
Let me start by saying that Crooks and Liars has had some issues this morning, as several readers have pointed out. Big thanks to reader mlk who provided an alternate link to C&L. We'll update as we get news on what's up.
UPDATE: Ooops, I spoke too soon. The real C&L seems to be running fine for me, now -- so it was likely just server maintenance. Carry on.
CNN has an initial report up on Hayden's opening statement -- wherein he said that intelligence is too often used as a political football. Nice public statement -- I'd feel better if I knew he meant it rather than suspecting it may have been said for public consumption, given that they've been woodshedding him on testimony. (Wonder if Hayseed Graham has helped with this nomination preparation, too?)
A huge thank you to all the readers who have stepped in for me in my hour of need this morning (child with tummy woes does not provide a good opportunity for momma to live blog hearings -- so sorry everyone, but she comes first). I wanted to highlight this from reader Jane S on Lawrence Tribe's analysis:
I am no lawyer, just married to one. Tribe is laying out the relevant SCOTUS decisions and recent laws to make the case that the mass collection of our calling records is in fact a violation of the 4th Amendment and of specific laws passed by Congress. He argues that this is not a Democrat/Republican issue and points to a recent Scalia opinion that warned of the dangers of new technologies infringing on individuals’ privacy rights.He mentions that the one case that the NSA defenders rely on is a 1979 Supreme Court decision which did not anticipate today’s technology and which is undermined by some more recent SCOTUS cases that address the topic indirectly.
And finally he says that the Congress was more aggressive in passing laws to protect Americans’ privacy with regard to calling records. And that because of these laws, there is a public expectation that our calling records will be protected.
And also highlight this bit from reader angie:
Levin: Did you design the specific NSA program.Hayden: I took certain actions after the attack and I told all y’all. Tenet asked me if there was more I could do. I participated in the design.
Levin: if the press reports are true, is there not a privacy concern?
Hayden: we knew it was serious. I told the workforce on the 13th Sept that we needed to balance freedom and security. There are privacy concerns involved in all NSA programs.
Levin: Pressing him — are there other programs???
Hayden: not answering in open session.
Yeah, as if that isn't raising little red flags on tin foil hats all over the listening area. (And some red flags among the not-so-tin-foily as well, if I may say so.)
Walter Pincus has an article in today's WaPo on the Hayden nomination and the goal of increasing human intelligence capabilities should Hayden gain the DCI position.
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, if confirmed as the new CIA director, would work to rebuild morale at the agency in part by emphasizing its central role in managing the collection of human intelligence overseas, including by agencies other than his own, according to active and retired senior intelligence officials.Hayden would arrive at a CIA headquarters still shaken by the stormy 18-month tenure of Porter J. Goss. President Bush two weeks ago ousted Goss, whose directorship was marked by an exodus of some of the agency's top experienced talent, an incoming wave of younger case officers and analysts, and growing White House dissatisfaction with the leadership provided by the former Florida congressman and his top staffers....
A powerful bureaucratic card in Hayden's hand is one that he and Negroponte dealt last October, when they established the National Clandestine Service (NCS), based at the agency, to coordinate overseas human espionage by the CIA, Pentagon and FBI, and named the CIA director to manage it. Hayden and Kappes are expected to play active roles in coordinating human intelligence collection.
"It is no accident NCS is at the agency because, warts and all, the gold standard for training, tradecraft, source validation and description is in the Directorate of Operations at the CIA," said a veteran senior intelligence official with responsibilities in the clandestine collection area. "No matter how big you build clandestine operations at the CIA, it would never be big enough, and you need diversity like DOD [Defense Department] and FBI humint folded into it," the senior official added....
The cold fact, said a senior intelligence official who has recently worked closely with Hayden, is that CIA analysis "is no longer ' primus inter pares ,' " first among equals, as it had been. It is one of 16 intelligence agencies, and it cannot be assumed, as in the past, that "how CIA judges an issue will become the result," the official said.
"CIA still has the largest number of analysts, but they are the youngest with almost 50 percent having less than five years of experience," the senior intelligence official said. "It is not very prudent to rely on that workforce. We have to go to the best people wherever [in the intelligence community] they may be," the official added.
Pincus always has interesting sources -- as much for what they don't say around the edges, as what does get reported as quotes. And I'm wondering if this isn't some subtle warning to Rummy to back off or else. Anyone else reading it this way?
