Posted on 12/19/2005 4:25:09 AM PST by angkor
Throughout the "illegal wiretaps" debacle of the last several days we have not heard a single citation of the actual law that is alleged to have been violated. And that's from both the accusers (Rats, the NYT, WashPost, etc.) as well as Republicans, up to and including the White House staff (e.g., Condi Rice on talking head circuit, Sunday morning, where she did not cite the law in defense of the practice).
Well, the fact of the matter is that the alleged "illegal surveillance" is not illegal at all. In fact it is specifically permitted under 50 USC 1802, and the White House and DoJ have complied with at least that part of the law requiring notification of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (even Nancy Pelosi has admitted that she was notified, and as a 10-year member of the House Committee we can presume she knows the law on this matter).
I'm posting this in Breaking News due to the gravity of the issue and because it is not being discussed anywhere in the MSM, or even on the more popular conservative blogs. The White House and Republicans generally have been completely negligent in simply citing 50 USC 1802 as permissive of this kind of surveillance.
Below is the pertinent text of 50 USC 1802, or you can click the link above to go to the page and do more digging if you so choose.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but the language seems quite clear.
TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 36 > SUBCHAPTER I > 1802
1802. Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court
(a) (1) 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 periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and
(C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801 (h) of this title; and if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.
(2) An electronic surveillance authorized by this subsection may be conducted only in accordance with the Attorney General’s certification and the minimization procedures adopted by him. The Attorney General shall assess compliance with such procedures and shall report such assessments to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence under the provisions of section 1808 (a) of this title.
(3) The Attorney General shall immediately transmit under seal to the court established under section 1803 (a) of this title a copy of his certification. Such certification shall be maintained under security measures established by the Chief Justice with the concurrence of the Attorney General, in consultation with the Director of Central Intelligence, and shall remain sealed unless—
[snip]
I haven't figured out how you could monitor 1 side of a call yet. If Osama phones Cindy Shehan with new orders, how can they monitor Osama without hearing Cindy pooh?
Just and old retired telephone man's thinking.
You of course took note that 50 USC 1802 spcifically excludes "United States persons" (citizens and permanent residents) from warrantless surveillance.
Ya think every Mohammad, Akbar, and Sami that sets foot on U.S. soil with a student or tourist visa is "the people" of the U.S. Constitution?
What about every Pedro, Jorge or Vicente who arrives without such documentation?
Well, no, they're not "United States persons" either, unless they're citizens or permanent residents. So of course they can be subject to FISA surveillance.
Isn't the principle clear enough for you?
Although you quoted...
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
...you seem to have skipped over the word "UNREASONABLE" a little too quickly.
IMHO, it is perfectly REASONABLE for our President, in war-time, to search the international air-waves for conversations between enemies who are plotting to kill Americans -- even if some of those enemies happen to be standing on U.S. soil.
Do not take this personally, but what kind of idiot would a person have to be to conclude that "the law" permits us to dispatch a cruise missle to kill Osama bin Laden, but does not permit us to listen to his phone calls to "sleeper cells" located in America?
And that may very well be the trap that the democrats and the media will walk into.
Why do people insist on electing republicans (rino's) and democrats that are absolutely ignorant of the facts and willfully ingnorant of the law?
Actually it is a very confusing post! Raises more questions than it answers.
This does a much better job of explaining the legal rational that Bush has used to tap comminications where one side is suspected al Qaeda on foreign soil......
The FISA Act And The Definition Of 'US Persons'
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1542814/posts
Ping
ping
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.