Senate Proceeding on Jul 9th, 2008 :: 0:13:31 to 0:38:45
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

Views:225 Duration: 0:25:14 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

0:13:25 to 0:13:38( Edit History Discussion )

John Rockefeller: and i ask unanimous consent that -- yesterday we had some discussions on a district court case in california, the al haramane case. i ask unanimous consent that comments on that be included in the record

0:13:31 to 0:38:45( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Russell Feingold

0:13:38 to 0:13:52( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: as if read. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. rd mr. rockefeller: i thank the presiding officer. i thank the senator from wisconsin. mr. feingold: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent

0:13:52 to 0:14:09( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: that senator leahy be recognized following my remarks, to be followed by senator specter for 10 minutes the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. feingold: mr. president,

0:14:09 to 0:14:23( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: i now yield myself such time as i may consume. before i get into my formal remarks, let me just react a bit to the remarks of the senator from utah. he's a great khraoerbgs a very cord -- great

0:14:23 to 0:14:34( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: colleague, a very cordial man. i enjoyed the 16 years i've served with him, but i'm going to use an unsenatorial word for one of the arguments he used. the word is "wow" the notion that 70 senators

0:14:34 to 0:14:47( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: would not be briefed on something we're voting on, and the notion that the creation of the intelligence committee -- which of course i'm a member of and which i support -- is a justification for having

0:14:47 to 0:14:59( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: 70 senators is not knowing what they're voting on is a very bizarre interpretation of why the intelligence committee was created. it was not created as a replacement for the united states senate when

0:14:59 to 0:15:12( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: it comes to voting on the fundamental laws and rights of the american people. and that's the best thing to come up with, mr. president, on asking us to vote when 70 senators don't even know the fundamentalsf

0:15:12 to 0:15:23( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: what this is about that this issue is addressing. it's incredible. let me get into the merits. apparently we've been lumped by the senator from utah as part of the black helicopter crowd. the coalition

0:15:23 to 0:15:37( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: in this country that has concerns about this bill is much broader than any such characterization. a number of senators came to the floor prior to the 4th of july recess to debate the fisa legislation,

0:15:37 to 0:15:51( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: and more debateas occurred this week. we've heard arguments for and against the legislation, and senators have cited a variety of reasons for their positions. several have defended the bill by arguing

0:15:51 to 0:16:03( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: that the legislation includes improvements compared to the senate bill we passed earlier. and of course i was not surprised to hear that line of argument. i agree that there are some improvements

0:16:03 to 0:16:16( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: to the senate bill contained in the legislation that we're now considering. mr. president, those changes, as you well know, are not nearly enough to justify supporting the bill, as i will explain in a few moments.

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

Russell Feingold: i was, however, surprised to hear several senators still defending the legality of the president's warrantless wiretapping program and still arguing that congress had somehow signed off on this program

0:16:28 to 0:16:42( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: years ago because the so-called gang of eight group was notified. mr. president, i thought we were well past these arguments. two and a half years ago, after this illegal program became public,

0:16:42 to 0:16:56( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: i cannot believe that we are still debating the legality of this program on the senate floor and that anyone, that anyone seriously believes that merely notifying the gang of eight -- eight senators

0:16:56 to 0:17:11( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: and congressmen -- while keeping the full intelligence committee in the dark somehow represents congressional approval.~ mr. president, it could not be clearer that this program broke the law. and that

0:17:11 to 0:17:23( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: this president -- this president broke the law. not only that, but this administration affirmatively misled t he congress and the american people about it for years before it finally became public. if we're

0:17:23 to 0:17:40( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: going to go back and discuss these issues that i thought had long since been put to rest, let's take a few minutes to cover the full history. here's the part of the story that somehow seems to have

0:17:40 to 0:17:50( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: been forgotten. in january of 2005, 11 months before "the new york times" broke the story of the illegal wiretapping program, i asked then white house counsel alberto gonzales at his confirmation hearing