(Thought everyone would appreciate a photo of a hot WV girl (Jennifer Garner is from Charleston, WV) instead of one of the myriad of folks involved in the Hayden hearings. And I can claim it's tangentially related to the above, since hiring her would certainly approve morale among some members of the CIA, I'm sure. *g*)
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Fitz!
Fitzzissimo !
Archibald Cox
Fitztabulous!
Hayden has the party line down like a champ. Talking in circles. He can’t possibly hide anything or lie. It’s just a matter of his public and closed session briefings.
All of this paternal shit about protecting us in secret ways makes me sick.
Wyden not backing down. He’s got specifics, he’s done his homework. He’s parsed the whole record and is shoving it back in Hayden’s face. I’m digging this guy.
Christy: You tease… pic won’t load.
*jonesin’*
Damn you FDL: From the very end of the last thread (and only b/c I have exquisite timing).
Prof Foland - I put my GC cap on in thinking about your question.
I beleive the answer is yes, shareholders can sue for the company’s failing to disclose the material risk that they were taking actions that exposed the company to potentially billions of dollars of liability by violating privacy laws. Whether they win?
There is an interesting article on CNET (you can link to it from Rawstory) claiming a potential out for ATT:
Some legal experts say that AT&T may be off the hook if former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was in office at the time the NSA program began, provided a letter of certification. (Other officials, including the deputy attorney general and state attorneys general, also are authorized to write these letters.)
“If the certification exists, AT&T is in pretty good shape,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and co-author of a book on information privacy law.
What is really interesting about it is that if the Qwest version of events are true - that they asked for something, really anything, in writing, and the gov’t wouldn’t provide them with one - then why did ATT get a letter and not Qwest? And as much, if the gov’t provided ATT a letter, then the gov’t knew that any authority it had for the info dumps was through complying with existing laws.
I wouldn’t mind seeing a shareholder suit - maybe Milberg Weiss (one of the largest shareholder class action firms), who are presently under investigation by the DoJ for its alleged behavior in past suits, wouldn’t mind taking this up as “revenge”
Hayden: I am a good guy!!!– I cannot reconcile the tension between article one and article two of the Constitution.
Wyden: I am going from the public record. I am concerned about a pattern where you say one thing in public and we have to find out via a clipping service something completely different.
How reliable is Wayne Madsen?
http://www.capitolhillblue.com.....pdate.html
Wyden asks the mother of all questions: Where is the independent oversight of all these activities? The general counsel of NSA doesn’t count!
Nice, CNN running the great ad with poppa Bush calling traitor anyone who reveals the id of an agent right in the middle of Hayden coverage…
Wayne Madsen?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Roberts is bitch-slapping Wyden down right now.
My connection was down (thanks a bunch NSA) but a comment left over from a little earlier:
Hayden actually talked about how he can use either hand for, erm “analysis”. And that he’s really Catholic. So, he’s an INFJ Catholic Steelers’ fan who uses both hands.
More adjectives to come, you’ll pardon the expression.
Breaking News!!!! Pat Roberts declares that he is independent!!
Now going off on a jag about how everybody got briefed and was cool with the program. Eating up the clock, blowing hot air. Dick.
Patsy stops Wyden– dern it!
I have been briefed 13 times and I am independent (jeebus!!!!!) Everything is hunky-dory and legal!
Why on earth would the AG come to meet with a grand jury, to be informed of an indictment of Karl Rove? Is it conceivable that Cheney’s been indicted?
Patsy stops Wyden– dern it!
I have been briefed 13 times and I am independent (jeebus!!!!!) Everything is hunky-dory and legal!
blah, blah, blah.
Larence Tribe -
And finally he says that the Congress was more aggressive in passing laws to protect Americans’ privacy with regard to calling records.
look at # IV below (highlighted) - I believe it relates to the recent National No Call list for telemarketers, could be wrong, but that would be recent tweaking of the Act which certainly speaks to Congressional aggression on phone record privacy -
It violates the Stored Communications Act. The Stored Communications Act, Section 2703(c), provides exactly five exceptions that would permit a phone company to disclose to the government the list of calls to or from a subscriber: (i) a warrant; (ii) a court order; (iii) the customer’s consent; (iv) for telemarketing enforcement; or (v) by “administrative subpoena.” The first four clearly don’t apply. As for administrative subpoenas, where a government agency asks for records without court approval, there is a simple answer – the NSA has no administrative subpoena authority.
