[MineralMan]

"Nope. They don't say hang up and get a warrant. They say comply with FISA, and go get a warrant within 72 hours, but you can keep listening while you do so.
If you place the decision on who is deserving of being eavesdropped solely in the hands of the eavesdropper, you no longer have any protection against eavesdropping by your government."

---

You are correct. However, the thrust of opinion here on FR is to let the government do as it wishes with regard to this eavesdropping.

That's fine, as long as an administration on the right side is doing it. The question everyone needs to ask is: What about a liberal Dem administration?

Yes, we need this information about calls between US Citizens and potential foreign terrorists. There is a process in place to do this, with retroactive warrants, if necessary. I'm still not sure we need to change that, since it seems perfectly workable to me.

[W04Man]

You don't understand the technical issues in this data collecting/data mining. And you don't want to tell more people about it, not even some Judges, especially ones that will resign on you and go public. They might reveal our technical means. So I would trust any duly elected administration, Democrat or Republican, since they could save many lives by listening in on our dastardly terrorist enemies. If they listen in for political reasons, they will get caught.

[El Gato]

There is a process in place to do this, with retroactive warrants, if necessary. I'm still not sure we need to change that, since it seems perfectly workable to me.

I think I like the notion of retroactive warrants much less than the notion of monitoring conversations involving foreigners, given that the US person being monitored has already been "tagged" by having a foreign communication with a non US person with a known connection to foreign terrorists.

As I understand it, they did ask for, but not always get, warrants to monitor the internal/domestic communications of these individuals. Also as I understand it, the FISA judge or judges got their noses out of joint because the information from these overseas communications were used to obtain the warrants for the purely domestic communications

[mrsmith]

"The question everyone needs to ask is: What about a liberal Dem administration? "

Why? You think the Constitution should be amended then?

"FRIDAY AUGUST 17th. IN CONVENTION
...Mr. MADISON and Mr. GERRY moved to insert "declare," striking out "make" war; leaving to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks.
Mr. SH[E]RMAN thought it stood very well. The Executive shd. be able to repel and not to commence war."

No, you living constitutionalists never want to amend the Constitution- you just want to ignore it.