Editorials On FISA: ‘Unnecessary And Dangerous Expansion of President Bush’s Powers’
Editorials On FISA: ‘Unnecessary And Dangerous Expansion of President Bush’s Powers’
Last week, under heavy political pressure from the White House, Congress approved the White House-backed version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which provided expansive spying authority to the Bush administration. The White House had earlier rejected a compromise bill that provided powers sought by the Director of National Intelligence, opting instead to play politics with the issue.
In the past two days, at least nine major newspapers have editorialized against the FISA legislation, with the New York Times today calling it an “unnecessary and dangerous expansion of President Bush’s powers.” Some examples:
USA Today:
A skittish Congress allowed itself to be stampeded last week into granting the president unfettered surveillance power. When it returns to Washington, it should do what it can to make sure that the sun goes down on this flawed measure. [Link]
Washington Post:
To call this legislation ill-considered is to give it too much credit: It was scarcely considered at all. Instead, it was strong-armed through both chambers by an administration that seized the opportunity to write its warrantless wiretapping program into law — or, more precisely, to write it out from under any real legal restrictions. [Link]
The New York Times:
While serving little purpose, the new law has real dangers. It would allow the government to intercept, without a warrant, every communication into or out of any country, including the United States. Instead of explaining all this to American voters — the minimal benefits and the enormous risks — the Democrats have allowed Mr. Bush and his fear-mongering to dominate all discussions on terrorism and national security. [Link]
The Los Angeles Times:
You know something’s wrong with this Congress when a Democratic champion of privacy rights feels compelled to vote for Republican legislation that compromises those rights. That’s what California Sen. Dianne Feinstein did last week when she joined a stampede to approve a temporary “fix” sought by the Bush administration in a law governing electronic surveillance. [Link]
San Francisco Chronicle:
No-limits spying is on a roll. In rushed votes, both the House and Senate meekly accepted a White House plan to vastly expand phone and e-mail eavesdropping. The changes were sold as a key step in tracking foreign terrorists and their allies on American soil. But the shift guts any semblance of oversight, leaving the picking and choosing of targets to spy agencies. [Link]
The Boston Globe:
The administration maintains that technological changes have created problems with the 1978 law. But never has Bush demonstrated why the terms of that law, which permitted officials to get warrant approvals up to 72 hours after they started a wiretap, are no longer workable. This and other questions could have been answered if Congress had demanded an open debate on the administration’s bill. Its failure to do so is a shameful abdication of its own responsibility. It’s difficult to maintain a system of checks and balances when one branch simply checks out. [Link]
Rocky Mountain News:
Now the authority to approve wiretaps rests with the attorney general - hardly a reassuring prospect given Alberto Gonzales’ performance in that office - and the director of national intelligence. … Given the administration’s expansive view of its own powers, this FISA rewrite could allow much wider eavesdropping, with little outside oversight. [Link]
Sacramento Bee:
After the 9/11 attacks, President Bush did an end run around the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which prohibits eavesdropping on Americans without judicial oversight. Instead of going to Congress to change the law, Bush decided to simply monitor without warrants the international phone calls and e-mails of people inside the United States. Six years later, the Bush administration belatedly has gone to Congress. But instead of promoting modernization in the law, the administration has ginned up new fears about terrorist attacks and cowed Congress into passing hasty, ill-considered changes. [Link]
Seattle Post Intelligencer:
The redeeming aspect of the political theater involving Americans’ rights to privacy is that Congress wrote itself an option for a better ending in six months. [Link]
UPDATE: More anger from local papers: The Huntsville Times, the Albany Times Union, and OC Register.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Yes thank the Blue Dog fools in Congress for allowing Alberto Gonzales to spy on the entire nation.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:36 amI have to wonder if the repubs will regret this action in 18 months when they realize all of the extra power they have given to a dem president?
August 7th, 2007 at 10:38 amI saw the Bourne Utliamtum over the weekend - though fiction, it probably woke up some people of the THREAT of an overarching federal government.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:39 amThose blue dogs need to be taken for a ride in the country, come primary season.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:39 amI think that anyone posting here who supports the FISA expansion, should stand up for the principle by posting all of their personal info (name, address, employer, bank account number, and SS number) prior to posting a comment.
C’mon guys - set an example!
August 7th, 2007 at 10:48 ammore like yellow dogs!
August 7th, 2007 at 10:49 am#6 - those same assholes are the ones that support the war but are too goddamn scared to pick up a pencil and fill out the enlistment application… you know everyone cant sign their name with an X.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:52 amthanks dems!!! :(
August 7th, 2007 at 10:53 am#5 - Let’s add the editorial boards that support it, like the Chicago Tribune to that list, Marcus. Come on, they’ve got nothing to hide, right?
August 7th, 2007 at 10:56 amNobody gets to have secrets - except those who support the expansion of FISA.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:59 amMaybe these editorials will wake up a few more sheeple….?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:00 am… under heavy political pressure from the White House…
THAT is the big conundrum… how can a low approval white house
put any kind of pressure on anything?
…
all this “spying” is not about the terrists…
all the tools for that were readily available…
it’s all about spying on their political enemies…
and THAT is why those dems, and ALL the repugs, caved…
just a hunch…
August 7th, 2007 at 11:01 amI think anyone opposing such legislation should criticise those in power in both houses who passed it without any serious debate and this blog for waiting 3 days before offering only a “here’s what people other than us are criticising about the Democrats passing this FISA expansion bill” post.
The difference is I’m talking to you.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:02 amYou appear to be talking to nobody.
So come on, set an example.
Maybe these editorials will wake up a few more sheeple….?
Comment by Zooey — August 7, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Doubt it. There are plenty of unpatriotic Americans who would rather give up liberty for a false sense of security.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:02 amUmm Kilo, maybe you need to take remedial reading classes, but we are criticizing the dems for caving, and Bush for asking. I guess when Hillary is president, you will be okay with the expanded power of the wiretap.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:05 amThe dems were thinking when they passed this bill. They know we will soon have a dem president, and they just gave him/her a lot more power. Thanks repubs!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:05 amWhat did you fools expect? The Democrats to represent you -lol!!!
