о подслушивании (политика опять)

[avva]

Свежий американский скандал с секретным прослушиванием телефонных разговоров американских граждан коренным образом меняет моё отношение к администрации Буша. По-моему, он заслуживает за это получить импичмент. У него была возможность сделать это законным образом, через FISA. Он ей не воспользовался.

Сомневаюсь, что будет импичмент, конечно... посмотрим. Но он его заслужил.

Подробное объяснение по-английски, для тех, кто не знает о чём речь, есть в обычном месте. Подробный юридический анализ ситуации - в блоге Волоха.

Comments

[arbat.livejournal.com]

Well, haven't dyak just given you the quote from Jay Rockefeller? Esteemed Senator claims that he was given materials, but, unfortunately, he was incompetent enough not to be able to evaluate them, unprincipled enough to continue holding the post where he knew he had no expertise, but smart to cover his ass by filing a letter where he proclaims all those things.

[(Anonymous)]

Senator Jay Rockefeller is not a committee. Do you see the difference?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

No, but it is kind of pointless observation. He is also not a Senate and he is also not a building. So?

He writes in his letter that he is incompetent to discuss the materials that were presented to the committee... Hey?! I have an interesting idea! Why don't you read the letter (http://www.livejournal.com/users/avva/1484451.html?thread=30086307#t30086307)? Will save us a lot of time!

to save a lot of time

[(Anonymous)]

I trust you are a programmer.

Do you know the difference between a character and a string?

[gron.livejournal.com]

One might inquire, in the same vein, exactly how competent our commander-in-chief is in his job. Would you expect him to be able to plan military operations?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

No, he is not an expert. He relies on experts. But that does not apply to the Rockefeller's situation: he is not a lawyer, but he is not the only Democratic Senator. There are lawyers among them. Lots of lawyers. Rockefeller could have resigned from the committee and he could have asked party leadership to find someone who is professional enough to be able to judge the situation. Or, he could have stayed, but find a way to replace some other Democratic member of the committee with a lawyer if he was not satisfied with other Democrats on the Committee (http://intelligence.senate.gov/members.htm). Consider:

Senator Levin - Harvard Law School.
Senator Wyden - University of Oregon, School of Law.
Senator Bayh - again, JD, University of Virginia.

I am not sure what kind of expertise Senators Feinstein, Mikulski and Corzine bring to the table, but, if Rockefeller (as a Vice Chairman) felt whatever they contribute - is not much, he could have asked his party to replace them.

So, is it convincing?

[(Anonymous)]

coulda shoulda woulda - very convincing ;)

it's really amazing how you don't understand the difference between a set and its element.

[gron.livejournal.com]

I still contend this is not required of a politician (although I woundn't mind if it were). Again, the committee chairman Pat Roberts is a journalist by education, with job experience listed as follows: "U.S. Marine Corps, 1958-62;Editor/Reporter, Arizona Newspaper, 1962-67;Administrative Assistant, U.S. Senator Frank Carlson, 1967-68;Administrative Assistant, U.S. Congressman Keith Sebelius, 1968-80.;". How does that make him competent?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

Well, but Senator Roberts never claimed that he is NOT competent. He took on the job and he is prepared to be held responsible for it. Senator Rockefeller claims that he can nto be held responsible because he neither has any knowledge that he thinks is essential for the job, nor did he knew how to use expertise of his fellow committee members. I guess, this is what is called a leader (http://www.livejournal.com/users/arbat/156111.html) among the Democrats.

[gron.livejournal.com]

There is a difference between claiming to be competent and being such. At least Rockefeller is willing to admit his doubts in his own competency.

By the way, how exactly a senator can be held responsible in this case?

[arbat.livejournal.com]

Yep, Senator Rockefeller - not a reader of a law, just a writer!

[ex-co-lum-bu730.livejournal.com]

I am surprised you still don't get arbat's point. Let me give you a hint? What makes Arbat competent in American history, law and politics? The fact that he never admits his incompetence (even when he is patently and demonstratively clueless)!

The same goes to Pat Roberts.

[gron.livejournal.com]

That would be called "leadership", I guess.

[m-p.livejournal.com]

Not just "leadership" - "strong leadership".