Posted on 12/20/2005 11:40:16 AM PST by JustAnotherOkie
Contrary to claims by Democrats currently hyperventilating on Capitol Hill over President Bush's decision to use the National Security Agency to monitor communications among terrorists, Bush's so-called "illegal" spy program has indeed undergone judicial review.
And a special foreign intelligence surveillance appeals court set up to review the case confirmed that such "warrantless searches" were completely legal.
Notes OpinionJournal.com today:
"The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978."
But the Journal notes that in a 2002 case dubbed: "In Re: Sealed Case," the FISA appeals court decision cited a previous FISA case [U.S. v. Truong], where a federal court "held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."
The court's decision went on to say: "We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."
What's more, notes the Journal: "The two district court judges who have presided over the FISA court since 9/11 also knew about" the Bush surveillance program.
I am always suspect of their own investigative reporting but in this case the entire premise of the article is based on a WSJ piece making it rock solid.
Repackaged by the nitwits at NewsLax, Watson. If you know anything about NewsLax, you know how they can twist a story FROM ANOTHER SOURCE and twist it to their liking.
So far as I know, no one at NewsMax has been forced to resign over forged documents, stealing other's work, or simply making things up.
I mean, as opposed to, say what's happened in the trusted lamestream media.
Give us an example, since in order to "know" anything about Newsmax one is required to know that they routinely (as you say) "twist" stories from other sources.
The same can be said for World Weekly News.
NewsMax is not a reliable news source -- they're in the business of making editorial comments about other peoples' news.
Here is the link to the WSJ article NewsMax is referencing:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007703
The relevant portion:
"The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. But no Administration then or since has ever conceded that that Act trumped a President's power to make exceptions to FISA if national security required it. FISA established a process by which certain wiretaps in the context of the Cold War could be approved, not a limit on what wiretaps could ever be allowed.
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.""
Just because an opinion piece (with no by-line) from the WSJ editorial page claims two judges knew about the authorization does not necessarily make it so. The WSJ is no further above reproach than any other print news source.
I'm from Missouri: show me. Show me proof, somewhere, that this activity came under judicial review, and then I'll consider that particular point to be "rock solid".
The NYT only released this story to try and sway legislation(PATRIOT ACT), they knew the story had no legs and they also knew that this leak would endanger America. This is just another case of the NYT and the Democrats playing politics with Americans lives.
Again the tokyo roses are delusional...
Me too.
This appears to be a brief filed in the "sealed" case:
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/092502sup.html
I came across earlier today in reference to another posting.
This is the New York Times that tried to rally the country against the Masters Tournament a few years ago and failed hilariously. I think sometimes to defeat a liberal you don't have to do any more than ignore him.
This is GREAT!
"everyone knows its bogus."
They know it's me?
I was referring to the fact that this stuff has been done before and that it is legal to do. How long can they keep that fact covered? How long can they protect their democrat cohorts? Probably a while yet.
A long long time. I have a betting pool going on how many days in a row the NYT can keep the story on the front page. My bet is 20. Not quite as long as Abu Ghraib, but close.
"I'd feel a lot better if this wasn't from NewsLax."
actually the source for this story is the WSJ
they blew a HUGE hole in the whole Lefty impeachment proceedings. LOL
here's the link
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007703
Hold on now. Let's not let facts get in the way of getting a lather up over this. Liberals need to hate and have negative feelings over this. We cannot deny them their daily hatred.
Well, they're at least as trustworthy as DebkaFiles!
I gave you the link....their reference is verbatim
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.