The Democrats HATE you. They use you. They could give two sh*ts about you. They just want power. AND they know to maintain power they have to bow to King George and his thugs. AND you idiots will continue to support them even as they shun impeachment and censure.
I am so glad I am NOT a Democrat. They are LIARS.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:08 amGutless bastards.
“So this is how liberty dies - with thunderous applause” - Pricesss Amadalla.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:08 amChris, the legislation sunsets in 6 months.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:09 amDoubt it. There are plenty of unpatriotic Americans who would rather give up liberty for a false sense of security.
Comment by toasterhead — August 7, 2007 @ 11:02 am
*sigh*
If they would open their eyes, they would see that we’re actually at more risk today than we were on 9/11.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:10 amI am reposting a letter I wrote to Congress yesterday:
26 BLUE DOGS DAMAGE DEMOCRACY
Monday 6th of August 2007
by Jay Randal
Pres. Bush’s Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, according to an article by Susan Crabtree “Spy chief courts Blue Dogs for FISA law overhaul” on 2nd of August 2007, met the Blue Dog Democrats at a secure location on Tuesday July 31st to convince them to vote for the “Protect America Act” override of FISA.
On Saturday night, 4th of August, 26 of 47 Blue Dogs voted Yeas to override FISA statute to allow wiretaps of anybody the Bush Regime decides might/perhaps be a terrorist, or is just a trouble-maker Bush opponent.
The Blue Dogs cut a back-room deal with McConnell, and stabbed the Democratic party membership in the back, so Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi must explain what she knew about this or punish Blue Dogs.
Democrats nationwide are enraged at the 16 Senators who voted for the bill, and are furious at the 41 House members too, but the Blue Dogs have betrayed us all!
(Jay Randal, political activist and writer in Georgia, USA.)
August 7th, 2007 at 11:11 am#
Chris, the legislation sunsets in 6 months.
Comment by Wilco — August 7, 2007 @ 11:09 am
#
Wasn’t the Iraq war supposed to be “weeks, not months”? Watch. The dems and repubs alike will choose again in 6 months to expand the power given to the office of the president.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:11 am#17 So who in the hell do you support?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:11 am“So this is how liberty dies - with thunderous applause†- Pricesss Amadalla.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — August 7, 2007 @ 11:08 am
Sadly, yes.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:12 amMoe, a depression-era boxing promoter, meets curly when he orders lunch at the restaurant where Curly works. Larry is a nearby street musician, and plays ‘Pop Goes the Weasel’ on his violin. When Curly hears ‘Pop Goes the Weasel’ he goes nuts and knocks out a boxing champ. Moe hatches a scheme to use Curly’s reaction to the tune to promote him as a great fighter. At the title fight, Larry’s violin is accidentally destroyed. Bedlam ensues.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:13 amThere is a powerful political calculus at play here. If there should be so much as shoe bomb found in a car trunk parked behind a 7-11, the repubs will scream to next sunday that the dems let it happen buy not giving jr and his minions carte blanche.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:13 amUntil the dems come up with a consistent well reasoned approach that can be encapsulated in sound bytes, civil liberties will continue to play 2nd fiddle to the GWOT. The repubs, led by Cheney at al, may be a buncha fear mongers playing politics with the Constitution - but they’ve won in the past with it (over and over) and can win again.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 7, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Well said, Marcus. Well written and insightful.
Thank you.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:14 amLiberal Editorials On FISA: ‘Unnecessary And Dangerous Expansion of President Bush’s Powers’
not shocking liberals wouldn’t aprove
August 7th, 2007 at 11:14 amYou should know better. Once a law is in, it ain’t coming out.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:15 amthe republicans are right about one thing: the dems are a bunch of cowards.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:16 amComment by Zooey — August 7, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Whoop, whoop, whoop, whoop, whoop…
n’yuck, n’yuck!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:16 amChris L
August 7th, 2007 at 11:16 amI get your point but I’m more hopeful than that.
I’d like to think identical legislation won’t be allowed back on the floor except perhaps in amendment form. Since leadership is against much of the provisions and have stated their intent to revisit, I believe they will do so and come up with a more agreeable set of changes.
I think that anyone posting here who supports the FISA expansion, should stand up for the principle by posting all of their personal info (name, address, employer, bank account number, and SS number) prior to posting a comment.
C’mon guys - set an example!
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
I think anyone here who opposes this expansion should be immediately subjected to the expanded surveillance techniques in the bill — just so we can find out what they are so worried about!
Let’s start with Marcus!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:18 amThe opposite is also true: if a bomb is found, the thugs will insist on further curtailing our rights (at great expanse to the Treasury with all payments going to their buddies), to keep us safe.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:20 amTrust me, you freekin’ neocon pig - you don’t wanna’ start nothin w/me. I’ll jack you up. You little fascist coward.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:21 amJust one day after learning the FBI raided the home of former DOJ attorney Thomas M. Tamm in connection with the December 2005 leak of President Bush’s illicit NSA domestic surveillance program, conservatives are beginning to clamor for action against another target: The New York Times.
For the details, see:
August 7th, 2007 at 11:22 am“Is the New York Times the Next NSA Leak Target?”
Chris, the legislation sunsets in 6 months.
Comment by Wilco
The Patriot act was supposed to sunset too. The 109th renewed it and took any sunset clauses out of the 2nd version.
When the government takes away rights and liberties, historically, it is almost impossible to ever get them back.
So now we have a government which claims more rights and privacy than it allows it’s own citizens.
The founding fathers should come back and haunt all these a$$hats in Washington.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:22 amMarcus, the bill has a sunset provision. it is DEAD in six months. If people want the legislation to continue, it will have to be resubmitted for a vote. I’m hopeful that won’t happen, as the Speaker has stated this will be reconsidered.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:23 amif a bomb is found, the thugs will insist on further curtailing our rights
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
That is one warped view, my friend. People trying to prevent terrorism are the thugs. Wow.
