Other Resources My Cup of Joe » W. and Wire Tapping Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 4
 
 
W. and Wire Tapping
OptionResults
OK17 Votes - [31.48%]
Not OK29 Votes - [53.7%]
I have nothing to hide, National Security is IMPORTANT!6 Votes - [11.11%]
Do you think they know that I don't use the bathroom anymore?2 Votes - [3.7%]

2005-12-20 6:48 PM
in reply to: #309370

User image

Elite
4344
2000200010010010025
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
tim_edwards - 2005-12-20 7:11 PM

10 points to the first person to identify the source of this quote:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

To those folks who do not object to the President George W. Bush authorizing searches of US Citizens without any oversight - would you be equally comfortable if President Hillary Rodham Clinton were to do the same?

Bill of Rights.  Amendment IV



2005-12-20 9:44 PM
in reply to: #308581

Elite Veteran
781
500100100252525
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
I worked in the Executive Branch for 5 years...and I'm really enjoying the commentary on BT.

If you think for one nanosecond that GWB didn't have legal top-cover each and every step of the way, you're high. Or have been abducted by aliens. Your choice.

I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to quote you how his actions have been legal, but you can bet that there is a significant legal case to be made on his behalf. Washington lawyers are--well--lawyers. They are the opposite of push-overs. Heck, we staffers sneezed and the lawyers were all over it.

I'd add more but I really don't want to be insulting. Just don't insult me. Unless you work in the Executive Branch. If so, fire away.
2005-12-21 9:09 AM
in reply to: #309466

User image

Elite
2733
200050010010025
Venture Industries,
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
lynda - 2005-12-20 9:44 PM

I worked in the Executive Branch for 5 years...and I'm really enjoying the commentary on BT.

If you think for one nanosecond that GWB didn't have legal top-cover each and every step of the way, you're high. Or have been abducted by aliens. Your choice.

I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to quote you how his actions have been legal, but you can bet that there is a significant legal case to be made on his behalf. Washington lawyers are--well--lawyers. They are the opposite of push-overs. Heck, we staffers sneezed and the lawyers were all over it.

I'd add more but I really don't want to be insulting. Just don't insult me. Unless you work in the Executive Branch. If so, fire away.


Lynda makes a great point: I've been spending my morning reading portions of the Patriot Act, U.S. code sections, including The International Emergency Powers Act; The Classified Information Procedures Act, The International Emergency Economic Powers Act, The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996; and I've come to a couple of conclusions:
1) Executive and State Department Lawers earn every penny of their salary. 2) This issue about wire tapping is far more complex then reported by the media and encompasses far more legal concepts and laws then just what has been reported. 3) The power of the president is far greater than I thought.
2005-12-21 9:47 AM
in reply to: #309603

User image

Philadelphia, south of New York and north of DC
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
ASA22 - 3) The power of the president is far greater than I thought.


For example?
2005-12-21 9:58 AM
in reply to: #308581

User image

Master
4101
20002000100
Denver
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
I'm getting my information from the press, so I may be wrong - but the impression I get is that the legal advice, while I'm sure is thorough, is questionable. These are the same lawyers who say that anything short of organ failure is not torture and does not violate the Geneva conventions. From what I gather, in this case the lawyers are arguing that the president is deriving all of his powers to circumvent exisisting laws such as FISA from the authorization to go to war and use force against those who had something to do with 9/11. It seems like the admin lawyers take an overly broad view of presidential authority and it will be interesting to see how successful they are at defending this view.
2005-12-21 10:35 AM
in reply to: #309645

Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping

dontracy - 2005-12-21 9:47 AM
ASA22 - 3) The power of the president is far greater than I thought.


For example?

Executive orders is an example.  Below is the text from an EO written by Clinton in 1995.

Presidential Documents
8169
Federal Register
Vol. 60, No. 29
Monday, February 13, 1995
Title 3—
The President
Executive Order 12949 of February 9, 1995
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.

THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 9, 1995.
[FR Doc. 95–3671
Filed 2-9-95; 2:30 pm]
Billing code 3195–01–P



2005-12-21 10:37 AM
in reply to: #309727

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Didn't Bush et all come into office condemning Executive Orders? I have a vague recollection...
2005-12-21 10:39 AM
in reply to: #309731

Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Renee - 2005-12-21 10:37 AMDidn't Bush et all come into office condemning Executive Orders? I have a vague recollection...


I really don't know, he could have.
2005-12-21 11:25 AM
in reply to: #308581

User image

Master
4101
20002000100
Denver
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
I saw this in a column in the Wash POst & thought it ws interesting...