I had to chuckle seeing CapitolHillBlue being used as a link to Wayne Madsen who is defending Leopold. Those clocks dont even have numerals or hands, just an awful lot of whirring, rattling and cuckoos…
Roberts eminds me of the Martin Short character on SNL who played every big corporate exec
“I can’t beleive you don’t think I’m independent. I an SO independent. It’s so funny you think we need more independent oversight when I am independent. I’m very independent, as you can see. How funny you think otherwise.”
fitz on dial up from russia. this cannot be posted first. oh well. hi from russia anyway!!!
something is wrong with my ‘puter– will have to shut it down and re start. Sorry for the repeat post @ 16 and 18– Christy can you delete one of them? I am flattered that you used some of my words, thanks!
Oh, Hello Senator Snowe,
you’re on the committee ? I feel sooo much better already
Pat Roberts is now explaining that he was briefed about the program Wyden was trying to discuss with Hayden (and not getting any satisfactory answers), and since he is so independent there’s no need to worry. “His recollection” is that everyone who was in that meeting was satisfied with its legality. Apparently, a whole seven Senators knew about this program.
[Have I ever mentioned my dislike of black programs?]
Wyden asks thirty seconds to respond, which Roberts wastes by asking him if this is about the Steelers beating the Seahawks. The CSPAN stream keeps getting interrupted.
Sen. Snowe is now scolding Hayden about not informing the committee about some program or another. Feels left out of the oversight role.
Snowe reading him the list of outrages against the American people when we are treated to a one-way briefing. Checks and Balances require give and take, not just notification to a limited group that can do nothing is NOT what our founding daddies had in mind.
Did he advocate to inform the full committee or some such thing that would be more inclusive?
Hayden: again goes into the priviledged communication mantra. He’s claiming that as a result of his previously mentioned Venn diagram and wanting to brief to oversight bodies.
Can I just say, sports fans aside, I really detest these constant sports metaphors. This isn’t a game!
CIA — Culture and Components
This is a great resource guide, to understand the organizational ins and outs of the Agency.
80% of CIA employees are in the Directorate of Intelligence — these are the Analysts.
20% are in the DO (Directorate of Operations) — these are the spooks.
http://intellit.muskingum.edu/.....6ctoc.html
I bet there’s a classified presidential memo along these lines:
The executive branch shall construe the concept referred to as “The Truth” in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on congressional and judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the President and the Vice President of protecting the executive branch from you meddling kids.
meta @10, you put your finger on the line of questioning that ISN’t happening. I have no problem with classified briefings and non-public sessions of the intelligence committee. That’s the place to press the issue on specific programs.
In open session, though, I’d love to hear more about oversight, accountability, and the relationship of the courts to all of this. There’s been some talk of article one vs article two powers - congress and the exectutive - but damn near nothing about article 3 and the fourth amendment. (I don’t get C-SPAN 3, so have been relying on the irregular coverage by CNN, FOX, etc. Grrr.)
Where’s the question that starts “General Hayden, let’s talk about oversight . . .”?
Where’s the question that starts, “General, the fourth amendment speaks both of ‘unreasonable’ searches and also of ‘warrants’ with regard to government activities. The former lays out a standard, and the latter lays out a path for determining whether that standard has been met: through the oversight of the judicial branch. . . “?
You can’t talk about secret programs in open session, but you can talk about the oversight of such programs. Why the hell aren’t they doing that?
Snowe is driving home the point that the Senate’s authority has been undermined. Good argument of how bi-partisan inclusion on these important issues is essential and necessary for a strong country.
Now going into a CIA/DOD line of questions.
meta @ 9:21 am (#26) - You can’t discuss national security without using sports metaphors. I’m pretry sure it’s a law or something.
Hayden tells Snowe that he really insisted that Congress be briefed– I really, really insisted and welcomed it. I’ve been a good guy- really!
Sports anal–ogies abound.
other Senate hearings are underway today:
WASHINGTON –A Senate committee approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage Thursday, after a shouting match that ended when one Democrat strode out and the Republican chairman bid him “good riddance.”
“I don’t need to be lectured by you. You are no more a protector of the Constitution than am I,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., shouted after Sen. Russ Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment, his affinity for the Constitution and his intention to leave the meeting.
“If you want to leave, good riddance,” Specter finished.
“I’ve enjoyed your lecture, too, Mr. Chairman,” replied Feingold, D-Wis., who is considering a run for president in 2008. “See ya.”
#33
Yeah, critically important use of millions of taxpayer $$$ that we keep these queers from marrying.
Absurd.