Here’s an idea. Let’s divide the the country in half geographically and have no federal security at all in one half and current levels of security in the other half. Then let’s see where the people want to live. My guess is that you might get pretty lonely in “no security” land, Marcus.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:26 amThe “Protect America Act” will end up biting the behinds of everybody in Congress, because Alberto Gonzales has been put in charge of the eavesdropping, since he has a vendetta against several Democrat Senators and Representatives. Over the next 6 months he could dig up lots of dirt to be used in next year’s election, plus dig up dirt on members of the GOP too to keep them in line, with fear of blackmail.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:26 amMarcus, the bill has a sunset provision. it is DEAD in six months.
Comment by Wilco
The same people who passed this sorry bill full of Constitutional violations will still be in Congress in 6mo, too.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:27 amIt’s really called the Protect America Act?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:28 amThat is utterly craptastic
Trust me, you freekin’ neocon pig - you don’t wanna’ start nothin w/me. I’ll jack you up. You little fascist coward.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
Tough talk from the Roman poseur. Please don’t make me laugh. You wouldn’t know what hit you.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:29 amThis could be good for us in the end, if it gives us Al Gore.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:29 amWayne, I understand your cynicism. I feel it. I’m just hopeful the legislation will not be renewed as is.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:31 amI find it hard to believe the Blue Dogs agreed with every provision and will be more than happy to vote for new legislation with actual congressional or judicial oversight, as opposed to just executive oversight which is, of course, a joke. but not a funny one
It. Never. Happens. That. Way.
You don’t get rights, won with blood over the long course of our history, back, because the “powers that be” decide they don’t need the power anymore. Once it’s in, it’s in.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:31 am“The same people who passed this sorry bill full of Constitutional violations will still be in Congress in 6mo, too.
Comment by Wayne — August 7, 2007 @ 11:27 am”
The only problem with your sentence above it that there is no longer a Constitution……
It is gone!!!!!
Sure people would like to believe that it is there, but it is dead in reality.
People can be kidnapped and torchered, held without Habeaus, spyed on without warrants, no free speach (those lovely free speach zones), etc….
I knew when this bozo was put into office by the Supreme Court that our country as we knew it was gone.
He has been a cheat and liar all his life, why would being President be any different?????
August 7th, 2007 at 11:31 amtest post
August 7th, 2007 at 11:32 amI don’t understand your posting policy. I submitted a post about 30 minutes ago. Your note says that it may take a minute to appear. Have I been secretly banned?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:33 amTP — why aren’t you letting me post?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:34 amtest post
Comment by missmolly
You get an A+
August 7th, 2007 at 11:34 amA new law expanding the government’s spying powers gives the Bush Administration a six-month window to install permanent back doors in the nation’s communication networks.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:35 amI return after alot of work and a little vaca and find nothing changes in Prog World!! Who knew??
The NYT wrings their hands and opines “the Democrats have allowed Mr. Bush and his fear-mongering to dominate all discussions on terrorism and national security.” (Gosh, for a second I thought the WTC HAD been located in New York. Unfortunately, these “newspapers” allow their blinding HATRED of Repubs to cloud their journalistic integrity.) Well I suppose if America allows our enemies access to terrorize, the NYT and their libtard “journalist” cronies might sell a few more papers…….(Psssst, Igor - quoting Leftard newspapers to PC Leftards doesn’t prove much of a point……)
August 7th, 2007 at 11:36 amThe Reichstag delegates rushed to give Hitler broad, sweeping powers under the Enabling Act too.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:37 amHere’s an idea. Let’s divide the the country in half geographically and have no federal security at all in one half and current levels of security in the other half.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 7, 2007 @ 11:26 am
This is a false argument, AGAIN!
(Don’t fall for it guys…)
The choice isn’t between NO federal security and current levels. It is simply about OVERSIGHT. You constantly ignore that KEY ELEMENT in this discussion. I have yet to hear ONE cogent argument as to why Bush s/b freed from all oversight. This is an admin that had ample warnings that something was up around 9/11 and chose to IGNORE everything, and now you want to give these very same incompetents the right to spy endlessly w/ NO oversight?
You have NO argument, just a bad attitude.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:38 amI’m in no way arguing that the legislation is ok…
August 7th, 2007 at 11:39 amIt’s irresponsible at least, and completely unAmerican and unconstitutional. I’m just hopeful. I have to be. I want to be.
You can have your own beliefs that the Constitution is dead, that there’s no going back, fine. I try to live more positively.
Jan 20th will be a rosy day
Doubt it. There are plenty of unpatriotic Americans who would rather give up liberty for a false sense of security.
Comment by toasterhead — August 7, 2007 @ 11:02 am
1. Doubt it. There are plenty of unpatriotic Americans who would rather give up liberty for a false sense of security.
Comment by toasterhead — August 7, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Virtually no Americans will be giving up any liberty as a result of this act. And it’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:41 amYou get an A+
Comment by Wilco — August 7, 2007 @ 11:34 am
I’d rather get my rant posted! LOL
August 7th, 2007 at 11:41 amMighty moron; I see that you are still around, like that proverbial bad penny that keeps turning up.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:41 amMarcus - Terror cells in America applaud your stance and proposed protection of their privacy….keep up the good work!!!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:42 amtoasterhead, r is right. No Americans will be giving up any liberty. Liberty is being taken away from them.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:43 am“You can have your own beliefs that the Constitution is dead, that there’s no going back, fine. I try to live more positively.
Jan 20th will be a rosy day
Comment by Wilco — August 7, 2007 @ 11:39 am”
The ONLY way it can recover is IF the Congress IMPEACHES all of the Administration.
We all know that will never happen…… Since this sets a PRECIDENCE, then there will be no countering it in the future if it is not fixed HERE AND NOW.
