were "HIRED" to Uphold the Constitution of United States and Abide by the Oath they Took.

People can't Eat, Medicate, Pay Necessary Bills with POTUS Legacies.

If the man is going to have to Make a Day for His Trial, then why would you not think his Supporters would NOT be out front defending him ????

Lib's Defend every Fart Obama makes, so "Touché".

.

I think you should tell Bush and "The Dick" that legacies aren't important.

There is such a disconnect between us. The right needs to expand their knowledge base. Something besides the GOP propaganda machine Fox News

(07-12-2009 02:49 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There is such a disconnect between us. The right needs to expand their knowledge base. Something besides the GOP propaganda machine Fox News

Come on Mach, the MSM loves higher taxes and thinks all white people are either racists or should apologize for their racist forefathers. Fox is the only straight shooter on the tube...they weren't the ones who concocted Memogate, or trashed Joe The Plumber, or are blindly in love with Ward Churchill.

uh, the first link is a report from the Obama Administration, vindicating Bush on all those things and showing they were complete liars on all those.

now they come out with a story the MSM is trying to parrot to divert from it.

not hard to follow here.

(07-12-2009 07:56 PM)GGniner Wrote:  uh, the first link is a report from the Obama Administration, vindicating Bush on all those things and showing they were complete liars on all those.

now they come out with a story the MSM is trying to parrot to divert from it.

not hard to follow here.

You should be running out of tin foil.

(07-11-2009 09:44 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Yeah, I agree guy's. Bush lying about going to Aschcroft in the hospital. Cheney directing Hayden to keep things away from the gang of 8. Inserting your own things in a NIE. Then citing that as a reason to expand servaliance powers. I hope we get to the bottom of all of this politicizing of our nation's security. It looks like Holder will start an investigation soon. I know you guys want to get to the bottom of it to.

Politicizing security like....

Connecting 9/11 to Iraq, said numerous times by both Bush and Cheney and conservatives bought it hook, line and sinker. Where are those WMD's?

Patriot ACT, what fools conservatives must be. I thought they were against government interference, but only when it fits their purposes.

Budget cuts to military, yeah when the majority of the spending goes to the military, yet you blame the social program.

Just keep on doing what you are doing Republicans/conservatives support Bush. It will keep you in the wilderness longer.

BUSH ISN'T IN OFFICE ANY LONGER!!! Jeez!

(07-12-2009 08:01 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-12-2009 07:56 PM)GGniner Wrote:  uh, the first link is a report from the Obama Administration, vindicating Bush on all those things and showing they were complete liars on all those.

now they come out with a story the MSM is trying to parrot to divert from it.

not hard to follow here.

You should be running out of tin foil.

Your wasting your time GG. As evidenced by Rob, some of our members just can't comprehend the written word.

(07-12-2009 08:36 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-12-2009 08:01 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-12-2009 07:56 PM)GGniner Wrote:  uh, the first link is a report from the Obama Administration, vindicating Bush on all those things and showing they were complete liars on all those.

now they come out with a story the MSM is trying to parrot to divert from it.

not hard to follow here.

You should be running out of tin foil.

Your wasting your time GG. As evidenced by Rob, some of our members just can't comprehend the written word.

How can one comprehend bull****?

Robert, IT'S FROM OBAMA! You just keep proving my point.

Ohhhhhhh I get it. Reality has a liberal bias.....................