Are they working together?

I have a two simple questions that I think need to be answered. These are solely based upon news reports, which are widely accepted and from credible news sources.

1. Why didn't Nancy Pelosi try to stop the NSA program when she learned of it?

2. Why didn't any other Democrats in the know, try to stop the program?

These are not as simple. These are speculative questions. They are tin foil hat questions.

3. Are the Democrats in the "know" about these programs working with the Republicans to keep them secret?

4. What would happen if America's two political parties decided to work together to gain and maintain power?

were told was confidential. They were all told they couldn't speak about it to anyone, or ask questions.

Other than leaking the info, I don't think they had much choice.

they would have pressed charges against any Democrat who had leaked it.

We also don't know how much they even told her.

1. She did draft a letter asking for more detail that, IIRC, was never answered. She was told, just as the few others that knew were told, that they could NOT speak of it with anyone that had not been briefed due to the ever present "national security" issues as well as the classified nature of the briefing.

2. Jay Rockefeller did draft a letter to speak to his concerns. He wrote it by hand as he could not tell his staff what he knew either. He could not enlist anyone to research what they were doing either. He questioned the legality and the scope in his hand written note that he made a copy of and then "hid" from his staff.

Their hands were tied. Who could they go to without being brought up on charges? They had no power to stop them even if they knew just to what degree this program was actually being used for. I, personally, don't think they knew just how big or involved this scheme was. I think they were told just enough to make them appear complicit and no more.

3. No, I don't think that has happened in this case.

(n/t)

That's why we're totally stuck with these two parties.

the extent of it?

I wouldn't trust that criminal administration to come clean on anything.

What the Congressmembers were told, they couldn't contest, because any briefings would have been secret and the revealing secret briefings could land them in big trouble.

Sometimes I think the administration briefs them on things just so they can't talk about them.

Suppose you are a member of Congress and you're told of or find information of an illegal domestic spying program, but you're told you can't say anything about it. Now, given it's illegal, why should anyone who is committing or aiding illegal and unconstitutional acts have any authority to keep you quiet? Is "National Defense" really a reason for not saying anything when every citizen's constitutional rights have been violated, with not one damned terrorist to show for it in the YEARS that this has been going on in the name of fighting terrorism? Where is that point where you make a moral choice between selling out every US citizen (and everyone all over the world on the other end of the phone line) and speaking up against treating all citizens as though they were the terrorists that haven't been caught?

Say, whatever happened to that Anthrax terrorist, anyway? Silly puppy, if he really wanted to shake up the Washington power elite, why would he bother with Democrats or reporters?

Oh, wait...

By the way, did you hear what so and so said in that conference call the other day? What's the strategy for screwing their bill before they can get it together? What are the chances we can catch a few of the other guys screwing each other over at the Watergate after the Friday poker game, eh?

Just a couple of thoughts, partly because the idea that favors or money (or 'clubhouse only!' rules) would matter more makes me ill, especially when it comes to such a majority of our elected officials. Over petty stuff, maybe--sad to say, but when the stakes are this high and things are getting this out of hand? Graft is still on the table, given the environment and climate of the day, but I'd like to believe at least some of our reps are caving over something a little more persuasive than the bucks and the power.

4. What would happen if America's two political parties decided to work together to gain and maintain power?

Good question. I think the probable answer is fascist totalitarianism.

Edited to add: Are they working together? Not intentionally, no. Involuntarily, maybe.