Gingrich on NSA Phone Records Program: Administration’s Conduct Can’t ‘Be Defended By Reasonable People’
Gingrich on NSA Phone Records Program: Administration’s Conduct Can’t ‘Be Defended By Reasonable People’
The disclosure of the NSA’s domestic call-tracking program has drawn criticism from some of Bush’s key allies:
House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH): “I am concerned about what I read with regard to NSA databases of phone calls.”
Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH): “While I support aggressively tracking al-Qaida, the administration needs to answer some tough questions about the protection of our civil liberties.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “The idea of collecting millions or thousands of phone numbers, how does that fit into following the enemy?”
Last night on Fox, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich added his name to the growing list of bipartisan critics of the program. Watch it:
I don’t think the way they’ve handled this can be defended by reasonable people. It is sloppy. It is contradictory, and frankly for normal Americans, it makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations.
Full transcript below:
GINGRICH: Good to be with you, Alan.
COLMES: Here’s what the president said in April of 2004 about the whole issue of wiretapping and warrants. Here’s what he said then.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLMES: Then he said when it came out a little while ago that there was some wiretapping he said it only applies to international communications. And now we’re finding something else. So it just seems we’re not getting a consistent story here, are we?
GINGRICH: No. You’re not.
COLMES: Why not?
GINGRICH: Look, I’m not — Alan, I’m not going to defend the indefensible. The Bush administration has an obligation to level with the American people.
And I’m prepared to defend a very aggressive anti-terrorist campaign, and I’m prepared to defend the idea that the government ought to know who’s making the calls, as long as that information is only used against terrorists, and as long as the Congress knows that it’s underway.
But I don’t think the way they’ve handled this can be defended by reasonable people. It is sloppy. It is contradictory, and frankly for normal Americans, it makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Newt’s positioning himself for a run, nothing more.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:52 pmIs it just me, or is the Newtster looking kind of old these days?
May 12th, 2006 at 1:54 pmWell, at least Newt’s saying the right things. It’s a start.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:57 pmI believe the real intention by the govt. here is to try to put a muzzle on dissention.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:57 pmNewt can go jump on a sharp stick for all I care. The “K Street Project” can’t be “defended by reasonable people”.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:58 pmLet’s just hope this isn’t simply posturing. Specter and Graham are famous for blustering on the front end of issues only to cave in when it is actually time to enact some tangible investigations or consequences. As to Newt…looks to be trying to set himself up as a candidate in 2008…I think he has determined that he needs some distance between he and the President to be a viable alternative for the Repugs.
At the same time, the D’s need a clear message on this issue that allows them to be tough on terror but even tougher on doing so UNDER THE LAW.
more observations here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
May 12th, 2006 at 1:58 pmJust because a private company can do something, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the government is allowed to do it, too. The government has to have probable cause to be allowed to intrude into your affairs. The fact that they let corporations do it without our knowledge or consent all the time is not the issue (though who gave them the right to do that is another good question). The government has limits on what it is allowed to do.
And this is in no way permissible under the president’s “inherent authority as Commander in Chief.” The C-in-C commands the military, not the civilian community. He can’t tell you what to do if you’re not in the Armed Forces (or his administration). And he can’t order someone to violate your rights.
And as for that stupid ABC poll, they should be drummed out of the polling business for that one. I read some of the questions and when asking people if they thought the government should be allowed to buy those records, no mention wa made that it was done without a court order or warrant. Give people the informaiton they need to come up with a well-informed opinion before you ask what that opinion is. Throw that poll out.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:58 pmI agree he’s running — let’s use him then
May 12th, 2006 at 1:59 pmNewt has never and will never have the interests of Americans at heart.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:59 pmIs Newt planning on running for president?
May 12th, 2006 at 2:00 pmI’m betting that within the month, more than one Republican will use the phrase, “George Bush who? Never heard of the guy.”
Man, are the rats jumping ship, or what? I guess the 29% figure is starting to scare the GOP and wake them up. Damn. I was hoping they’d sleep until late October.
It’s funny how I keep running into people who begin a political conversation by saying, “You know, I used to be a Republican. But then….” Can’t say I’ve run into anyone saying, “You know, I used to be a Democrat, but these Republicans are so awesome at running this country, I’m going to support them now.”
