VirusHead

I am sorry to disagree that you offered any FACTS, you offered a single instance and it was on a obvious biased blog. I don’t see how you can offer this as a fact to say that Clinton never used warrant less wiretaps. This was a very limited information entry and it offers no facts.

You continue to point to the FISA law and it doesn’t cover this program. This program was set up under US Constitutional powers given to the President and until it is proven that this wasn’t the case it doesn’t represent a violation of FISA or the 4th amendment.

Gee, do you think the difference between the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration is the fact that we’re at WAR!?

Duh.

You mean the WaronTerrorTM? Afghanistan? Iraq? The Senate approved executive powers under certain conditions, none of which the President honored, and it urned down language that would have given the President the powers he took anyway.

The law is still the law. The use of warrantless wiretaps on American citizens was never discussed when Congress authorized the White House to use force against al-Qaida after the Sept. 11 attacks. Congress explicitly denied a White House request for war-making authority in the United States.

Gonzoles even argued that they didn’t try to get legislation passed later because they thought it likely Congress would refuse to pass it – this despite having already argued that Congress had already authorized it.

Bush admitted that he had ordered the National Security Agency to intercept Americans’ communications without seeking lawful judicial approval. Similar abuse of power was part of the impeachment charge brought against Richard Nixon in 1974. Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his own illegal behavior! Some democracy.

If you recall, the first line of defense was that the spying was necessary because getting warrants under FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) was too “time-consuming.” Of course, they can be approved in a matter of hours, or even up to 72 hours after the fact. And almost all of them are approved.

The USA Patriot Act expanded FISA significantly, equipping the government with the tools it needed to fight terrorism. Further amendments to FISA were granted under the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2002 and the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

Show me where in powers granted in the commander-in-chief clause that grants the president the ability to conduct clandestine surveillance of American civilians without any oversight whatsoever from any form of the judicial system. None of these acts grants the president unchecked power to spy on our own people.

The Clinton executive order permitted such searches only under certain very limited circumstances that are legal under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the very statute that Bush has admitted ignoring. Clinton approved physical searches without a court order to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year — but only if the attorney general made the certifications required by Section 302(a)(1) of FISA. That section requires the attorney general to certify that the search or surveillance in question would not invade the property or premises of “a United States person,” meaning a citizen or someone living here legally.

If the President can act like a dictator, disregarding constitutional checks and balances, then isn’t that a point for the terrorists? Aren’t we supposed to be defending democracy and freedom and human rights?

The old conservative republicans honored the separation of powers – they have been replaced by this neoconservative (or whatever you want to call it – I have other names) tide, which worships executive power and thinks of the Constitution as an inconvenience.

Bush could have gotten most of what he wanted without disregarding the law. Perhaps he wasn’t spying for legitimate reasons. What would he need to keep the judicial system – even the secret one – in the dark? Chew on that, and watch things develop.

Just a quick note to wish you a great 2006!