Peterr, I agree. This IS the mother of all questions. Snowe is touching on the same stuff, but Hayden’s is just doing the not messy gloss-over. Like I said in the previous thread, BushCo has all the loyal servants and paid legal advice that result in the the ultimately meaningless self-refential daisy chain. They are accountable to only their circle jerk. That no one in Congress doesn’t pronounce this from the highest rooftop is just staggering. And to listen to Pat Fucking Robets sit there and simultaneously assert his independence and compliance is beyond belief.
DiFi on now, asking that the legal opinions be provided to the committee.
JEEEBUS! He’s never read the freakin’ Justice opinion! Good God, gimme me a break!
DiFi asking to see legal opinions and Mikey says he hasn’t even seen them! Nothing in writing, just they FELT (real feely pattern here) comfortable.
Well, then.
DF: FISA is the authority, right? what do we need to do to change it? Meanwhile you’ll follow it?
MH: I’ll get RIGHT back to you on that.
DiFi moving onto rendition and detention. She says it undermines foreign relations and our morale authority.
Good subject, Di.
OK
My head just exploded. Di FI asked Hayden a quaetiion about the 4th ammendment and he said that he had consulted on this matter with a relative who was currently a law student.
WTF?
He can’t find a constitutional lawyer to talk to?”
Finally, some 4th amendment questions on probable cause!
Mikey: The 4th amendment is really about “reasonableness” ,not really probable cause (though he did at least acknowledge there is such a phrase in the freakin’ Constitution.)
DiFi: As if!
I would have liked to see her a lot stronger on that,; not just we’ll see you in closed session on that, though.
On Secret torture: Same thing. I can’t tell you anything out here in front of the citizens of the USA.
DF: So how about waterboarding? Cool? Not?
MH: Same…closed session.
Actually this is getting pretty close to torture. o)r at least tortured.
Keep losing the connection to FDL and get wordpress.
DiFi read the 4th amendment to him. Thankfully, he consulted some family members who are in law school about it…..
WHAT?
All the specific torture and rendition questions– gotta go to closed session.
Iran is a hard target…
Lt. Barney GreenwaldSenator ?:DoctorGen Hayden. You have testified that the following symptoms exist inLieutenant-Commander Queeg’sthe Chimpministration’s behavior. Rigidity of personality, feelings of persecution, unreasonable suspicion, a mania for [im]perfection, and a neurotic certainty thatheit is always in the right.DoctorGeneral isn’t there one psychiatric term for this illness?Doctor DicksonGen Hayden: I never said there was any illness.:)
it’s FROGMARCH SEASON and the servers are acting stupid! It’s all a Cheney plot . . .
Man, something going on with the airwaves today? Verrrrry sloooooow DSL, C-Span is now timing out like crazy, I keep getting a wordpress notification about not being able to connect to the FDL database, and sometimes I wind up doing the same post twice. Yikes.
One funny thing I caught just before my C-Span fizzled - DiFi didn’t realize her microphone was still on….she uttered, “he didn’t answer any of my questions.” Get used to it, Di!
angie #41 I am on cable so loosing connection is not a problem here; however, FDL is very slow loading for me today..
EPU @ 7
Hi Evil One! did some digging in to EFF filings/press releases wrt to their current suit against AT&T
Couldn’t find discovery requets - was looking for ‘Cert’ from Ashcroft
therer’s been so much of the usual obfuscation and footdragging to date, but the Court has been backing EFF on all their requests
AT&T is claiming three of their docs in EFF’s possession constitute proprietary info and demanded them back - Judge said no, but will keep them under seal for now
can’t see how Ashcroft cert would be considered ‘proprietay’, but IANAL - am wondering if they were trying to get docs back b/c somehow AT&T’s shareholder ass isn’t covered by it - although it would appear to be
and hey, if they had a cert from AG as per Sec. 2518 (7), why oh why did the WH feel a need to issue 5/5/6 Presidential Memorandum that is redundant to existing law ?
In TWN News: Michael Hayden, Bobby Ray Inman, and Richard Armitage
snip…
“But like any of us, he could be wrong.
What Inman shared with some of us — and this was a repeated assertion from comments that I have confirmed that he made in Austin – is that the person in Patrick Fitzgerald’s bull’s eye is Richard Armitage.”
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
*ilson, check out Raw Story on that hearing on gay marriage. Apparently, Feingold walked out!
The Associated Press reported a fuller account of the exchange between the two senators:
“I don’t need to be lectured by you. You are no more a protector of the Constitution than am I,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., shouted after Sen. Russ Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment, his affinity for the Constitution and his intention to leave the meeting.
“If you want to leave, good riddance,” Specter finished.