Since many of the crimes of this administration has been alowed to continue, there is no way to regain those lost Constitutional rights!
What will change on Jan. 20th????? A new President with the same powers and a PRESIDENCE to continue, because the Congress did nothing to the previous president so the now cannot decide that the actions are illegal….. They needed to make that determination when it was occuring.
There is a difference between being living more positivley, and being realistic.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:44 amJan 20th will be a rosy day
Comment by Wilco
Unless a true Independent is elected, the roses will be black.
Dem or Repuke, they don’t give a rats’ a$$ about middle income folks like you and me. The US Government is a whore house of elitist, myopic shysters looking to get an edge anywhere, anyway they can.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:44 amOkay . . . EVERYTHING these bast*rds want falls under the ‘we must have it for the war on terrah’ umbrella .
August 7th, 2007 at 11:45 amWho was it that ignored the PDB ?
And who was it again that hit the towers ?
Just doesn’t add up does it ?
I must be one of the conspiracy freaks with the aluminum foil head-gear.
“Virtually no Americans will be giving up any liberty as a result of this act. And it’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 11:41 am”
Sure…. I have a beach front property to sell you in Pheonix Arizona too.
I’ll sell it to you real cheap, since you are the GULLIBLE type!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:46 amThe only problem with your sentence above it that there is no longer a Constitution……
It is gone!!!!!
Comment by RemoveBush
Don’t worry about it, RB. Just a piece of paper.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:46 amEditorials in the paper are fine, but the people that NEED to hear this only watch the TeeVee. And the TeeVee this morning (CNN) had an in-depth report on the Christian theme-park in Florida, reports that Lindsey Lohan is back in rehab but nary a mention of the FISA amendment– let alone what it means.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:47 amMakes my stomach hurt
August 7th, 2007 at 11:47 amtest post
Comment by missmolly
Come on in Molly, the water is warm.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:48 amBush and Hillary Going Down.
In this thread for June 2007, search for info on BAE, Riggs bank, and Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia…
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/0…
They’ve hit the mother lode at last. This is treason.
And Bush is the head of the conspiracy in the U.S. He was bought many years ago as was his father. For shame. I believe some of the Democratic congresspeople have also been bought. I have particular senator in mind who shall remain nameless.
Aw, go ahead, tell us. What’s her name?
(Oops.)
was not there a $26 million Saudi check cashed in Oct of ‘04 …..
…. to help with the election fix.
If I remember it right it was cashed in Montreal.
Saudi Slush Fund Scandal No matter where you go I will find you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9u9XpSuM0w
MADCOW PROD
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003868.php#comments
If its money laundering, I wonder if it is tied to what the Frankfurter Allemaigne alleged, that our media hasn’t touched a micron, which is an investigation they claim that points to the CIA in effect counterfeiting money to fund black ops away from Congress’s eye and then blaming these “super dollars” on North Korea, that has lead to us getting new currency.
Read more about it here:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/46786/
If this is what they are covering up, you can see why the courts and even Democrats like Sylvester Reyes were trying to cover up the FBI report that was leaked about Cunningham a few weeks ago. Acknowledging this story having any legs would be PRETTY explosive:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/ theblotter/ 2007/ 07/ critics-slam-in.html
August 7th, 2007 at 11:48 amRemoveBush, I just don’t agree that your position is realistic. I’d love to see Bush and Cheney, et al kicked out of office. That would be great. But I don’t think it’s the only way to stop their actions from continuing with the next president. You seem to believe that there is no improving upon the presidency from one man to another. There was no other trail of tears after Jackson. No Japanese Americans have been put in camps since Roosevelt. And slaves were freed under Lincoln (talk about going against precedence!)
August 7th, 2007 at 11:50 amTHAT is reality. The nation has recovered time and again from rule under horrible presidents. We rebound nicely!
Virtually no Americans will be giving up any liberty as a result of this act. And it’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 11:41 am
Let’s divide the the country in half geographically and have no federal security at all in one half and current levels of security in the other half. Then let’s see where the people want to live. My guess is that you might get pretty lonely in “no security†land, Marcus.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 7, 2007 @ 11:26 am
You keep pursuing the same dishonest arguments.
Don’t fall for this, guys!!!
This isn’t about NO surveillance or giving Bush whatever new spy powers he wants. This is about OVERSIGHT, pure and simple. Under the old FISA rules, the Admin was allowed to file for a warrant 2 weeks in arrears.
That’s all - 2 weeks after the fact. Basically, Bush wants unlimited power, w/ NO oversight. The OVERSIGHT is the issue. Both of your arguments are false.
Bsuh had ample warnings that something was up around 9/11 and ignored them all. And now you want to give unlimited spying powers to the same bunch of imcompetent fools? WAKE UP!
August 7th, 2007 at 11:50 am“Don’t worry about it, RB. Just a piece of paper.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 7, 2007 @ 11:46 am”
So is the dollar!
Only the Constitution is what this country was FOUNDED on and was it’s guiding PRINCIPALS until 2001 when Bush took office…..
Why is it that YOU hate America?????
Why do you DISRESPECT all of the Sodiers that have given their lives and have served this country to provide YOU those RIGHTS in that “piece of paper”???
Why do you have so much HATE for America, that you DISRESPECT the Constitution and the Soldiers?????
WHY??
August 7th, 2007 at 11:51 amWelcome to the US police state.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:55 am“Comment by Wilco — August 7, 2007 @ 11:50 am”
All of that is true, but things are EXETREMELY different now.
The Government was different back then. They did not sell out their souls to corporations……
I have to run to a meeting, but I’ll continue this later if possible.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:59 amLet’s see. Who would be juicy targets for a little wiretapping? Journalists, lawyers, judges, doctors, democrats . . . feel the freedom.
. . . the awesome privilege of the axis of evil (Bush, Cheney, Rove) to protect themselves from US.
They have seen the enemy . . . and believe it’s US.