Sniff, sniff…. smell that? I do: GOP fear.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:00 pmNewt,
May 12th, 2006 at 2:02 pmNone of this is “sloppy”, as you’d like to believe.
This is calculated, premeditated action on behalf of a criminal organization that makes its living off of the destruction of America.
in other words, ’sloppy’ means they got caught and faults them for that. Oh by the was nobody CARES what you think.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:03 pmIf Newtie is jumping on the bandwagon, then you know everyone is pissed off about this latest round of illegal bs.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:05 pmToo bad the jackasses let this happen in the first place. Geez, you give someone unlimited power and they try using it. Go figure.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:15 pmWayne and I don’t normally watch Joe Scarborough, but last night even he went off on a diatribe against this. I was pretty surprised, and somewhat heartened.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:15 pmDiscussions of this type of intrusion inevitably bring out the “I don’t have anything to hide” crowd. Ceding the 4th Amendment comes so easy to many people. Ask them if they’d like glass walls on their houses. Nothing to hide, right? How about mailing a list to every household of every stop all their cars made the previous month. Dad gets mom’s list and vice-versa. We’ll just tag every car with a monitor and let everyone know all its travels. Nothing to hide, right? How about a high powered microphone by the watercooler at work. Nobody ever gossips or says anything untoward about the boss. Nothing to hide, right? Let’s see, we’ll publish on the internet everything you view on pay cable, a monthly summary accessible to all. Nothing to hide, right? Where do we stop? We don’t, not until each of our daily lives are akin to the amoeba under the microscope, every undulation of its protoplasm noted and recorded. Happy monitoring!!
May 12th, 2006 at 2:16 pm#17 steve,
Nicely put. I am also sick of hearing the “nothing to hide” argument as support for government spying, especially illegal government spying. You provided a great list of the things we wouldn’t necessarily want people to know about ourselves.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:22 pmKnee jerk neo-cons support King dumbya no matter what.
Traditional republicans SHOULD be up in arms about this kind of stuff. Aren’t they supposed to be the party of limited government?
Funny thing about the neo-cons, they’ve ended up turning Democrats into old time republican values & republicans into blithering fascists, for the most part. Jeez, I guess this is one of those only Nixon could go to China, only dumbya could turn Democrats into liberty & freedom fighters.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:24 pm“The idea of collecting millions or thousands of phone numbers, how does that fit into following the enemy?â€
Billions. With a “B”.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:24 pmChanges in values are common in politics Kindness, up until desegregation and the equal rights movement, the roles were reversed to a certian extent. Strom Thurmond and the dixiecrats broke away from the democratic party because of desegregation, and when they failed to win any popular support outside the south, joined the republican party.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:27 pmThough they go to great efforts to demonize, the greatest enemy of Republicans is always other Repubicans.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:27 pmThe NSA must have something on Newt… That he doesn’t want known.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:28 pmIts “business as usual” as Fox pays Newt Gingrich to blather (in a lather) without even bothering to consult with, or interview, a true legal expert on the Fourth Amendment. “Fair and balanced” my lilly white ass.
I would rather die a free man than live one moment as a slave of fear.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:29 pmYes, Newt criticized Bush, but the criticism was directed at Bush’s handling of the PR aspects, not the legality or the facts of what Bush was doing. In fact, Gingrich repeatedly emphasized that he had no problem with what Bush had actually done and he thought Americans would endorse it, too.
I thought Newt’s final words in the segment were very chillng, when he made the Fourth Amendment sound like a legal technicality. “Look, Abraham Lincoln fought a civil war in which at one point he suspended habeas corpus because it was the price of sustaining the union. In the Second World War, we did the things we had to do to win and a US Supreme Court Justice said the constitution is not a suicide pact… And I think most Americans would agree that there’s a practical issue of national security that transcends the lawyers.â€
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/12/fox_news_doesnt_like_the_fourth_amendment.php
May 12th, 2006 at 2:30 pmFunny thing about the neo-cons, they’ve ended up turning Democrats into old time republican values & republicans into blithering fascists, for the most part.
Ding! Ding!
You win the cupie doll. That’s exactly what’s happened.