“I’ve enjoyed your lecture, too, Mr. Chairman,” replied Feingold, D-Wis., who is considering a run for president in 2008. “See ya.”
Hayden’s refusal to discuss waterboarding in public session is confirmation that yes, the CIA does do torture. If they didn’t do such shit, he would be hollering about it loudly and proudly. Torture is still officially a secret so he can’t talk about it in polite company…
Feingold has a statement up at his site about why he walked out. My favorite senator, ever.
*ilson,
hat tip to you - got back in via “feeds” as you’ve suggested in the past ! thanks
I’m going to split my stuff up so the links don’t put it into moderation.
Has no one asked Hayden yet about his prior testimony to Congress that was incorrect and misleading? We have discussed it here before, but Think Progress has a nice recent summary. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/.....broke-law/
Also – how is Tribe involved? I haven’t watched (I just can’t take it)
Welcome to the world of total political bullshit- there won’t be a sincere action taken for the next five months in terms of doing what’s right for the country- all stage craft and shit kicking- from BOTH parties- as each tries to steal the show with more outrageous behavior. Bullshit abounds- don’t pay any attention to any of it.
Speaking of Russ - and this is soooo OT (and with acknowledgement that I’m an extremely greedy person), he is one of the three at the TOP of my wishlist to show up at Yearlykos.
The other two are Wes Clark and Al Gore.
Not saying in any way that I’m not COMPLETELY happy and excited about all the amazing people who we already know will be there.
Like I said - extremely greedy!
The Eternal Value of Privacy
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/1,70886-0.html
A fascinating story in the Baltimore Sun (free registration required) shows that NSA COULD have done the telephone analysis legally. Lots of stupid bureaucratic infighting killed the attempt. (Thanks to Digby for the pointer.)
It is hilarious to hear Hayden talk about the most secret portion of the government being a political football. Right, the stealth football.
CBL - All companies, when they are sued, try the “proprietary” document argument. It really isn’t an accuse that court’s normally buy into. First, most of the docs that are claimed as “proprietary” really aren’t (at least as you or I would understand the concept of business secrets). Second, the court has many options to insure that anything that the company claims is proprietary are reviewed in camera by the court, and if found to be proprietary, then the court issue an order that the other side has to keep them secret (for example, they can be held at the court for review).
I am not sure where the idea that proprietary claims concerning documents trumps discovery rights or the courts authority, but it the idea doesn’t hold water. Its one of those last refuge of scoundrel’s arguments. Even a not so smart judge should fall for it. A smart judge will just get pissed.
if this place doesn’t get up and running correctly before Fitzy announces his next rounds of indictments, I’m gonna cancel my annual subscription here !
harumph !
[ kids, get out of my yard or I will sic my pitbulls on you … scram … outta here … ]
accuse = excuse. I’ve been trying out metric spelling, but will stop now.
Ok, a little distracted now by Jennifer Garner! ;) Stop Christy, you are causing my brain to take a back seat!
Here’s a little background info on General Hayden and the NSA phone records program. To claim that he was just following orders in the NSA spying ignores the fact that he was advocating curtailing civil liberties in favor of aggressive surveillance. Now, he’s just saying he was just a lackay. Not True.
After spewing platitudes about the constitution and the law and the 4th amendment and Hayden stating that everything he did at the NSA was lawful without saying anything, every one of the Senators will say good job, oh what a qualified candidate and confirm.
Hayden will then go about making the CIA into a partisan politcal spy agency with a “classified” specialty - domestic spying on organizations and individuals that Cheney considers subversive and not loyal enough.
EPU:
Ebonics?
hey, this is cute
even hayden says the administration made up the intel for Iraq
http://thinkprogress.org/
I love that;
And later tonight…
‘Hey ,Woodward! I made a new friend! He doesn’t say much, but he’s really sticky…’
;>)
Dr. Bong - EPUnics - which I am pronouncing e-pooh-nics.
Mary, Wyden (from our beloved Oregon) got in Hayden’s face about the many discrepancies in his public statements. Wyden was thorough and commanding and impressive in his relentlessness. He flat out said he thought Hayden wasn’t being truthful and didn’t deserve the trust of the American people. Hayden wiggled and squirmed and blinked and twitched and said what amounted to, oh well. He working from a script and it’s quite obvious that he’s working from a script.
