A longer article on the subject:
Secret court modified wiretap requests. Intervention may have led Bush to bypass panel
I posted the UPI article, because it had the numbers.
Apparently the FISA court doesn't know we have been attacked on 9-11-2001 and doesn't care if the terrorists will nuke a US city.
Thank God! that George W. Bush was elected and re-elected. I sure wouldn't want to be living in any major parasite nest, er, city, if a scumbag Democrat gets elected. Whew!
On the other hand, if a scumbag Democrat gets elected, it will mainly be thanks to the voters of the major parasite nests, er, cities. In which case they can get what they deserve.
(As long as the winds don't bring too much fallout my way.)
This makes no sense - has the MSM lost its collective mind? Can they no longer tell the truth at all? They 1st line is contradicted in the 3rd paragraph.
All the libs claim there have only been a few warrants turned down.
My jaw is at my ankles, this is alarmingly scary.. The President tries to protect us after being attacked on our own soil and then judges handcuff him.. something smells bad.
God Bless the courage of GWB for doing his duty to protect Americans.
When I saw the judge was a female with a hyphenated name, I knew what the problem was....
Bush is Protecting America from terrorists. TraitocRats are Protecting terrorists from America!
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops
But in wartime, does not the President have more authority?
From another thread, both of you were wondering why the Executive branch of the government didn't trust U.S. Secret Court.
BTTT
and from the longer article:
The court's repeated intervention in Bush administration wiretap requests may explain why the president decided to bypass the court nearly four years ago to launch secret National Security Agency spying on hundreds and possibly thousands ...
Both statements are outright speculation on the part of the "reporters" and their sources, but are designed to leave the impression of a causal relationship between the rate of rejections and modifications and the decision to not go to the FISA court in some cases. The "may have" of the longer article has been modified into a certainty by the UPI "report".
It is just as, or maybe more likely (but also speculation on my part and that of many others), that in some cases the timing required was such that the critical need or opportunity would have been overtaken by events had the time been taken to get the court's approval.
Strange that the "reporters" while freely speculating away, do not speculate at all on alternate explanations that would make sense and that would not cast a negative light on the Administration. I wonder why ...
The first line of the article and the headline as well. The proof of the claim is described in the article NOWHERE. That is odd isn't it? Well no it isn't. It is actually quite common in the leftist media.
Lawyers don't win wars. Countries that put them in charge lose wars.
If this president does not intercept transmissions from al Qaeda associated groups to people in this country, I want him impeached. This is what a commander in chief does.
Don't understand why the Chief Justice loaded this court with anti-American blk robes/judges....