0
Andy9o8

Bush authorized domestic wiretaps without warrants

Recommended Posts

The way the story has been presented impies he did something wrong or illegal.

I implies he did it without oversight or working with congress.

I did it with oversight and with the knowelge of congress. It is withing the law (whether is it liked or not is a different thread) and son this is a non-story.....except for the fact the one that leaked this story should go to jail........
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The way the story has been presented impies he did something wrong or illegal.

I implies he did it without oversight or working with congress.

I did it with oversight and with the knowelge of congress. It is withing the law (whether is it liked or not is a different thread) and son this is a non-story.....except for the fact the one that leaked this story should go to jail........



Where was the oversight? Oversight is not the same as knowledge. I have knowledge of quantum mechanics but I don't exercise any oversight on electrons or photons.

You are confused - again.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Congressional oversight != Congressional control



Agreed, and knowledge != oversight

Oversight: Noun

1. oversight - an unintentional omission resulting from failure to notice something


2. oversight - management by overseeing the performance or operation of a person or group
superintendence, supervising, supervision
management, direction - the act of managing something;

3. oversight - a mistake resulting from inattention
lapse
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Congressional oversight != Congressional control



Agreed, and knowledge != oversight

Oversight: Noun

1. oversight - an unintentional omission resulting from failure to notice something


2. oversight - management by overseeing the performance or operation of a person or group
superintendence, supervising, supervision
management, direction - the act of managing something;

3. oversight - a mistake resulting from inattention
lapse


Why do you choose to ignore the info that is out there just to back your position,

First, what Bush is currently doing passed a legal test back in 1986. A lawyer from Chicago had filed suit because his communications to overseas persons thought to be terrorist were being monitored. He lost.

Regan, Bush and Clinton all used the program.

Congress was breifed and did not complain. Hell, one of them wrote a letter a year ago and just chose to release it.

This whole issue is a bogus political manuver.

Get over it.

and I agree with it's usage as described.

So, you can move forward with the truth or look less than smart in your complaints and by following the NY Times and other tabloids[:/]
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They did follow due process under the act they are using. I know you are inteligent enough to know that but you choose not to acknowelge it:S

More support for "this is political bullshit" point of view...
From the LA Times....

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-media20dec20,1,1407570.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And this.
More info .

OpinionJournal.com today:

"The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978."

But the Journal notes that in a 2002 case dubbed: "In Re: Sealed Case," the FISA appeals court decision cited a previous FISA case [U.S. v. Truong], where a federal court "held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."

The court's decision went on to say: "We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

What's more, notes the Journal: "The two district court judges who have presided over the FISA court since 9/11 also knew about" the Bush surveillance program.



Oh, the pain of it all

He is going to get away again:S
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

They did follow due process under the act they are using. I know you are inteligent enough to know that but you choose not to acknowelge it

More support for "this is political bullshit" point of view...
From the LA Times....



No they did not.. Why.. because in the past only 5 of 19,000 were turned down.. and since they were investigating NON Terroist groups.. just POLITICAL ENEMIES.. the court would have turned down a high percentage of thei request... that is bad... so they circumvented the law... read that BROKE THE LAW. Where is all of that moral outcry from the FAR RIGHT.. that you guys vilified Blow Job Boy for.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1220-27.htm

Remember when President Bush joked that things would be easier if he were a dictator. I guess he wasn't joking. Democrats and Republicans are now calling for a congressional investigation to determine if the president went beyond the Constitution.

Over the weekend, the president said he authorized the program to ''intercept the international communications of people with known links to al-Qaida,'' which doesn't inspire much confidence given this administration's now debunked claims of al-Qaida links to Saddam.

If you think it disrespectful to discuss dictators, President Bush and the Constitution in the same column, be sure to give John Dean a call. The former White House counsel under President Nixon wrote a paper in 2002 in which he discussed the possibility of a America becoming a ''constitutional dictatorship

''The distinction between a 'constitutional dictator' and a strong president is remarkably thin, if nonexistent,'' he wrote.

All this eavesdropping business reminded me of C. William Michael's 2002 book ''No Greater Threat: America After September 11 and the Rise of the National Security State.''

Besides providing a detailed analysis of the USA Patriot Act, he lays out the 12 most common characteristics of a national security state.


Visible increase in uniformed security. Got that;
Lack of accountability in law enforcement. George Tenet got a medal for his fine WMD work and ''Brownie'' was praised for doing a heckuva job in the Katrina aftermath;
Reduced judiciary and executive treatment of suspects. Can you say ''detainee''?;
Secrecy of ruling authority and momentum of threat. It's an open secret that this administration has taken official secrecy to a whole new level;
Media in the service of the state. The Times held the eavesdropping story for a year, to say nothing of the WMD reporting of the major media in the run-up to the war;
National resources devoted to security threat. The most recent budget passed in Congress speaks for itself;
Patriotism moving to nationalism. Since 9-11, America was divided in two - between those who don't know the difference between patriotism and nationalism and those who are terrorist-sympathizing, blame-America-first traitors;
Lack of critical response by religions. Name one prominent national church leader critical of the way U.S. power has been wielded. At this point, I'll settle for a religious leader who isn't telling their parishioners to vote Republican to stop abortion and gay rights or who isn't calling for the assassination of foreign leaders;
Wartime mentality and permanent war economy. See any Bush speech;
Targeted individuals and groups. Scott Ritter, Richard Clarke, Joseph Wilson, Cindy Sheehan and MoveOn.org come to mind;
Direct attack on dissent. See previous comment; and
Increased surveillance of citizenry. Or as it's being called now, a ''special collection program.''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a hoot!

