Posted on 01/20/2006 7:36:18 PM PST by groanup
Or will you be suspicious they might write another Patriot Act?
I already told you I can't... but if I am going to be against it, I need some specifics.
I made it clear that was a part of proving loyalty. You can read correct?
I would think the courts have to throw that out for actions in defense of the country in time of war.
There are also national security issues there.
Michael Chertoff and Viet Dinh wrote the unpatriot act.
You should read the "patriot" act it before commenting on it...and the first step to show others you have read it is to know who authored it.
I can. However, your "loyalty test" is un-American. Not everybody has, or can, serve in the Armed Forces.
Don't bother responding. I'm thinking you're a garden-variety bigot.
Cheers!
<<< I would think the loon would have to at least have some proof of damages.>>>
Libs don't want PROOF, they want THE ISSUE....
They could care less about FACTS of any kind, it's just one more thing to throw at the wall and see if it sticks...
not a SINGLE shred of proof exists that ANYTHING illegal was done, yet Libs are trying to spin this into some Grand Conspiracy against America!!!!
Anyone got a free link to the Wall Street Journal article by Victoria Teonsing (Terrorists on Tap) earlier this week? It's been quoted on quite a few news shows, but its subscription only on the WSJ site. Supposedly it's the best legal defense of NSA actions out there.
OK, now that we have established who wrote it... what provision(s) are unconstitutional? (we have also established I have not read it, that is why I am asking you)
Thank you. That is very helpful, as opposed to others input.
is this the lawsuit being handled by the Rosenbergs grandaughter, Ivy Meeropol?
Assistant Attorney General Viet D. Dinh Viet D. Dinh was sworn in as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy on May 31, 2001. Prior to his entry into government service, Dinh was Professor of Law and Deputy Director of Asian Law and Policy Studies at the Georgetown University Law Center. Dinh graduated magna cum laude from both Harvard College and Harvard Law School, where he was a Class Marshal and an Olin Research Fellow in Law and Economics. He was a law clerk to Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. He served as Associate Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Whitewater Committee, as Special Counsel to Senator Pete V. Domenici for the Impeachment Trial of the President, and as counsel to the Special Master in In re Austrian and German Bank Holocaust Litigation. He is a member of the District of Columbia and U.S. Supreme Court bars. As an academic, he specialized in constitutional law, corporations law, and the law and economics of development. His representative publications include Reassessing the Law of Preemption, 88 GEO. L.J. 2085 (2000); What Is the Law in Law and Development?, 3 THE GREEN BAG 2D 19 (1999); Codetermination and Corporate Governance in a Multinational Business Enterprise, 24 J. CORP. L. 975 (1999); and Races, Crime, and the Law, 111 HARV. L. REV. 1289 (1998). Born on February 22, 1968, in Saigon, Vietnam, Dinh came to America as a refugee in 1978. After 2 years in Portland, Oregon, his family settled in Fullerton, California. He currently resides in Washington, D.C.
He should have his law license revoked. There is no way he does not know that he hasn't a prayer of establishing standing - unless he really is working with terrorists.
Excellent point (from Toensing article).
Preferably, though -- since this smacks more of grandstanding by an out-of-work lawyer than anything else -- I would prefer to see Congress and the Senate (backed by the courts) put Messr. Bush back into his place.
Not that I worry about Bush. I worry about the precedent. Hillary with this sort of power simply will never relinquish her Presidency. Period.
Your post in response #71 had to be removed because it contained a complete Wall Street Journal article.
Please do not attempt to bypass copyright restrictions again.
And also he should get slapped with a nuisance fine.
I have heard this argument before about precedent and what a future pres. would do with it. Bill and Hillary engaged in this activity for eight years already. You are assuming that previous administrations didn't do it because it was against the law. Don't be so naive.
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.