Published on December 20, 2005 By drmiler In Politics
This is for ALL the people who think President Bush broke the law by authorizing wire taps without a court order. And YES that includes you col! Maybe ALL of you should go read FISA which was signed into law by President Carter. Yes that's right you read correctly.....Jimmy "the peanut man" Carter. Let me help ya'll by posting the pertinent sections:

Section 1811
of the act pertaining to surveillance during wartime states:
Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period not to exceed fifteen calendar days following a declaration of war by the Congress.

Or this section:

Section 1805
of the Act covers emergency situations where a court order cannot be obtained in advance. Such surveillance can only last 72 hours before an Order is applied for.

(f) Emergency orders
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, when the Attorney General reasonably determines that--
(1) an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing such surveillance can with due diligence be obtained; and
(2) the factual basis for issuance of an order under this subchapter to approve such surveillance exists;
he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if a judge having jurisdiction under section 1803 of this title is informed by the Attorney General or his designee at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ emergency electronic surveillance and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance. If the Attorney General authorizes such emergency employment of electronic surveillance, he shall require that the minimization procedures required by this subchapter for the issuance of a judicial order be followed. In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 72 hours from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest.


Now argue with this. That is if you can.

Comments (Page 4)
6 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6 
on Dec 21, 2005
There you go Colon Bin Gangrene, wrong again. The Supreme Court can't decide on the legality of the actions of a sitting president, they can only decide the Constitutionality of the executive order itself. The SCOTUS does not hold trials on people or crimes, and there is nothing in the Constitution that gives them the authority to judge the actions of anyone (including the president).

Only the Senate has the authority to decide the legality of acts of the president. Only they can "end all speculation". But from what I've seen from both parties, nothing will "end speculation", only further fuel the speculation of the side that doesn't get their way.
on Dec 21, 2005
Parates2k

Wrong again. The way this reaches the court is to have a group or an American bring action to enjoin Bush and or the NSA from tapping the communications of Americans except as provided under the 1978 law. If that results in a ruling that Bush Violated the 1978 law, then it is time for the Senate to impeach and the House to decide if Bush is to be removed from office. If the court rules Bush acted properly the issue is settled.

I have suggested this process in other posts.
on Dec 21, 2005
First please understand I do hate Bush.

I don't think this is going to be that easy for Bush to Flush. I see this one getting stuck in the hopper like so much toilet paper.

But you have to wonder how Bush has walked into this snafu.
Wasn't there anyone around him that told him this is a grey area where he is treading and potentially damaging? Or has Bush removed these people from around him?
on Dec 21, 2005

But you have to wonder how Bush has walked into this snafu.
Wasn't there anyone around him that told him this is a grey area where he is treading and potentially damaging? Or has Bush removed these people from around him?

Bush did not "walk into it".  It was never secreet from congress, and indeed appears to be totally legal.  The NY Times is just sensationalizing for their own, and the book authors gains.  Just follow the Benjamins to find out why this is even in the news.  It is not hard.

on Dec 21, 2005
sushik

There have been recent articles, sighting high level White House sources that say Bush gets nasty when anyone questions him even BEFORE he takes a public position. That is why Powell resigned. Rice is a Bush lap dog. I see more similarities between Nixon and Bush every day. Similar reports say the same things about Cheney and Rummy. We have a VERY dangerous Executive Branch in power today.
on Dec 21, 2005
sushik

There have been recent articles, sighting high level White House sources that say Bush gets nasty when anyone questions him even BEFORE he takes a public position. That is why Powell resigned. Rice is a Bush lap dog. I see more similarities between Nixon and Bush every day. Similar reports say the same things about Cheney and Rummy. We have a VERY dangerous Executive Branch in power today.
on Dec 21, 2005
I've been waiting to weigh in on this for some time. I absolutely, positively hate (and I mean HATE) to do this, but I have to agree with COL. Bush poked the pooch on this one guys. I'm a former electronic intel guy, so I have a bit of first hand experience with this topic (disclosure statement, so you know where I'm coming from).


