Senate Proceeding on Jul 9th, 2008 :: 0:01:39 to 0:11:44
Total video length: 2 hours 35 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:470 Duration: 0:10:05 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

0:00:17 to 0:01:43( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Christopher S. Bond

0:01:37 to 0:01:52( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, Søren Kierkegaard a number of years ago made the comment to venture causes anxiety but not to venture is to lose one's self. from the outset, let me be crystal clear in voicing my strong opposition to all three pending

0:01:39 to 0:11:44( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Orrin Hatch

0:01:52 to 0:02:07( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: amendments to h.r. 6304. but before i discuss these amendments, let me address a few things said on this floor yesterday. one of my colleagues said that the congress shouldn't -- quote -- "jam

0:02:07 to 0:02:21( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: this bill through." if working on a bill for over 440 days is jamming it through, then webster's dictionary should prepare a new definition for the word. we heard comments yesterday critical of the fact that

0:02:21 to 0:02:38( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: not every senator has been fully briefed on the activities of the intelligence community. i guess this same argument didn't stick the first time it was offered back in december. more desperate attempts

0:02:38 to 0:02:56( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: would be made. if at first you don't suck saoerbgsd try, try again. memories are short around here and we should appreciate the very creation of the intelligence committee was controversial. the committee

0:02:56 to 0:03:08( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: was created so that a limited number of members would have oversight of our intelligence agencies. during the ten days of debate on the resolution creating this committee, numerous senators openly worried

0:03:08 to 0:03:26( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: about possible leaks in providing highly classified material to a large number of individuals. here's what senator milton young said in may of 1976 -- quote -- "it is my understanding that on

0:03:26 to 0:03:41( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: this new committee, this staff would have access to the most sensitive information. human nature is such that when too many people have access to this information, someone is bound to leak parts of it

0:03:41 to 0:03:53( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: to an ambitious and inquisitive press." unquote. also in 1976, here's what another senator said. this is senator walter mondale on the need for the senate intelligence committee on may 13, 1976. "we

0:03:53 to 0:04:04( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: have the worst possible system for congressional oversight of intelligence. responsibility and authority are fragmented in several committee. it is impossible to look at intelligence as a whole because authority

0:04:04 to 0:04:19( Edit History Discussion )

and responsibility are not welded together, we are incapable of dealing with problems privately and there is the inevitable temptation to deal with them through leaks." 32 years later these statements

0:04:19 to 0:04:27( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: contain points that are still vitally important to this discussion. is this the system of oversight that we should go back to? those that argue that we shouldn't vote until every member gets some sort

0:04:27 to 0:04:41( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: of vague access or essentially -- are essentially saying all 535 members of congress plus hundreds of cleared staff should be read into highly classified programs as jurisdiction is otherwise limited

0:04:41 to 0:04:57( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: to the intelligence committees. if you want to guarantee future leaks, this would be a -- this would be a good approach. this sort of logic begs the question: why do we have an intelligence committee?

0:04:57 to 0:05:10( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the answer is obvious, and i urge my colleagues to remember the extensive efforts of our predecessors which created a committee with the authority to review these materials. while the issue of

0:05:10 to 0:05:22( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: liability protection for telecoms has been debated over the last months the amendments before us attempt to alter or remove the carefully crafted bipartisan civil hraoeubt provision. i agree with the comments

0:05:22 to 0:05:34( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: from both sides of the aisle in opposition to these amendments. the bingaman amendment, for example would needlessly delay the liability provision. i believe the amendment is unwise, as its purpose disregards

0:05:34 to 0:05:47( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the extensive work that congress has already conducted on this issue. by my last count, congress has conducted over 27 hearings on the terrorist surveillance program and fisa over the last few years.

0:05:47 to 0:06:01( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: let there be no doubt, the i.g. review will not and cannot determine the legality of the terrorist surveillance program. any suggestion that the review will do so is incorrect. inspectors general are

0:06:01 to 0:06:16( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: not qualified and lack jurisdiction to review the legality of intelligence programs. and as furtherth evidence ofvi ts obvious point, let's look at this quote. this is by the department of justice inspector

0:06:16 to 0:06:28( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: general in conducting legal analysis. he says -- quote -- "that is not our role as the inspector general." in addition, the i.g. review will not publicly reveal which companies elected to participate

0:06:28 to 0:06:47( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: in this program, as that information still remains highly classified. simply put, attempts to alter the fisa compromise based on a misperception of the eventual i.g. review should be strongly rejected, and we

0:06:47 to 0:07:00( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: should do so this morning. close inspection of the lawsuits against the telecoms reveals quite dubious claims as has been previously stated, the plaintiffs consistently confuse speculative allegations

0:07:00 to 0:07:15( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: and untested assertions for established facts. it's very simple. congress should not condone oversight through litation. the lawsuits seized on the president's brief comments about the existence of

0:07:15 to 0:07:30( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: a limited program to go on a fishing expedition of n.s.a. activities. but this is really worse than a fishing expedition. this is draining the lock necessary to find a phopb -- the loch ness to find a monster.

