(Sen. Pat) Roberts not ready to endorse CIA nominee

[sabra]

http://www2.ljworld.com/blogs/kansas_congress/2006/may/09/roberts/

Roberts not ready to endorse CIA nominee

Sen. Pat Roberts likes Gen. Michael Hayden. But that doesn’t mean Hayden will get Roberts’ support to be the next director of the CIA.

AP reports: “President Bush's nomination of Gen. Michael Hayden as CIA chief ignited a confirmation fight Monday over the intelligence veteran's ties to the controversial eavesdropping program and his ability to be independent from the military establishment.

“Senate Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., stopped short of endorsing Hayden: ‘While I am not opposed to his nomination, senators - including myself - will have important questions which they will want addressed.’

“Several Republicans, including House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., have called Hayden's military background troublesome in this case. It will fall to Roberts to keep order on the intelligence panel as it considers Hayden's confirmation.”

[Jacobin]

1. Translation: "We have to at least PRETEND we aren't rubberstamps'

[blm]

3. That's what I think, too. Except in Roberts' case. I think he believes HE

deserves the post, since he's proven his willingness to coverup for BushInc at every turn.

[long_green]

2. Saxby Chambliss didn't find Max Cleland's military background

too troubling to lie about him during their campaign.

Totally unrelated to the title post but I felt like a mini-rant.

[IChing]

4. I smell "fear" from Repugs on what his nomination hearings will bring out

His NSA's abuse of the 4th amendment and inter-working knowledge of the CIA
and loyalty pledges to the Bush administration which has cause resignations with career officers
could open a can of worms for the Repugs to explain.
This could be devastating in revealing the abuses
ie. extraordinary rendition and corruption with hookergate.


If they brought in an outside man he wouldn't have to explain any of this.

[IChing]

5. Think about it, Roberts questions his nomination, the asshole

who is holding back investigations?

[sidpleasant]

10. Actually, they're not worried at all

Dependable DINO Diane Feinstein set a new land speed record yesterday rushing to get her nose up Hayden's backside and f**k up any Democratic strategy to hold a united front against him. "I think the most important thing is that the individual be a competent, qualified, intelligent professional, and Mike Hayden is all of those things...I don't know a civilian that's really as well-connected and competent in the present stage of intelligence in America, and I think that's relevant," she squeaked to CNN.

[IChing]

11. Russ Feingold will do just fine ....believe me.

There is a reason Roberts doesn't want him and it has nothing to do with his statement.

[chaumont58]

6. Appointing this General is like appointing Brown to head FEMA

TPM MUCKRAKER has a thread on the really good results this general brought to the NSA. If he gets through the Senate, those voting for him need to be fired.

Is anyone running the White House? That crew can't do anything right.


link to Josh Marshall's site:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000592.php

snippet of thread:

Baltimore Sun reporter Siobhan Gorman recently did some outstanding reporting on the technology problems and truly massive cost overruns at NSA when Michael Hayden was director. Newsweek's Mark Hosenball mentioned it in his recent piece on Hayden's nomination to be CIA director, which led me to re-read her pieces.

Oh, my goodness.

In short, Gorman found that between 1999 and 2005, the NSA bungled two key technology programs and an important oversight effort. As a result, "The agency has been gradually 'going deaf,' as unimportant communications drown out key pieces of information," an official told Gorman. Meanwhile, the secretive agency has been burning through billions -- billions -- of dollars.

"Nearly 4 1/2 years after the Sept. 11 attacks, the NSA lacks a system to comprehensively evaluate all of the communications collected by its vast networks of high-tech ears," Gorman concluded.

[IChing]

7. This is another reason Roberts doesn't want him....HEARINGS

and investigations
it has nothing to do with him being a General, that is just smoke and mirrors.

[IChing]

8. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS): Chairman of the Senate Cover-up Committee

Roberts Believes In Virtually Unlimited Presidential Power. Tim Russert asked Roberts on Meet the Press, “Do you believe that the Constitution gives the president of the United States the authority to do anything he believes is necessary to protect the country?” “Yes,” Roberts replied, “but I wouldn’t say anything he believes.” “I think you go at it very, very carefully, and that’s been done by every president that I know of.”

Roberts Flip-Flopped,
Then Flipped Again On Domestic Eavesdropping Legislation. First, Roberts said he had “worked out an agreement with the White House to change U.S. law regarding the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program and provide more information about it to Congress.” A few days later, Roberts seemed to buck the President and argued the program should be brought under the FISA court’s authority. But the next day, his staff director backtracked and said, “The senator remains open to a number of legislative and oversight options.”

Roberts Blocked Vote On Domestic Wiretapping Investigation.
Senate Intelligence Committee ranking member Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) requested a vote to begin an investigation into the domestic wiretapping program. Rather than allow a vote on Rockefeller’s proposal, Roberts instead held a vote “to adjourn a closed-door session without considering the investigation.” Reportedly, Roberts thought “he had the votes to defeat Rockefeller’s motion in the committee,” but after Sens. Snowe (R-ME) and Hagel (R-NE) “told the chairman that if he called up the motion, they would support it,” Roberts adjourned the meeting with a party-line vote.

Roberts ‘Wholeheartedly’ Supports Warrantless Domestic Wiretapping.
“I support the terrorist surveillance program wholeheartedly and am comfortable in my belief that it is necessary, effective and lawful,” Roberts said.

Roberts Claimed Other Senators Believe Bush Is A Greater Threat Than Osama Bin Laden.
“I am concerned that some of my Democrat colleagues used this unique public forum to make clear that they believe the gravest threat we face is not Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, but rather the president of the United States,” Roberts said.

Roberts On The Constitution:
‘You Really Don’t Have Any Civil Liberties If You’re Dead.’ “I would only point out that you really don’t have any civil liberties if you’re dead,” Roberts said at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

Roberts Parroted Bush Administration’s Spying Arguments.
Roberts set out in a 19-page memo to the Senate Judiciary Committee why he believes the NSA “is within the President’s inherent authorities, why the program is legal, necessary, and reasonable, and why Congress, through the congressional intelligence committees, has been kept ‘fully and currently informed’ as required by statute.” The memo focused on the “President’s inherent constitutional authority,” but it also did “not discount the legal arguments of the Department of Justice concerning the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) and its implicit authorization of this capability.”
>>>>>snip

http://thinkprogress.org/roberts-coverup/

[democrat_patriot]

9. Translation 2: "Hey GW I need a favor......"

Repubs even blackmail their own.

[0007]

12. Pat Roberts is now playing the Arlen Spector game. Just watch and see!