Posted on 12/27/2005 10:47:23 AM PST by Pragmatic_View
WASHINGTON, Dec. 26 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush decided to skip seeking warrants for international wiretaps because the court was challenging him at an unprecedented rate.
A review of Justice Department reports to Congress by Hearst newspapers shows the 26-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court modified more wiretap requests from the Bush administration than the four previous presidential administrations combined.
The 11-judge court that authorizes FISA wiretaps modified only two search warrant orders out of the 13,102 applications approved over the first 22 years of the court's operation.
But since 2001, the judges have modified 179 of the 5,645 requests for surveillance by the Bush administration, the report said. A total of 173 of those court-ordered "substantive modifications" took place in 2003 and 2004. And, the judges also rejected or deferred at least six requests for warrants during those two years -- the first outright rejection of a wiretap request in the court's history.
You stated it was a slipper slope. How is it slippery if it's been happening since the 1970's? Let me know.
And I have a simple question. Do you think it's important to know which Americans are in contact with Al Qaeda?
They are appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from the list of people already on District Courts (I think); it's hard to say who appointed them to those lower courts.
Dem....its more than even the leaks...they view themselves as a sort of star chamber. They ruled on how the Justice Dept can interact with intel people....that is not part of their job description..
Why do you tink Clinton packed the DC curcuit with his judges..
I agree.
I'm waiting for anyone to name any person who's "rights" have been violated during this Congressionally informed program?
If the Slimes had any evidence of Constitutional Rights violations then they would have printed the names of the people.
Here are the choices, NY Slimes stating Rights Violations without the evidence or the President who admits the program but states no rights have been violated and he has the Constitutional Obligation to authorize this program. Who do you pick?
What is the status of the Patriot Act right now? (I've been out of the loop for a few days.)
It should be noted that at least three of the 11 judges have to be within 20 miles of DC. That means the DC circuit.
Reading all this classified information smeared all over the networks and the papers, I have this awful feeling we are heading toward a "Frank Church Hearing" in the spring where once again the liberals will disembowel our intelligence apparatus.
But I will say one thing: something is REALLY wrong at the CIA.
Extended until Feb 06...a month.
Is that where the FISA picks come from?
Remember when we read all about the DC Circuit judges meeting IN SECRET illegally and deciding who would get what cases?
Why shouldn't Hillary be allowed to tap the phones of terrorists?
Excuse me, I should have said the DEMOCRATIC D.C. Circuit judges; Republicans weren't invited to those closed door meetings.
Thanks.
For the likes of the Clintonistas, laws as for OTHER people to follow--not them!
They love to do that when the guy was 18-22 or so and turned really liberal from 22 to 59. I hate that. They act like the guy spent his whole life in the military. So he did a few years in the military. Thank you for that. Now why have you completely turned on your country is the question.
Let me tell you something. If Bill Clinton, as president, were spying on Al Qaeda, I'd support him completely.
No kidding. Makes me wonder if Gorelick is on this friggin' secret court! There's so many evil and powerful agendas going on that I'm sure the Devil is ecstatic. We need to continue praying for the Bush administration every single day and night.
You could be right about those hearings; I don't know what the answer is to stop them.
Think how much easier it was to work in an intelligence agency during the Clinton years. Even if your analysis was wrong, no worries because it's not like anything was actually going to be DONE with the analysis. Nothing like start a little war over it.
And they've gotten fat and lazy and must really hate the challenges presented in light of 9/11 and the Bush administration.
Good for you. Would you like a cookie or something now?
The last Dem in office didn't need any of these powers given to him in order to do these very things against regular American citizens, and worse.
That's another thing that has gone down the memory-hole.
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.