Howdie doodie, Gonzo’s on patrol . . . and doin’ a heck of a job : >)
It just makes me tingle . . . feel the love.
Oh you dems. See how you deliver. Screw the Constitution, you deliver.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:08 pmSure…. I have a beach front property to sell you in Pheonix Arizona too.
I’ll sell it to you real cheap, since you are the GULLIBLE type!
Comment by RemoveBush — August 7, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Which part do you think is gullible?
Virtually no Americans will be giving up any liberty as a result of this act.
This part is true. “In 2005 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court signed off on 2,176 warrants targeting people in the United States believed to be linked to international terror organizations or spies.â€
Out of 300,000,000 Americans I’d say that’s virtually none.
Or
It’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
What’s gullible about that?
Back up you’re “gullible” snark if you can.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:12 pm““In 2005 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court signed off on 2,176 warrants targeting people in the United States believed to be linked to international terror organizations or spies.â€
Out of 300,000,000 Americans I’d say that’s virtually none.
Or
It’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
What’s gullible about that?
Back up you’re “gullible†snark if you can.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 12:12 pm”
“Back up you’re “gullible†snark if you can.”
Easy!!!!!
You are quoting the LEGAL portions actually ABIDED BY!!!!!
Bush authorized the ILLEGAL spying shortly AFTER 9/11, he even ADMITTED IT!!!!!
So, can you tell me how many Americans were caught in this ILLEGAL warrentless wiretapping??????
Those figures only represent those that they chose to take the LEGAL path on!!!!!
Please provide figures to support the ILLEGAL portion of this program that supports your claim that Americans have not had their RIGHTS violated……
Let the music play…..
August 7th, 2007 at 12:16 pmr - Brilliant. Back in the day, warrants were required to spy. FISA signed off on 2,176 warrants. Unfortunately, lots more than 2,176 wiretaps occurred. 2,176 was an inch. The number of actual wiretaps stretched for miles.
Now that we’ve cut out the middleman, the world is our oyster. Unhinged freedom to spy . . . on you, me, granny, you name a pain in the admin’s ass, we can wiretap it! Yee haw!
August 7th, 2007 at 12:18 pmr, I’d say you’re gullible. The Admin admitted to warrantless surveillance. so there were more than 2176 people surveilled in 2005.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:19 pmThat is the issue. How you could think the issue is that the government is spying on anyone at all is beyond me.
Virtually no Americans will be giving up any liberty as a result of this act.
Comment by r
Wrong. Your right to privacy eroded further under this act. That you cannot understand that is truely amazing.
Have you read this piece of trash they passed? Really read it?
It’s not a false sense of security if we catch a head chopper before he kills you or me.
Comment by r
Now we get the real problem, people like you are pants pissing cowards.
Car wrecks kill more people yearly than terrorists do. Does that mean the government needs to ban cars?
You would be much safer if they just locked you up in your home and never let you out, too. So maybe the government should put everyone under house arrest, just so you can quit being so pants pissing scared.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:22 pmWhat a fscking moron you are.
We have a Democratic party that has been emasculated by the MSM. Now we see the editorials hitting the papers and television that call the Democrats for their failure to act aggressively.
1. I may nlotlike the stance of the Democrats on Iraq or the recent wiretap legislation, but I can undersand how gun shy they have become.
2. The MSM was also emasculated years ago by the corporate interests that acquired and consolidated the media. The media now serves the conservative agenda of the new, corporate aristocracy.
3. Notice how every Democratic candidate is attacked on these character revealing, non substantive issues. The wealth of Edwards, Obama’s middle name, and Hillary’s cleavage as well as her “shrillness”. Yet, we never really see the attacks on Guilliani’s marital and family strife, Thompson and his trophy child - I mean bride, or the others. Why is that? The MSM knows how it can mold opinion so that substantive issues neither matter or are discussed.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:23 pmThe number of actual wiretaps stretched for miles.
Now that we’ve cut out the middleman, the world is our oyster. Unhinged freedom to spy . . . on you, me, granny, you name a pain in the admin’s ass, we can wiretap it! Yee haw!
You can say it, but that doesn’t make it true.
“Miles†of wiretaps seems vague. “you, me, granny†I guess this could still fit in “virtually no one†if it were true, but it’s not – unless you can show you’ve been spied on, you really haven’t proven any point of your own, and certainly haven’t disproved mine.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:25 pmYou can say it, but that doesn’t make it true.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Anything and everything I say is a helluva’ lot more truthful than anything that is spewed out by this administration ; and that is a fact.
This is the most dishonest and secretive (and worst) administration in US history , and you’re attempting to doubt those that do not believe or trust them ; how incredibly enlightening and totally naive and stupid ………
August 7th, 2007 at 12:36 pmCERTAIN Dems showed their true colors on this vote.
So let’s take a closer look at where the Senate’s “Shameful 16″ were really coming from:
The following are Senate Dems who capitulated to Bushco to grant Gonzo the power to tap your cellphone and read your email without a warrant:
Lincoln (D) - DLC
Pryor (D) - DLC
Feinstein (D) - DLC
Salazar (D) - DLC
Carper (D) - DLC
Nelson (D) - DLC
Inouye (D) - DLC
Bayh (D) - DLC
Landrieu (D) - DLC
Mikulski (D)
Klobuchar (D) - new seantor DSCC’s chosen candidate.
McCaskill (D) - new senator Vice-chair of the Third Way
Nelson (D) - DLC
Conrad (D) - DLC
Casey (D) - new senator DSCC chosen candidate
Webb (D) - new senator DSSC chose candidate
—————————————————
(thanks to Zodiak Ironfist over at DU for the I.D. breakdown)
_________________________________________
According to Z.I. at DU, 11 of the 16 are DLCers!!!
The others probably didn’t read the bill before signing it. Either way they all suck.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:40 pmNow we get the real problem, people like you are pants pissing cowards.
Car wrecks kill more people yearly than terrorists do. Does that mean the government needs to ban cars?
What a fscking moron you are.