Thank you Evil One @59 - you confirm my suspicions
the parties did have a Case Management Conference yesterday, but don’t see any new docs. posted by EFF as to what came out of it -
again, would love to see their discovery requests - guess I’ll keep going through their docs
Hmmm…Isn’t today’s “nobody’s lackey” usually tomorrow’s culpable “loose cannon with an agenda” in disservice to the public welfare? See here “Oliver North”. As someone who read Leslie Cockburn’s “Out of Control” and listened to all of the Iran Contra hearings on NPR, the fact that so many of the same people are still distorting the
notion of patriotic service to empower men like Hayden should give us all cause to raise our voices and awaken the complacent before further damage is done.
searp @ 10:29 am (#58) - It is hilarious to hear Hayden talk about the most secret portion of the government being a political football.
Not to mention sadly ironic. The idea that we should just trust people who seem to feel that they are in no way accountable to this country is laughable.
twolf1 56 -
If I “have done nothing wrong,” the probability of my being rightfully accused is EXACTLY ZERO. The probability of my being surveilled without cause and then WRONGFULLY accused, however slight the chance, is INFINITE by comparision. That is not a chance I am willing to take. Show some reasonable cause, fine, have at me. Otherwise, STAY THE FUCK OUT OF MY BUSINESS.
THAT is a core rationale for the 4th Amendment. Your very “freedom” hinges on it.
CBL - There are docs that may be held to be discoverable but not made part of the public record. They may never show up for you or I to see, but the plaintiff’s attorneys will get to use them. The proprietary claims don’t sound legit, I would have thought they would have had Chimpco come in and say they are secret b/c they deal with national security. As if.
Sorta off topic but goes to the question of what did the spooks know and when and who did they or did they not tell. ‘Pears that JudyJudyJudy knew in July 01 that Al Qaeda was about to launch a massive attack on US soil “I remember the weekend before July 4, 2001, in particular, because for some reason the people who were worried about Al Qaida believed that was the weekend that there was going to be an attack on the United States or on a major American target somewhere. It was going to be a large, well-coordinated attack. Because of the July 4 holiday, this was an ideal opportunistic target and date for Al Qaida.” Via Digby.
Mary -
here is link to Lawrence Tribe if you still need it. H/T reader Jane S. last thread
LawrenceTribe
Not so much OT: Don’t know if anyone here has posted this yet, but Raw has a story up in which St. Judy claims she was tipped off to 9/11 from WITHIN the White House, and *sniff* regrets not running the story in the summer of 2001.
OF course, Mikey blames 9/11 on the CIA, not on White House inaction and incompetency.
“Nobody anticipated 9/11″ (or words to that effect) — Preznit, Jr., Kindasleazy, et al
hey, servers age getting overun, maybe a dns attack going on, very slow connections and sometimes going into wordpress
make sure you guys aren’t getting hacked right now
Oral Hatch carrying buckets of warm spit for bushco… again! suprise
Wow, Hayden remembers every date with stunning recall– cyborg! Sounds as though this has been rehearsed.
CNN has what they call a developing story on the Hayden hearings. Despite its headline, it seems to have hit most of the high points. My favorite quote from Hayden:
Even his use of technical terms is bullshit.
angie - could have sworn I posted this earlier, but now it’s gone. markfromireland was looking for you in Late Nate (#94)
OT-Anyone want to venture a guess about who will get the contract for the big ol’ fence Bush wants to build along the border? Hmmmm, let’s see. Hmmmmmmm. Gosh, I wonder if…..Hmmmmm, let’s see. No, not Halliburton, no! Maybe KBR? No way! Oh, they’re the same thing? Really? Gosh.
I think the Armitage feint might be a sign that things are about to come down.
Seems like the dodge and weave techniques come in thick as the legal nooses tighten.
-GSD
Hayden: Emphasis will be put on the collection of human intelligence.
Sure. Collect the humans and the intelligence will follow.
EPU: Careful with your phonics. Your razor-sharp wit has taken you dangerously close to eunuch!
Hee hee
~
Hatch: “I mean, when was the last time we had a terrorist attack in the US?” Heckuvajob!
lhp – I was EPU’d, but that eagle does still soar, doesn’t it? *g*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1. Did Hayden help our enemies when he broke confidentiality and discussed the 4th amendment with someone?
2. The Senators need to move the “reasonability” “probable cause” discussion to the REAL point. Warrant. FISA Judges said, and it is pretty much true, that there is not some superhuge discrepancy between how they would analyze based on the two, but the main issue is that Hayden’s view is that the 4th stops half way through, without ever moving on to the issue of a WARRANT issued by a JUDGE. What he needs to be asked about is why he feels that he doesn’t need a warrant. That is NOT an Article I v. II, question that is in any manner undecided – it is a Bill of Rights v. Articles I and II question and it has been decided. As long as courts are open and operating, the President is subject to the Bill of Rights, even in a time of war.