Traditional conservatives (fiscal responsiblitiy/small government) have more in common with the Democratic party than the Republican party. Independents are now left ward leaning due the fact the right has moved further to the right.
The only problem with this is that traditional Democrats are now labeled as moonbats. And the old-school far left folks are falling off the left side of the political chart.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:30 pmHe’s not criticizing the program, though…just the handling.
It’s all a part of the incompetence meme. He’ll never admit that the policy is just bad.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:35 pmHe’ll never admit that the policy is just bad.
You know, you’re right.
I’ll go ahead and admit it for him.
The policy is just bad. God-awful bad. Supremely bad. Really, really, really, really bad.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:39 pmYou want to see our future? Watch two movies: Gattaca and Brazil. We’re doomed…
May 12th, 2006 at 2:51 pmI, as a liberal, progressive, I believe in basic decency, honor, truth, humanity, healing of our planet, feeding and educating the world. If there is something evil about any of this, please, tell me.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:52 pmI love the movie Brazil. A fine cinematic adventure.
One topic, Newt does defend the NSA phone spying as legit, he is saying that the handling of it is sloppy. no suprise from the republican water carriers.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:55 pm[...] ThinkProgress has a round-up. [...]
May 12th, 2006 at 2:58 pmWhat’s so wrong with “three totally different explanations?”
Worked for me, didn’t it?
–
May 12th, 2006 at 2:58 pmmadashell….your normal, and so are 70% of us.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:59 pm“I think we need to fully enforce the law. I think we need to have an attorney general that says if a law is broken, we’ll enforce it. Be strict and firm about it.”
-GWB
May 12th, 2006 at 3:16 pmI think only Santo knows what Santo is talking about.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:18 pmThe opinions of Republicans that really matter are the ones which comprise both houses of Congress. If they do not begin to finally realize that the oath they took when they entered office was to the Constitution and not to the president, then Bush will continue to walk, with impunity, all over them.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:18 pmJust a thought – how many Congress people can honestly say that they support this because they “have nothing to hide”? Afterall, it’s ALL Americans who would be under surveillance – including the big business CEO’s and politicians, right? Just a thought…
May 12th, 2006 at 3:25 pmCheck out this story:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/5/12/8012/38216...
Bush motorcade aimed an assault rifle at peaceful protesters.
It isn’t terrorists on which they hope to spy. It is anyone who doesn’t support their regime.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:27 pmHEY THIS IS BIG – YOU MUST READ!!!!!
(clip)
“I know your shocked — SHOCKED! — that George Bush is listening in on all your phone calls. Without a warrant. That’s nothing. And it’s not news.
This is: the snooping into your phone bill is just the snout of the pig of a strange, lucrative link-up between the Administration’s Homeland Security spy network and private companies operating beyond the reach of the laws meant to protect us from our government. You can call it the privatization of the FBI — though it is better described as the creation of a private KGB.”
The Spies Who Shag Us
May 12th, 2006 at 3:27 pmThe Times and USA Today have Missed the Bigger Story — Again
I don’t know where any of you live, but I live in a very small seaport town in Washington State. We have ferries, and an island across the bay that stores missiles and ammunition. Thus, homeland security. I swear, I live in a town of less than 10,000, and their presence is everywhere, working in collusion, I’m sure, with our local law enforcement that keeps getting bigger. Anyway, my point is, they are everywhere. Beware.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:37 pmIt scares me to think that, according to the WaPo poll last night, myself and 35% of this country are terrorists! WTF! Better lock us all up.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:40 pm“You’re either with us, or with the terrorists.” aWol
And I was confused before I started reading the comments :)
May 12th, 2006 at 3:48 pmAnd how is Port Towsend Madashell? or are you in Port angeles, or Port Orchard? I grew up in seattle and the east side. My wife and I are moving b ack onoce where done in LA. Anyway more to the point, I have seen how much port security has been ignored despite the best efforts of the Murray and Cantwell. I just hope that with the republicans collapsing life will get better.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:50 pm#7 Wayne A. S.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:52 pmGreat post – as usual.
#17 Steve D.
Apparently people are just not thinking of the ramifications of this spying. The I have nothing to hide crowd scares me with their heads in the sand.
Newt was one of the Progenitors of ‘K’street, he’s flip flopping, already, to save his political hindquarters..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I posted this elsewhere, forget where.
