Obama threatens to veto intel bill

President Obama will veto a major intelligence funding bill unless lawmakers remove provisions that would toughen congressional oversight of spy agencies and require more stringent congressional notification of intelligence activities.


Three sections of the bill are of "serious concern to the intelligence community," OMB Director Peter Orszag wrote to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Vice Chairman Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Calif.) and ranking member Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.). The three sections are "so serious that the president's senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill if they are included."


At the top of the list are Senate provisions that expand congressional notification requirements when the intelligence community changes to covert actions. Current law requires the president to notify the Gang of 8 — the top eight lawmakers on the two congressional intelligence committees — when the most dramatic actions are taken. The new funding bill would require the president to notify the eight when an administration makes any changes to covert action policy, and it would require intelligence officials to notify every intelligence committee member of the "main features" of all intelligence activities.

So this would be Obama's first veto. Well it doesn't surprise me what type of bill he will veto.

www.politico.com...

One more point for Obama looking like Bush's policies.

The maintenance of Patriot Act was another.

I will keep judgment until he steps down however... almost every president does last minute pardons and changes afterall.

Wait, I'm confused. Isn't Obama a socialist? Is this news that conservatives like? This should garner support for Obama from the right, right?

For someone who campaigned on transparency and accountability, it's just more hypocrisy. Here he has a chance to increase oversight and transparency, even if by a small margin, and what happens? Threatens to veto the bill because of "concerns" from the intelligence community.

Well I have a concern too, Mr. Obama. Except if I shared it here, I'd be told straight where to go instead of me telling you where to go.

reply to post by skunknuts


Quit your obfuscation and lap dog attitude. The Dems and the Repubs are the same in accounts for transparency and control.

One party wants control for their purpose, the other party wants it for theirs.

Sick of control freaks on both sides of the aisle.

Kill the Federal Reserve, vote out all incumbents, revoke all income taxes and other control parameters.

Hell, the debt doesn't matter right? So why is their income taxes? Explain that to me. The Federal Reserve brings in enough on the creation of money as it is. So why even give them our income taxes. Still trying to figure that one out.

It is only play money anyway, RIGHT?

OK, let me explain this in a different manner than most. In fact I will even provide some links to allow you to read your own.

First in this mishmash we have the Congress wanting the CIA and the Intelligence agencies to be accountable and provide reports and updates that would of course become law if allowed to pass. It's about having the CIA answer questions which of course the CIA does not want to do. In fact, the CIA is acting like the FED Reserve in that they do not want anyone to know what they are doing and to whom or why because it will begin to shine light on covert operations that have nothing to do with anything lawful or authorized. As such, it is the Congress that is demanding some accountability.

Second is the NSA, CIA and other Intelligence agencies that do not want to be held accountable and do not want anyone to know what they do, when they do it or why they do it whenever they do whatever it is they do that they don't want us to know about. This sorry lame excuse is used to imply that agency assets will be threatened or endangered by such a reporting requirement to Congress. Starting to see the Picture?

Third in this issue is Obama. Well, in case you haven't been keeping up, Obama is a puppet of the CIA and has been a CIA asset since the late 70's.
Since Obama does what he is told, he has been told by the CIA that they the CIA do want such a reporting to Congress rule and are demanding of Obama to veto the bill if not deleted. Since Obama will do what he is told like the grocery boy sacking groceries for the local food store. He will do nothing that the CIA does not want and in this case he will Veto the bill just like he was told by the CIA he must do to act tough.

With all the above it becomes clear that the CIA does not want any accountability and Obama does not want any CIA retaliation for not doing what they told him and well the only losers in this game of deception is the Congress and the American public.

We deserve some accountability from those that manage our Nations security and if they don't want to be held accountable then cut their funding.

Here are those links that will allow you to make your own mind up about what is going on. Enjoy and thanks for the posting.

blogs.abcnews.com... tml

rawstory.com...

Sorry about that, try this link. The last one cut off the tml and so it wont load.

Try this again:

blogs.abcnews.com... tml

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
For someone who campaigned on transparency and accountability, it's just more hypocrisy. Here he has a chance to increase oversight and transparency, even if by a small margin, and what happens?

Threatens to veto the bill because of "concerns" from the intelligence community.

Well I have a concern too, Mr. Obama. Except if I shared it here, I'd be told straight where to go instead of me telling you where to go.

Wait you don't understand. That whole bit about transparency was a campaign promise. Those are meant to be broken.

*sarcasm off*

First off...

How did you leap from

Originally posted by Misoir
.....The three sections are "so serious that the president's senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill if they are included."

to

Obama threatens to veto intel bill

Which is it? Has he threatened to Veto it? Or has someone said if these sections are included that the Presidents senior advisors (whoever they are) would recommend he veto it?

Maybe I am just having a low patience day, but don't we get enough spin and BS from the news and politicians in general without further distorting facts here?

Has OBAMA...not some unamed person claiming his advisors would "recommend" he veto it...HAS OBAMA HIMSELF threatened to veto this bill?

Link Please...

Otherwise save the BS thread title for a Fox News forum or something. NOT ATS.

[edit on 16-3-2010 by maybereal11]