[inquest]

Then take your argument up with the appellate courts judges who identified the distinctions you disagree with so vehemently.

I'm taking it up with you who's alleged that these courts have done so. Outside of that one piece of dictum from that one opinion at the bottom of #289, all they've established is that foreign surveillance is a power of the President, not that it's any more sacred than any of his other powers.

[Boot Hill]

inquest:   "I'm taking it up with you who's alleged that these courts have done so."

No thanks, I'm simply not interested in your digression. The topic under discussion is the legality of the President conducting warrantless foreign intelligence intercepts. Do you have something to add to that, or don't you?