Interesting how FBI Director Robert Mueller chose to blame his management and agency rather than the USA Patriot Act in Senate testimony Tuesday about the FBI’s shocking misuse of the authority to gather phone, e-mail and financial records on Americans without a warrant. “The statute did not cause the errors. The FBI’s implementation did,” Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee. Still, in light of the abuses, the new Congress needs to ensure that the Patriot Act’s far-reaching tools are necessary.
Some of Tuesday’s talk did seem premature: The suggestion from Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., that the FBI’s spying powers might be better trusted in the hands of a new agency. Surely new bureaucracy isn’t the answer.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
10 Comments
This is what Congressional Oversight was intended to be.
As far as a new agency, I don’t think so.
I don’t see how a new agency would help anything. If we can’t trust one with that power, why would we trust another?
And Specter proposing a new agency – I thought Republicans were all about limiting the powers of the government and keeping it small?
Brian you think wrong, Republicans have never reduced the size of goverment.
This is both on topic and not. There was conjecture earlier in the week about the prez and AG trying to use the Patriot act to circumvent due process. This article puts the lie to this. This witch hunt should be stopped now. Brian and Dingus I am sure you would support this since you have expressed a desire for smaller government.
“Federal prosecutors and ‘the president’s pleasure’
Sampson, who quit earlier this month amid the furor, disputed Democratic charges that the firings were a purge by intimidation and a warning to the remaining prosecutors to fall in line.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, offered Sampson some support, saying he had seen no evidence that the dismissals were “designed to impede or actually did impede a criminal investigation or prosecution.”
Sampson testified that federal prosecutors serve at the president’s pleasure and are judged in large part on whether they pursue or resist administration policy.
Sampson acknowledged that at one point he had advocated using a new provision in the Patriot Act to get around Senate confirmation of new federal prosecutors, but said Gonzales rejected the suggestion.
“He thought it was a bad idea and he was right,” Sampson said.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17852146/
I thought this topic was on the FBI spying on americans? Then again leave it to a “right winger” to divert attention from the issue at hand…..right KSGRM?
ksgrm,
As long as you’ve brought this up here…
Given the multiple, contradictory and ever shifting dismissals and excuses we’ve heard on this issue, I wouldn’t put much faith in anything Sampson, Gonzales and the rest of the bunch say at this point.
With regard to that Patriot Act provision intended to circumvent the normal Senate approval process for US Attorney appointments, just ponder this coincidence for a moment: Brett Tolman, the Congressional staffer for Arlen Spector, was the guy who actually slipped the provision into the Patriot Act. Tolman was subsequently given a promotion. Just guess what his new job is. Just guess.
Meet Brett Tolman, US Attorney for the District of Utah: http://hatch.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=1623&Month=7&Year=2006
Another AMAZING coincidence: Tolman’s main competition for that post was one Kyle Sampson. http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/03/prepare_to_withstand_political.html
President Bush picked Tolman for some reason.
And one more nearly unbelievable coincidenc: All eight fired US Attorney’s were from states that figure to be key to the 2008 election.
“And one more nearly unbelievable coincidenc: All eight fired US Attorney’s were from states that figure to be key to the 2008 election.”
More from the Tin Foil Hat DemocratUndergroundSalon Crowd
Fleetwood,
everything in my post above is an obvious fact for which I’ve provided sourcing.
Yesterday GSA administrator Lurita Doan testified in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee about a purely partisan political presentation one of Karl Roves deputies gave to to the GSA leadership following the 2006 elections. The powerpoint presentation covered the upcoming 2008 election in detail including Top 20 lists of Republican seats to defend and Democratic seats to attack. After the presentation Doan asked her subordinates what they thought they could do to help “our candidates.” That’s a CLEAR violation of the Hatch Act.
Every day it becomes more and more obvious that this Administration is running the US Federal Government like nothing more than an extension of the Republican National Committee. If these things were happening under a Democratic Administration you’d be foaming at the mouth right now.
Condor, Condor, Condor you really need to pick your news outlets better. Those leftwing rags you read are certainly different than the hearings going on right now before Leaky Leahy. I’m sure after Sampsons appearance today, he isn’t so happy tonight.
I bet he’ll stew all night over how to come back tomorrow and save face. The fired attorneys told him he was wrong. AG’s assistant told him he was wrong and now what is he to do.
A good answer is what he was sent to Washington to do – but that would mean the democrats had to have a action plan and some way to accomplish it. It’s so much more fun chasing those rascally repubs.