Comment by Wayne — August 7, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Car wrecks kill more people yearly than terrorists do. [Does this include our troops in Iraq.] I missed your post shouting down the “wave†of violence†in Iraq – 70 killed last month as inconsequential by comparing it to car wrecks.
Are you now referring to the progressives who post here as pants pissing cowards because of that view. Or are you intellectually dishonest?
August 7th, 2007 at 12:42 pmr- You’re getting’ a little testy.
Miles and thousands miles of fiber optic cable and land lines, literally spanning the globe . . . These are not the days of amateur plumbers in black skull caps breaking into the Watergate to put bugs in telephone receivers. Wake up and join the 21st century. We’ve got technology. Set up shop in a little back room at Qwest and have a wiretapping ho-down. No need to travel. Just download all day and all night.
My alarm went off this morning for no apparent reason. If I were paranoid, I might think that some evil doer were trying to wiretap my DSL line for my anti-American comments on Think Progress, but bungled the espionage by accidentally tapping into my alarm system. Oops. S**t happens.
With Gonzo in charge . . . s***t is bound to happen. Ya know?
Oh yeah, and Granny . . .she’s old, but quite subversive. Old Reagan repub . . . absolutely wants to throw the shrub off that bridge you’re buyin’.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:43 pmAnything and everything I say is a helluva’ lot more truthful than anything that is spewed out by this administration ; and that is a fact.
This is the most dishonest and secretive (and worst) administration in US history , and you’re attempting to doubt those that do not believe or trust them ; how incredibly enlightening and totally naive and stupid ………
Comment by MCMetal — August 7, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
Your supporting documentation seems thin.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:43 pmSo let’s take a closer look at where the Senate’s “Shameful 16″ were really coming from:
Lincoln (D) - DLC
Pryor (D) - DLC
Feinstein (D) - DLC
Salazar (D) - DLC
Carper (D) - DLC
Nelson (D) - DLC
Inouye (D) - DLC
Bayh (D) - DLC
Landrieu (D) - DLC
Mikulski (D)
Klobuchar (D) - new seantor DSCC’s chosen candidate.
McCaskill (D) - new senator Vice-chair of the Third Way
Nelson (D) - DLC
Conrad (D) - DLC
Casey (D) - new senator DSCC chosen candidate
Webb (D) - new senator DSSC chose candidate
—————————————————
(thanks to Zodiak Ironfist over at DU for the I.D. breakdown)
_________________________________________
According to Z.I. at DU, 11 of the 16 are DLCers!!!
Now who could have seen that coming?
August 7th, 2007 at 12:48 pmAnything and everything I say is a helluva’ lot more truthful than anything that is spewed out by this administration ; and that is a fact.
This is the most dishonest and secretive (and worst) administration in US history , and you’re attempting to doubt those that do not believe or trust them ; how incredibly enlightening and totally naive and stupid ………
Comment by MCMetal — August 7, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
Your supporting documentation seems thin.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
“WMD’s in Iraq”
“We’re fighting them over there , so we don’t have to fight them over here”
“We’re turning a corner in Iraq”
“The insurgency is in its final throes”
“Things are getting better daily in Iraq”
“We believe he(Saddam) has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”
“My jobs and growth plan would reduce tax rates for everyone who pays income tax.”
Want me to go on , retard ?
August 7th, 2007 at 12:58 pmr
August 7th, 2007 at 1:00 pmif 2176 surveilled out of 300,000,000 is truly no big deal beacuse of just how small a percentage, why is 3000 so very important? Or is that percentage of the population the cut off point for who matters to you?
The Constitution was not created to protect only the rights of the majority, but to protect the minority as well. Any abuse is not simply ok because it’s on such a small scale. “Only” 3000 of 300,000,000 Americans died on 9-11. It’s not the number, it’s the tragedy itself that matters.
r-
What percentage of American’s must die in Iraq before it’s too many?
(Once Barb and Jenna are drafted, the war must end)
What percentage of your freedom are you willing to surrender before it’s too much?
If you’re a good tool, you’ll surrender all of mine and none of yours. When mine is exhausted, you’ll seize on my neighbors. . . . isn’t that sort of the facist model?
August 7th, 2007 at 1:09 pmWant me to go on , retard ?
Comment by MCMetal — August 7, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
Every statement on your list is, or was believed to be true when made.
And you really shouldn’t use retard as a slur, you could offend someone.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:18 pmIf you’re a good tool, you’ll surrender all of mine and none of yours. When mine is exhausted, you’ll seize on my neighbors. . . . isn’t that sort of the facist model?
Comment by rockyroad — August 7, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Guess I’m a bad tool then.
I won’t surrender any of your, or your neighbors freedoms – unless you deserve it. If you break the law, you go to jail you lose freedoms. If you make terrorist calls you get them monitored, you lose freedoms.
It’s not up to me, it’s up to you.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:24 pmWant me to go on , retard ?
Comment by MCMetal — August 7, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
Every statement on your list is, or was believed to be true when made.
And you really shouldn’t use retard as a slur, you could offend someone.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
According to whom ?
Most of those statements were made even after it was revealed to the jerkoff uttering it , that it was total BS
You’re just a Chimpy administration apologist , and a pathetic excuse for an American , you partisan jackass………
August 7th, 2007 at 1:27 pmOr are you intellectually dishonest?
Comment by r
You are the one who is intellectually dishonest, purposefully obtuse, and so scared you are willing to toss the Constitution out the window.
I served and bled for that Constitution, which I swore to defend, “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”, so I do not stand by quietly while these fascists in Washington try to destroy it.
It is you who is a coward.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:28 pm#94 r - You’ve lost me . . “If you make terrorist calls you get them monitored, you lose freedoms.”
What the heck is a “terrorist call”? I call Granny, she wants to throw shrub off your bridge, is that a terrorist call?
Your approach seems a bit pre-emptive and overly vague.
How are you going to know that I am going to make a “terrorist call”? ESP. Or do all you wingers just have that “gut feeling”?
