Page 6 - Terrorist Surveillance Program News Today

>> chris: you would put it back on the table if you were the president and you got another high value target. >> i would have the program ready to go that any day we may capture a detainee with vital information about the next attack or some new development and i think that program provides us with the capacity to collect that intelligence and gun that program together with our terrorist surveillance program, those two things i think were the most important steps we tooking that kept us safe for...

Indirectly led to the death of usama bin laden and i dont think theres any way to deny that. i have also written doubts about violating written law against torture and were between a rock and a hard place but we have to give credit where credit is due. george bushs enhanced interrogation techniques as well as the terrorist surveillance program both of which that i had legal doubts about were effective in the killing of usama bin laden. >> why thats important is because lenny davis is a democrati...

War there, and the concern that i have expressed in my questioning today is that the court has taken a lot of power away from congress. the court is doing a lot of legislating. they are supposed to defer to congress. we have a 100,000-page record. they have set hundreds of years of precedence by allowing corporations to make political contributions. so the court is taking over a lot of our legislative function in many, many cases, and then when the executive, when the president asserts his autho...

A al harmane cairgs and senator specter and i have discussed this. i mean, its my understanding that what the judge did here was find the terrorist surveillance program illegal, and essentially say that the plaintiff was entitled to damages from the government. so i guess the question might be whether that case goes up to the supreme court or not. but but clearly, the judge here dealt with something that was outside of the scope of law, which was the terrorist surveillance program and made a fin...

This year. the al harman case and senator specter and i have discussed this. i mean, its my understanding that what the judge did here was find the terrorist surveillance program illegal and essentially say that the mroif was plaintif entitled to damages from the government. so, i guess the question might be whether that case goes up to the supreme court or not. but, clearly, the judge here dealt with something that was outside of the scope of law, which was the terrorist surveillance program an...

I have expressed in my questioning today is that the court has taken a lot of power away from congress. the court is doing a lot of legislating. they are supposed to defer to congress. we have a 100,000-page record. they have set hundreds of years of precedence by allowing corporations to make political contributions. so the court is taking over a lot of our legislative function in many, many cases, and then when the executive, when the president asserts his authority, as he did with the warrant...

War there, and the concern that i have expressed in my questioning today is that the courthouse taketh a lot of the power away from congress. the court is doing a lot of legislating. they are supposed to defer to congress. we have a 100,000-page record. they have set hundreds of years of precedence by allowing corporations to make political contributions. so the court is taking over a lot of our legislative function in many, many cases, and then when the executive, when the president that serves...

Process. saying she was not being very revealing of how she thinks and how her legal mind works. that was among the reasons you were casting a vote against her. you voted against her. what is it that you expect out of these judicial nominees? what is it that she didnt reveal that somehow other nominees have revealed in the past, one, and two, is this going to be a concern of yours if she is brought up as the presidents nominee for the supreme court? >> chuck, i voted against her because she woul...

Think that the judiciary committee members, myself included, havent been, frankly, tough enough on insisting on some answers. for example im considering, havent made up my mind but conditioning my vote on whether the supreme court nominee will take up these questions. congress has the authority to the tell them which cases to handle, and i have legislation, for example, to require them to decide the constitutionality of the terrorist surveillance program. but supreme court nominations a little d...

Against somebody on that basis? >> well, it is different to ask them how youll decide a specific case. i think thats out of bounds. but to ask them, will you take up an issue, will you not duck it as they did the terrorist surveillance program and as they duck the lawsuit involving the survivors of victims of 9/11 where congress had made an explicit determination of sovereign immunity not applying, i want to know that theyre prepared to take the cases. the supreme court has a very light backlog....