Specter on Meet the Press talked about the NSA wiretapping and disavowed the WaP reporting that he has proposed "blanket amnesty" for administration officials involved in NSA wiretapping. Whew!
Specter repeated his position that the NSA program violates FISA.
After learning that Cheney had been "lobbying" other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, Specter had written a letter to Cheney:
There is no doubt that the NSA program violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which sets forth the exclusive procedure for domestic wiretaps which requires the approval of the FISA court. It may be that the President has inherent authority under Article II to trump that statute but the President does not have a blank check and the determination on whether the President has such Article II power calls for a balancing test which requires knowing what the surveillance program constitutes.
On June 8th, Specter was quoted in WaP as saying:
"I think he [Cheney] is serious about trying to work something out," Specter said in a telephone interview. "For the first time, he said they are willing to consider legislation."
Number 1: what the good is legislation with the President's "signing statements"? doesn't matter anyhow because Article II trumps statutes, right?
Number 2: On MTP, Specter says he is backing off the committee hearings, for now, because he just doesn't have the votes to go forward!!!
What the hay Specter? Are you saying that there is NOT ONE Republican on that committee who would call for oversight of the NSA wiretapping program? Are you saying that the Democrats on the committee will not vote for the hearings .... will not push for oversight?
In his letter to Cheney, Specter wrote:
It has been my hope that there could be an accommodation between Congress's Article I authority on oversight and the President's constitutional authority under Article II.
With the present bunch on the Judiciary Committee, I guess Article II trumps Article I?
Maybe Article I is "quaint" .......