0:17:50 to 0:18:02( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: to be the attorney general, whether the president had the power to authorize warrantless wiretaps in violation of the criminal law. neither i nor the vast majority of my colleagues knew it then, but

0:18:02 to 0:18:12( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the president had authorized the n.s.a. program three years before and mr. president alberto gonzales was directly involved in that issue. at his confirmation hearing he first tried to dismiss my

0:18:12 to 0:18:25( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: question, if you can believe it, as hypothetical, even though he knew what was goingn. he testified -- quote -- "it is not the policy or agenda of this president to authorize actions that would be in

0:18:25 to 0:18:37( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: couldn'ter vengs of the program." it was in direct the convention. alberto gonzales knew that. but he wanted senate and the american people to think that the president had not acted on the extreme

0:18:37 to 0:18:50( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: legal theory that the president has the power as commander in chief to disobey the criminal laws of this country. the president too misled the congress and the american public. in 2004 and 2005 when

0:18:50 to 0:19:07( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: congress was considering the reauthorization of the u.s.a. patriot act, the president went out of his way, and i remember this very clearly, to assure us that his administration was getting court

0:19:07 to 0:19:18( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: oers for wiretaps. court orders. all the while knowing full well that his warrantless wiretapping program was ongoing. here's what the president said on april 20, 2004 -- quote -- " by the way any

0:19:18 to 0:19:29( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: time you hear the united states government talking about a wiretap, it requires the president said -- it requires a wiretap, requires a court order. nothing has changed by the way. when we're talking

0:19:29 to 0:19:41( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: about chasing down terrorists, we are talking about getting a court order before we do so." those are the words of the president of the united states to the american people. and, again, on july 14,

0:19:41 to 0:19:56( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: 2004, quote, the government can't move on wiretaps or roafing wiretaps without getting a court order." unquote. thron what the president said on june 9, 2005, law enforcement officers need a federal judge's

0:19:56 to 0:20:07( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: permission to wiretap a foreign terrorists phone a federal judge's permission to search his property. officers must use strike standards to use any of these tools and these standards are fully consistent

0:20:07 to 0:20:19( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: with the constitution of the united states." unquote. so, please, let's not pretend that the highly classified notification of the gang of eight delivered while the president himself was repeat --

0:20:19 to 0:20:32( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: repeatedly presenting a different picture to the public that congress acquiesced to this program. several members of the gang of eight raised concerns when they were told about this and several said

0:20:32 to 0:20:45( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: that they were not told the full story. of course, all of them -- all of them were instructed not to share what they have learned with a single other person. so, mr. president, i cannot leave unanswered

0:20:45 to 0:20:57( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the arguments mounted in defense of the legality of the n.s.a. program. i will not spend much time on the argument that the authorization for the use of military force that congress passed on september

0:20:57 to 0:21:10( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: 18, 2001, authorized this program. that argument has been thoroughly diskret i had -- credited, and the president -- was to use military force against those who attacked us on 9/11 a necessary an justified

0:21:10 to 0:21:21( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: response. we did not authorize the president to wiretap american citizens on american soil without going through a judicial process that was set up nearly three decades ago precisely to facilitate

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

Russell Feingold: the domestic surveillance of spies an terrorists. senators have also dragged out the same old tired arguments about the president's supposed inherent executive authority to violate the fisa statute.

0:21:35 to 0:21:45( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: they argued that a law passed by congress can't trump the president's power under the constitution that argument may sound good. but it assumes what we're trying to prove that the constitution gives the

0:21:45 to 0:21:59( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: president the power to authorize warrantless wiretaps in certain cases. you can't simply say that any claim of executive power prevails over a statute. at least not if you're serious about the rule of

0:21:59 to 0:22:12( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: law. and about how to interpret the constitution. the real question is when a claim of executive power and a statute arguably conflict, now how do you resolve that conflict? fortunately, this is not something

0:22:12 to 0:22:24( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: that the supreme court mass been silent about. the supreme court has told us us how to answer the question. we're talking about here about the president acting in direct violation of a criminal statute.