There is always a first time for everything. The irony is that Col is so bent on making Bush look bad by his own hatred that he has completely ignored your post that actually backed him up. Still even with your info it seems that Col is still running off his Bush Hating fumes. He reminds me why I am happy that LP records are mostly gone, the constant jumping and repeating of a single piece of a song when the record was scratched.
on Dec 21, 2005
But you have to wonder how Bush has walked into this snafu.
Wasn't there anyone around him that told him this is a grey area where he is treading and potentially damaging? Or has Bush removed these people from around him?


Think about what you just said. Does it sound logical for someone, anyone, to put themselves in a position to get screwed, specially the President? I find it hard to believe that something of this nature, known by Congress, would have been done if the consiquences were very serious. Either this was pefectly legal and being twisted by the media or there is no doubt that Bush is the Dumbest person to walk the face of the Earth and we put him as our President and everyone who backs him in his Adminstration is just as dumb. I find that a bit hard to believe. Just because Bush is President doesn't mean he is almighty and everyone around him has the right to object to his ideas and this would have been known long ago anyways. Makes no sense for it to come out 1 year later or so.
on Dec 21, 2005
I saw the post. It did not require an answer. I know what I have said is correct and the people like drmiler blindly support Bush regardless of the facts. The same thing is true about his fiscal policies but here again the people on this Blog site refuse to look at what is taking place. I would be happy to give Bush credit for solving our nation’s problems but the fact show me that they are getting worse.

In one of my earlier Blogs, I pointed out the negative impact of the Iraq war if the type of government that results in Iraq is like the government in Iran. It will not be in how fast we train Iraqi police and military or the elections. The preliminary election results indicate what I pointed out is a real danger from the Bush adventure in Iraq-- a religious government similar to the one in Iran. It looks very much like that is the type of government that was chosen on Dec 15th. That will be a major problem for this country in the future. We may have exchanged a dictatorship for another Iran. BIG MISATKE!
on Dec 21, 2005
Bush did not "walk into it". It was never secreet from congress, and indeed appears to be totally legal. The NY Times is just sensationalizing for their own, and the book authors gains. Just follow the Benjamins to find out why this is even in the news. It is not hard.


Dr you are stating that this current issue is just spin by the libs? That U.S. District Judge James Robertson has stepped down for no reason?

Let's give this a few weeks and see where this goes but my money is on deeper trouble for BUsh. I bet Bush will wish he had gotten a hummer in the oval instead of getting into this mess.
on Dec 21, 2005
Either this was pefectly legal and being twisted by the media or there is no doubt that Bush is the Dumbest person to walk the face of the Earth


I support the second option here.
on Dec 21, 2005
It is true Bush is not the sharpest knife in the drawer but he is also arrogant and drunk with power.
on Dec 21, 2005
In one of my earlier Blogs, I pointed out the negative impact of the Iraq war if the type of government that results in Iraq is like the government in Iran. It will not be in how fast we train Iraqi police and military or the elections. The preliminary election results indicate what I pointed out is a real danger from the Bush adventure in Iraq-- a religious government similar to the one in Iran. It looks very much like that is the type of government that was chosen on Dec 15th. That will be a major problem for this country in the future. We may have exchanged a dictatorship for another Iran. BIG MISATKE!


You have to understand Col, this is all based on what you believe in. Not facts. You think these things will happen cause that's your point of view, that doesn't make it real. You say we may have exchanged one dictatorship for another, that doesn't mea it's what has happened. For crying out loud we are helping chage decades of horror to something better, did you or anyone really think this would be a piece of cake? Even if the President himself said it would be easy, only naive people would have believed it. Those in political positions always say what people want to hear, but sometimes they are not near being close to hitting the mark.
on Dec 21, 2005
I saw the post. It did not require an answer. I know what I have said is correct and the people like drmiler blindly support Bush regardless of the facts.


Me disregarding facts? Look who's talking. You have been presented with PROOF (facts) that you are as usual incorrect about Bush and what do you do? You ignore them or trash them as per usual! No bigger fool than you!
on Dec 21, 2005
I told you col, keep it on topic. I will not warn you again. Your last reply was deleted for not staying on topic.
6 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6