Comments on: Arlen “Scottish Haggis” Specter Enumerates Bush’s Law-Breaking

By: ticktock

ticktock — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 19:15:59 +0000

“You think Haggis is still pissed Dick Cheney bypassed him on the illegal wiretap program?”

Portion of letter:

THE VICE PRESIDENT,
Washington, June 8, 2006.
Hon. Arlen Specter,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

“The executive branch has conducted the TSP, from its inception on October 4, 2001 to the present, with great care to operate within the law,”

So this whole thing started on October 4, 2001…

Reiterating a post I did the other day….

If the war on terrorists is such an important issue why wasn’t the issue brought forth back by our government when Qwest’s former ceo was apparently refused warrant-less surveillance in February 2001 prior to 9/11?
Instead apparently the incident is revealed years later in an article in a Washington Post October 17th 2007.
Also, why is warrant-less wiretapping wrapped around 9/11 because it appears the procedure was introduced (& probably inacted) months prior to the incident.

What about this activity that was apparently “incepted” around February of 2001?….

By: bmaz

bmaz — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:58:29 +0000

Yes; and I want to take the unusual step of amplifying and explaining what EW said (Crikey I better get this right eh?). It is not just that Pelosi got truncated briefings because of her change in status; it is that all of the intel committee folks, in both houses, were likely each given somewhat different, tailored, briefings with none of them, form either party, given the whole unadulterated story. I would further hazard a guess that most were given little “off the record” pep talks “to help them put it all into context” that further falsely and/or disingenuously muddied the waters. At this point, each of said intel gangs has a vested personal interest in A) Not letting it become public that they participated in such sheer lawlessness; and B) That they were played for such fools, and in such a repetitively obvious manner.

At this point, we are left with a Congress comprised of two basic vegetable groups. The first that is simply too stupid, uninformed and undesirous of becoming informed to really understand the scope of what has happened and that want to look strong and are, therefore, compliant. The second, knows damn well enough what went on by this point in time, but either have directly the issues described in the preceding paragraph, or feel they are effectively in the same position because of having followed the misleading leaders to start with. Both groups of vegetables thus have a vested interest (both personal and electoral) for not delving into this wrongful behavior, having accountability and setting the record straight for the future. It is truly a sad an sick situation producing total inertia against that which is necessary to protect our Constitution and country.

By: BlueStateRedHead

BlueStateRedHead — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:26:30 +0000

There must be an overweaning reason for the Senator to take time from the so much more important football tape destruction investigation. EW mentions the Cheney ~~pissing off~~ issue, others cite the possibility of a Dem. Pres. EW can you do one of your super-duper bottom liners on this.

By: danps

danps — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:05:11 +0000

Aha. I wondered where that came from – I knew Haggis was an unappetizing mix of sheep innards but didn’t know about the “spineless” part. So with that in mind how is his potential anger towards Cheney or Bond relevant? He’ll do nothing with either.

By: HangingJudge

HangingJudge — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:16 +0000

test

By: oldtree

oldtree — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:46:51 +0000

Why must it be someone that will turn around and approve anything that cheney tells the puppy to say comes out to tell everyone about the law? Pretty damn sick.

By: Rayne

Rayne — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:46:25 +0000

Hence the moniker, “Haggis”.

Spineless sheep’s organ filled with offal and cereal-matter — cooked.

BTW, Gung Haggis Fat Choy on this first day of the Year of the Rat.

By: NelsonAlgren

NelsonAlgren — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:45:04 +0000

More Snarlin’ Arlen brilliance:

http://www.attytood.com/2008/0.....hto_1.html

He needs to be sent packing in 2010.

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:32:21 +0000

About time someone mentioned the NSAct violations. Rockefeller and Pelosi and Harman - they all helped Bush violate that Nat Sec Act for that matter.

There is no legally acceptable “Gang of Four” for briefing purposes. It’s an illegal approach. And no one mentions it. They needed to have a full Gang of 8 briefing followed as soon as expedient with full intell committee briefings.

Now that Haggis is looking at the possiblity of a Dem president, he’s thinking maybe someone should mention that the Nat Sec Act shouldn’t be violated? Yeah - whatever.

The Bush/Cheney planting of covert info with Judy Miller was equally and very clearly a violation of the Nat Sec Act (not a instadeclassification) but no one will pay much attention to that either.

By: danps

danps — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:02:18 +0000

Hi Marcy – sorry I’m late to the party on this one, but I hope you can respond: Doesn’t he have a well-deserved reputation of being all bark and no bite? He seems to talk tough in public and cave in private. I’d like to be more encouraged but haven’t we seen this before?