Again;
Of all the voices berating the Republican Party for its culture of corruption, none rings more hollow than Newt Gingrich’s. According to the Associated Press, the former House Speaker has said he is considering running for President in 2008. Now, in preparation, he is leading a stampede of corrupt Republicans desperate to distance themselves from the money-for-votes scandal plaguing the nation’s capital.
Gingrich isn’t stupid. He knows that in today’s era of establishment-worshiping journalism, all he had to do was give one speech pretending to be outraged at the scandals and the media would largely ignore that Gingrich was the happy midwife of the out-of-control corruption America is now living through.
Gingrich’s calculation was right: The media fawned on cue when he derided his party for engaging in “a system of corruption.” He was lauded as “one of Washington’s Big Thinkers” by the Chicago Tribune, praised by the Washington Post for issuing a “dire alarm,” embraced by Newsweek as a “bipartisan reformer” and venerated by the New York Times as having supposedly headed an “anticorruption revolution” when he came to power in 1994. Other media simply quoted Gingrich saying, “We need to clean this mess up” without so much as mentioning his complicity in making the mess.
And “complicity” is putting it mildly.
Gingrich, after all, was the architect of the so-called K Street Project, which is at the center of the current corruption scandals. As the Post reported in 2002, “Starting in the mid-1990s, some Republicans, including then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and [Representative Tom] DeLay, have advocated tracking the political affiliation of lobbyists, as part of an effort to place more conservatives on K Street.” In return, K Street would help the GOP ram through corporate-written legislation and fill GOP coffers with campaign contributions
Newt Sees only Green
SEE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
and Ignores the Sheeple, lets NOT forget
So Newt Gingrich now comes out against the occupation of Iraq, saying that the last 34 months have been a mistake. What a cowardly rat. First of all, Newt was on the Defense Policy Board, which means that he had an inside track to actually affect policy. Which apparently he did not try to do.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:52 pm~~~~~~~~~~
Give it up NEWT you Slimey Toadie, We are unto you and your cohorts, the Flip FLoppers and Warmongers, NEWT IS JUST ANOTHER RAT. A flip flopping ship jumping GOP NEO-CON RATFinK
Not only defended by reasonable people, it’s already settled law with respect to the U.S. Supreme Court. If I remember my LLL Mo0b@t Supreme Court primer: “once the high court rules on something it’s settled law.” But does that only apply to killing babies (ie Roe-vs-Wade) and not trying to shelter terrrorists (who want to kill babies and adults)?
May 12th, 2006 at 3:53 pmYes, let’s all be reasonable.
Feh.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:54 pm.
[...] Watch Newt Gingrich [...]
May 12th, 2006 at 3:56 pm*The New York Times* reports today (10 Jan 1997) that Newt Gingrich was overheard in a telephone conference call to other House bigwigs on 21 Dec 1996 plotting strategy on how to deal with his ethics problems and possible attacks from opponents. This despite his promise, made the same day to the ethics subcommittee by his laywer, that he would not use his office or his allies to orchestrate a counter-attack to the charges.
See the GUY is a HUGE HYPOCRITE!!
May 12th, 2006 at 3:57 pmWill the evidence you post, will most likely be used to argue this case before the supreme court RRS, I think that the SCOTUS may see a difference between a single use on a specific phone number, and the collection and databasing of millions of phone numbers. Especially when you consider, that while the police in this case did not have a warrant they most certianly did have probable cause.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:59 pmthat Newt Gingrich was overheard in a telephone conference call
See Newt Got ‘TAPPED’ and he DIDN’T LIKE IT DID HE?
No It Exposed ETHICS Probs.
Yet DID NEWT Try to Stop George and his Warrantless Taps?
OH NOOO!!
Is this REASONABLE NEWT?
May 12th, 2006 at 4:01 pmI think your a Lying SOS Newt.
Whaddya think about my Reasoning?