0:22:24 to 0:22:36( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: that means -- that means his power was w as justice jackson said in his famous and influential concurrence in the steel seize why you case half a century ago -- quote -- "at its lowest ebb." the

0:22:36 to 0:22:48( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: presidential power, justice jackson said, was at its lowest ebb. when the president argue news he has the power to violate a specific law, he's on pretty shaky ground. that is not just my opinion, it

0:22:48 to 0:22:58( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: is what the supreme court made clear. no less than an authority of the chief jus tice of the united states, john roberts, repeatedly recognized in his confirmation hearings over and over again, that

0:22:58 to 0:23:12( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: justice jackson's three-part test is the appropriate framework for analyzing questions of executive power. in early 2006, a distinguished group of law professors and former executive branch officials wrote

0:23:12 to 0:23:26( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: a letter pointing out -- quote -- "every time the supreme court has confronted a statute limiting the commander in chief's authority it has upheld the statute. it has upheld the act of congress. it

0:23:26 to 0:23:38( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: has upheld the act of congress over claims of executive power that overreach and conflict with the rights of this congress to make the laws in this country. the senate reports issued when fisa was

0:23:38 to 0:23:49( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: enacted confirmed the understanding that fisa overrode any preexisting inherent authority of the president. 1978 senate judiciary committee report stated that fisa quote recognizes no inherent power of the

0:23:49 to 0:24:05( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: president in this area unquote. and quote congress declared that this statute, not any claimed presidentialpr power, controlsings. unquote. contrary to what has been said on this floor, no court

0:24:05 to 0:24:20( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: has approved warrantless surveillance in violation of fisa based on some theory of article 2 authority. the truong case so often hauled out to make this argument was a vietnam era case based on

0:24:20 to 0:24:33( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: surveillance that occurred before fisa was enacted. so it could not have decided this issue. and the issue before the fisa court oft review in 2002 had nothing to do with inherent presidential

0:24:33 to 0:24:46( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: authorities. yet these cases are repeatedly cited by supporters of the president complete with large charts of the supposedly relevant quotations. but, mr. president, the fact is not a single court,

0:24:46 to 0:24:59( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: not the supreme court or any other courter has considered whether after fisa -- after fisa was enacted the president nonetheless somehow has the authority to by pass it and authorize warrantless wiretaps.

0:24:59 to 0:25:13( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: in fact, mr. president, as the senator from pennsylvania and i discussed on the floor yesterday, just last week a federal disdirect court strongly indicated were it to reach the issue, it would find that

0:25:13 to 0:25:24( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the president must in fact follow fisa. the court was considering whether the state's secret privilege applies to claims brought by the fisa civil liberty provisions and found it does not. the --

0:25:24 to 0:25:34( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: it was based on the conclusion that congress spoke clearly, intended fisa and the criminal wiretap laws to be the exclusive means, the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance is conducted anddu

0:25:34 to 0:25:44( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: fully occupied the field in this area replacing any otherwise applicable c ommon law. here's what the court said, quote, congresss appears to have clearly intended and did establish the exclusive means fo

0:25:44 to 0:25:56( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: foreigns intelligence surveillance activities to be conducted, whatever power the executive may otherwise have had in this regard fisa limits the power of the executive branch to conduct such activities. unquote.