Define terrorist. Is Granny a terrorist if in her heart of hearts, she wishes Bush would choke on a peanut? If she wishes that your bridge were just a little higher?
Can we have a “terrorist chat” in her living room or on a ski slope . . . just so long as it isn’t a “terrorist call”?
Call in the though police . . . it’s clear where this is going.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:40 pmOops . . . should have been “thought” police. But you knew that.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:44 pmHey… what ever happened to Dennis the Democrat Dhimmi?
August 7th, 2007 at 1:47 pmAnd you really shouldn’t use retard as a slur, you could offend someone.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
August 7th, 2007 at 1:51 pm————
Very true, we are “Progressives” after all.
And you really shouldn’t use retard as a slur, you could offend someone.
Comment by r — August 7, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
————
Very true, we are “Progressives†after all.
Comment by Johannes Duns Scotus — August 7, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
You’re a “Regressive” , you Chimpy nut hugging stooge…….
August 7th, 2007 at 1:53 pmWhat if Granny survived the demolition of her house in New Orleans during Katrina flooding by rafting off her roof with Fluffy, a mut she got at the Humane Society, landed at the Superdome, where she fended off thugs with her walker, then was transported to Houston, lost to her family due to her “old-timers disease.” When we finally found her, we discovered that she had lost her life savings to Ken Laye and Enron and so had no health insurance.
Yeah, she’s mad as a crazy, old-timer with a walker, Fluffy and no insurance. One thing she knows, she’s been terrorized, but it wasn’t by an Iraqi. It was by this God-foresaken administration.
Define “terrorist.”
August 7th, 2007 at 2:02 pmI don’t want hysteria. I wan’t details about how this is going to affect you, today, here and now.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — August 6, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
——————————————————————————
That’s the problem with you repukes!
It’s always ok as long as it doesn’t happen to you!!!
If you were in germany in the 1930, you would have had no problem at all, you nazi!
- DDD
(more below)
August 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmI don’t want hysteria. I wan’t details about how this is going to affect you, today, here and now.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — August 6, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
——————————————————————————
(cont.)
Now the fasc’st’s at bushco want to kill terrorists that might be in the us!
And how are they going to do it!?
They are going to use surveillance and other tools provided for them legally by the recent bills passed since 2001!
The government could be listening to you right now!
What if you get a call from islameosandibad?!
That black tinted van that isn’t parked out side might hull you away to a secret prison, and there you will be forced to watch someone piss on the koran, and flush it down the toilet!
For me, that means the whole country is going down the toilet!
Comment by Dennis the Democrat Dhimmi
August 7th, 2007 at 2:08 pmCan Bush and merry band of spooks listen into my conversation between myself inside the US and the person I called inside the US if my phone company happens to route the call through foreign routers and nodes - for their convenience? What happens if they choose to route ALL domestic calls thusly, while Bush and the posse “interpret” the law to allow them to listen in to any call coming into the US whether it originated and ended inside the US or not? Any call made in the US could then be intercepted. All they would need to do is route the calls through major hubs in Canada, at the request of Bush’s band of merry men. Easy to do. Just sayin’.
August 7th, 2007 at 2:16 pm#105 Great point. The federal government used inter-state trade as a means of prosecuting civil rights violations during the sixties and that tool subsequently exploded to allow federal regulation of almost everything. I’m not going to get into a detailed discussion, but because almost any activity in which Americans’ engage involves interstate trade (a restaurant buys a can of soup, it travelled across state borders, the feds can regulate the restaurant), the feds are entitled to regulate. Logically, it follows that the flow of telecommunications “touches and concerns” international communications, the field is wide open. Foreign companies are invested in local carriers, Canadian routers handle domestic communications . . . use your imagination . . . no doubt Rove’s wheels are in overdrive.
August 7th, 2007 at 2:29 pmThis law is an ILLEGAL expansion of ILLEGAL powers.
The government cannot violate our unalienable rights. When a government becomes destructive of our rights, it is our DUTY as patriots to alter or abolish it. We’ve tried altering it, but that failed. We’re up to the abolish part.
Check the Declaration of Independence. It’s all in there…
http://www.archives.gov/ national-archives-experience/ charters/ declaration_transcript.html
August 7th, 2007 at 2:54 pmWhy haven’t any candidates or elected officials aside from Feinstein spoken out against this POS legislation. None has even commented.
August 7th, 2007 at 2:54 pmYou forgot one
here
August 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pmhere
Comment by jack moss — August 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
Aw… and folks call the lefties “extremist”.
August 7th, 2007 at 3:18 pmTROS; That site fits in with the Hitler Youth Program.
August 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pmGood question tooltime, Why?
My guess is they wanted this to pass, because we will have a Dem President soon, and they do so much want as much power as they can grab just as the Pubs do.
on off note, Rocky I almost peed my pants laughing at your post about the granny.
I am a granny….and I would guess that I might be subversive to this administration, lol. I protest, and all that too. One of my buddies got arrested for protesting “outside” the free speech zone” lol.
Yep I might not mind too much if the shrub ate some peanuts, lolol.
August 7th, 2007 at 3:51 pmEven the USA Today happy talk rag has misgivings!
USA Today:
August 7th, 2007 at 4:22 pm#33 Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 7, 2007 @ 11:18 am
You are a traitor! Beware!
If there is to be surveillance in America, then let it be directed toward the WH and Cheney’s dungeon. Why should they be exempt? These criminal bastards–our so-called leaders–are the ones that need to be watched–by We, the People.
And #35–I completely agree with your sentiments toward that “neocon fascist pig!!”
August 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pmThanks Granny,
Nuts to you!
August 7th, 2007 at 5:11 pmOff point, but still relevant.
As owner of the Texas Rangers, dubya brought all his closest buds in to On the Border in Arlington. He left a #30 tip on a @1,200 bill.
If you’ve ever waited tables. that sucks.
He took over the restaurant. We depend on that money to pay our tuiton, for our rent for our healthcare.