This is how the Nazis took control. Looks like the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree – Prescott Bush supported the Nazis and his grandson George W Bush emulates Hitler.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:02 pm12. None of this is “sloppyâ€
Agreed. This is all carefully parsed language in response to tidbits of information as they become public, and crafted to nip each revelation in the bud if possible.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:02 pm#17 Steve
Good post.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:04 pmIt makes no sense to listen to these three totally different explanations…
It makes no sense to listen to an overinflated decaying GOP windbag with thousands of reasons.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:05 pmBut does that only apply to killing babies (ie Roe-vs-Wade) and not trying to shelter terrrorists (who want to kill babies and adults)?
Comment by Retired Republican Soldier — May 12, 2006 @ 3:53 pm
I believe Newt Gingrich described you to a T.
How this Maryland case is relevant to the wiretaps by the NSA is something that makes sense only to you, considering Pres Bush has claimed to have the “inherent authority” to order wiretaps and hence would need no legal support from any precedent set by a Supreme Court ruling….
May 12th, 2006 at 4:06 pm#23
The NSA probably caught Newt and his new girlfriend.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:07 pmI would rather die a free man than live one moment as a slave of fear.
Comment by TANSTAAFL! — May 12, 2006 @ 2:29 pm
I agree – only I would be a free woman and not a free man.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:09 pmwe could use the gender neutral free person, but that would make the trolls start frothing at the mouth.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:12 pm#57 – 4th Amendment – must have probably cause to obtain a warrant so in other words searches must have both – can’t obtain a warrant without probable cause thereby NO SEARCH.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:24 pmGregor Samsa, read the ruling is all I can suggest. It’s settled law because the Supreme Court ruled that you can’t expectation of privacy of your phone number and who you might call. Not the content of those calls, just the connection of a number to yours. I only use the term settled law because that is what the left calls Roe-vs-Wade. I am assuming that they will remain truthful to their word that once the Supreme Court rules on a matter it’s settled law be it abortion or phone numbers.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:25 pm#67 – meant to post “probable” and not probably.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:27 pmRRS,
you should read my post as well. I realize that my arguments don’t sit well with you. Bringing up Roe VS. Wade is a pitiful red herring attempt to derail converstation. Plus if you look at the most recent post on Think Progress, you will note that a NSA agent, is coming forward and saying there is much more then a gathering of phone records.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:30 pmOHHHH!!! The flea’s are jumping off the dog!!!
May 12th, 2006 at 4:41 pmKrazny,
Plus if you look at the most recent post on Think Progress, you will note that a NSA agent, is coming forward and saying there is much more then a gathering of phone records.
He would not discuss with a reporter the details of his allegations, saying doing so would compromise classified information and put him at risk of going to jail. He said he “will not confirm or deny†if his allegations involve the illegal use of space systems and satellites.
Sadly he isn’t saying anything yet except “OOOOOHHHH I know stuff, you just wait”
May 12th, 2006 at 4:41 pmI know Tundra, but you should see his post on that thread. I can imagine the spittle flying from RRS’s mouth. Next I will bring up hillary and he will go positively apeshit. His type always do.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:51 pmGregor Samsa, read the ruling is all I can suggest. It’s settled law because the Supreme Court ruled that you can’t expectation of privacy of your phone number and who you might call.
Comment by Retired Republican Soldier — May 12, 2006 @ 4:25 pm
I did read it. If anyone in the Supreme Court or the Bush administration thought this was a precedent they could rely on to defend their wiretaps, they would have said so from the very beginning. They didn’t and still haven’t; they relied on the Pres Bush’s “inherent powers” argument instead, or his authorisation for use of military force.
Not a word on this so-called precedent you chose to put forth here.
As a matter of fact:
A report by Congress’s research arm concluded yesterday that the administration’s justification for the warrantless eavesdropping authorized by President Bush conflicts with existing law and hinges on weak legal arguments.
Report Rebuts Bush on Spying
I am assuming that they will remain truthful to their word that once the Supreme Court rules on a matter it’s settled law be it abortion or phone numbers.
1.- Your mention of abortion in a thread about wiretaps is a red herring.
2.- A Congress research already concluded that the wiretaps rely on weak legal arguments.
You are defending the indefensible.
May 12th, 2006 at 4:58 pm[...] Gingrich. Boehner. Scarborough. This is what 29% buys you. [...]
May 12th, 2006 at 5:06 pmBeen doing a quick little bit of research.
