Congress Removed Domestic Military Authorization From Sept. 2001 War Resolution
Former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle has revealed that the Bush administration attempted to include language allowing domestic activities in the joint resolution for the use of force to defend the nation following the attacks of 9-11.
Congressional negotiators removed the language before passing the resolution on Sept. 14, 2001.
Daschle says that the issue of domestic surveillance itself never came up, but that the reference to domestic military activities having been denied means that the administration's claim that the power was implied by the congressional act is false.
If the power to conduct domestic surveillance was implied, Bush would not have had to expressly add text permitting such actions to the resolution. The fact that the language was disapproved, puts the administration in an even shakier legal position in this matter than had been previously known.
If and when the current Congress gets around to investigating the legality of the NSA domestic eavesdropping flap, Daschle will make a convincing witness:
"I did not and never would have supported giving authority to the president for such wiretaps. I am also confident that the 98 senators who voted in favor of authorization of force against al Qaeda did not believe that they were also voting for warrantless domestic surveillance."
Daschle goes into detail how the administration tried to put one over on the Congress:
"Just before the Senate acted on this compromise resolution, the White House sought one last change. Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words "in the United States and" after "appropriate force" in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused."
People who think they know about politics have an image of Daschle as a wimpy liberal. Some observers know better. Daschle is actually a very tough politician who is perfectly comfortable giving an enemy a shot in the nuts.
"If the stories in the media over the past week are accurate, the president has exercised authority that I do not believe is granted to him in the Constitution, and that I know is not granted to him in the law that I helped negotiate with his counsel and that Congress approved in the days after Sept. 11. For that reason, the president should explain the specific legal justification for his authorization of these actions, Congress should fully investigate these actions and the president's justification for them, and the administration should cooperate fully with that investigation."
Should the White House succeed in cajoling, bullying or bribing their way out of responsibility for their crimes, it will be a very bad development to say the least. The citizens of the United States will finally have the unmistakable proof of something that the rest of the world has been aware of for the last four years. The "last, best hope for mankind" will have fallen to the level of a lawless, dangerous and despicable dictatorship.
Congressional negotiators removed the language before passing the resolution on Sept. 14, 2001.
Daschle says that the issue of domestic surveillance itself never came up, but that the reference to domestic military activities having been denied means that the administration's claim that the power was implied by the congressional act is false.
If the power to conduct domestic surveillance was implied, Bush would not have had to expressly add text permitting such actions to the resolution. The fact that the language was disapproved, puts the administration in an even shakier legal position in this matter than had been previously known.
If and when the current Congress gets around to investigating the legality of the NSA domestic eavesdropping flap, Daschle will make a convincing witness:
"I did not and never would have supported giving authority to the president for such wiretaps. I am also confident that the 98 senators who voted in favor of authorization of force against al Qaeda did not believe that they were also voting for warrantless domestic surveillance."
Daschle goes into detail how the administration tried to put one over on the Congress:
"Just before the Senate acted on this compromise resolution, the White House sought one last change. Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words "in the United States and" after "appropriate force" in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused."
People who think they know about politics have an image of Daschle as a wimpy liberal. Some observers know better. Daschle is actually a very tough politician who is perfectly comfortable giving an enemy a shot in the nuts.
"If the stories in the media over the past week are accurate, the president has exercised authority that I do not believe is granted to him in the Constitution, and that I know is not granted to him in the law that I helped negotiate with his counsel and that Congress approved in the days after Sept. 11. For that reason, the president should explain the specific legal justification for his authorization of these actions, Congress should fully investigate these actions and the president's justification for them, and the administration should cooperate fully with that investigation."
Should the White House succeed in cajoling, bullying or bribing their way out of responsibility for their crimes, it will be a very bad development to say the least. The citizens of the United States will finally have the unmistakable proof of something that the rest of the world has been aware of for the last four years. The "last, best hope for mankind" will have fallen to the level of a lawless, dangerous and despicable dictatorship.
posted by Effwit at 11:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home