3. There need to be simple, direct questions about when, where and how Hayden believes that the President can order members of his agencies to break the laws established by Congress.
*Can the President order the military to prepare psyops for use at home? Does that violate law? Are you aware of any instances where this was done? Are you aware of any psyops that includes the domestic audience as a target audience?
*Can the President order the NSA to collect information involving calls of an American on American soil without FISA warrants? Does that violate law?
*Gen Hayden, you’re a military man and presumably understands more about illegal orders than most civilians. Is the defense that someone is just following orders a valid defense? Is the defense that “if the President does it or says to do it, it’s legal a valid defense?
*What are the risks to agency employees and operatives when they are asked to break the laws passed by Congress based on secret Executive Orders?
4. Someone needs to be point person on classification.
First the issues of classifying lawbreaking behaviour.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292
http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html
Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified in order to:
(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.
Second what about declassification v. selective leaking? What is it when and official, for example a VP, takes selective favorable info and directs that it be leaked to the press while at the same time requiring unfavorable info to remain classified. Is that declassification – or a violation of classification? What is declassification and how do you know when it is done. What is your role, as head of the CIA, re: CIA classified information that The President chooses to declassify? Should you be consulted? Should you get to approve? What if it is the VP that declassifies? etc.
Third if your duty to keep information secret conflicts with your duty to not mislead Congress, which prevails? How did you handle our duty to not mislead Congress at the Oct 2002 hearing? When you said that Congress should speak with its constituents and determine if the lines should be redraw, why did you omit the information that you, the President and the AG were going to go ahead and move that line on your own, without Judicial or Congressional input, until you heard back. Why have you allowed the program to proceed for HALF A DECADE without ever seeking legalization? How exactly does it benefit our enemies for Americans to have a thorough discussion of their rights – and your agencies’ obligations, under the Fourth Amendment and at law? Is it some international secret that the United States has laws and a Fourth Amendment? Where they classified when Congress wasn’t looking?
5. Was there any follow up with him on the legal opinion – i.e., did he at least has NSA Counsel review it?
Thanks so much, punaise!
Good grief! This is a mutual lovefest between Orrin and Mikey– it is a complete joke and the american people and our Constitution are being sucker punched silly while they stroke one another.
boogers…
Is there a bigger BushCo suckup than Oral Hatch? I mean besides Sessions, Spector, Roberts, Cornyn, Kyl, DeWine, etc, ets, etc..
Like any of the Republican rump-swabbing assclowns could ever put the Party aside and stand on principle to do what is right for the nation.
Lincoln let these bastards off the hook and they have been fucking the nation ever since.
-GSD
Hatch– his supercilious and derisive manner are just despicable. He is a national disgrace.
Hi all from Russia. I saw a really hot review over on Amazon for Glenn’s book. Looks like it’s running 5 stars for now!
Jennifer Garner may be from Charleston WV, but her lips are from Collagen CA.
Mary says:
May 18th, 2006 at 10:55 am
I wish they would ask these questions. I want to know how they’d answer (besides ‘can’t talk about it in open session’ which is not an answer).
‘We the people’ need to know if we’re getting the shaft again from our elected (theoretical) representatives.
oh I left out the fact that beside Sanctimonious Blowhard in the dictionary is a picture of Hatch.
meta 68 – WONDERFUL – nod to Oregon and Wyden? Did he happen to mention, also, that it is ILLEGAL to lie to or mislead Congress? Has anyone asked him if he is engaging in the same kind of obfuscation, omission and misstatements in this hearing?
Boots rule!
JWR – I like the fact that Hatch came out and said that the FISA Chief judges had been briefed (about how much and how many of the NSA programs, who knows?) which was also something in an article (WaPo?) a few months earlier. However, the WaPo article also goes on to say that they both thought the program was illegal, but didn’t know what they could do bc there was no case in front of them when they were briefed on it – but they did try to establish some firewalls – which were promptly breached. Hatch seemed to forget that part.
Jennifer Garner could probably analyze intelligence as well as some of the Gosslings.
Thanks for the updates. I tried listening on the radio, but I had to shut it off when Roberts got to the bit in his opening bloviation about not having civil rights if we are dead.
I guess they don’t teach about the American Revolution in Kansas. (Maybe the creationism takes too much time.) There was a time when Patriots believed that life without liberty wasn’t worth living, and men were willing to die for the rights their government was denying them. Roberts is a craven tool.