Newt Gingrich [Gingritch] is Really Newt Mcpherson
Mcpherson, then to the Slaymaker Family;SCHLEIERMACHER [Slaymaker]-FERREE CONNECTION:
Mr Gingrich, Please Read this,
In 1685, when Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes, which granted religious freedom, he sent soldiers to all towns and villages to kill the Protestants and confiscate their properties. Daniel and Marie escaped to Germany where their daughter, Mary Catherine was born. It is believed that Daniel died while the family lived in Strasbourg. Details of his death are lacking; One report says he was slain during the insurrection in France following the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.2 He may have died before 1708 in Lindau, Bavaria. After Daniel died, his wife assumed her maiden name for safety.
The family moved from Strasbourg to a safer area in Lindau Bavaria where they heard of a “new Moses”, William Penn, who was selling his rich land in the New World cheaply, title to which would ensure owners political asylum and freedom of opportunity and religion.
March 10, 1708, Mary Ferree and her seven children, along with a young couple they had befriended in Strasbourg, Mathias and Catherine Schleiermacher [Slaymaker], were pass ported by the Bavarian Civil Service to immigrate “via Holland and England to the Island of Pennsylvania to reside there.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Okay Mr Gingrich Mcpherson.
Heres your CHANCE to do a GOOD thing.
You see here WHY we as Americans, Believe in FReedom of Opportunity and Religion.
Why have you gone down this PATH of Religious BIAS NEWT?
WHy have you taken Corporate and Political Interests and not the Freedom that your family desired?
Can you not see Mr Gingrich why we have seperation of CHurch and State to this day?
And now you NUzzle with those GOP Liars whom wish to impose a theocratic state?
You help these people to keep the Working man down?
I dont understand you NEWT Mcpherson.
Surely you can do more for the FREEDOM of the PEOPLE.
The family moved from Strasbourg to a safer area in Lindau Bavaria where they heard of a “new Moses”, William Penn, who was selling his rich land in the New World cheaply, title to which would ensure owners political asylum and freedom of opportunity and religion.
May 12th, 2006 at 5:07 pmI feel that way regarding everything this administration does. Can reasonable people defend this administration, and the things that have occurred the last 6+ years. These are twlight zone times. Very, very sad for Democracy, for our way of life.
May 12th, 2006 at 5:08 pmThe people who defend the administration on this website, I would not consider reasonable.
May 12th, 2006 at 5:10 pmOh, and Retired Republican Soldier, the Fourth Amendment protects citizens against unreasonable searches without probable cause.
In the case you linked to, the police had the licence plates to the vehicle, the description of the man making the obscene calls who identified himself as the robber. That has probable cause written all over it.
Also, regarding electronic surveillance:
The Government’s duty to preserve the national security did not override the gurarantee that before government could invade the privacy of its citizens it must present to a neutral magistrate evidence sufficient to support issuance of a warrant authorizing that invasion of privacy. This protection was even more needed in ”national security cases” than in cases of ”ordinary” crime, the Justice continued, inasmuch as the tendency of government so often is to regard opponents of its policies as a threat and hence to tread in areas protected by the First Amendment as well as by the Fourth.
May 12th, 2006 at 5:16 pmElectronic Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment
Krazny, I suggest you read some of the offerings of Mr. Russell Tice before you declare him your savior from the evil Bush. But then they might make perfectly good sense to you. FYI he was diagnosed a paranoid delusional and THEN had his clearance pulled. Since he will be talking about classified information I doubt that his testimony will be made public. Too bad because I am sure it would be entertaining to say the least.
May 12th, 2006 at 5:42 pmRRS,
BushCo. are terrorists of the most pathetic kind. Armchair terrorists who never served, but are more than willing to condemn thousands or americans to death in order to enrich the top 1 %. How anyone can call themself a Republican is beyond me.
t-mac
May 12th, 2006 at 5:58 pmdo you have any facts that back up those claims RRS, that don’t come from the national review, or powerline. I didn’t say tice was my savior, I said he had more to say. I am curious how you seem to know all about his mental state. I see you are no loner claiming the maryland ruling means bush can collect phone records. I am guessing that Gregor’s well phrased post put you in your place. Your point has been more then adequatly refuted. Thank you for playing please come again.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:02 pm#52. As I read it, one of the tests of Katz is whether (paraphrasing here) “society is prepared to recognize that individual’s expectation of privacy as legitimate.”