"None of these [defenses of the spying] makes sense if the NSA program involved nothing more than an expansion of ordinary taps of specific individuals. After all, the FISA court would have approved taps of domestic-to-international calls as quickly and easily as they do with normal domestic wiretaps. What's more, Congress wouldn't have had any objection to supporting a routine program expansion; George Bush wouldn't have explained it with gobbledegook about the difference between monitoring and detecting; Jay Rockefeller wouldn't have been reminded of TIA [a John Poindexter effort]; and the Times wouldn't have had any issues over divulging sensitive technology.

"It seems clear that there's something involved here that goes far beyond ordinary wiretaps, regardless of the technology used. Perhaps some kind of massive data mining, which makes it impossible to get individual warrants? Stay tuned."

2005-12-21 11:29 AM
in reply to: #309731

User image

Philadelphia, south of New York and north of DC
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Renee - 2005-12-21 11:37 AMDidn't Bush et all come into office condemning Executive Orders? I have a vague recollection...


Hold on, Renee. You're a triathlete, you're only suppose to pedal forwards.

In the first post of this thread, Jim said that the surveillance was an example of the POTUS running roughshod over the Constitution.

I still don't fully understand the law involved here, but it seems that it is at least probable that the POTUS was following the law.

If that's true, then I have a qustion:

Who leaked this and why did they do it?
2005-12-21 12:09 PM
in reply to: #308581

User image

Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
What do the courts have to say about FISA and the President's authority to conduct warrrantless searches?

it's not fun reading, so I'll summarize, 2002 case, interpreting FISA, in dicta notes the precedent of "all cases discussing the issue" that the President has inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information and that FISA cannot encroach on that inherent authority.

In Re Unsealed Case

I can't wait until Bush is voted out of office, then all the political sniping will stop..... right? anyone? Bueller?


2005-12-21 2:21 PM
in reply to: #309839

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping

ChrisM - 2005-12-21 12:09 PM

I can't wait until Bush is voted out of office, then all the political sniping will stop..... right? 

Oh yeah. Cuz we all know political sniping is a new phenomenon, peculiar to this Presidency only. President Clinton was daily showered with daisy petals by all members of Congress; Newt Gingrich used to wash Willy's feet in a rose water bath each morning.

2005-12-21 2:27 PM
in reply to: #308581

User image

Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
uhhhh, I was kidding, sniping is as old as the trees, as much as we like to think we are so ultra partisan these days (but it's interesting that substance is ignored in favor of sarcasm )

Man, this cuppa joe forum is spicy

Edited by ChrisM 2005-12-21 2:29 PM
2005-12-21 3:44 PM
in reply to: #308581

User image

Regular
64
2525
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Do it! Gotta smoke these guys out...
2005-12-21 8:07 PM
in reply to: #309971

User image

Elite
2733
200050010010025
Venture Industries,
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Just so everyone is aware, every President has used the executive office for intelligence gathering and covert operations. George Washington had a secret "slush fund" for that purpose that at one point equaled 13% of the Governments budget. He and he alone was in control of that fund for the use of covert operations and intelligence gathering (spying).
2005-12-22 8:24 AM
in reply to: #310247

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping

True but that was when the Republic was still in it's infancy and they didn't know from one month to the next if the Republic would survive. That is not our current state of affairs. The US will withstand our enemies; we will be our own undoing in the long run.

Even during the Revolutionary War period, before the Republic was fully formed, George Washington accepted extraordinary war powers from the Continental Congress with the caveat that he would accept the powers only so that he could help form a Republic in which a leader would have no such powers (only he said it more eloquently than that).

You must admit, GWBush is no George Washington.



2005-12-22 9:44 AM
in reply to: #310409

User image

Elite
2733
200050010010025
Venture Industries,
Subject: RE: W. and Wire Tapping
Renee - 2005-12-22 8:24 AM

True but that was when the Republic was still in it's infancy and they didn't know from one month to the next if the Republic would survive. That is not our current state of affairs. The US will withstand our enemies; we will be our own undoing in the long run.

Even during the Revolutionary War period, before the Republic was fully formed, George Washington accepted extraordinary war powers from the Continental Congress with the caveat that he would accept the powers only so that he could help form a Republic in which a leader would have no such powers (only he said it more eloquently than that).

You must admit, GWBush is no George Washington.



I agree Bush is no Washington. However, my point was to demonstrate that every president, since Washington, to the current administration has used the executive branch for conducting covert operations.
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » W. and Wire Tapping Rss Feed  
 
 
of 4