enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Perjury?
by Textualist
+2/-3 Reply

<<"there has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse" as a consequence of expanded FBI powers under the Patriot Act. We now learn that at the time, he was in possession of at least six FBI reports detailing unlawful surveillance, searches, and improper use of national security letters.>>

"verified" - sounds like what he would say if he read some reports that were not vetted.

"abuse" - sounds like a term he would use if there were possible problems in the program, but they were probably "good faith" mistakes.

I don't doubt the impression he gave to some may have been wrong and his responses"Clintonesque", but that doesn't make him a liar... that makes him a practicing attorney. I have noticed he minces words very much, but no different than most lawyers (especially in front of partisans).

I agree that he, as well as many in the administration, are rather "breezy" about mistakes that are important (Iraq, Some of Katrina...) and "good faith" only goes so far, but I have little doubt his #1 priority after 9/11 was the protection of the American people "at home". Even though we were/are the most "juicy" target to Al Qaeda et al, unless you are a 9/11 conspiracy believer, the Administration must have done something correct thus far.

Toyota Priuses prevent Elephant Attacks
by degsme

Using your logic about 9/11 and Al Qaeda we can also conclude that Toyota Priuses prevent Elephant attacks. After all, have you ever seen anyone get attacked by an elephant when a Toyota Prius was nearby?

You don't have to be a 9/11 conspiracy believer to recognize that it has been in this administration's best political interests to hype, re-hype and re-re-hype Al Qaeda's threat. The reality is that 9/11 wasn't all that sophisticated, well executed or well coordinated attack. It was a threat vector that had long been well understood and wargamed.

And no, the USA is not the most "juicy" target. It is hard to reach from the middle east, and absent our incursion into Mess o' ptamia, since we have withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden doesn't really have that much with which to enrage his followers against the USA.

Re: Perjury?
by maroci
Wrong. The language is clear. If he knew of the reports he is clearly guilty of perjury and should be impeached.
View as RSS news feed in XML