Smith was decided in 1979, and Chapter 121 was passed into law afterward, as far as I can tell.
Therefore, it might well be argued that, in the passage of time and with the passage of Chapter 121 since Katz and Smith, “society” has developed the recognition of “that individual’s expectation of privacy as legitimate” as necessary to invalidate Katz, Smith, etc. as a precedents.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:33 pmKrazny,
Republican Soldire is partially right -again presenting a fact that is barely relevant while ignoring what is inconvenient.
About Tice:
Russell Tice was a senior intelligence analyst at the National Security Agency until he demanded to know in April 2003 what had happened to a report he had filed about a former colleague he suspected of spying for China. Two months later, he found himself checking coolant at the agency’s motor pool.
Not only did Tice get demoted from the elite ranks of the intelligence community, but he was also deemed “paranoid” by one of the agency’s psychologists, a death sentence in the intelligence field. Just nine months earlier, Tice had been found psychologically sound during a routine evaluation.
In federal job: Blow whistle, get boot
He was not the only one to be labeled “paranoid”. Funny thing is, some whistleblowers are no liberals, but simply critical of the Bush administration’s misguided policies:
Whistleblowers who have stepped forward to accuse the National Security Agency of retaliating against them by falsely labeling them “paranoid,” “delusional,” or “psychotic,” cover a range of political views. Russell D. Tice, a self-described conservative, believes President Bush should be impeached over the current controversy involving the NSA’s domestic surveillance program. Another whistleblower, Diane Ring, is a staunch Bush supporter who supports the surveillance program.
NSA Whistleblowers Were Allegedly Isolated, Intimidated
Take heed, Republican Soldier. Even you can fall from your Supreme (mis)Leader’s grace and find yourself labeled “paranoid” or worse.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:41 pmI think it will be difficult for a legal stance against the database given that the court had already ruled on it. I think the legal term is its called precedence? FYI you can’t swing a stick in the LLL blogosphere without getting a hit on Russell Tice. Hell just google his name and read a couple of his interviews/columns. You all have a nice tinfoil hat weekend.
May 12th, 2006 at 7:20 pmI think it will be difficult for a legal stance against the database given that the court had already ruled on it. I think the legal term is its called precedence?
Comment by Retired Republican Soldier — May 12, 2006 @ 7:20 pm
Re-read my posts. The Maryland case set a precedent to the warrantless wiretaps only in your imagination. That you insist on clinging to this notion shows your inability to understand the written word.
Unlike the warrantless wiretaps that record entire conversations, a “pen register” is a device “that records the numbers dialed on a telephone ” but “does not overhear oral communications”. Read the case notes.
Unlike the warrantless wiretaps that affect thousands of callers, the Maryland case was against one person against whom police had sufficient probable cause. Read the case notes.
Unlike the warrantless wiretaps, the pen register was a matter of local law enforcement not a foreign intelligence situation.
You have chosen to ignore that legal and constitutional scholars say Pres Bush doesn’t have the authority to order wiretaps at will.
You have chosen to ignore the fact the the Republican-controlled Congress already conducted a research into the matter and concluded Pres Bush’s authorisation conflicts with existing law and is on weak legal ground -in lay man’s terms, he’s full of it.
You have also ignored that, by existing law, during foreign intelligence wiretaps the communications monitored must be “exclusively between or among foreign powers and there is no substantial likelihood any ‘United States person’ will be overheard”, something that has been ignored in the wiretap operations.
If the Maryland case were a precedent to recording conversations, Alberto Gonzalez et al would have used it already. That they didn’t means this defence is even weaker than anything they have used so far.
May 12th, 2006 at 8:08 pmGregor if the repugliscam soldier were really good at finding loopholes in the law for the idiot in chief, KKKarl would have hired him to work at the white house not just try and disrupt this blog………see where he is.
May 12th, 2006 at 8:25 pmCliff, yes I realise that.
It just irritates me how blind some people are to the reality surrounding them.
Kind of like those Bible literalists…. I wonder if Ret Rep Soldier also thinks the Earth is 8,000 years old… hhmmmm….
