Oh, really? No conservatives are calling for impeaching President Bush, right?
I guess that means Pat Buchanan isn't a conservative, then. He called for it.
Posted on 12/22/2005 9:42:46 PM PST by RWR8189
WASHINGTON -- 2005 was already the year of the demagogue, having been dominated for months by the endlessly echoed falsehood that the president ``lied us into war.'' But the year ends with yet another round of demagoguery.
Administration critics, political and media, charge that by ordering surveillance on communications of suspected al Qaeda agents in the United States, the president had clearly violated the law. Some even suggest that Bush has thereby so trampled the Constitution that impeachment should now be considered. (Barbara Boxer, Jonathan Alter, John Dean and various luminaries of the left have already begun floating the idea.) The braying herds have already concluded, Tenet-like, that the president's actions were slam-dunk illegal. It takes a superior mix of partisanship, animus and ignorance to say that.
Does the president have the constitutional authority to conduct warrantless searches against suspected foreign agents in the United States? George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr (one critic calls him the man who ``literally wrote the book on government seizure of electronic evidence'') finds ``pretty decent arguments'' on both sides but his own conclusion is that Bush's actions were ``probably constitutional.''
In 1972, the Supreme Court required the president to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on domestic groups, but specifically declined to apply this requirement to snooping on foreign agents. Four appeals courts have since upheld presidential authority for such warrantless searches. Not surprisingly, the executive branch has agreed.
True, Congress tried to restrict this presidential authority with the so-called FISA law of 1978. It requires that warrants for wiretapping of enemy agents in the U.S. be obtained from a secret
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
The good Doctor is 100% correct - it's over. Only the usual drunken bums are hanging on and hoping for something to happen. Give 'em one for the road and kick them out - jeez.
Next they will want to impeach him for being a Christian and President simultaneously, which violates the principles of separation of church and state.
Oh wait a minute, they already are...
Powerline just finished exhaustive legal research on the legality of the NSA taps. Its a good read.
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/012631.php
Ohhhhh, that was a good one!
Pretty good column by Krauthammer but not his best in my view. That Clinton after FISA and every president since Carter inclusive have used the NSA this way means Bush certainly has a reasonable stance in asserting this power until a Court rules he can not or Congress explicitly passes a law barring it. So I think Krauthammer is wrong and Bush was under no obligation to ask to do what so many other presidents deemed within their authority.
The AG's office did their own research and delivered a 5 page letter stating case law....
U. S. Department of Justice
Office of Legislative Affairs
December 22, 2005
Dear Chairmen Roberts and Hoekstra. Vice Chairman Rockefeller, and Ranking Member Harman:
The purpose of this letter is to provide an additional brief summary of the legal authority supporting the NSA activities described by the President.
We hope this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
William E. Moschella
Assistant Attorney General
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1545787/posts
Not according to this thread.
Cheers!
While President Bush is Protecting Americans, the TreasoncRats are busy Protecting Terrorists!
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops
Every time I read your comments, you're bashing either Christians or conservatives. If Bush would act more often on conservative principles and values, it would yield great dividends for him and the country. In any case, no conservatives are calling for Bush's impeachment, so quit bringing it up. You should save your venom for the RINOs, Dems, liberals & left-wingers. Or are these the sides you're partial to?
Or, likely as not, impeach him for being a Christian which violates their principles of ~values~.
I have one thing to say, and to put on a tee-shirt.
Impeach me bitch!!!
bttt
Leno was telling impeachment jokes tonight, something to the effect that Clinton got impeached for dallying and Bush is now in danger of being impeached for spying on U.S. Citizens. (Paraphrased)
The dems are sooooo desperate to impeach Bush to get even.
A.H.s
Oh, really? No conservatives are calling for impeaching President Bush, right?
I guess that means Pat Buchanan isn't a conservative, then. He called for it.
Well you are correct about one thing, there are crazies on the right and on the left.
President bush isn't going to be impeached, that is just dems trying to lash out and hurt him in any way they can. Still hurting from Bushs victories in the last two big elections. Can't get over the fact that they lost to him with algore and the shit kerry.
First of all, I do not bash Christians. I'd love for you to find where I said it once.
Secondly, the "conservatives" I bash are the fringe kooks who spew nothing but venom toward President Bush. Those who claim to be "conservatives" but refer to the President as a "POS" or "BuSHIT" deserves nothing but disrespect.
I don't know what Buchanan is, but I don't think he's what we normally think of as "conservative." Or even sane.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.