Democrats Were Briefed On CIA methods

[blackascoal]

was this committee of congresspeople responsible for oversight?

NO .. and you should study the Gang of Eight before you draw such conclusions.

 

[Jarod]

Even in your hilariously stupid analogy, the people you told of your plan would be charged as accessories if they did nothing to stop or report you.

Jarod are you really a lawyer?

Thats just not true, you have no duty to report a crime merely because you know its occuring. You knowith not about what you speak!

 

[blackascoal]

yes. if they broke the law and then used the laws to hide the crime, they should be prosecuted.

At least you're consistent, although still wrong about the Gang of Eight.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

NO .. and you should study the Gang of Eight before you draw such conclusions.

if the 'gang of eight' were not responsible for oversight, who was and why were THEY not briefed?

fill me in here. I do not have the time to read 8 hours of material on the gang of eight.

 

[blackascoal]

Thats just not true, you have no duty to report a crime merely because you know its occuring. You knowith not about what you speak!

That is very true, particularly when you are sworn by oath as Members of Congress are.

 

[Bonestorm]

Maybe someone could explain to me why these members of congress would be permitted to pick and choose which laws they can violate. Exposing classified information is a crime. If they revealed the details of what they were told by the Administration they would be violating the law (and their oath of office for those that think it has the force of law).

And please note that this is purely a legal argument not a moral argument. From a moral standpoint they were dead fucking wrong.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Maybe someone could explain to me why these members of congress would be permitted to pick and choose which laws they can violate. Exposing classified information is a crime. If they revealed the details of what they were told by the Administration they would be violating the law (and their oath of office for those that think it has the force of law).

And please note that this is purely a legal argument not a moral argument. From a moral standpoint they were dead fucking wrong.

from a legal standpoint, how can it be lawful to break the law? I realize that we've had the courts in this country supporting government lawlessness for decades now, but whats the legal rationale for that?

 

[blackascoal]

if the 'gang of eight' were not responsible for oversight, who was and why were THEY not briefed?

fill me in here. I do not have the time to read 8 hours of material on the gang of eight.

The Gang of Eight isn't even a function of government. It's nothing more than a trumped-up excuse not to inform Congress of the activities of the Bush Administration.

The responsibility belonged to the Attorney general who also knew what the administrtion was doing and whom the administration looked to for blessing of their illegal activities.

We can say illegal now, but the question is could you have said that then.

 

[Bonestorm]

from a legal standpoint, how can it be lawful to break the law? I realize that we've had the courts in this country supporting government lawlessness for decades now, but whats the legal rationale for that?

It's not. But telling someone about your lawbreaking while they are under a legal obligation to not reveal what you told them doesn't make them law-breakers too.

 

[blackascoal]

Maybe someone could explain to me why these members of congress would be permitted to pick and choose which laws they can violate. Exposing classified information is a crime. If they revealed the details of what they were told by the Administration they would be violating the law (and their oath of office for those that think it has the force of law).

And please note that this is purely a legal argument not a moral argument. From a moral standpoint they were dead fucking wrong.

I absolutely agree.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The Gang of Eight isn't even a function of government. It's nothing more than a trumped-up excuse not to inform Congress of the activities of the Bush Administration.

link me to some info on the gang of eight please. I guess i'll have to find it all myself.

The responsibility belonged to the Attorney general who also knew what the administrtion was doing and whom the administration looked to for blessing of their illegal activities.

The AG provides legal advice for the executive branch, it cannot prosecute them. That is what congress is for. If the gang of eight had no official oversight over this, then not only should the executives be prosecuted, but the congressional leadership of both sides should be as well.

We can say illegal now, but the question is could you have said that then.

with nobody forthcoming about the illegal activities of the US government, nobody could. Will anyone here vote for the incumbents involved in this next election? I know I won't be.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It's not. But telling someone about your lawbreaking while they are under a legal obligation to not reveal what you told them doesn't make them law-breakers too.

since they had no official or legal oversight responsibility, i guess not. I think it should be though.

 

[blackascoal]

link me to some info on the gang of eight please. I guess i'll have to find it all myself.

The AG provides legal advice for the executive branch, it cannot prosecute them. That is what congress is for. If the gang of eight had no official oversight over this, then not only should the executives be prosecuted, but the congressional leadership of both sides should be as well.

with nobody forthcoming about the illegal activities of the US government, nobody could. Will anyone here vote for the incumbents involved in this next election? I know I won't be.

I still contend that your confusion is in your misunderstanding of how government functions.

The invasion of Iraq was illegal. Do you see anybody being prosecuted for it?

It is illegal to wiretap American citizens without cause. Do you see anybody going to jial for that?

It's all fine and dandy to proclaim what Americans would have done, but the reality is that they would have cowered in fear exactly as the politicians did. We don't operate on information, we operate on fear.

Had they known, Americans wouldn't have done shit.

It's real easy to blame politicians and the government for our own cowardice.

My information comes from CRS, you can't go there, but it was they who determined that informing the Gang of Eight alone was "inconsistent with the law."

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I still contend that your confusion is in your misunderstanding of how government functions.

I understand how the government is SUPPOSED to work. I also see how it doesn't follow the precepts that were laid out for it at all.

The invasion of Iraq was illegal. Do you see anybody being prosecuted for it?

Technically, the resolution to use any and all force necessary, signed by congress, gave Bush the authority to invade. As wrong as it may have been, it was legal.

It is illegal to wiretap American citizens without cause. Do you see anybody going to jial for that?

it is illegal to wiretap with out warrants. warrants require probable cause. I've long felt that FISA courts were a politically motivated 'sidestep' around the constitution and should be done away with.

It's all fine and dandy to proclaim what Americans would have done, but the reality is that they would have cowered in fear exactly as the politicians did. We don't operate on information, we operate on fear.

sad, but true for most americans. I'm not one of them and i'm guessing that you aren't either?

Whats CRS?