Nixon and watergate...........lets get back to the glory days:S

Look at my post above. It was reviewed and it is legal.

and go ahead and keep calling names and aplying titles. It is an old way to try and win an agrument but today it just shows the playbook is old..................very, very old
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can keep them coming. I am waiting for your info in responce

[Federal Register page and date: 60 FR 8169; February 13, 1995]



THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release February 9, 1995


EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949

- - - - - - -
FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801,
et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for
the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes
as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the
Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a
court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of
up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications
required by that section.

Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney
General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain
orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign
intelligence information.

Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following
officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or
defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section
303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical
searches:

(a) Secretary of State;

(b) Secretary of Defense;

(c) Director of Central Intelligence;

(d) Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation;

(e) Deputy Secretary of State;

(f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and

(g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that
capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications,
unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate.


WILLIAM J. CLINTON


THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 9, 1995.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is a hoot!

Nixon and watergate...........lets get back to the glory days:S

Look at my post above. It was reviewed and it is legal.

and go ahead and keep calling names and aplying titles. It is an old way to try and win an agrument but today it just shows the playbook is old..................very, very old



The USSR had laws, so does Red China. The Tianenmen square massacre was legal.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once again, off topic and no substance...........

You play the political gothcha game and when you are shown that your reputed enemy has not broken any laws you divert the subject.

This tatic is legal and has been used by many presidents but only now it is a problem , why, because the evil GWB is doing it:S

wire taps of internaitonal calls to known persons out of country, the info can not be used in a court of law and still you whine/.

They can listen to my calls as I got nothing to hide.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Once again, off topic and no substance...........

You play the political gothcha game and when you are shown that your reputed enemy has not broken any laws you divert the subject.

This tatic is legal and has been used by many presidents but only now it is a problem , why, because the evil GWB is doing it:S

wire taps of internaitonal calls to known persons out of country, the info can not be used in a court of law and still you whine/.

They can listen to my calls as I got nothing to hide.



OK, so you identify with O'Brien and I identify with Smith.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is a hoot!

Nixon and watergate...........lets get back to the glory days


Why not... SOOOO Many in this administration cut their baby teeth ripping off the American people under Tricky Dicky. Its their standard paranoia of the American People at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Once again, off topic and no substance...........

You play the political gothcha game and when you are shown that your reputed enemy has not broken any laws you divert the subject.

This tatic is legal and has been used by many presidents but only now it is a problem , why, because the evil GWB is doing it:S

wire taps of internaitonal calls to known persons out of country, the info can not be used in a court of law and still you whine/.

They can listen to my calls as I got nothing to hide.



Can you really not tell the difference between "foreign" and "domestic"?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Once again, off topic and no substance...........

You play the political gothcha game and when you are shown that your reputed enemy has not broken any laws you divert the subject.

This tatic is legal and has been used by many presidents but only now it is a problem , why, because the evil GWB is doing it:S

wire taps of internaitonal calls to known persons out of country, the info can not be used in a court of law and still you whine/.

They can listen to my calls as I got nothing to hide.



Can you really not tell the difference between "foreign" and "domestic"?



I understand completely. You however must not.

The program which we are addressing listens in on intenational calls in or out of the US to know terrorist contacts. If those contacts are in the US and the call is completely in the US then I have no problem with that either.......

Now, where are your references that what is being done is illegal or unprecedented in some way?? Or is just bitching about GWB good enough:S
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is some more...
From Drudge....

FLASHBACK: CLINTON, CARTER SEARCH 'N SURVEILLANCE WITHOUT COURT ORDER

Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval

Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"

WASH POST, July 15, 1994, "Administration Backing No-Warrant Spy Searches": Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."

Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."

Secret searches and wiretaps of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant.

Government officials decided in the Ames case that no warrant was required because the searches were conducted for "foreign intelligence purposes."

Government lawyers have used this principle to justify other secret searches by U.S. authorities.

"The number of such secret searches conducted each year is classified..."

Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The program which we are addressing listens in on intenational calls in or out of the US to know terrorist contacts.



Right. And I'll also add that the intercepts are being conducted outside of the U.S.

Quote

If those contacts are in the US and the call is completely in the US then I have no problem with that either.......



I have a MAJOR problem with it: that's where the FBI and other domestic law enforcement agencies come in. Believe me when I say that you don't want DCI's jurisdiction to include your own backyard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a MAJOR problem with it: that's where the FBI and other domestic law enforcement agencies come in. Believe me when I say that you don't want DCI's jurisdiction to include your own backyard.



Probably true.......the domestic agencies should handle those as they operate with more restrictions.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assuming you're correct that Carter & Clinton each issued the executive orders to which you refer:
In my opinion, to the extent that those orders authorized wiretaps within the territoral boundaries of United States without a judicially-issued warrant, they are unconstitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Assuming you're correct that Carter & Clinton each issued the executive orders to which you refer:
In my opinion, to the extent that those orders authorized wiretaps within the territoral boundaries of United States without a judicially-issued warrant, they are unconstitutional.



You forget one very important principle. If GWB gets a BJ in the Oval Office it will be quite OK because Clinton Did It First.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0