Posted on 06/06/2013 8:12:31 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Not according the articles I have read. The Bush administration did wide-scale gathering of records to look for patterns. Once they found suspicious patterns, they would then target their investigations on the individuals involved, but they cast a wide net just as in this case.
I am amazed on this and other threads regarding all aspects of policy and government behavior the number of defenders Barack Obama has on Free Republic. It boggles my mind.
If Andrew McCarthy is defending anything done by this Administration, then he is an idiot and not a patriot.
I don’t buy the load of horsesh!t that this administration gives a fig about the War on Terror. They botched preventing Benghazi. They botched preventing the Ft. Hood massacre. They botched preventing the Boston Marathon bombing.
They KNEW about the individuals involved in advance and DID NOTHING. They had outside alerts and DID NOTHING. They have stonewalled investigations and prosecutions.
And so now they expect me to swallow a bullsh!t sandwich that they are engaged in information gathering to prevent terrorist attacks?
Bush’s wiretaps were of persons stateside communicating with known members of Al Qaeda. Time Magazine, for one, had reporters engaging in such communications.
The press opposed the policy because they didn’t want to be brought up on charges of siding with the enemy in a time of war.
The government has no more right to know who and when I called than it does to have agents sit in front of my house keeping track of who comes and goes and following me everywhere. Obviously someone doesn’t understand the concept of free speech and right to assemble in the First Amendment.
Hillary Clinton illegally possessed 900 FBI files and was not prosecuted. Having the law expanded to have access such materials does not guaranty abuse just as having laws in place to prohibit such abuse will not prevent it from occurring or lead to prosecution if/when it does occur.
I'd refine that a bit. I understand that the purpose was for tracking terrorist calls from throw-away phones that would otherwise be impossible to track due to the delays in getting warrants. So, Bush didn't do it for completely illegal political purposes as Zero probably has. Still, it is a usurpation of power that, once established, WILL be abused. For that, Bush is responsible.
There were far superior alternatives available, starting with securing our borders and putting a bounty on Muslims involved in overthrowing the Constitution behind which they are hiding. He didn't do it and did this instead.
Who said that Mr. McCarthy is not honorable? I neither stated nor implied any such thing.
I was referring people to the reasoning of the posters, which I think stands on its own without reliance upon the posters’ identities or credentials.
“The government has no more right to know who and when I called than it does to have agents sit in front of my house keeping track of who comes and goes and following me everywhere.”
Well, yes. That is the exact correct analogy. it is annoying, and it is offensive if you are defensive, but anyone whatsoever can watch where you go, and who comes to visit you.
This idiot has no idea how much information can be obtained by traffic analysis.
Sorry, but in this case, he is just flat out, and stupidly wrong in every particular. This type of blanket surveillance of the American people is wrong regardless of whether it is democrats or republicans doing it.
Apparently Verizon supplies the phone service for the House and Senate, hence Kirk’ s question today. This wasn’t random; they were spying on the legislature and the SC (Holder blew it by saying “and not The Supreme Court, either”... when he wasn’t even asked about the Court).
I find it fascinating that many of the SAME Freepers that had no problem with this under W are now outraged.
It’s a big story...
With the software the NSA has this information will be more telling than actual phone conversations.
Whatever they’re after - they’ll find.
And since they’re ONLY targeting American citizens we must assume they’re after conservatives to bolster the IRS’s delusional case against conservative Americans.
NBC and ‘60 Minuets’ are waiting breathlessly for the leak that will allow them to trash conservative Americans - or just give them the excuse for the trashing they’re already done.
Jerks, friggin’ jerks.
Well then... one wonders how it is that James Rosen was declared a ‘criminal’ if they didn’t ‘record’ his conversations ?
True. The 'process' has been in place. It is now possible to store the phone conversations and access them later.
The problem is not that this occurs, it is HOW THEY USE THE INFORMATION. And we all(at least the informed segment of the populace) have seen how that information is being used.
True. Actual 'wiretapping' doesn't even occur anymore.
All cell phone calls are recorded and retransmitted several times by cell towers and satellites.
All landline calls go through switching centers and satellites and are recorded as well.
Due to modern digital compression techniques, ALL calls can be stored and accessed later.
SO, what would be the purpose of having the 'records' ? You couldn't PROVE anything other than SOMEONE on a phone talked to SOMEONE else on another phone.
The purpose is to have a 'trail' that can be used to retrieve the actual 'conversation'.
Which is all seemingly a straight forward, necessary step in dealing with CRIME (of any kind).
The problem, again, is HOW they use this information, and the CLAIM that they (the FEDS) are not 'wiretapping' anyone's phones.
They can safely say that, because they aren't doing it. It is done by nature of the process.
“but you can’t Google me as I am not of national prominence. “
Wanna bet?
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.