0:25:56 to 0:26:09( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: another court, a district court in michigan also has held that the president's wiretappingteletext program was unconstitutional. although that

0:26:09 to 0:26:21( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: decision was reversed on procedural grounds. procedural grounds by the sixth circuit. so, mr. president to the tent that there is any case law that actually addresses this issue, it totally undercuts

0:26:21 to 0:26:32( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the administration's arguments. and, of course, is certainly does nothing, nothing to support those arguments. mr. president, we also heard that past american presidents have cited executive authority

0:26:32 to 0:26:46( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: to order warrantless surveillance, of course those past president, president wilson and roosevelt are often cited were acting before the supreme court decided in 19 1967 that our communicationings

0:26:46 to 0:26:59( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: are protected by the fourth amendment and that congress decided that the executive branch can no longer unilaterally decide which florence wiretap. those -- longer decide which americans to wiretap.

0:26:59 to 0:27:16( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: those examples are not relevant to this debate. the arguments that the president has inherent executive authority to violate the law are baseless. it is not even a close case. the repeated efforts

0:27:16 to 0:27:27( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: here in the senate to prevent other wise are very discouraging. now, mr. president, it may seem that i'm going over ancient history because this program is no longer operating outside the law. but

0:27:27 to 0:27:40( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: actually this is directly relevant to the current debate. the bill that the senate is considering would actually grant retroactive immunity to any companies that cooperated with a blatantly illegal

0:27:40 to 0:27:55( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: program that went on for more than five years. and that the administration repeatedly misled congress about. so if congress short circuits these lawsuits, we will have lost a prime opportunity to finally

0:27:55 to 0:28:07( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: achieve accountability for these many years of lawbreaking and that's why the administration's been fighting so hard for this immunity. it knows that the case that's have been brought directly against

0:28:07 to 0:28:25( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the government face much more difficult procedural barriers and unlikely to result in rulings on the merit so we can get to the direct question of the legality of the president's warrantless wiretapping

0:28:25 to 0:28:36( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: program. these lawsuits involved in the telephone companies may be the last chance to obtain a judicial ruling on the lawfulness of the wiretapping program. it is bad enough that congress abdicated

0:28:36 to 0:28:46( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: its responsibility -- that congress abdicated its responsibility to hold the president accountable for breaking the law. now it is trying to absolve those who allegedly participated in his lawlessness.

0:28:46 to 0:28:55( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: this body should condemn this administration for the lawbreaking not letting the companies that alleged by cooperated off the hook. this body should not grant the government new over expensive surveillance

0:28:55 to 0:29:09( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: authorities, which brings me to the part of the bill that in some ways concerns me even more than the immunity provision. let me explain why i'm so concerned about the new surveillance powers brand in

0:29:09 to 0:29:22( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: this bill and why the modest improvements in this bill really don't come close to going far enough. first, mr. president, the fisa amendment's act would authorize the government to collect all communications

0:29:22 to 0:29:33( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: between the united states and the rest of the world. now that could mean millions upon millions of communications between innocent americans and their friends, families, or business associates overseas could

0:29:33 to 0:29:47( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: now be legally collected. parents calling their kids studying abroad, e-mails to friends serving in iraq. all of these communications could be collected with absolutely no suspicion of any wrongdoing

0:29:47 to 0:29:57( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: at all under this legislation. second, like the earlier senate version, this bill fails to effectively prohibit a practice known as reversed targeting. namely wiretapping a person overseas, what the government

0:29:57 to 0:30:08( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: is really interested in doing is listening to an american here at home with whom the foreigner is communicating. this bill does not have a provision that purports -- does have a provision that does

0:30:08 to 0:30:20( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: sort of purports to address this issue, it prohibits intentionally targeting an american person outside the united states if the purpose is to target someone reasonably believed to be in the united states.

