Q Good to talk to you. All right, a couple things. We got you for a limited amount of time, and I want to race through a couple of things. I see here today an AP story that the House of Representatives has voted to delay the demise of the wiretap law by two weeks. So we've got a two-week extension on FISA. You know, we're in the middle of a presidential election year, and a lot of people's attention is focused on that, not on FISA and the efforts that you and the people in the administration are doing to continue to detect potential attacks. What's the status of it? What's the big deal with two weeks?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, the legislation is absolutely essential, of course. They passed a six-month extension last August, which expires on Friday, and -- with the idea that they would finish up the legislation by Friday. They've had six months to work on it. One of the main things we need in there, for example, is retroactive liability protection for the companies that have worked with us and helped us prevent further attacks against the United States, and that's the most controversial part.
Q Like the phone --
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Right. And so far they haven't been able to get it done. So what has been agreed to is to give them 15 more days to wrap it up and finish it up here. It's -- the President has been holding their feet to the fire. They claim they can get it done in 15 more days. And the battle right now is focused on the Senate; the House has already passed a version of it. And -- but we do badly need this legislation. It's been essential in terms of protecting the country against further attacks, vital -- one of the most vital things the President has done since 9/11, and it would be a tragedy if this authority weren't extended.
Q The opposition in the Senate primarily from Democrats, correct?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Correct. People who don't want to -- or, I guess, want to leave open the possibility that the trial lawyers could go after a big company that may have helped those companies –- helped, specifically, at our request. And they've done yeomen duty for the country. And this is a so-called terrorist surveillance program; it's one of the things it was called earlier. It's just absolutely essential to know who in the United States is talking to al Qaeda. And it's a program that's been very well managed. We haven't violated anybody's civil liberties. It's in fact a good piece of legislation.
Q Yes, it's amazing that it's a political issue. I want to ask you, is the Democrats' opposition to this oriented toward, you know, payback for a big constituency of theirs, the trial lawyers? Is it purely political, trying to damage George W. Bush because of their pent-up resentment of his success? Or is it something else?
There's a story -- I forget where it is, I just finished reading it; it's at Politico.com. I think with Rudy Giuliani's defeat last night, that the politics of 9/11 are finished, they're over; that nobody is going to succeed running on 9/11 and thus the continued threat. Is this really part of an effort by some in the Senate to try to convince the American people we don't face a threat anymore, and there's no reason to run the risk of violating people's civil liberties, blah, blah, blah?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, it's been focused especially on the Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Pat Leahy, chairman of the committee, has opposed parts of the statute that we think are essential in terms of going forward, including specifically this retroactive liability provision. But I don't like to question people's motives. I assume he's got reasons why he believes the way he does, but the fact is it's their inability to resolve that issue that's delayed passage on this legislation.
I think there are people out there, frankly, Rush, that don't like what we've done, that are opposed to the bold action and tough decisions the President has made since 9/11. I think there were a lot of people who were panicky in the aftermath of 9/11, but now that we've demonstrated our ability to defend the country for the last six-and-a-half years, they want to act as though there's no threat and we don't need to take these important measures.
But the fact of the matter is, the threat is still there, it still exists. I look at it every day in our intelligence brief. We need to perpetuate and protect our capabilities here, as well as in terms of our ability to interrogate prisoners.
Q You may not be able to answer this, but if you feel confident that two weeks can take care of this retroactivity in protecting I think there are 40 civil lawsuits that have been filed against the phone companies -- what do the opponents of this want in exchange for going along?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the fact of the matter is at this point, they don't have the votes; that is, I don't think they can prevail. I think there are a number of Democrats, for example, who've indicated they will vote with us on the key issue on this legislation in the Senate, but to date it's been hung up through various parliamentary maneuvers. But I think eventually we'll -- we will get the legislation, as I say, I do think the votes are there. But they want more time to let the opponents sort of air their grievances and probably vote on some more amendments before we go to final passage.
Since this is BusinessWire there is not a copyright problem so the four paragragh provision need not apply
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080130006331&newsLang=enThere is more to the interview but the rest is about how great the surge is doing and how the economy is so great it is going to weather this little itty bitty subprime problem created by "those people". Same ol' Same ol'.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
