Well post festum, it looks like one of your explanations of the Senate's actions on the NSA spying case is more plausible:
Pat Roberts (R-Kansas), Saturday's NYT
"The irony of this is that it is portrayed now as administration pressure brought to bear on us, meaning the Republicans on the committee and basically me," Mr. Roberts said Friday. "It's just the reverse. It's the Republicans on the committee, my staff and myself, who have been really ? I don't want to say pressuring, but trying to come up with a reasonable compromise that will settle this issue. It was our activity that brought them along to this point, plus the possibility of an investigation."
I like how he mentions the "possibility of an investigation" at the end as the thing that makes the adminstration willing to talk about this at all.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
And the Washington Post jumps on the "Giving the Pres a Constitutional Mulligan actually strengthens Congress" bandwagon:
"At two key moments in recent days, White House officials contacted congressional leaders just ahead of intelligence committee meetings that could have stirred demands for a deeper review of the administration's warrantless-surveillance program, according to House and Senate sources.
In both cases, the administration was spared the outcome it most feared, and it won praise in some circles for showing more openness to congressional oversight.
But the actions have angered some lawmakers who think the administration's purported concessions mean little. Some Republicans said that the White House came closer to suffering a big setback than is widely known, and that President Bush must be more forthcoming about the eavesdropping program to retain Congress's good will."
Post a Comment