posted                      

quote:

---

Vice President's Remarks to the Traveling Press
Air Force Two
En route, Muscat, Oman

Q Sir, if I could ask you to step back for a moment, there has been a lot written and talked about recently about executive power, the power of the presidency. You have a really interesting perspective on this having served in the Ford White House, which arguably was the point at which presidential power had reached its absolute nadir. And I'm curious how that experience has shaped your view of presidential powers, and the degree to which you felt over the last four years that you and your office need to play a role in reasserting those powers both vis-a-vis Congress, and in terms of expanding presidential powers to take account of the world that we live in now, which is a very different world from --

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, I do have the view that over the years there had been an erosion of presidential power and authority, that it's reflected in a number of developments -- the War Powers Act, which many people believe is unconstitutional. It's never really been tested. We sort of have an understanding when we commit force that the U.S., the government, the executive branch will notify the Congress, but making it clear we're not doing it a different form of the War Powers Act, in fact. It has never been tested. It will be tested at some point. I am one of those who believe that was an infringement upon the authority of the President. The budget -- the Anti-In Common and Control Act, back in the '70s, passed during the Ford administration that limited the President's authority to impound funds, a series of things Watergate -- a lot of the things around Watergate and Vietnam, both, in the '70s served to erode the authority, I think, the President needs to be effective especially in a national security area.

----

In other areas, in the perspective looking at issues that come up during this administration, one of those was the Energy Task Force. My belief that the President is entitled to and needs to have unfiltered advice in formulating policy, that he ought to be able to seek the opinion of anybody he wants to, and that he should not have to reveal, for example, to a member of Congress who he talked to that morning.

I think you're right, probably the end of the next administration, you had the nadir of the modern presidency in terms of authority and legitimacy, then a number of limitations that were imposed in the aftermath of Vietnam and Watergate. But I do think that to some extent now, we've been able to restore the legitimate authority of the presidency.

---

quote:

---

Imperial Assumptions

----

At his news conference yesterday, he took advantage of the sovereign's divine right to rewrite history. Clearly outraged at the Senate's recalcitrance on the USA Patriot Act, the president issued a challenge: "These senators need to explain why they thought the Patriot Act was a vital tool after the September the 11th attacks but now think it's no longer necessary." The president conveniently forgot to mention that Congress originally set a "sunset" date for the act to expire precisely because members were so deeply concerned about the extent to which it compromised our liberties.

He also sought to explain why he believes he has the right to order the National Security Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans without first getting a warrant. He cited Article II of the Constitution, which of course doesn't mention telephones or the Internet. When it's convenient, the president recognizes that "strict constructionism" has its limits.

None of this is really unexpected from a president whose apparent goal from the beginning has been to reinflate the presidency and unshackle it from those inconvenient restraints that Congress or the courts might seek to impose.

Think about the powers this White House has asserted: to detain terrorist suspects indefinitely, without charges or due process. To kidnap suspects and hold them in secret CIA-run prisons, with no acknowledgment that the suspect is even in U.S. custody. To inflict on these prisoners inhumane and degrading treatment that amounts to torture.

And now the president claims the unilateral right to tap your phone and mine whenever he wants. Never mind that there is a legally established procedure to obtain warrants for such domestic surveillance; never mind that this lawful process is conducted quickly and in total secrecy. The imperial president does not bow to lowly courts. He just does what he believes he needs to do.

---

quote:

---

Gonzales backs wiretaps

By Guy Taylor
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales yesterday said President Bush has "inherent authority" to conduct secret surveillance on people inside the United States without getting a warrant from any judicial body.

Speaking at the White House before Mr. Bush's press conference, Mr. Gonzales vigorously defended the legality of the secret domestic spying, the existence of which elicited an uproar on Capitol Hill ever since Mr. Bush acknowledged the program Saturday.

The administration has been authorized to intercept phone calls and gather "signals intelligence" without warrants since shortly after September 11, when Congress authorized the president to "use all necessary and appropriate force" to combat terrorism.

"We also believe the president has the inherent authority under the Constitution, as commander in chief, to engage in this kind of activity," Mr. Gonzales said. "Signals intelligence has been a fundamental aspect of waging war since the Civil War."

---

quote:

---

Authorization for Use of Military Force

--S.J.Res.23--

S.J.Res.23

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and one

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

---

quote:

---

Power We Didn't Grant

----

On the evening of Sept. 12, 2001, the White House proposed that Congress authorize the use of military force to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States." Believing the scope of this language was too broad and ill defined, Congress chose instead, on Sept. 14, to authorize "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided" the attacks of Sept. 11. With this language, Congress denied the president the more expansive authority he sought and insisted that his authority be used specifically against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

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.

---

quote:

---

White House Elaborates on Authority for Eavesdropping

----

FISA also contains emergency provisions that permit warrantless eavesdropping for up to 72 hours when the attorney general certifies that there is no other way to get crucial information. The law also permits warrantless eavesdropping for up to 15 days after a declaration of war.

"There is an emergency provision within FISA, and one could ask for more authority," Gorelick said. "If they had good reason, Congress would have given it to them."

Gonzales said that the administration contemplated doing that, but was told by "certain members of Congress" that "that would be difficult if not impossible."

---

quote:

---

SEC. 218. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION.
Sections 104(a)(7)(B) and section 303(a)(7)(B) (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)(B) and 1823(a)(7)(B)) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 are each amended by striking "the purpose" and inserting "a significant purpose".

---

quote:

---

Bush was denied wiretaps, bypassed them

WASHINGTON, Dec. 26 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush decided to skip seeking warrants for international wiretaps because the court was challenging him at an unprecedented rate.

A review of Justice Department reports to Congress by Hearst newspapers shows the 26-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court modified more wiretap requests from the Bush administration than the four previous presidential administrations combined.

The 11-judge court that authorizes FISA wiretaps modified only two search warrant orders out of the 13,102 applications approved over the first 22 years of the court's operation.

But since 2001, the judges have modified 179 of the 5,645 requests for surveillance by the Bush administration, the report said. A total of 173 of those court-ordered "substantive modifications" took place in 2003 and 2004. And, the judges also rejected or deferred at least six requests for warrants during those two years -- the first outright rejection of a wiretap request in the court's history.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jay the Obscure:
The reason I say that is important, is that in the new Imperial Presidency, when denied warrants by the constituted court, you just ignore the court and commit a federal crime and no one is supposed to actually.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Press Conference of the President

----

As President and Commander-in-Chief, I have the constitutional responsibility and the constitutional authority to protect our country. Article II of the Constitution gives me that responsibility and the authority necessary to fulfill it. And after September the 11th, the United States Congress also granted me additional authority to use military force against al Qaeda.

After September the 11th, one question my administration had to answer was how, using the authorities I have, how do we effectively detect enemies hiding in our midst and prevent them from striking us again? We know that a two-minute phone conversation between somebody linked to al Qaeda here and an operative overseas could lead directly to the loss of thousands of lives. To save American lives, we must be able to act fast and to detect these conversations so we can prevent new attacks.

So, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, I authorized the interception of international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. This program is carefully reviewed approximately every 45 days to ensure it is being used properly. Leaders in the United States Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this program. And it has been effective in disrupting the enemy, while safeguarding our civil liberties.

This program has targeted those with known links to al Qaeda. I've reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for so long as our nation is -- for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens.

---