Thanks dubya.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:54 pmSome of the editorialist and some of the above writers should read the bill if they think it has a sunset in 180 days.
Try today blog Balkinization to check this out. The AG can continue to read you mail, check you e-mail and listen to your calls until Jan 2009.
Why does everyone seem to forget who we are dealing with. Liar in Chief and to quote from above “Yellow dog Dems.
August 7th, 2007 at 6:31 pmHave you seen the one where Moe plays a Roman who tries to look like he has principles by issuing a challenge to everyone to stand behind what they believe in then pussies out of doing the same thing himself ?
August 7th, 2007 at 8:14 pmExcept Hillary won’t see this bill. So you are asking am I okay with the concept of different Presidents.
This changes nothing in regard to the US intercepting all my communications, as I’m not a US resident.
It actually changes nothing in regard to the US intercepting all of yours either unless you are stupid enough to believe that Canada intercepts all your calls using NSA equipment and programs without the involvement of the NSA.
This bill merely legitimises those programs undertaken by the Bush administration which haven’t even bothered to adhere to the loopholes of the law and have just ploughed right through them.
Hillary doesn’t factor into this, nor is there anything to suggest she will ever see this bill. So really all you are saying is that you’re happy with Bush getting this. Okay.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pmBTW while we’re on the topic of everyone being against domestic surveillance under Bush and willing to entertain the possibility that he won’t be the last President of the US, have any of the current Presidential candidates suggested that wiretaps by NSA programs of all US citizens’ calls will cease if they gain office ?
Anyone declaring they will shut down the NSA which operates global surveillance of telephone and internet relays and closing the agency completely would appear to be the only solution unless someone can figure out that the US is on that same globe ?
No ?
Oh well, I guess there’s some unspecified reasons to expect that the same agencies that operated under the last Democrat President won’t be doing the only thing they are designed to under the next one.
Best of luck with that. Or more to the point, best of luck with pretending you believe that for the duration.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:34 pmOk “they” are spying on people for their own political purposes, fine. I don’t believe it for a minute - these are patriots! But fine, Let’s assume that they are doing it and that they would naturally be particularly interested in codes and cyphers, figuring that these must contain very interesting dope.
So, if it became popular to email random numbers to several randomly selected email addresses each day, then the cray supercomputers at nsa would be clogged up attempting to crack data from random inputs.
It is said that they can crack a 256 key in about 8 hours. I wonder how long they’d try to crack a long string of meaningless 0’s and 1’s. A week?
The point is that a blanket spying program would not work, it’s too easy to wrench.
August 7th, 2007 at 9:08 pmWho said that they were interested in “codes and cyphers”? They’re interested in campaign outcomes, pr, real estate deals and government contracts. It’s a little more like herding cats to screw up this type of surveillence.
August 7th, 2007 at 9:15 pmI still believe we need to ask ourselves “why” some of the Democrats rolled-over on this crucial a piece of legislation. The one that shocked me the most was Jim Webb - and Feinstein was was also a shocker. Why would perfectly good representatives roll-over for a lame-duck President? The absurdity is mind-boggling - as they had to know this would infuriate their constituents.
How can anyone explain how this new Congress has so quickly become Bush yes-men - refusing to tackle the issues that Americans feel are most important. There’s something surreal about it - and they have a lot of explaining to do. This completey blew any credibility the Congress may have been trying to build. What a disappointment…
August 7th, 2007 at 10:12 pmthe dems rolled because they believe bush when he says “they hate us for our freedom” and that scares them - then what more logical thing to do than remove someone’s freedom - that way there will be nothing to hate us for and we will all be safe…..right?
August 7th, 2007 at 10:24 pmYes, this Democratic Congress will go down as the Benedict Arnold Congress - the one that turned its back on freedom and sold out to the Crown.
This action supported by so many Democrats caught the entire nation by surprise. They sandbagged us all. Sold us down the river.
What in the freaking world were they thinking????????????????????
I donated money to more than one of them, and I will tell you one thing: They won’t get one penny from me again.
I have long wondered what it was like for Roman citizens, in the final decades of their nation, as it wound down - did they see it coming? Did they do anything to stop it?
. . . . Steve
August 8th, 2007 at 12:54 amWell there’s one thing you can know for certain, that pretending they weren’t Romans wasn’t the answer.
The US built and operates the world’s global surveillence infrastructure and is its primary beneficiary.
August 8th, 2007 at 8:10 amWhat do you think the odds are you are going to opt out of this, ever ?
The Police State is here:
http://www.freedomfchs.com/unwarranted_surveillance.pdf
August 8th, 2007 at 10:55 amKilo,
You’re chaning the subject. The issue isn’t whether the US should or should not monitor — it should. The issue is whether the Constitution — requiring a warrant — will be respected. This Congress has defied the Constitution. It has illegally transferred to the AG the power to issue General warrants. That is illegal.
It is a false choice to pretend that unless this illegal power was gratned we woul dnot be safe. The President was illegally doing this before Sept 2001, and we were attacked. Whether technoclogy or information is or isn’t used, oerated, accssed is secondary: The Constitution does not permit this Act; it does permit lawful judicial oersight. This Congress has defied its oath.
Members of Congress need to be prosecuted for this illegal act; and all contractors, DoJ Staff, and NSA personnel relying on this act should reasonbly know it is not lawful; and contrary to the Constitution.
Please stop making excuses for illegal activity. No one is suggesting that surveillance cannot lawfully be done. Yet, the AG is lying when he says he doesn’t have the time or resoruces to do this lawfully. You offer no explanatyion why, when the AG was lying, the DOJ Staff were working on non-official businsess during duty hours. hardly an overworked staff; more a reckless DoJ management.
I urge all Americans reading this blog to review the information showing the members of Congress, contrary to their oath, had reservations; and well know this act is illegal. This is the basis to prosecute these Members of Congress. They are domestic enmies. Time to put them under surveillance.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:16 am