0:07:30 to 0:07:39( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: sometimes what you're looking for doesn't exist. yet we consistently hear that some wiretaps were warrantless. lest we forget, the fourth amendment does not proscribe -- p-r-o-s-c-r-i-b-e -- warrantless

0:07:39 to 0:07:52( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: searches. here's a quick example a few blocks from here. waiting for searches at the national archives, waiting tor search -- waiting to be searched before viewing the fourth amendment it is. the president

0:07:52 to 0:08:06( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: implemented a system to prevent future attacks. but critics rushed to pull out the batteries so it wouldn't and couldn't work. my feelings of admiration and respect f the companies who did their part to

0:08:06 to 0:08:21( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: defend america are well known. as i've said in the past, any company who assisted us following the attacks of 9/11 deserves a round of applause and a helping hand, not a slap in the face and a kick to

0:08:21 to 0:08:35( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the gut. when companies are asked to assist the intelligence community based on a program authorized by the president himself and based on assurances from the highest levels of government that the program

0:08:35 to 0:08:45( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: has been determined toer be lawful, they should be able to rely on those representations. in the ove 40 outstanding civil lawsuits, is there any proof that any litigant was specifically targeted by

0:08:45 to 0:08:53( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the government? can any of the plaintiffs show that they are -- quote -- "aggrieved persons" under the definition of fisa? the answer to both questions is no. rather, many of the lawsuits utilize the

0:08:53 to 0:09:04( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: following logic: i've long-distance service so i'm going to sue because i think you listen to my calls. enough. though they have no proof -- even though they have no proof, even though the government

0:09:04 to 0:09:14( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: has more important things to do than listen to their random phone calls, they push on in their desire to justify their view of self-importance and irrational belief in government conspiracy. i don't want to

0:09:14 to 0:09:26( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: bruise anyone's ego, but if al qaeda is not on your speed dial, the government is probably not interested in you. the possible disclosure of classified materials from ongoing court proceedings is a grave

0:09:26 to 0:09:39( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: threat to national security and the very point of these lawsuits is to prove plaintiffs claims by disclosing such classified information. simply put, you don't tell your enemies how you track them. that

0:09:39 to 0:09:51( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: is why the n.s.a. and other government agencies won't say what they do, how they do it or who they watch. nor should they. to confirm or deny any of these activities at the heart of the civil lawsuits

0:09:51 to 0:10:00( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: would harm national security. we should not discuss what our capabilities are. if the identities of the companies are revealed and officially confirmed through litigation, they will face irreversible harm.

0:10:00 to 0:10:11( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: harm in their business relations with foreign governments and companies and possible physical harm to their employees both here and abroad who are truly soft targets for attackers and terrorists. i've come

0:10:11 to 0:10:25( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: to this floor on numerous occasions during the last year to discuss the issue of fisa modernization, and i am hopeful that the need to continue to do so will finally end this morning. i am confident

0:10:25 to 0:10:36( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: that when congress considers this issue, we will finally send this vitally important legislation to the president to be signed into law. mr. president, i want to compliment the distinguished chairman

0:10:36 to 0:10:52( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: of the committee and the distinguished vice chairman of the committee, senators rockefeller and bond. they have had to handle this matter through all kinds of vicissitudes, and i think false claims and

0:10:52 to 0:11:03( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: false logic. and they've done an exceptionally good job. they and their staff have really, really stood up and tried to let america know just what is involved here. the people who -- who -- many of

0:11:03 to 0:11:14( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the people who make arguments against this, i think i said at one time, should join the black helicopter crowd and wear tin foil hats, and i think they'd be in greater company. the fact of the matter

0:11:14 to 0:11:26( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: is that these two leaders have done a great job on this committee. they've passed bipartisan legislation overwhelmingly. it would have been passed by the house pretty much overwhelmingly had it been

0:11:26 to 0:11:40( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: brought up, and of course hopefully it will be passed today without any of these three amendments which i think would foul up this bill and cause a veto. so, mr. president, i want to thank those who vote

0:11:40 to 0:11:49( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: for this bill and those who have been considerate enough to look at all the important arguments here and support this bill which is much-needed, certainly much-needed before this month of august