0:30:20 to 0:30:36( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: now, this doesn't do the job, mr. president. at best this prevents the government from targeting a person overseas as a complete pretext for getting information on someone in the united states. but this

0:30:36 to 0:30:48( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: language would allow a lot more. this language would prevent unconstitutionalns warrantless surveillance of an american so long as the government has any interest, any interest at all, no matter how small in the

0:30:48 to 0:30:58( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: person overseas with whom the american is communicating. the bill does not include language that had the support of the house and the vast majority of the senate's democratic caucus that would have

0:30:58 to 0:31:09( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: required the government to obtain a court order whenever a significant purpose of the surveillance is to acquire the communications of an american in the united states. the administration's refusal to

0:31:09 to 0:31:21( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: accept that reasonable restriction on its power is really quite telling. third, the bill before us imposes no meaningful consequences if the government initiates surveillance using procedures that have

0:31:21 to 0:31:29( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: not been approved by the fisa court and the fisa court later finds, mr. president, to this those procedures were actually unlawful. says that -- say that the fisa court determ ines that the procedures

0:31:29 to 0:31:40( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: were not reasonably designed to wiretap foreigners outside the united states rather than americans here at home. under this bill all of that illegally obtained information on americans can be retained

0:31:40 to 0:31:50( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: and used. once again, mr. president, over and over again in this really sorted tale there are no consequences for illegal behavior by the government of the united states.~ now that's just wrong.

0:31:50 to 0:32:01( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: unlike the senate bill, this new bill does not generally provide for fisa court review of surveillance procedures before surveillance begins, and that's one of the changes that's been touted by supporters

0:32:01 to 0:32:13( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: of the bill. but the bill also says if the attorney general and the director of national intelligence certify that they don't have time to get a court order for intelligence important to national

0:32:13 to 0:32:25( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: security may be lost or not timely acquired, then they can go forward without judicial approval. now, this is a far cry from allowing an exception to fisa court review in a true emergency, because arguably,

0:32:25 to 0:32:37( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: mr. president, all intelligence -- all intelligence -- is important to national security, and any delay at all might cause some intelligence to be lost. so, i'm concerned that this so-called ex-general is

0:32:37 to 0:32:46( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: i exception could -- exigency exception could swallow the rule and undermine any presumption at all of prior judicial approval. no court review, no judicial review. let's just trust an administration,

0:32:46 to 0:32:55( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: including this administration, rather than having the checks and balances that clearly the founders of our country understood to be essential in any situation like this. fourth, this bill doesn't

0:32:55 to 0:33:04( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: protect the privacy of americans whose communications will be collected in vast new quantities. the administration's mantra has been, again, don't worry, we have minimization procedures. but, mr. president,

0:33:04 to 0:33:14( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: minimization procedures are nothing more than unchecked executive branch decisions about what information on americans constitutes -- quote -- "foreign intelligence." that's why on the senate floor

0:33:14 to 0:33:26( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: i joined with senator webb and senator tester earlier this year to offer an amendment to provide real protections for the privacy of americans while also giving the government the flexibility that

0:33:26 to 0:33:36( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: it needs to wiretap terrorists overseas. this bill relies solely on inadequate minimization procedures to protect innocent americans, and they are simply not enough. mr. president, as i said at the

0:33:36 to 0:33:45( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: outset, some supporters of this bill have pointed to improvements made since the senate passed the bill earlier this year. and i appreciate it that some changes have been made. but those changes are either

0:33:45 to 0:33:53( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: inadequate or they do not go to the core privacy issues raised by this bill. in fact, as the vice chairman, the distinguished senator from missouri of the senate intelligence committee, said just yesterday,

0:33:53 to 0:34:02( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the bill before us is -- quote -- "basically the senate bill all over again" with only -- quote -- "cosmetic fixes." that's what the republican vice chairman of the committee said, and any democrat

0:34:02 to 0:34:13( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: who suggests this somehow is a big change, frankly, i don't think must have read the bill. because it doesn't do the job. for example, i'm pleased that the bill provides for fisa court review of targeting

0:34:13 to 0:34:32( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: minimization procedures. as i mentioned, there is a potentially gaping loophole allowing the executive branch to go forward with surveillance without court review, an exception that could swallow

0:34:32 to 0:34:44( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the rule. the bill also now explicitly directs the fisa court to consider whether the government's procedures comply with the fourth amendment, but that's an authority it should have had anyway. the

