Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Personally, I think it has been very clear that the rhetoric on the FISA issue has been "over the top". As the issue fades from the headlines, it seems Congress will do the right thing in spite of all the empty rhetoric.
Also, you think there should be more investigation into this issue, but I don't know what else you need to know and for what purpose - given a non-punitive goal. Seems like they would want to conclude investigative efforts before making law on this issue.
|
ace....you and I obviously place a different level of importance on Congressional oversight. You have said repeatedly in this and other threads that you think its political grandstanding and a waste of time and money. IMO, it is a critical responsibility of Congress equal to enacting legislation.
And IMO, this oversight investigation has a much broader reach and potential impact than just the FISA law. It goes to the issue of a president unilaterally determining his own powers under the Constitution and withholding that decision from the legislative and judicial branches.
What else do we need to know?
Most importantly, how about a detailed explanation from the WH on its legal basis or justification for determining that the 2001 "use of force" resolution gave Bush the power to conduct surveillance on American citizens without a judicial warrant. Did the WH ever plan to inform Congress or keep it secret until they got caught?
Other unanswered questions?
How about determining if there was a "quid pro quo" between the WH and the telcomms.....multi-million$ federal contracts in exchange for "voluntarily" assisting in a potentially illegal activity? or was their coercion by the WH?
How about the criteria used to determine which citizens' rights were worth violating the law? Was there "reasonable cause" or was it a "witch hunt"?
But I guess those are just "over the top" questions of little relevance.