But we knew that.
Maybe he thinks the New Hampshire license plate is about being a cheapskate?
From the manual on how to become Director of the CIA:
Rule 1: Lie. You will be doing a lot of this in your new job so you might as well get started now. Of course, if you have been nominated for this position, you probably are already quite good at this.
A few pointers:
If you are a political appointee, stress that you are nonpartisan. Decry politics and politicization.
If you have done things that are frankly illegal, remember that most people mistake repetition for truth. Repeat as necessary that everything you have ever done is legal. Refer to it as job experience. Do not quibble over even clear evidence to the contrary.
Rule 2: OK, having been nominated for this post, we’ll just take it for granted that you are, shall we say, character challenged. Don’t worry. Cite your long and sterling service. BUT DO NOT GO INTO DETAILS! Details are like facts, which while a nuisance can be twisted by the unscrupulous into a portrait of who you are and what you have been up to. If you must go into details, say you like Shakespeare or something.
Another pointer:
If you have headed up anything, just stress how long you were there. Remember there will always be partisan hacks out there who will be more than willing to say what a great job you did even if involved eating small children. Remember too that there will be a few hatchetmen from the “other side” spewing charges that you were inept and unprincipled then and unqualifed for your new position now. Don’t panic. Refer to Rule 1.
Rule 3: Promise cooperation and openness. No one will believe this but, being a promise, it can’t be disproved and once you are confirmed it won’t matter.
Rule 4: Keep calm. Be patient. Remember once you get the job, you’ll have the files on all these guys and I mean all these guys.
Rule 5: I’m not being judgmental here but if you have “unorthodox” hobbies, say like hookers, ease off them during the hearings. You will have plenty of time for all that later.
(PS: just a friendly heads up, if you have these kind of interests which, of course, you don’t, I hope you have been paying for them yourself and in cash. We live in a cruel and malicious world which is precisely why we need men like you in positions like these.)
Well having read this, I’m sure you’re well on your way to a successful confirmation and I just want to be the first to congratulate you and welcome you into your new job, Mr. Director!
During his confirmation hearing today, General Michael Hayden showed he did his homework and finally learned the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
For more on probable cause, reasonableness and Hayden’s changing defenses of the illegal Bush NSA domestic spying program, see:
“Hayden Learns the Fourth Amendment.”
GSD - “Republican rump-swabbing assclowns”
heheheheh. the baboon brigade. I think we can take that as a gibbon.
Wayne Madsen reporting that Luskin has been informed he is a target, Rove announcement tomorrow.
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
Is there any more frustrating feeling than listening and listening and listening for the questions that need to be asked, and realizing that the people whose job it is to do the due diligence, and who are supposed to be informed enough to ask the questions, are probably not ever going to ask them?
I’d like to ask: “given how any information about NSA programs has only come to our attention through the media, how can I be certain that we have now been fully briefed? Give me a reason why we should trust that we aren’t going to find out in six weeks or six months that there are other programs, or other aspects of the current program that someone just “forgot” to tell us, or decided we really didn’t need to know. How can we be certain, given the president’s predilection for authorizing that laws and procedures can be ignored, that we are only being briefed to the extent that the president has decided is appropriate?”
I haven’t been able to devote as much focus to the hearings as I would like, but the sense I have is that they just don’t get it. They don’t.
Is there any reason to think that this will be anything more than the usual 50 cent dog and pony show? I’ve listened to some of this, read your comments and those on some of the other blogs and I can find no reason to believe that there is much of real substance here.
“Because,” said Scrooge, “a little thing affects them.
A slight disorder of the stomach makes them cheats.
You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of
cheese, a fragment of an underdone potato. There’s more of
gravy than of grave about you, whatever you are!”
It would appear to me that Hayden is headed towards a swift and easy confirmation.
EPU - accuse = excuse. I’ve been trying out metric spelling, but will stop now.
Oddly, it also works with accuse if you think French-ly.
Shayana Kadidal has an excellent post about the Hayden nomination up at HuffingtonPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....21204.html
He posts the information that the Center for Constitutional Rights just sent to the Senate Intelligence Committee about Hayden. Which includes Hayden’s novel parsing of the Fourth Amendment that our Unitary Executive and the Rubber Stamp Republicans led by Pat Roberts have now implemented in lieu of the Fourth Amendment that our Founders carefully created and adopted. [A new two-phase Fourth Amendment, that is, with the second, warrant, phase optional…]