0:34:44 to 0:34:53( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: bill includes an inspector general review of the illegal program, which is a positive change. but that doesn't make up for the lawsuits that are going to be dismisd as a result of this legislation. and

0:34:53 to 0:35:04( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: i strongly support the strength and exclusivity language which may deter a future administration from engage ing in lawless behavior. let's not lose sight of the fact that fisa as originally enacted

0:35:04 to 0:35:19( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: clearly stated already that it and the criminal wiretap laws were already the exclusive means for conducting electronic surveillance. the idea that we would simply trust this administration especially

0:35:19 to 0:35:37( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: or any administration to follow this exclusivity language is absurd. this was confirmed in the strongest terms possible, again, by a federal district court just last week. only under the unprecedented

0:35:37 to 0:35:54( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: legal theories of this administration could that clear language be ignored requiring congress to pass language that effectively says no, we really mean it. this bill, if enacted, i am by no means

0:35:54 to 0:36:11( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: reassured that this administration, which repeatedly broke the law and misled the public over the past seven years, will now respect the exclusivity of fisa. the bill does contain a key protection

0:36:11 to 0:36:23( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: for americans traveling overseas. it says if the government wants to intentionally target americans while they're outside of the country, it has to get an individualized fisa court order based on probable

0:36:23 to 0:36:37( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: cause. that is a great victory and one we should be proud of. it does not override the greatly expanded authorities in this bill to collect other types of communications involving americans. in

0:36:37 to 0:36:49( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: sum, mr. president, these improvements are obviously not enough. they are nowhere close. mr. president, i must strongly oppose this bill. when you consider how we got here, this legislation is particularly

0:36:49 to 0:37:00( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: discouraging. we discovered in late 2005 that the president authorized an illegal program in blatant violation of a statute and that congress and the public had been misled in a variety of ways leading up to

0:37:00 to 0:37:12( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: this public revelation. congress, to its credit, held hearings on the program but was largely stonewalled by the administration for many months until the administration grudgingly agreed to brief

0:37:12 to 0:37:22( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: the intelligence committees and more recently the skwraoubgts. nonetheless the vast -- the judiciary committees. nonetheless the vast majority in the house and senate have never been told what happened. in with

0:37:22 to 0:37:32( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: 2006 when the republicans tried to push through legislation to grant massive authority, we stopped it. now in a democrat controlled congress -- a democrat-controlled congress -- not only do we pass the protect

0:37:32 to 0:37:40( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: america act, but we're now about to extend for more than four years these expansive surveillance powers and we're about to grant immunity to companies that are alleged to have participated in the administration's

0:37:40 to 0:37:55( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: lawlessness. mr. president, i sit on the intelligence and judiciary committees, and i'm one of the few members of this body who has been fully briefed on the warrantless wiretapping program. based

0:37:55 to 0:38:08( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: on what i can know, i can promise members of this body will regret that we pass this legislation. i'm also familiar with the collection activity conducted under the protect america act and will continue

0:38:08 to 0:38:19( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: under this bill. i invite any of my colleagues who wish to know more about these activities to come speak to me in a classified setting. publicly august i can -- all i can say is i have serious

0:38:19 to 0:38:32( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: concerns. if we grant these due powers to the government and the effects become known to the american people, we will realize what a mistake it was. of that, i am sure. mr. president, i hope my colleagues

0:38:32 to 0:38:43( Edit History Discussion )

Russell Feingold: will think long and hard about their votes in this bill and consider how they and their constituents will feel about this vote 5, 10 or 20 years from tpou. i'm confident that history will not judge

0:38:43 to 0:38:53( Edit History Discussion )

Patrick Leahy: this senate kindly if it endorses this tragic retreat from the principles that have governed government conduct in this sensitive area for 30 years. i urge my colleagues to stand up for the rule of law and