http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/2006/03/american-dictatorship-down-pat.html

“communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers,” this includes foreign agents in the USA if the communication is international.

“no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party” notice it says no likelihood, not that it is illegal if it happens, that is covered under the minimization procedures.

“meet the definition of minimization procedures” this means if unintential surveillance of a US person occurs, procedures have to be followed such as destruction of the surveillance material. It does not mean “go to jail if this happens”.

It’s all right there if only you guys would learn to read and comprehend.

Can Senators be impeached or do they have to be removed by violation of the law?

Or can they only be removed by violating rules of an ethics committee?

I ask these questions because I would like to see my Republican Senators,Hutchinson and Cornyn, either put in jail for the torture that they have allowed or exile them to a third world country. Putting them in front of the Hague would be a dream come true.

What can I do as a citizen to remove these yahoos from office?

How about you give the full section, so as to not lie to anybody. There are resrictions in that section followed by the “certifies in writing under oath that -”

(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—

(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—

(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or

(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;

(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and

(C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801 (h) of this title; and

if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.

The most important part of this is in the part you posted:

the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath

Alberto Gonzales was not sworn in.

Sorry, you are trying to pass off a lie. Sorry, my Kung-Fu is stronger than your Kung-Fu.

Your deceit failed bobblehead.

“(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—”

you can look up the conditions for yourself. Bottom line, one year, no court order, for foreign intel collection, as long as minimization procedures are followed. Now you all see how the liberal leadership has lied you into deep disappointment. This surveillance was already authorized. bobbleleads

http://www.rayrobison.com

What else is funny is that David Horowitz looks just like Mark Borchardt from American Movie: http://miblogweighsaton.blogspot.com/2006/03/questions-for-david-horowitz.html

You hit the nail on the head. What else could it be? Just as sure as we are breathing, the NSA was eavesdropping on members from both sides of the aisle in Congress (and others who went up against the administration at times, such as Powell). Probably had some good dirt on them, too. Had the Intelligence Committee investigated, and found out who was on the list, Congress would have had no choice but to impeach and remove them from office. End of the Bush empire.

Contrast this with the ports deal. Yeah, Bush has threatened a veto of any attempt to block the deal, but that’s been about it. Suppose a bill goes through to block, and Bush’s veto is overridden. At worst it’s political egg on Bush’s face, and another company gets to manage the ports. Bush keeps his job, and the public is impressed enough with the Repubs’ stance on national security that they maintain control of Congress in Nov.