Intel authorization bill 07 may re-introduce language Clinton vetoed

[rumpel]

This is another "Keep Your Eyes and Ears Open and Watch Them Closely" issue.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021602186.html?referrer=email&referrer=email

Senator May Seek Tougher Law on Leaks
Intelligence Chairman Roberts Says Measure Vetoed by Clinton Could Be Model
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 17, 2006; Page A04


The chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said yesterday that he may add language to the fiscal 2007 intelligence authorization bill to criminalize the leaking of a wider range of classified information than is now covered by law. He indicated the new measure would be similar to legislation vetoed by President Bill Clinton more than five years ago.

The statement by Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) comes as Bush administration is campaigning against leaks and focusing on the people who receive and distribute them, including journalists.

snip

In 2002, with George W. Bush in the White House, Shelby reintroduced his language, but then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft said that "rigorous investigation" and enforcement of existing laws -- not new legislation -- were the best way to fight leaks.

They are moving on all fronts to make it more difficult for the public to know what the government is doing, under the guise of the "war on terra", and our "war president".

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. Clinton only used the veto powers twice that I remember.

Once because they wanted to take away the stockholder's right to sue their CEOs. Didn't Lieberman help overrule that veto?

As for the Bush Administration, with those ports being sold to the United Arab Emirates, they're weak on national security and now with this leak problem, they're turning out to be the biggest leakers and threat to our national security.

[rumpel]

2. add the indebtedness to the other countries...

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. Another application of Newton's Third Law in Politics

For every Democratic action there is an equal and opposite Republican reaction (or maybe it should be "over-reaction")

[FreedomAngel82]

4. What can we do?!