Plus it is fun to shoot down their talking points ;-)
May 12th, 2006 at 8:33 pmGingrich wants to have it both ways > a far-right GOP fruitcake, at the same time someone who occasionally acts sensible! Tomorrow he will probably be back on the Bush koolaid again > lol.
May 12th, 2006 at 9:31 pmexcellent posts, Steve, Wayne and Gregor Samsa. I may need some of your information. The path we are headed on is not good. Peace be with you all.
May 12th, 2006 at 10:53 pm*Sigh*…WHEN are these people going to finally come out of their mass hallucination and get hip to the fact that Dubya doesn’t give a rat’s ass about people’s civil liberties?!? They can talk until their faces are as blue as the sky at twilight…but unless these folks start growing some cojones and actually start DOING something other than assuming the position, the President has no motivation to “answer tough questions” or do anything else to explain his behavior. C’mon, people…the man’s been offering the same lame lies and excuses for the past FIVE YEARS! Do you honestly think that he’s going to offer anything new NOW just beecause you’re finally starting to wake up and make a few hesitant objections? Think again. A mule balking for all he’s worth ain’t got nothing on Dubya for sheer stubborness — and like the talking mule in the old joke, he ain’t going to do diddly-squat until y’all pick up the two-by-four and hit him on the head with it a few times to get his attention…
May 12th, 2006 at 11:00 pmI have been so pissed off at this illegal so called administration for 5 plus years now, and this illegal spying just pisses me off more, so my other half and I just came up with the best one for them yet:
At the end of every e-mail and telephone conversation we will use the following:
To you spies listening in My name is ______, and we believe that GWBush should be impeached and tried at the hague.
May 13th, 2006 at 11:54 amVerizon Sued Due To NSA Program And More NSA Revelations…
In every Western democracy civilians need to defend themselves against too much government intrusion. Whether they will win or not, what is quite sure is that Verizon will not be happy about it and will think twice before they will give information lik…
May 13th, 2006 at 1:55 pmMOST OF THE COMMENTS ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE NEWTSTER….HE WANTS TO FIND A WAY TO GET INTO THE SPOTLIGHT AND IF HE COULD DEFEND THE SCREW-UPS, LIES, AND OUTRIGHT CRIMES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION, HE WOULD BE JUST ANOTHER RIGHT-WING HACK [& THEREFORE NOT WORTH MENTIONING]. NEWT OBVIOUSLY KNOWS RIGHT FROM WRONG, JUST LIKE MANY OF THE OTHER NEO-CON ARTISTS, BUT COMING OUT WITH THE TRUTH NOW SETS HIM APART AS A MODERATE, LEVEL-HEADED REPUBLICAN, AND POSSIBLY PUTS HIM IN THR RUNNING FOR RENEWED GOP LEADERSHIP(?) …YEAH, RIGHT.
May 13th, 2006 at 7:28 pm[...] NSA wiretaps come under fire from all sides, even the right. [Think Progress] [...]
May 13th, 2006 at 9:39 pm[...] I hear the paste-eater is a drug-addicted whackjob who has imaginery conversations with his drugs (um, I did a lot of drugs and they never, uh, talked to me), the telcos are actively helping the government spy on us (um, duh) and lying about it, the Right is crying their mascara-stained eyes out for some civility the turd blossom might get indicted and even Newt “killing-the-government-to-save-it” Gingrich knows when to jump ship. [...]
May 14th, 2006 at 4:39 amgingrich then and now — still barfaliscious. He was on MTP this morning and woke me up out of bed with his garbage about how THEY balanced the budget. Then his sly smile when he got in a couple “talking points” I had to swallow some fast puke — took me by surprise. Gross. At least Russert pointed out that Reps have full reign now and they are going nuts with the spending. If the best they have in Gingrich somebody get his mama to call Lauara Bush a biatch and get it over with already.
May 14th, 2006 at 7:56 pmCheck out the response I got from Verizon in regards to my nsa compliant email I sent them
May 15th, 2006 at 5:01 pmCheck out the response I got from Verizon in regards to my nsa compliant email I sent them
http://bloggingbernieward.blogspot.com/
May 15th, 2006 at 5:02 pm[...] (transcript by Think Progress) [...]
July 25th, 2006 at 4:20 am