CENSURING THE PRESIDENT (At Kos) BY RUSS FEINGOLD

[kpete]

(I did not see this posted yet)

Censuring the President
by Senator Russ Feingold
Mon Mar 13, 2006 at 09:41:44 AM PDT

Like all Americans, I woke up on the morning of September 11th, 2001 as though it was simply another day. The horrific events that unfolded made it anything but, and our lives were changed forever. In the days after 9/11, I was proud to stand with the President in strong support of the authorization to use force against those who attacked us. During those days our President showed great leadership. Politics were put aside, the country pulled together and for a brief time we were united.

In the four-plus years since, everything changed. The President exploited the climate of anxiety, misusing the trust he was given in the wake of the attacks on 9/11 to, among other things, grab intrusive powers in the Patriot Act, and take us into a war in Iraq that has been a diversion from the critical fight against terrorism.

Serious questions remain about certain provisions in the Patriot Act that threaten the privacy of innocent Americans, and about the basis for the claims the administration made in leading us into the Iraq war. In both of those instances, Congress gave its approval to the President's actions, however mistaken that approval may have been.

That was not the case with the illegal domestic wiretapping program authorized by the President shortly after September 11th. The President violated the law, ignored the Constitution and two branches of government, and disregarded the rights and freedoms upon which our country was founded. No one questions whether the government should wiretap terrorists -- of course we should, and we can under current law. But the President is refusing to follow that law, which includes safeguards to protect innocent Americans, and instead he's making up his own law. It's time that he is held accountable for breaking the law.

Congress may consider a range of other actions, including investigations, an independent counsel, or even impeachment. But at a minimum, and as a first step, Congress should censure a president who has so plainly broken the law.

Today I will introduce a Senate resolution censuring the President.

The facts and the case for censure are clear. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, makes it a crime to wiretap American citizens without a court warrant - which is what the President has admitted doing. Before the program was revealed, he also misled Congress and the American people about the wiretapping that was being done. For example, at a 2004 speech in Buffalo, he said, "Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires, a wiretap requires a court order." And at a 2004 speech in my home state of Wisconsin, he said that "the government can't move on wiretaps or roving wiretaps without getting a court order."

When the domestic spying story first broke, the President went from saying he wouldn't be able to talk about it, to suggesting there was no other way to wiretap terrorists, to implying that the FISA law is out of date. He went on to claim that sweeping inherent powers of the presidency or the authorization of force back in 2001 gave him such authority -- neither of which is legally or factually correct. While the President has cherry-picked information before, he cannot do the same with the laws of our land.

Censuring the President is not something that should be taken lightly. But the President has BROKEN the law and there needs to be action and accountability.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/13/114144/941

[blm]

1. Feingold should stick to exactly what he says here, it's fully supportable

I hope like hell he just misspoke when he said on MSNBC today that impeachment was radical while his censure was appropriate.

[Kierkegaard]

2. Bravo, Russ!

This guy is 100% presidential material and I'd love to see him run in '08.

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. A real Democrat

Russ for Prez!

[wordpix2]

4. thank you , Russ, you'd make a fine president

[mdmc]

5. kick

[WiseButAngrySara]

6. Thanks for posting. He gave a very powerful presentation.

I particularily enjoyed his initial comments that used the Federalist Paper #51 to support his case:

"But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place OBLIGE IT TO CONTROL ITSELF."

This administration, perhaps more so than any other in American History, has proven the amazing wisdom of our constitution, and at the same time has revealed it's potential frailties. We have to protect it from the likes of His Royal HighnAss. I doubt very seriously that B* has read any of the Federalist papers, yet the arguments contained therein are the logical reasons behind our form of government and our constitution, and our checks and balances of power. Most of it is probably over B*'s head.