SOTU: Bush Falsely Claims That Previous Administration Did The Same Thing
SOTU: Bush Falsely Claims That Previous Administration Did The Same Thing
Bush said: “Previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have.”
FACT – BUSH IGNORE THE LAW, OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS FOLLOWED IT: The White House has made this claim before and the AP debunked it:
McClellan said the Clinton-Gore administration had engaged in warrantless physical searches, and he cited an FBI search of the home of CIA turncoat Aldrich Ames without permission from a judge. He said Clinton’s deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick, had testified before Congress that the president had the inherent authority to engage in physical searches without warrants.
“I think his hypocrisy knows no bounds,†McClellan said of Gore.
But at the time of the Ames search in 1993 and when Gorelick testified a year later, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act required warrants for electronic surveillance for intelligence purposes, but did not cover physical searches. The law was changed to cover physical searches in 1995 under legislation that Clinton supported and signed.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Clinton did it — drink the whole bottle!
January 31st, 2006 at 9:32 pmHow can the president get away with such blatant lying!
January 31st, 2006 at 9:34 pmosama’s phone is tap’ed. he recieve’s a call from the states. the nsa must hang up to protect their privacy. is this really what you are all proposing?
January 31st, 2006 at 10:07 pmTheir privacy is constitutionally protected already, mule. The NSA should not be on that line. Get a warrant, no problemo.
January 31st, 2006 at 10:09 pmosama’s privacy is constitutionally protected?
January 31st, 2006 at 10:16 pmthe paperwork is an inch thick for the warrant.
#osama’s privacy is constitutionally protected?
the paperwork is an inch thick for the warrant.
Comment by howlingmule — January 31, 2006 @ 10:16 pm
If Bush HAD Osamas Number, then WHY hasnt he caught, or not care where he is?
February 1st, 2006 at 12:01 amI think you terribly misunderstand Sigint Datamining and how it Works. People dont TAP phones. The Computers, using Diction databases and Filters, pick up on ‘CODE’ words, the call is then marked for further evaluation.
Bush could have gotten a Warrant after all….
OSAMAS been running around for 4+ YEARS!
thats not enough TIME to get a Warrant? Sheesh.
Lets also talk about the that the Saudi Hijackers were here on Student Visas. That means they weren’t American Citizens and could have been tapped without a court order
February 1st, 2006 at 12:05 amA recent analysis performed by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research arm of Congress, however, found that “President Bush’s rationale for eavesdropping on Americans without warrants rests on questionable legal ground, and Congress does not appear to have given him the authority to order the surveillance,” the New York Times reported in early January.
“Thirty-five years ago,” the San Francisco Chronicle’s Bob Egelko recently wrote, “President Richard Nixon claimed constitutional authority to wiretap Americans’ phone calls to protect national security without asking a judge…” In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled “against Nixon, saying the Constitution granted the powers he was claiming to judges, not presidents.”
Egelko also pointed out the “Presidents have approved wiretaps without court orders since the 1940s, but the legality of the practice was thrown into doubt after the Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that electronic eavesdropping was a search, and thus covered by the prohibition on unreasonable searches in the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.”
February 1st, 2006 at 12:23 amumm. comment #7, 50 U.S.C. 1802(a)(1) the section of u.s. code that allows for warrarntless wiretapping, states that it can only be done, to gather foreign intelligence, and that it can only be done by foreign powers, and when, there is substantial likelyhood that no u.s. person will be involved.
while foreign nationals on student visas aren’t considered u.s. persons, USC1802 states that foreign powers can only be defined by USC1801(1)(2)(3)
no where in that section of code does it say that people on student visas are considered foreign powers
February 1st, 2006 at 12:58 amWhen all else fails > Bush blames Clinton > lol.
February 1st, 2006 at 1:54 amClinton was a wimp when it came to fighting terrorism. That’s why we are in the mess we are in today.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:10 am[...] That and other quibbles related to Bush’s economic claims are explained by Peter Wallsten and Maura Reynolds in today’s Los Angeles Times. Wallsten and Reynolds also debunk Bush’s defense of his NSA spy program, a defense that employed the same old, familiar lies. Lies like “Previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have†and “Appropriate Members of Congress have been kept informed.†[...]
February 1st, 2006 at 10:51 amTina, it’s moronic imbeciles who support the unelected boob that have gotten us into the mess we are in today. But at least you’re not stupid enough not to realize that we are in a mess. There’s still hope.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:18 pmBush is spinning and lying to the American People as Usual. Not to worry he will be gone forever in 2 years, then later on to the Hell to reap for whatever he sow so far, including other criminal elements from the republican party.
http;//www.electgore2008.com
February 1st, 2006 at 4:43 pm